Master-Blade

Doh! lol

Thanks for letting us know. I guess I'll just hang out and wait for the new site and Herostats to be updated.

I think he knows how to get to first person.. I think he was saying he wouldn't be able to stand playing that way.

What method are we using to verify/auto-update badges to the new layout?
Is there a new version of HeroStats or another program?

The Default is 0, which means the effects will always play unless in First-person view. Any FX while in Third-person view will be displayed until the distance is changed.

The units are in feet. 300 sets the value well beyond the normal camera distance.
I believe the default camera distance when you first start the client and log in is 10.
The maximum camera distance using the Mouse Wheel is 80.
/CamDist # can get you up to 120.
While base editing, you can zoom out as far as 800 feet.

Note:
Keep in mind that the /SuppressCloseFX command will only affect auras and effects on your own character, and some powers are not flagged to allow suppression. If you find such a power/set, and feel it was accidentally overlooked, make sure to bring it to the attention of the appropriate Dev so that it might be fixed in a later patch.

Also:
No matter what distance you set with /SuppressCloseFXdist, you must still make sure /SuppressCloseFX is set to 1 to enable the suppression. Set /SuppressCloseFX to 0 to allow all effects again.

This, and for larger/taller toons, jumping doesn't always work at first, but doing the ;sit emote and then jumping backward usually makes you pop right out... at least from my own experiences anyway.

Good to know. Thanks. It's been a while since I set up any badge teams for those.

Did your other problem with starting certain matches ever get fixed? If not, maybe it's related?

I think what she was saying was that there are a small handful of TFs that you already qualify for, and if you join those, you'll get enough XP to qualify for the next lvl range. (Remember: We now get XP while EX'd.)

According to Ginko's schedule, that's Positron (6/17), Moonfire (6/24), Sister Psyche (7/1), Citadel (7/8), Hess (7/15).

That should easily get you to 30+ to run Manticore on 7/29.
You already qualify for Synapse on 8/5.
He'll be running Maria's AV arc from a contact on 8/12, which means you would be SSK'd up with no minimum level requirement.

I'd imagine you'd be 35+ by 8/19 (2½ months from now) to run the ITF.
With any luck, you might even be 45+ to run Kahn (8/26) and Faathim (9/2) as well.

So it looks like the only one that toon might not qualify for is Numina on 7/22, and possibly the last two, depending on if you did any leveling outside the weekly TFs.

No. I still had my client open from the first time I tried earlier this morning. I had the server status page open on my other screen, and when I noticed the servers were "Up", I simply logged in again without having to exit for any patches.

However, just because there was no client patch, this doesn't mean there wasn't any kind of changes serverside. I don't see any announcement though.

My math is correct too, and I still got 42.

There was at least some breakage with the release of the new chat interface of i12 as well, but it wasn't as bad... and it got fixed. Issues have come and gone over the years... and some just come. lol

That doesn't work anymore if you have any line breaks. It'll paste the whole thing as one line and you still have to manually try to add the lines breaks, which can still be a pain at times.

I can't view it, and your picture is not currently working for me either (I didn't even know you had an image link until I pressed quote and saw the code). Either they are having problems, or it's just a fluke thing that I can't view their site at all. lol

Well, I kept your image link in my quote, so hopefully it'll display properly eventually. haha

9x6 in a Base10 number system is 54, yes.. but we are referencing a Base13 system here. A Base10 system has 10 numbers (0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9), so a Base13 system would have 13 (0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C).

I'll draw up a table to demonstrate how 54 in Base10 is equivalent to 42 in Base13:

1. 1
2. 2
3. 3
4. 4
5. 5
6. 6
7. 7
8. 8
9. 9
10. A
11. B
12. C
13. 10
14. 11
15. 12
16. 13
17. 14
18. 15
19. 16
20. 17
21. 18
22. 19
23. 1A
24. 1B
25. 1C
26. 20
27. 21
28. 22
29. 23
30. 24
31. 25
32. 26
33. 27
34. 28
35. 29
36. 2A
37. 2B
38. 2C
39. 30
40. 31
41. 32
42. 33
43. 34
44. 35
45. 36
46. 37
47. 38
48. 39
49. 3A
50. 3B
51. 3C
52. 40
53. 41
54. 42

