Luminara

Understood.

So, boys and girls, how about those awesome CGI-enhanced script proposals for that new film that's entering production? It's called Mass Effect. Looks like it's going to be entertaining.

That's what she said!

Mmm... Taco Bell...

What I'm talking about is so far over your head, it has an orbital altitude. I've explained it nine ways to Sunday and you're still clinging to your rope.

So keeping the air properly conditioned, the oxygen at a certain percentage, the water clean, the waste separated and recycled, the food uncontaminated, the meals cooked, the computers working, and even, yes, the doors functioning, none of these things are relevant or complex because... the drive is working. This is your conclusion.

Really. So in your opinion, an ocean liner is no more complex in construction or mechanical operation than a dingy with an outboard motor. A glass sphere with air inside it is no more complex than a nuclear-powered submarine. A Chevy Bronco with an eight cylinder engine is no more complex than a moped with a single cylinder engine. The ISS is no more complex than a single space shuttle or rocket. A Beowulf cluster is no more complex than a PDA. And engineers all over the world have, somehow, missed this for thousands of years, and still don't know about it.

You should totally announce your discovery to the world. I'm sure someone here can hook you up with any number of experts in the field of engineering. You could make bazillions. Just tell 'em about the rope.

Can a single window-mounted air conditioner properly circulate cool air for the Empire State building? No. You'd need hundreds of similar devices to do the same job in that building that one would do in a three room house.

That's true across the board. One pump which would be sufficient to move water in a small ship would not suffice for a ship 100x larger. One circuit panel which would handle basic systems for one small ship would not be workable in a ship significantly larger. One hydraulic assembly to open ten doors will not even open a single door if it's hooked up to ten thousand doors. The larger you make the ship, the more equipment you need to make it function properly. The more equipment you add, the greater the complexity. And the greater the need for redundancy, and spares, which further magnifies the complexity because all of that equipment is capable of failure, must be checked regularly and monitored constantly. Whereas small ships can house small groups using small, comparatively simple systems, a single large ship capable of housing a population equivalent to the state of New York is going to need sufficient equipment to serve that population.

The systems designed to support smaller groups of people have to be scaled upward drastically to support a population nearly equivalent to the population of the state of New York. 17,000,000 Quarians are not going to get by with one air conditioner, regardless of how many times you say it or try to convince everyone else that it's true. You need sufficient support to keep everyone alive, support provided in the form of multiple systems. A thousand air conditioners, all interconnected to provide redundancy in the event of failures in a few, with backup air conditioners in place and enough spare parts to rebuild the bare minimum number of air conditioners to keep the population alive. Every system has to be designed this way, and it is, despite your assertions, much more complex.

Unless you'd like to share that tremendous breakthrough that you've had which will permit us to cool entire 100 story buildings with a single window-mounted air conditioner, or pump water throughout an entire city with a 1 horsepower pump, I find your reasoning to be more than a little suspect.

And the sanitation system, and the electrical system, and the computers, and the hydraulics, and the recycling system, and the food delivery system, and the...

Your way, the latter is guaranteed.

No, I keep saying that the larger devices are not inherently simpler devices, and that larger mechanical devices are composed of more smaller devices, which inherently makes them more complex, not simpler. If you knew anything about any of what you were attempting to discuss, you'd know how true that is.

Mechanical devices are not braided, twisted fibers. Ropes don't have millions, thousands, hundreds or even dozens of moving parts, circuitry or wiring, electrical components, pipes, hydraulics, doors, decks or anything else you'd find in a space ship. How you arrived at using rope as an analogy for complexity in mechanical objects is beyond me, because it isn't even remotely comparable.

And despite that being the stupidest analogy possible, it can still be used to prove that you're wrong. When you extend the length of that rope 10x, you correspondingly increase the risk of breaking the rope as well. The longer it is, the greater the chance of failure at some point along the rope because it will have more flaws and you will have a greater likelihood of missing something during an inspection or repair. The only thing you've proven is that you know even less about any of what you've said than was previously in evidence.

