FourSpeed

So, basically you're saying you think a single enhancement should work as well
as an Incarnate Power (Reactive)?

GL with that.


4

lol - that too, I suppose.

4

Well, there was quite an uproar when PvP was announced initially, and for many
folks, the fact that the game didn't initially have PvP was a feature rather than a
problem.

I think the devs were hoping that adding some incentives for PvE folks to enter
would gradually lead to a larger PvP community. In the early days, I think it did
actually achieve that in some small measure, but the fact that it ultimately
didn't succeed large-scale is due to several factors inherent in the way PvP
was designed and implemented (which is to say "poorly" and leave it at that).

Of course, it also didn't help that PvP newbies who might have been willing to
become regular PvPer's were summarily ganked (if not outright farmed), and frequently
ridiculed, early and often by some of the harsher PvP folks.

That sort of experience isn't conducive to enticing risk-averse and gun-shy players
to embrace a system they don't understand, don't thrive at, and didn't much
want in the first place.

The PvP 2.0 revamp really nailed the coffin shut as the new mechanics eliminated
any realistic chance for PvE'ers to make any sense of how their powers worked
(or in some cases didn't work anymore) in PvP.

If there is a silver lining in there for PvE'ers now, it's that most PvP zones are
dead, which makes getting the PvE rewards in them much easier to obtain.

Whether that's a Good Thing, or not, is open for debate.

Regards,
4

/this.

My piece of anecdotal evidence to coumterpoint OP's anecdotal evidence is:

I ran a BAF and a Lambda Saturday night on my level-shifted blaster. I shot
at everything targetable in sight and only got a Common in each case.

That was without any deaths in Lambda (ie. actively attacking stuff the whole
time), and a couple of BAF deaths (when the "adds team" lost control of said
adds, and a bunch of us squishies got bushwacked at the very end phase).

The darn trials must gauge participation on how many players you buff
(yes, I'm joking).

So, apart from basic participation criteria, the end drop is random.


Regards,
4

Hmmmm... Had it in my head that it worked off the base 100%, but sure enough,
Mids' treats it as you describe, so I must be confusing it with something else.

I blame it on early Alzheimer's

That said, I'd still be fine with just the Proc (although, I don't have a single toon
with Stamina that *only* has a single slot)

Anyway, thanks for the correction - good to know.


Regards,
4

lol - well, maybe you need to leave Atlas Park once in awhile.

I've been using /hide as the default for my toons since it went live and I don't seem
to encounter the issue you describe - Go Figure.

I suspect there's a correlation to be found there somewhere, but I'll leave it be...


Cheers,
4


PS> You didn't quote squat from me until after I quoted your "complaint" so you're
mistaken (or being intentionally disingenuous) from the get-go... Again, I suspect
a correlation.

You *did* read the OP, right???

So, if you're needing to use /ignore* frequently, I'm guessing anonymity isn't
the problem in *your* case...

The OP, on the other hand is trying to solve a much simpler issue.

Carry On.

4

Easily solved by "Ignore as Spammer" or /petition Harrassment,
but yeah, you can still be seen, and if you're talking in broadcast, or a channel,
you can still be "detected", although that's a bit of a "PEBKAC" if you ask me...

That said, /hide is still pretty effective if you're not feeling particularly sociable.


Cheers,
4

Sorry.

Statesman's Blaster credo in I-1 was "Range IS defense". It was wrong then,
and it's still wrong now.

Your last sentence is far more accurate - it's not the range that is the
defense, but rather the damage.

Damage dealt is and was *always* a better "defence" than range.


Regards,
4

Those items don't create inf unless you vendor them (and not much, if you do).

Yes - it's my default mode for all of my toons.

As others have mentioned, the /hide command will pop up a box where you
can select options for it.

Some of my toons have all of them clicked, some have a few clicked, and
ALL of them have at least one of them clicked It works quite well.

You can also set your teaming status to decline invites as well.

Happy Soloing


Regards,
4

I doubt there's anyway to even ballpark estimate that.

First, keep in mind that the market does *not* create influence. In fact, it
destroys it (while shuffing the other 90% around the population base).

It would be interesting to have some general transaction and inf volumes traded
on the market, but I think we can safely say "inf-generation" is less than zero
for it.

The only activities that actually create inf are: defeating mobs, completing missions,
finding blinkies and (some) badges, and vendoring goods.

How you would even begin to accurately determine quantities for those activities
(given the data we have access to) is beyond me.

Obviously, I'd be curious too. That said, the devs did give us an actual number
about a year ago - 56 Billion

Given that some individuals had more than that amount themselves, we laughed,
and figured the devs were off by at least a factor of 1000 - Go Figure.

It's especially amusing to me, that the handful of accounts comprising this survey
have more inf on-hand than the devs quoted for the entire game (by more than a
factor of 40).


Cheers,
4

I think the bonus you're thinking of is Dmg (45% bonus in Nova form iirc). It also
has To-Hit bonus, I think as well.

