Mystic_Cross

I support this 1000%


Survey done & done...

Thing's I'd like to see in the market: game subscription time purchaseable with points... all the standard ones, 1, 3, 6 and 12 month subs... and maybe even the 12+2 holiday one during christmas.

Things I'd like to see in super packs: Character slot unlocks, Salvage and Recipe inventory increases

Seeing others suggestions here, I suppose there are a few more I could have put in, but those things just came off the top of my head, didn't put a lot of thought into it.

Thanks for making the survey available to everyone!

serious question: so what if i want to slot a full set of Stalkers Guile into Assassin's Strike... recharge enhancement makes up 5/6 of the set. I've loaded this set into every stalker I play, and they all use it in AS, it's the only power i'm interested in putting it in. at this point, is my choice to either not use spiritual or agility alphas, or not use the set I paid for?

Stalkers Guile ED caps enhanced recharge already, as do most of the Archetype sets I've used. This alone is apparently going to affect the proc in those sets and effectively gut DPS potential for *my* stalkers, at the least. I don't use uber pre-analyzed attack chains or anything, I just use powers I want to use when I want to use them. the one power I do use consistently now is AS.


Now given that the Stalkers Guile chance to hide proc will only activate once every 10 seconds no matter what, due to the buff it puts on you when it procs... it already has a cap to how it can be used, unlike most of the other procs.


so can Synapse, or anyone, tell me how this particular proc is going to be affected by the proposed changes? because from where I'm standing it looks like there isn't really a way to increase PPM from where it currently is, so the 90% chance to proc is only going to lower PPM in this case, then add in the inclusion of recharge enhancement reducing it further, and/or the alpha... it's basically made worthless unless the core way the proc functions is changed as well.

EDIT:below - just saw this as I was looking through the thread trying to catch up.


So in regards to the Stalkers Guile chance to hide, you took where it currently sits being able to activate no more than 5ppm due to the buff it places on you when it procs, increased the actual PPM to reflect 5, then reduced the proc chance (90%) and added the additional qualifier that if you choose to slot the whole set for the bonuses, you will be greatly less effective and end up with approximately 3PPM which can be further reduced if you actually use AS while the procs "buff" is still on you, not allowing you to go into hide even if the proc "hits" and then reduced further again if you choose to slot any alpha that has a recharge component. to me, that looks like it will be typically just under half as effective as it currently is... or about a 60% nerf, in practice, garnering around 2-3PPM as the end result. the impact looks to be much less on paper, but in-game that seems like quite a huge difference.

considering that the proc will not work if you are under the stalkers guile buff it places on you, and that buff lasts 10 seconds, there is no way to activate it more than 5 times per minute under ideal circumstances when considering activation time, no matter what it says "on paper". even with the fast 1s animation time of un-hidden AS, you're looking at 1 proc every 11 seconds at best which would allow for a 5ppm "cap" already effective in its current state on live. there is absolutely no way to overcome the 5ppm "cap" regardless of how much slotted or global recharge you have.

EDIT: p.s. there is also no way to increase the ppm of the catalyst version of this proc/set over 5ppm, since it also places the same 10 second buff on you when it procs. the changes effectively make the standard version 2PPM and the catalyst version 4PPM, approximately, from what I can see here.

^^
I second what Forbin said.

maybe, if Percy Winkly is the writer...

so, does that include your own post on the last page? or are you saying nobody in the thread has made a valid point except you? those are both rhetorical questions, in case you were wondering. I really don't have any intent to see if you respond or even revisit this thread again.

The "argument" as you put it, is moot. itrials will continue to form in rwz regardless, as there's no benefit to itrial members for forming them in any other location.

Nice close! I agree completely! that little display in the start of your post really helped me understand where you're coming from, too. well done!

Don't know of any "dictionary" offhand, however, http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Main_Page may be of some assistance for some things. below is the basic lowdown on the "soft cap" from wiki, which in most cases is in reference to the 2nd example below regarding defense. as for S/L, it's a shortened term referring to damage types. Smashing/Lethal/Fire/Cold/Energy/Negative Energy or S/L/F/C/E/N are the most commonly referenced here on the boards. you'll often see the whole spread like I listed above, or in their common pairs of S/L, F/C or E/N

Soft Cap
From Paragon Wiki
Definition

Soft Cap
A soft cap is a practical but not absolute maximum to some bonus or stat, where it is possible to go higher but doing so produces little or no additional benefit.
Examples



The two most common examples of soft caps are:

• Enhancement Diversification. Once a character reaches a certain percentage of Enhancement bonus to a power, each additional Enhancement provides sharply diminished returns.
• Defense. +45% is the soft cap on Defense versus an attack. Due to the way the game's Attack Mechanics work, any more Defense past that will not make the character any harder to hit, except in cases where the attackers have ToHit buffs, are six or more levels above him, or can give him -Defense debuffs.
  • Note that in the Incarnate Trials, enemies have an equivalent to +14% ToHit, so the Incarnate soft cap is 59% instead of 45%.

I just wanted to echo what Tony said, I completely agree. Love how it keeps track of updates for Live, Test and Beta servers all in one place, and while I don't think it's any faster launching the game client, It also isn't slower... everything feels about the same on my end.

Also, I can't speak for others but I haven't run into a single problem (yet) using the launcher with Windows Vista ultimate (64-bit). I've been running it since about a week after the original announcement. My wife and son also haven't had any problems running the launcher on Windows XP professional and XP home, respectively. All of our installations were setup and go, very smooth transitions.