There may be fewer total moving parts on one large transportation unit than there are on a thousand smaller transportation units, but the equipment on that one larger transportation unit is far more complex, prone to failure and difficult to maintain than the thousand smaller ones. No-one who knows anything about engines will argue that a single enormous one, like you'd find on a locomotive or ocean liner, is simpler and easier to maintain than a hundred basic ones, like you'd find on mopeds or chain saws.

Furthermore, the larger your transportation unit, the more "stuff" you have to put into it to support the inhabitants, and unless you make it with magic, there is a point where that one large unit is using more "stuff" to keep it going than all of the smaller units would use combined. Additional cooling for working systems, extra backup systems to avoid wiping out the entire population in the event of failure of a single system, more spare parts which must be checked and tested for functionality regularly.

Except that you wouldn't have to clean those 100 at the same time. They can be maintained or repaired on the fly, or abandoned, while the rest of the fleet moves on or waits. And due to the increased complexity of the larger one, it would take as long to disassemble, clean and reassemble the larger one as it would to clean a preset number of smaller ones, which may actually be greater than the equivalence of ships currently in the Migrant Fleet.

So many erroneous assumptions here...

If one smaller one breaks, it doesn't put the entire population at risk.

The larger one is more likely to break than a smaller one because it is more complex. Yes, it may have "less moving parts" than a hundred smaller ships, but that's irrelevant because 100 smaller units aren't going to suffer identical failures at the same time. In actuality, you can only compare the repair and maintenance time of a single large engine to the expected average for the smaller ships together.

Analogy: A single semi has fewer moving parts than a hundred mopeds. But a single semi is not easier to maintain or repair than a hundred mopeds, because a hundred mopeds won't all fail at the same time, won't all fail in exactly the same way and won't require exactly the same repairs. Nor is it easier to work on that semi, because the complexity of the the engine, fuel system, hydraulics, electrical system and mechanical parts are all far, far greater than the complexity of the mopeds.

The larger one is also more likely to break than the smaller ones because the parts are being used more heavily and with fewer rest periods for maintenance, replacement and adjustment. Smaller ships can stop, do maintenance or repairs, and catch back up to the fleet later. A large ship just breaks down and drifts, or kills the entire population if the failure is severe.

They need twice the material goods, minimum, plus space to store all of what they need for repairs, plus space and equipment to fabricate replacements and repair parts on site. One giant ship can't scavenge anything for repairs, because there's only that one giant ship, nothing from which they could scavenge. In addition to all of the parts it has actively working, it needs sufficient spares to swap out everything, or materials and space to fabricate replacements. And that's in addition to all of the backup systems that have to be kept on standby, and yes, they absolutely would have backup systems for everything. Electrical, environmental, engine, plumbing, sanitation, everything. One thing failing and not having an immediate switchover to a backup could kill the entire population.

Read up on ocean liners. They operate essentially identically to what you're describing for a "city ship". They aren't as simple as you'd like to believe, they don't have the material requirements that you espouse and the same is true of spacecraft.

Remember market window divider position.

Remember state of memorized recipes (COLLAPSED, FOR THE LOVE OF FRANK).

Remember e-mail window size.

And add my voice to the clamor over that invisible poop-help (not a typo) window.

Really frustrating to have to fight the UI to access the game.

Red splash text is for warnings. It has absolutely nothing to do with rarity, of any sort. Your comparison has no bearing or connection to the drop system, how item drops are colored by tier or anything else being discussed in this thread.

Then I suggest starting a new thread to discuss that, because that's not the purpose of this thread.

Yes, as a matter of fact, there are rules for that. You not receiving a PM to inform you doesn't mean they don't exist or aren't followed. Just as there is a rule which says Defense is purple and Healing/Regen is green, there's a rule which says that splash text coloring is specific to different things. Red for warnings, blue for enhancement drops, white for drops which are common within a system (recipes, salvage), yellow for drops which are uncommon within a system, etc.

