-
Posts
1185 -
Joined
-
I just can't believe that a poll resulted in 85% to 15%, and the 15% result was still used.
I really appreciate that you made sure that the margins were adequate for forum functionality, but you should have done the same thing with #1 instead of #2. You still can. -
Vahz vomit was actually Fire damage, and Vahz darts were Negative damage at release. People thought they were untyped because most people that cared about damage type were playing Invuln and expecting Smashing/Lethal resistance to affect it. Firey Aura Tankers did very well against the Vahz in comparison to Invuln.
Edit:
Whoops, didn't see this.
If it was ever untyped, it must have been during beta, because I tested it shortly after release, before Issue 1. -
For me, it's not a matter of "is KB good" or "is KB bad". It's different in different situations, and depending on playstyle preferences, it may be overwhelmingly good, overwhelmingly bad, or somewhere in between.
I personally love single target ranged attacks with any kind of KB. The KB is usually more beneficial than it is detrimental, in my experience, especially when solo.
I also love single target melee attacks with 100% chance to KB (I guess that's just Power Thrust, right?), particularly on non-melee characters (I probably wouldn't use it much on a melee character, but it would still be both fun and useful on occasion with one).
I love ranged cones and AoEs with 100% chance to KB at small magnitudes when solo, or on a small team with limited AoE powers. I think that's pretty much just Shockwave. It's awesome solo and on small teams (like 2-3).
I like ranged cones and AoEs with less than 100% chance to KB when solo, or on a small team with limited AoE powers. The lower than 100% chance causes more scatter than usual, but if I don't need to worry about keeping enemies in range of Radiation Infection or something similar in order to survive, it's no big deal, and generally beneficial.
I feel guilty using ranged and AoEs cones with 100% chance to KB at small magnitudes when solo, or on a small team with limited AoE powers. Again, that's pretty much just Shockwave, but I've had it knock people away from where a teammate was about to place a patch, or slide foes close enough to the next spawn to be unable to engage them in melee without adds, that I've just dropped it from my Claws Scrapper and picked up Spin instead. I love Shockwave, so this was disappointing, and I plan to pick it up again when this IO comes out.
I tolerate single target melee attacks with less than 100% KB, as long as it's only on one attack in my chain. I've got a character that has Crane Kick, and if I didn't absolutely love the animation, I'd drop it for a different attack. But I deal with it KBing stuff I don't want to KB and (this is important as well) it not KBing stuff I do want to KB.
I strongly dislike ranged cones and AoEs on large teams, or teams that need AoE buff/debuffs/damage/control/taunts to survive or make progress at a decent speed. The KB is more disruptive than beneficial due to the scatter in most of these cases, and I don't enjoy the moments when I fire off Energy Torrent or Explosive Blast only to see my teammate drop Freezing Rain where half the group just was, or I knock the guy with Darkest Night on him out of range of a Boss or two that then whack me or someone else much harder than they otherwise would have (if they'd have even hit in the first place). I really hate wanting to use Wormhole as much as my Fire Controller teammate can use Flashfire, and having to hold it for when we're near a corner.
I hate PBAoE KB unless I'm solo or on a small team where nobody has any meaningful AoE powers. It's one of the most disruptive things in the game. Jumping in to a spawn and using Hand Clap right off the start on every spawn (like I used to do when the game first came out) when you're on a team with Fulcrum Shift or other fantastic AoE powers that everyone benefits from is about the worst thing a teammate can do. It's also a stupid thing to do if you have Foot Stomp, and you just negated your ability to hit everyone with it. Obviously, this can be mitigated somewhat, by standing on the edge of the group and trying to use it like a cone. It's usually not very successful, and that's not really the fun in using a power like Hand Clap. For the record, I'm very disappointed in this situation, because I think Hand Clap is a fantastically epic power that belongs in any superhero game. I just think this game is designed in a way that makes large amounts of scatter a detriment in most teaming situations.
