Quasadu

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
yackity schmackity.

[/ QUOTE ]

I got it, Athyna, even if no one else did.

[/ QUOTE ]

So did I.

*wanders off to get a little OJ...*

[ QUOTE ]
Why didn't the poll have more options? Such as:

do you use:

_ Myspace
_ Livejournal
_ Friendster
_ Facebook
_ (etc)

And put the first effort into the one you found the most players used?

[/ QUOTE ]

<plug>

Can't speak for the others, but Livejournal already has thriving, well known City of Heroes and City of Villains communities that have been around since the launch (even the Beta) of their respective games. We're unofficial and fan-run, but so well established that NCSoft really doesn't need any official presence on LJ. Besides, we've got the names already. But as co-mod of the CoH community, I'd be overjoyed to see the Red Names pop in and say hi anytime they feel like it.

</plug>

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I actually wanted to go with Drops II: Drops Harder

[/ QUOTE ]

*sniff sniff*

Hmm. A faint odor of a positronic suit, there. Must be my imagination.

[/ QUOTE ]

No way, I would have gone with Drops II: Attack of the Drops.

[/ QUOTE ]

Star Wars reference; +3 Points. Reference is a prequill, -11ty billion points!

Better would have been; Drops 2: Return of the Drops.

=. .=

[/ QUOTE ]

The Drops Strike Back?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I just read the entire thread, all I can say is I think I deserve a rare recipe from pool B for that.

I would like to add that I'm thankful the dev's are looking into alternate solutions as I was a bit concerned previously.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is another good point. While I'm still very concerned about the potential for fixed supplies of Pool B loot, I do appreciate the Devs' willingness to listen to our concerns. I appreciate them mentioning the fact that they are listening to our concerns even more. I know you guys take a lot of abuse (from myself and others) so thanks for keeping up the effort, and keeping the lines of communication open.

-D

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT.

Thanks for letting us know you're out there and listening, Lighthouse, Doc B, Castle, everybody.

<qr>

Something else just occured to me and I haven't seen it mentioned...

It was mentioned by Doc B that rewards from pools B, C and D depend on level, and that the Trial Recipe Pool doesn't exist at "early levels."

What's the state of the Task/Strike Force Recipe Pool at levels 10-15, 30-35, and 40-45? Villains have no Strike Forces in these level ranges, but Heroes do have Task Forces there.

Or did Doc mean that the reward depends on character level, so that a 42 exemping into a 35-40 Strike force can get a 42 Recipe?

[ QUOTE ]

Completed Story Arc: 100% Chance of Pool B Reward
Completed Taskforce: 75% Chance of Pool C Reward, 25% Chance of Pool B
Completed Trial: 75% Chance of Pool D Reward, 25% Chance of Pool B


[/ QUOTE ]

I could go for that.

[ QUOTE ]
A totally off the wall idea for high lvl characters, heck for all characters.

Hazard Zones. Defeating a spawn in a hazard zone has a chance of dropping any type of invention salvage.

The risk is higher xp debt, the reward is a chance at a rare drop.

Yes this could/will lead to farming, but so will any other solution.

[/ QUOTE ]

Villains do not have hazard zones.

[ QUOTE ]
I prefer: "Drops II: The Wrath of Story Arcs"
KAAAAAHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNN

[/ QUOTE ]

Fixed that.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Positron is twiddling at the workbench now.

[/ QUOTE ]

...

that just sounds RUDE.

[/ QUOTE ]

I lol'd, seriously.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Didn't the Devs say once that an issue with Flashback is that not all enemies go the full range? Only a few do, most notably CoT, Longbow, and, uh... help me out here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Council and Arachnos.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks!

So, except for those 4 groups, you'd need to modify all enemies. That's a tall order!

[/ QUOTE ]

Not if the flashback system just auto-exemps the player, rather than trying to bump the enemies to theplayer's level.

[ QUOTE ]
I'd also echo the concern of level 50s missing out on a key source of rewards. Maybe make the high levels provide more of a particular type of reward in order to promote trades with the ones they cannot access?

Example, 50s gan probably get a lot of AV rewards. They can use these for themselves, or trade them for the story arc ones they need.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are no AV rewards. Doc just said that Minions and AV's drop the same stuff. Enemy defeat is enemy defeat.

That said, the 50's have more access to the Trial and SF/TF stuff.

[ QUOTE ]
Ack no EG I don't do TFs or Trials, but I do as many story arcs as I can before out leveling them. Your saying I can't get any of the rarer recipes?

grrrr.

