KidCrisis

Speaking personally, I'm less concerned about whether or not the costume creator can be used to create interesting/modest/cool costumes in general, which is clearly something that's possible, and more concerned about what seems to be an ongoing trend with new costume pieces, especially in the paid boosters. I like the boosters, I like (generally) what's in them and I don't mind buying them. Clearly, not all of them have had this issue, but when what we have to look at is the Wedding Pack, and the Magic Pack, and the Mutant Pack and now the Steampunk pack, it's hard not see a trend that's, at best, irritating and, at worst, a little disturbing.

I don't actually think sexism is at work here, or at least nothing but the sort of institutionalized undercurrent sexism lurking in the culture in general. If I thought the devs were a bunch of leering jerks, reveling in their ability to force people to make scantily-clad club bunnies, I wouldn't bother posting. What I do think is at work, or at least what I hope, is just a sort of unfortunate combination of genre conventions and a general ignorance of what some groups of players want. There's no larger conspiracy at work that's keeping female toons from simultaneously having cigars, cool coats and an actual t-shirt texture, but whatever the reasons actually are, they don't and it really frustrates the hell out of me.

I don't know if it's laziness, lack of interest, missed opportunity, statistical analysis or secret instructions from the moon people, but I'd like to see it change. If bringing it up can help do that, or at least help someone remember it the next time costumes come up at a design meeting, then good.

Someday, I'd be curious to see an explanation of how "men get awesome looking coats and women get lingerie" translates into a "greater variety in character design options." Were players really hurting for more ways to make female characters in their underwear? Wouldn't the greater variety be for women to get the cool looking Steampunk coat this time, while men got a steel codpiece?

I'll wait to see what changes go in before buying this. There's a lot to like here, but c'mon, how about some new female costume items that don't look like they came from Frederick's of Paragon? My female characters want long coats too.

So I'm trying to put together a Claws/WP brute build and it was pointed out to me that the Brute version of Claws has different damage and recharge values than the Scrapper version, which means all the nifty attack chains floating around aren't as useful as I thought they were. Now I'm confused and lost in a sea of DPA and Arcanatime. Does anyone have a thread they could point to or some numbers to crunch that could show me some good Brute Claws attack chains and the recharge needed to run them?

That's right, Space Nazi,
My midget robot chicken
Wields a mighty wrench.

@kidcrisis

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I stand corrected. Thank you for the update.

I am trying to figure out how that works for 4 procs as an experiment. I understand the first portion is .2 x .2 x .2 x .2 = .16 for all 4, but I'm not sure I understand the second portion of the equation for 3 and up (.2 x .2 x .2 x .16 does not seem right at a glance).

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming all the procs you are using have a 20% chance to proc, the chance that three will proc, is (.2*.2*.2)*.8*4=2.56%

The first part of that is easy, the chance that three of the procs will go off = .2*.2*.2 But because we only want three of those procs to go off, we need the fourth proc not to go off (that's the .8 (1-.2). Now there are 4 different procs that you could choose to be the proc not to go off, so that's the final 4. For a total chance that 3 procs will go off of 2.56% This is quite a bit higher than the .8% change that you would have with only 3 procs.

Now the chance that you will have two procs go off get's a bit more complicated. we still have then (.2*.2*.8*.8) that we had before which is the chance that 2 procs will go off and 2 procs won't, but now we need to take into account all the possibilities for how we could choose 2 procs. Well, we have 4 options for the first proc, and that leaves 3 options for the second proc. However, we have counted proc A and then proc B as well as proc B and then proc A so we need to divide by 2 (4*3)/2 =6 So the chance that 2 procs will go off is (.2*.2*.8*.8)*6 = 15.36%

The chance for just one proc to go off is *.2*.8*.8*.8)*4=40.96%
So with 4 procs the chance that at least one will proc on any given attack is 59.04% (Assuming i multiplied and added correctly).

So, in general if you have X procs with Y chance of procing. And you want to know what the chance of Z (<=X) of those procs going off is. Your answer is:
Y^Z*(1-Y)^(X-Z)*[X*(X-1)*...*(X-(Z-1))/Z!]



[/ QUOTE ]

You can also shortcut this a bit when calculating P(at least one happens) by calculating 1-P(none happen). In the case of four procs, the probability of no procs going off is (.8*.8*.8*.8) or .4096, so 1-.4096 gives you the same 59.04%, but without having to calculate a P for each possible outcome.