The developers don't throw stuff into the game at random, without any planning or design guidelines. Believe it or not, they actually spend more than thirty seconds thinking about how they're going to implement things, and they even try to maintain consistency in implementation. Shard drop notifications are white because shards are common Incarnate salvage, for the same reason that Nevermelting Ice drop notifications are white because they're common Invention salvage and Range recipes are white because they're common Recipes. The developers created those rules for themselves and follow them to maintain consistency. If you have an issue with those rules, take it up with them.

This sidetrack is over. If you'd like to continue to argue, debate or ***** about splash text coloring not making sense to you, start another thread. This one concerns audible feedback for shard drops.

Shards are common Incarnate salvage items. Actually, they're one step below common, but there isn't a color code to denote that, so they share the white used by common.

One tier above that is the actual common components, the ones obtained by completing specific T/SFs or through purchase with Vanguard merits.

The next step up is the uncommon Incarnate salvage, which is yellow in the Incarnate window. These are the ones which we create by combining a common component with eight shards.

All of this is based on the same theme that was used to create the Invention system, so it's a given that there will be rare Incarnate components, colored orange in keeping with the established pattern. There may even be purple Incarnate components used in the top tier boosts.

The fact that shards are the only Incarnate salvage items which actually drop, or what their drop rate is, is irrelevant. They're color coded white because they're bottom tier salvage for the system in which they're used. This prevents unnecessary confusion which would arise from, for example, players getting orange or purple shard drops and combining them into white or yellow components, which would be in contrast to the existing Invention system, and it means the developers don't have to create yet another color coding system which separately identifies Incarnate drops, which would also be confusing and add another unnecessary layer of complexity.

So it doesn't really matter if shards drop less frequently than purples, or as frequently as rare salvage, or rain down from the heavens like Rikti during a raid, it's where they reside on the Incarnate salvage list that determines color coding, not the drop rate. And since they're bottom tier Incarnate salvage, they're white.

Trick Arrows.

I like archery. I like the animations. I like the diversity it offers. I like debuffing. I like not having to worry about losing an anchor or toggles dropping. I like the tactical aspects and advantages of OSA, and the additional damage. I like having powers which aren't dependent on a teammate or pet to function. I like the mobility. And I like the challenge of making it work despite the bugs, less than average mitigatory potential and poor balance in lower level play.

So I keep playing it. I have TA defenders, masterminds, corruptors and controllers. I've put over 1000 hours on my TA/Dark and I'm still playing her. And I still have half a dozen and more planned TA builds of various kinds that I haven't even started yet. I've played many of the other debuffing sets, but none of them meets my needs the way TA does. So despite its flaws and having grown so familiar with it that sometimes I just have to stop and play something entire different (how i ended up leveling a Fire/Elec scrapper and Bane to 50) in order to keep my interest in the game, I always go back to TA.

*waves pom-poms* TA cheerleader for life.

Did you know that the "assume the position" emote looks like you're holding up pom-poms if you do it with Hasten active and not facing a wall?

It also works for "JAZZ HANDS!".

>.>

<.<

Everyone's staring at me again. I hate that. Stop it. -_-

The purpose of Real Numbers is to inform players exactly what their powers do. Whether the information is correct for the specific pointer it's referencing is irrelevant, it's a bug because it's not performing the intended function of giving players accurate information on those powers.

Jump.

Absolutely. Whether they can or will have time to fix them, only they can say, but they're definitely bugs.

There will be when you're finished compiling it. Thanks for volunteering!

I reply to each point individually, in order. Always. It provides reference for the reader to see exactly what I'm addressing and clarifies the response. If there are fifty things to address, then I will quote fifty distinct parts and respond to them sequentially. I don't quote an entire post and tag it with a one-liner, or throw out a "naked" response with no quoted material to indicate to whom I'm replying or what I'm addressing, nor do I quote a post and try to respond to discrete points in that post with a single wholesale response.