[/ QUOTE ]

No he's saying that you would get your stuff as explained but that those who missed it could also get it from a TF or Trial.

edit: stupid bbcode

[ QUOTE ]
As for reasons to fight Giant Monsters... well the Hive and the Abyss now contain very good reasons to defeat these guys.

[/ QUOTE ]

o.O

[ QUOTE ]
I think you just made my point. There is only a relatively marginal increase for using the FULL 6 part set vs only 5 of the IOs. The fact is I can use 5 parts and anything else and have a great setup but that defeats the point of using a FULL set. Again, the key word is FULL.

[/ QUOTE ]

It all depends on the set bonuses. I'm very interested to see what that Res (Psi) bonus will be, because I can see it being worthwhile to stick three complete Luck of the Gambler sets in my Energy/Energy brute's three defense toggles (Kinetic Shield, Power Shield, and Energy Cloak). Right now I have those three powers all five-slotted (3 DefBuff and 2 EndRed) and I am sure I could find three slots to take from other powers to make this work.

But again, whether it's worth it or not depends entirely on what that Res (Psi) bonus is.

[ QUOTE ]
It seems to me that Full IO Sets are lacking power. That is to say that there is very little advantage to use a full set in some cases than to just use part of a set.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not true at all. I figure at level 50, for example, the Luck of the Gambler Defense Set is going to give me:

+7.5% Overall Recharge, +57.08% Defense Buff, +67.5% End Reduction, +67.5 Recharge

Plus set bonuses to Regen, HP, ToHit, Res (Hold) and Res (Psi)

Compare that to slotting it three DefBuff, two EndRed, one Rech, where you'd have 56% Def, 66% EndRed, and 33% Rech.

I'll take the Luck of the Gambler set, plzkthx.

[ QUOTE ]
it is possible for certain...unimaginative....people to mix I and l as needed to make it *look* like they have a certain name, when in fact they have another

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all, what's wrong with that?

Second, don't be so quick to assume that the only people taking advantage of the L and i trick are unimaginative. I think the Parallel Illusion on Triumph is a brilliant idea. If you don't know, all the members of the SG are Phantom Army decoys, once summoned by Illusion controllers, that have gained independence and semi-permanence. We all look exactly like the PA decoys, and we all have the same name, The Parallel Illusion. There are well over 50 of us.

Now, if you wanna be able to immediately tell the difference on your end, I have no problem with that. It's your game, too. But let's not just assume that this feature is always a bad thing.

I don't know for sure if this has been mentioned or if this is the right place to post it but... Veteran Reward Greek Letters... where is Pi? Seriously. How could you forget to include Pi?

[ QUOTE ]
I thought that seeing that my post was a reply to him, and not you, that this would have been apparent.

[/ QUOTE ]

See, normally it would have. Today must be Monday or something.

[ QUOTE ]
Effective, however, is more subjective. Would the situation above be an effective use of the snipe power? I say no, so might others. Does that mean the power itself is not effective? Not necessarily. The immediate arguement might be that it is not effective in that context, but then... does the effectiveness of the power itself change in this situation? That depends. What defines the powers effectiveness? Is it how much potential damage it is doing to the targetted mob? If that's the case, then no, the effectiveness is NOT being altered by this use. Is the effectiveness of the power determined by its potential risk to the caster, in terms of death? Then the answer would be yes, the effectiveness is being severly reduced in this case, since the caster is putting him/herself in greater danger of dying. Perhaps the effectiveness of the power is measured in terms of overall contribution to the completion of the mission. What if, by doing this, it allows for a couple of other teammates to stack some holds on the AV, thereby allowing a safer combat session for all others on the team. Similar to a sacrifice run in baseball. The sniper sacrificed his/her own safety with the goal of allowing others time to act without risking death themselves. This then contributes to the greater good of the team, and could easily be called "effective" depending on that team's strategies and abilities.

[/ QUOTE ]

You just made my point. Saying "snipes are effective" by itself is not the same as saying "the Earth is round" because whether the snipe is effective or not depends upon all those things you mentioned. Whether the Earth is round or not depends on nothing. It is.

As for fun vs. effectiveness, you're absolutely right. They are not at all the same thing and may be completely unrelated. I never mentioned the word 'fun' in any of my posts.

Editted to add: And now upon paying closer attention I see that you were in fact supporting my argument, not contradicting me... which explains why I kept saying "but that's my point!" when I was reading your post. Heh. Move along. Nothing to see here...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The person who said this was an invalid comparison was completey correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope. If it weren't a valid comparison, you, or they, could and would have been able to find fault with it as it applies here. You haven't. Snipes are not, at all, subjective, they're every bit as objective as the shape of the earth. Snipes are an objective measureable fact of the game, the fun and effectiveness of which, for general purposes, are just as suitable for discussion and scrutiny as the question whether the earth is flat.