I mostly dislike uncontrolled pets with AoE KB unless I'm solo or on a small team where nobody has any meaningful AoE powers. There's no way you're going to "control" this KB with skill. You're not even in control of it. That being said, Phantom Army makes up for its KB because of the aggro control and damage it also provides. The Thug with Hand Clap KB (it's KD now, right?) was often infuriating.
So, over the 8 years I've been playing this game, I've found myself caring more about the teaming situations, and because of that, I would like a way to convert AoE KB into KD. I have an Energy/Energy Blaster that I love, but she does not have Energy Torrent or Explosive Blast, because I found them to be disruptive enough on teams that I would have to hold them back for certain circumstances. Eventually I realized that I'd enjoy myself more if I simply dropped them for two other powers. Now I'll be able to pick one up again.
I think the pro- and anti-KB people are both right. The pro-KB people just likely prefer different situations than I do, and the anti-KB people probably prefer situations similar to the ones I do.
So, yeah, I think it's mostly just playstyle preferences, so I'm happy we're getting this IO, and I hope we'll get a couple more types so I can slot one in Wormhole and Hand Clap. -
I would like more outdoor instanced maps. I don't like open world content, as I prefer to play just with my friends.
I don't mind traveling to and from missions in the open world, but I like to think of my character being a superhero in a world full of superheroes, and that's difficult to do when I'm constantly encountering people like xXN I N J AXx and Nurse Spanksalot, and I'd rather not have to team up with them for zone events. People that like characters like that deserve to play the game the way they like too, but I'd rather play with people who are like-minded with me when it comes to character concept. -
This is called "opportunity cost", and is my favorite form of "drawback" in game design. It isn't an actual built-in effect in the power that can be detrimental in certain circumstances. Parry doesn't provide any effect that can be considered detrimental that every other melee attack in the game doesn't already provide.
-
Will do, I can always use more of those.
-
-
-
Quote:I've heard theories that it takes more than just goodness, but also overcoming great struggles, or someone who has something like a "warrior's heart", which is why Captain America, a WWII soldier, can lift it, and Wonder Woman (an Amazon warrior) would be able to lift it, but not Superman.I can't understand why Superman wouldn't beable to lift Thor's hammer. :/
EDIT: Yeah, this is actually paraphrased from Walt Simonson's quote on the Beta Ray Bill wiki page -- the wielder needs to be willing to kill, because this is a weapon designed to kill Frost Giants. However, in that same quote, he said he didn't think Captain America should be able to wield it, because he's a symbol of the US, which would prevent a Norse artifact from choosing him. So you know, it's just whoever the writers feel like letting pick it up. -
-
Your own screenshot earlier in the thread shows that it is attuned.
-
-
Quote:Thank you for adding this. I've wanted it for years.The conversion (Knockback to Knockdown) happens 100% of the time; if the power you slot this in does not have Knockback in it then it adds a proc to do Knockdown.
I think the first thing I'm slotting it in is Wormhole. Then I'm going to take Shockwave on my Claws Scrapper. Then I'm respeccing back into Energy Torrent or Explosive Blast (haven't decided which) on my Energy/Energy Blaster.
Oh my god. Hand Clap. I'm going to start taking Hand Clap again. -
Sorry, man, according to Kevin Feige, Marvel's President of film Production, it's Tony's father, and that is indeed supposed to be the Tesseract in his notes:
Quote:And while there are some obvious date errors in there, there's really nothing that surprising about a rich eccentric playboy not settling down and having kids until 55 years of age.In Iron Man II there’s a scene where Tony is flipping through his father’s old notebook. I told Jon that we thought the young version of Howard Stark was going to be a character in Captain America, because we need a gadget guy, sort of a Q for SHIELD. I said, “What if the prop guy just draws a little cube on this page of this notebook? You never have to mention it, never even talk about it, it’s just there.” Jon said, “Sure, whatever.” The trick is, the Easter eggs have to enhance the experience for those who know what they are, but not detract from the experience for those who don’t. -
Quote:I agree with this (at least for the version depicted in this particular film). Otherwise why would Hulk have been so concerned about Tony Stark at the end? I think he had concern because of the admiration and respect Banner has for Stark as being the successful scientist he wanted to be, and the bond they formed in the lab on the helicarrier. Hulk had no experience with Stark prior to this fight, so he can't be a different person from Banner, because that was all Banner's concern.I believe that's because the Hulk is "a bit of Banner" in terms of being a piece of Banner's subconscious in the first place. But I don't think Banner's literal conscious mind was in a fuzzy sense lurking in the Hulk. I don't see the Hulk and Banner as two different people where one is in the foreground and the other in the background alternatingly. I think the Hulk is a part of Banner he suppresses when he's not the Hulk. Another way of putting it is I think Banner is a different person when he's the Hulk like a drunk person is a different person when intoxicated, only to a much higher degree.