Still, the ranged attacks are 80 ft (except the cone), and while Nova is a bit squishy,
you can build for nice Ranged Defense, get two heals (Reform Essence, and Dwarf's
Sublimation), a Max health power (Essence Boost), an Endurance Reducer (Conserve Energy),
some very nice resistances with either Dwarf Form or Light Form, you have travel
powers built-in and access to a phase-shift power without the Concealment Pool.

If you like the Concealment Pool, Invisibility works nice because you can still
do self-buffs, and when you're set to bring the carnage, switching to Nova
conveniently shuts it off to attack.

Dwarf form is also your mez protection, turtling dmg absorbing form, and your
escape route (with tp) if things go south.


The real trick is to manage forms well - it's an easy AT to play, but a challenging
one to play well...


Regards,
4

For folks that may not have read the entire thread, take a peek at post #109
to see my analysis of Category E. tl;dr There's nothing special about E and
it *should* be rolled into D (hence the two graphs).

In fact, I've flipped those graphs, so the "proper" one is seen first.


While I've presented this in the other thread (in Mkt Forum), given that the
data has slowed down to a trickle now, I'll re-iterate my analysis here.

First, the caveats, disclaimers, quid pro quos, addenda, and other "but..."

Blue's question "Is this data representative?" is a good one. My answer: Yes & No.

Yes: The data distribution appears to be log-normal, which is typical for studies
of income distribution and we have a pretty typical curve.

No: It's 157 accounts... We don't know how many accounts are actually in
the game (I'm using 100,000 for discussion purposes, because they don't delete
accounts, and past charts I've seen are typically around that number). On that
basis, we have a sample size of 0.16% of the assumed population -- the statisticians
will tell you (rightfully), that's "Not Good"

Some of the other (many) Caveats:

* Game Population: clearly affects total income in game. So, from the very outset
we're speculating hugely here... 100K? 10K? 50K? Who knows? Purely for discussion
I'm using 100K as a basis.

* Activity Ratio: Active accounts continue to make inf - Inactive - not so much.
Presumably, nearly all the accounts have some amount of inf on them, but what
ratio is still actively earning inf?

* Timing: A subset of the above point, accounts that went inactive prior to WW/BM
probably have a *lot* less inf on them than ones that went inactive more recently.
We know it's easier to make inf now than it ever has been previously, so there's
an element of timing that probably affects total inf in-game.

Forum Bias: I've said all along that I think forum posters are more informed,
more dedicated to the game, and consequently, probably have more inf as a whole
than the average population. As such, extrapolating these numbers out should
give us a theoretical maximum (ie. If forumites make more than average, the
full population shouldn't beat the number we'd get by using our data to represent
everyone).

Also, since I think the distribution curve itself is valid, we can speculate about
the full population by simply shifting the entire curve to the right and see what
we get.

Obviously, those are some pretty severe caveats, so honestly, the actual data
doesn't really help us very much to get anywhere near an accurate measure
(with any appreciable level of confidence), but, it can still be fun to guess.

SO... How much inf *could* there be in-game based on what we see here?

Actual Data: 157 Accounts worth 2.4263 Trillion gives us an average of ~15.45 Billion
per account. Multiplying that by 100K gives us a theoretical maximum of about
1.5 Quadrillion inf as our upper limit. I'd expect the actual amount to be much
lower than this.

If I take the sample percentages and drop them into a spreadsheet with a 100K
population basis, I also get 1.5 Quadrillion (not surprising - since in both cases
we're treating the sample as representative of the entire population).

If I apply Pareto terms, looking at the top 3 categories, we see that 28% of our
sample controls 87% of the wealth. So, if I take our average * 28,000 and divide
that by 87% we can get another estimate for the full population, which works out
to approximately 497.2 Trillion influence. This number seems plausible.

Category Shifting: Assuming forumites are wealthier, let's shift the categories,
right once, and then twice and compare those results. I don't think we can
shift it 3X for a simple reason: These days, one character who cashes 2 A-merits
for a LotG would, by itself, get into category F - it's just too simple to make
inf these days, to think the bulk of the population is any lower than G (imho).
As we shift categories right, I'll make A 1/2 of B and tweak the largest category
to get 100%.

Shifting once (ie. Mean in Group F instead of D/E) gives us ~706.5 Trillion.

Shifting twice (ie. Mean in Group G instead of D/E) gives us ~336.3 Trillion


So, looking at the various numbers (which are slightly different with today's
updates compared to the last time I did it), for an assumed population of 100,000
accounts, there could be anywhere between 336 Trillion and 1.5 Quadrillion
inf in-game.

Or, it could be some other number entirely, depending on what effects the various
caveats have on the data.


Cheers,
4


PS> At this point, I don't expect to add any more updates. It's highly
doubtful that we'll get enough further data to refine any of the uncertanty,
or cover any of the numerous caveats that can apply.

Thanks All for your input - it's been a very interesting project.

If he makes it to trillionaire status, I'd have to make a new category in my survey.
Somehow, 100 Billion+ would be inadequate...

D*mn You TopDoc!!!


Cheers,
4