No reasonable person would ever discuss "what idiosyncratic traumas from my childhood snipes alleviate." Which is a major point of my criticism of the class of trolls this guide addresses.

They're not subjective, no matter how popular it has become to declare everything subjective as a way of copping out on giving good advice for fear (or, annoyance) of being trolled.

[/ QUOTE ]

Snipes are subjectively effective because they are subject to the ability of the player to use them correctly, the situation in which they are being used, the slotting they have, and so on and so forth. Like I said to begin with, it is not given that because you have a snipe in your power selection that snipe will be effective. Snipe's effectiveness is subject to other factors. The shape of the Earth is not. A snipe can be ineffective. Earth's always round.



As for your context argument; it's hogwash. You're just covering up for people who have difficulty with their vocabulary. If you're using the word "necessary" you should know what it means. If you're using the wrong words to ask a question, then don't be surprised when you get the wrong answer.

Editted to add: And I find it childish and offensive that you refer to me as a troll, simply because I prefer to answer the question that was asked.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To use your own example, it is a totally different thing to say that "some people find the world to be flat", compared to "some people find that snipes are not effective". That is an invalid comparison. If you actually go and measure the world, you will actually find it is not flat. On the other hand, if you are terrible with sniper attacks, and cannot master subtle strategies such as timing the build up to correspond to the space between foes' shots, then measuring the number of times you are successful with a sniper shot will support your subjective belief that snipes are not effective for you.

[/ QUOTE ]

And if you're terrible at measuring the world, you may incorrectly deduce the world is flat. In fact, even if you're amazingly good at it, you may come to the wrong conclusion. But us crazies who care about good information still force the truth on people, fascists that we are-- and somehow adapting to a world shape that really is rather counter-intuitive just isn't that painful for most people.

Snipes are X amount effective, and have a learning curve that simply doesn't vary so wildly from the learning curves of other powers in realistic combat contexts to make this objection to my comparison valid, especially considering that very little in the game is *painfully* hard to learn to do except maybe herd with Telekinesis and mitigate with Dimension Shift (which are not overwhelmingly effective things anyway), so with a tiny number of exceptions people just won't have any trouble rising to the challenge of a the kind of *slightly* steeper learning curve you get in CoH.

There are certainly lots of powers that are better than snipe in certain builds, and I can readily imagine not having the power in some builds that could have it. Snipe, just FYI, does not make my list of powers that are actually likely to come into question this way.

[/ QUOTE ]



This is another argument that bothered me and I can't resist pointing out the errors in your logic on this subject, even if it is somewhat tangential to the main point of the original post.

The person who said this was an invalid comparison was completey correct.

The Earth is not flat. Period. There is no room for discussion on the subject. If you "find" that the Earth is flat, you are in error.

Snipes can be effective. There are many other criteria, however, that must be met beyond having the snipe in your power selection. It is not given that because you have a snipe, the snipe will be effective.

Whether a snipe is effective or not is subjective. Whether the Earth is flat or not is objective.

I will again recommend Dictionary.com if you are not familiar with the difference between objective reality and subjective reality.

Thanks Kias. I didn't want to be quite so snarky about it, but you are exactly right. The problem does not lie with the answers to the question. If the question asked is "Is it necessary" and the answer is "No, you can do X, Y, and Z instead," then the answer is perfectly valid. If the question intended is "would you recommend taking it," then that's how the question should be asked.

Words have meanings, and you can't expect people to understand what you meant when you didn't actually say what you meant.

The definition of "necessary," from Dictionary.com:

[ QUOTE ]
1. being essential, indispensable, or requisite: a necessary part of the motor.
2. happening or existing by necessity: a necessary change in our plans.
3. acting or proceeding from compulsion or necessity; not free; involuntary: a necessary agent.
4. Logic. a. (of a proposition) such that a denial of it involves a self-contradiction.
b. (of an inference or argument) such that its conclusion cannot be false if its supporting premises are true.
c. (of a condition) such that it must exist if a given event is to occur or a given thing is to exist.

[/ QUOTE ]

So I think you have it backward. If the question "is this power necessary" refers to one of your four listed powers that are required, then the answer is "yes."

If the question "is this power necessary" refers to any other power, then the answer is "no."

The guide should not tell the reader how to interpret the misused word "necessary," it should be to the person asking the question to use a different word. How about instead of "is Hasten necessary," you ask "should I take Hasten?" That is, after all, what your guide seems to suggest is actually being asked.

<3 the jumpjet