-
Quote:This actually explains a lot. I have no memory of that specific pair-off (I need to see this movie again, ARGH!) so that jives with an interview comment I read from Joss that was talking about how you don't want him to be transforming into the Hulk at that point, because he's actually mad at her (prior to your comment, I was like "why was he mad at her?").Banner and Black Widow were the ones who paired off during that group argument, so any hostility he was feeling toward her likely bled over into Hulk's persona.
I'm still not sure about the bit with the Jet pilot though. I just was thinking, maybe he grabs him in anger, realizes he shouldn't kill him, and then tosses him away in anger. -
Quote:This is something I was trying to figure out. Did Hulk catch the pilot after he ejected to check to make sure he had a parachute?Not to mention he couldn't easily squished Black Widow or the pilot of the fighter jet and didn't.
I'm having a lot of trouble not seeing the whole scene with Hulk on the carrier being Hulk manipulated by Loki, and actually wanting to hurt people, but luckily not doing so. The only other possibility I can think of is that he was mad and just wanted to scare the people he was mad at.
I can't wait for the DVD/Blu-Ray commentary. -
Quote:Unfortunately, I have a poor memory of the opening scene. I want desperately to see the movie again (and again, and again), so that I can pay more attention to it, but I just haven't had time. So yeah, if Thanos's speaker's dialogue implied (or outright stated) this offer in the beginning, that's cool, and makes even more sense.Actually, that's exactly how I assumed conquering Earth helps him regain his rightful place. It seemed nominally obvious to me from the opening scene that the deal was Loki had to prove he was a good investment: conquering Earth was the audition to demonstrate he was worth his benefactor investing more into an effort to retake Asgard. The fact that it is a place his brother loves is just the icing on the cake and the fact that Loki needs the adoration anyway means it doesn't take much to convince him to try to take over the world as a stepping stone.
-
Quote:Loki does just want to rule something if he can't have Asgard, but I think Loki also wants to rule the Earth as revenge against Thor. Thor loves Earth, so Loki wants to take it from him, as he feels Thor took his chance at ruling Asgard.The only other nitpicks I had were that the plot was pretty basic, bad guy wants to take over the world. And I couldn't quite get Loki's motivation for wanting to rule earth other than it'd be easy when he should still want to rule Asgard. Perhaps if they had made it clearer that if he were successful with Earth, they'd assist him with Asgard for example.
Quote:The other thing I didn't quite catch, either because I missed it, or it wasn't quite covered was how Loki knew about each of the Avengers that were going to be used so he could put his plan into motion. The best guess I had was that he pried it all from Hawkeye's mind. In which case, his plan had been spawned by a moment of luck?
I hate 3D, too, and was lucky enough to see it in glorious 2D. -
Quote:Red Hulk is just terrible, period. I wish that character would go away, and that they'd put She-Hulk back on the Avengers.(Red Hulk has a bunch of his own baggage that would make him terrible for the movies.)
I'd love to see Hulk himself back on the Avengers in the comics, but I don't really see that happening any time soon after World War Hulk. -
Quote:Joss is an atheist, so he wouldn't believe that "there's only one God" (as he believes in zero gods). So yeah, in this case I think Joss was attempting to realistically convey the beliefs of the character, even if though he does not share them.I'm curious where it says the writer doesn't believe it.