I've done it this way for over fifteen years, because it's clear, concise and very effectively conveys information specifically where it's needed in a discussion. It gives me the opportunity to fully address everything, organize my thoughts into a coherent response and at least attempt to say everything I want to say in one reply. It gives the reader the same options and allows them to more easily follow a thought process or conversation.

If I wanted to give a humorous and/or disrespectful response, I would simply say something like, "Are you high?" and leave it at that. Capisce?

Yes, it looks different, and yes, your post was read fully. It's a visual indicator that all of the Rare boosts will be valid for the Very Rare boosts, rather than only specific ones like the previous boosts. That's all.

Are you high?

Irrelevant. Everything is subject to change in this game. That doesn't invalidate current and verifiable information.

No, it isn't. If you do what Nox suggested, hover your mouse pointer over any of the Very Rare boosts, you'll very clearly see that it states "[Ability Cost: Any two Rare]" at the bottom of the tooltip window which pops up.

Yes. Any two Rare can be used in the creation of a single Very Rare.

It wouldn't say "Any two Rare", then, would it.

Yes we do.

Yes we do, and yes they do, because all of Alpha slot material was ready to be released months ago. It was pushed back to I19 in order to add playable content to go along with the new abilities, as Positron stated when he posted about the Incarnate content being put on hold temporarily.

Or we can forgo speculation in favor of reading the information made available.

These are facts, provided by the development team. You owe Nox an apology. Get on it.

That was my initial intention, but Cardiac Core is too perfect for my build for me to bother testing anything else.

Well, I only have 12 right now, and an Ancient Nictus Fragment, but basically, yes, I'm hoping to save enough components to blitz the next two enhancements.

I've gotten almost all of my shards soloing, so... *shrug*

I expected to stop chasing shards as soon as I finished the Cardiac Core, but I'm enjoying the additional range and smoother endurance usage so much that I'm still logging in nightly to spend an hour or three just obliterating spawns and watching for that giggle-inducing "Incarnate Shard Bonded" message.

Having gotten enough purples, rare drops and relatively desired uncommon recipes to rack up 2.5 billion influence in the last couple of weeks (i had less than 25 million when I19 went live), as well as topped 700 badges, including Leader, hasn't done much to deter me from playing my main, either.

ME2 was released about two years after ME, so ME3 coming two years after ME2 is an appropriate time frame.

Was hoping to hear something about The Old Republic, but I'm not seeing anything here. :/

It's a tool for self-aggrandizing dick-waving more often than not, and the situations when it could be utilized to help a player improve his/her damage output only exist in this game in the form of AVs, GMs and Monsters, none of which are actually difficult enough for any team to defeat that they should need DPS tracking and analysis. The only instance when a DPS meter could be useful here is when a player is soloing an AV/GM/Monster, and if the player has reached that point, he/she damn well better know how much damage he/she is dealing already.

Furthermore, if you're going to track DPS, you're obligated to track everything else. Healing, buffing, debuffing, controlling, pet commanding, phasing, everything. Anything that you don't track is someone's dick left dangling, which leads to bad attitudes and poor teammate selection based on falsehoods generated by a lack of information.

You also create and encourage competition where none currently exists, or should exist, thereby fostering an environment of discontent and an erroneous belief that X doesn't contribute because X wasn't doing something that was tracked by UberSpecialMeter, or Y can't contribute because Y doesn't have a resume in the form of sixteen pages of IO set bonuses.

So no, a DPS meter is not something we want in Co*. If you're that interested in watching dicks waving, read SG recruitment ads or look in the individual server forums for SG fights. They're just as misleading, useless and pointless, but at least they don't continually waste CPU cycles and memory after you're done laughing at them and moved on.