Another way to convert 42 in Base13 into Base10 would be to multiply 4 by 13, then add 2:
4x13 = 52
52+2 = 54

Therefore, 4213 = 5410

And since both 9 and 6 remain unchanged in both number systems, a valid answer to 9x6 (regardless which Base is being used) is 4213

I hope that clears it up a bit... then again, does it strike anybody funny that in Base10, 6x7=42, and 6+7=13, and the answer to our question was 42 in base 13, both derived from 6 and 7? There is a conspiracy somewhere! lol

I understood that there are other ways a mail can "bounce" back to it's sender, but the way it was worded made it sound like a bounced email (from a full inbox) could exceed your own cap.. It would be impossible for this to happen. If you are full, you cannot send an e-mail attachment to anybody, let alone send one to a full box and have it bounce back. lol

Ah. That's the post I apparently missed. The announcement I was referring to is similar to what they listed on Wiki in the i17 notes:
That seems silly to me actually because if you are already at 20 e-mails and cannot send another one, how would you be able to send one to a full mailox to have the bounced mail exceed your cap? lol

Anyway, back to your reasoning.. if that's the case, then it would be nice to have a "sent" folder or some other way that would allow you to retrieve unclaimed messages after a certain period of time.

For example, just for kicks, I know a bunch of people that have sent out "candy grams" (a message saying hello and a candy cane attached). I'm sure there are at least a few people that would keep it because it's cute.. but then the person who sent them wont be able to use that feature anymore if 20 of those random people happened to save it. That's a bummer.


Anyway, regardless of how the limit works, we kinda got off topic. The point here is that I sent a message to 2 different inactive accounts, and both of them were immediately returned to me. I know for a fact that neither one of them would have reached the limit (no matter which way it works), and at least one of them does have email enabled.

That tells me that you cannot send items to inactive accounts.. which is a really good thing anyway because then we get back to the limit of 20, and if outgoing counted, and you sent to inactive accounts, you'd be screwed as well. lol

My inactive secondary account that I used as a test does not even really use e-mail, so it has never sent or received 20 total e-mails, let alone having 20 still active... then again, for all I know the e-mail options on that account might be disabled completely and bouncing it automatically.

So as another test, I just sent to a third account which has also been inactive inside the 90 day period. I know the e-mail preferences were active on that account as I used it a couple times before letting it expire. It still did not send or receive a total of 20 e-mails though, and it STILL bounced the mail back to my main account.

On a sidenote, I have a slightly different interpretation of the mail announcement (unless there was a more detailed one that I missed). I believe you are allowed to send or receive a new attachment when your inbox has less than 20 attachments in it. Outgoing mails do not count. If a sent e-mail is "returned" or bounced back when an account expires, it may exceed your limit of 20, but you will have to claim them until you have less than 20 in order to be able to send or receive again.

If it worked the way you say it, then 20 random e-mails over the years that 20 people happen to save for whatever reason might screw you out of being able to even use the attachment feature ever again and you wouldn't even know who is saving the mails and wouldn't be able to take any kind of action to correct it.

He didn't say there was nothing at all wrong with CoH. He simply stated that some part of the issue must be on your side somewhere, which given the available information is exactly right.

Whatever settings/hardware or overall capability of your system seems to be is apparently at a certain threshold with lower tolerances than our systems. That's why minor tweaks, fixes, population or server stability on CoH's side tends to decide your fate one way or the other.

The fix from CoX may fix your issue, but that does not mean it was the whole problem to begin with. If it was, then EVERYBODY would have been experiencing the same thing. Any one of us with a setup that works fine at the same time yours does not obviously has different variables allowing our system to succeed where yours fails. That makes the problem partially on your end (or somewhere inbetween).

That's easy, It's 42!

I can't speak for the OP, but ATI 5770 here. I have FSAA off because of the Occlusion conflict, but everything else is maxed. Do you not experience the same draw distance effects with your shadows?