Or does the writer actually believe in the Norse Gods?
I don't think Joss sneers at Captain America. I do hear he sneers at Wonder Man, though.
I think Jubilation Lee = Jubilee is the worst, personally, but that hasn't been revealed in a movie yet. -
-
As a Hulk fan, who has often been disappointed with his portrayal in various media (including comics), the period from when he first entered the fight in the invasion until the end of the movie made me very emotional. I never imagined that I'd get to see the Hulk portrayed on the big screen like this. Laugh if you like, but I teared up at seeing him single-handedly take out that massive serpent thing, and each successive scene with him just got better. Getting to see him be a hero instead of a monster, following Captain America's orders, fighting alongside Thor, and saving Iron Man was a very big deal to me.
The CG version of the Hulk also looked perfect. I had complaints about the Ang Lee hulk looking too smooth and plasticky with a baby face, and the Norton Hulk was overly detailed (muscles on muscles) and his face would distort when he'd scream, but this one was perfect.
I was really disappointed when they dropped Edward Norton, but Mark Ruffalo was fantastic.
Joss and the actors did an amazing job, the studio obviously didn't mess it up at all, and I just couldn't imagine the movie being better. -
Quote:Yes.Actually, that's only half-right...
IIRC Energy Blast (or the graphics for it?) was originally a 'Water Blast' set, way back in alpha or beta??
I really, really hope this means we'll also get an Energy Blast set that looks more beam-like, and less like firing globules of opaque liquid. I don't care if it's a new set called Energy Beam or something, or an alternate set of VFX for Energy Blast, but I'd like one either way. -
Quote:Sorry I didn't respond to this earlier. I agree with everything you've said here in general, especially the bit about predictability and the last paragraph.That's not what I was thinking. It would perhaps be better to state that I have thought of ways to make the AI not do obviously stupid things, and not act consistently predictably.
For example, having the critter AI ignore taunt breaks the intent of taunt. But having taunted critters that have no melee attacks at all run up to the tanker when taunted is idiotic. In fact, running out of the county when the thing you're primarily attacking is itself a melee character is equally idiotic. It makes more sense to run thirty feet and then turn and start shooting again.
"Smarter AI" as I am thinking of it doesn't mean "figure out the best way to frustrate the player." Its more of "always act with (apparent) purpose." Why move closer if it doesn't help your offense? Why continue to run if the attackers can't hit you? Why watch the players kill something right in your line of sight? Why stand all in one place? Why patrol in a straight line without ever looking behind?
The problem is people think addressing these issues would require massive computational resources, but I don't think they do. I think you can leverage the principles of emergent behavior to engineer simple AI that generate complex results when perturbed by situational changes.
To add to it, I'd like to see some personality show up in AI. Yeah, for the most part, enemies shouldn't be doing stupid things. But you know, some people are stupid, even highly trained people (a friend of mine who was in the Navy on an aircraft carrier once described how he was shown a training video showing people running towards a fire on the deck instead of away from it, as an example of how people can act irrationally under pressure). And sometimes having your enemies do something stupid or crazy is interesting. Just not if they always (or even often) do it. I think personality quirks like this would result in some of that emergent behavior. Having some kind of automated dialogue to go with it would prevent it from people thinking "this is a bug", if the guy just randomly taking off yells "Oh god, we're all going to die!" or the guy rushing into melee with his rifle yells "Raaaargh, I will shoot you in the FACE!" or something.
Just so you know, when I said "it's often the sort of thing people come up with when they want to make smarter AI", I also meant that I've heard game developers say it. To be fair, I've never worked on AI before, but it's odd to me that most (as far as I've seen) game developers, when they are talking about good AI, think "what would a smart player do here" and not "what things might a sentient being do if they were in the situation that this critter is in?" My goal with AI would be to try to keep the game interesting and engaging, but for a lot of people, good AI means trying to beat the players.