Sam_Fetisher

[ QUOTE ]
You've seen no such evidence because we're ignored

[/ QUOTE ]

First off, what does being ignored have to do with someone posting or not posting this problem exists with a post date of pre-I6.

Second off, I think that people feel they are ignored because you can't give everyone personal attention. Or if you do, it won't be worth while personal attention. Think about how many people there are. There is no way to address everyones concerns on an individual basis. And the fact remains that issues have been addressed and changed because of player feedback.

Look, I am not trying to defend anyone here. I am not a friggin fan boy or whatever you guys call any oposing view. In fact I don't even concider myself an oposing view. I don't even think you understand my main point here (in all fairness, I guess I have a few.) When valid bugs come up, we should not drown them out with complaints about the power itself and we should put a stop to this Us against Them mentality. Again, that last statement was not a defence against "Them", it was a simple statement that perpetuating that kind of mentality is counter productive at best.

This is a reply to both you and Shadow_Song

[ QUOTE ]

Actually, no, defiance has sucked since it's inception shortly after I5. The posts that you are finding are testament to that effect.
[ QUOTE ]

As a developer myself, I find it hard to trust users on their statement of what is actualy going on and regularly rely on Historical data to prove or disprove said statements.

I have begun to try and search for it, but am getting frustrated because all of what I have found so far has been statements to the effect that Deffiance is bugged because of its effect, not an actual bug more a unsatisfied player.


[/ QUOTE ]

I cannot even begin to descibe the irony of this statement given your bickering with me over the last few posts. You and this attitude are precisely what I think is wrong with CoH and it's dev team. They're too wrapped up in their vision to understand that it's not just about the power being bugged (which, I gather, it is) but it's about the fact that we hate it! and it's not fun and that it's useless

Does it not occur to you that perhaps the sheer preponderance of posts may... y'know... indicate that there is in fact a problem?

[/ QUOTE ]

Regards to Deffiance sucking. This is not the thread to post that. This is the thread to find the real problem. As far as it sucking. I firmly believe that it does not. If it sucks for you, then you do not have a good team. It isn't as good of a power Solo. Your team needs to keep the agro off of you when you are in the red and have Deffiance Activated. If your team does their job, you are a killing machine. I have a RL friend that is a controller. Together, using voice chant, we run through missions at 4 or 5 times the normal rate.

Solo, it is not something you can rely on, but I have had it save my life a couple of times.

I am not sure what the irony is, please explain. I am not sure what attidude you think I have, please explain. I am not sure what I said has anything to do with what is wrong in CoH or the Developers, please explain. [When I say please explain, I mean please start a new thread, post a link to it here, and explain in that.]

My concern would be first and foremost the actual Bug with the power. Not the percieved "bug" with how it works. As I stated the power is awsome, people just aren't using it the same way I am I guess. I am almost sure that if people were, it would probably get nerfed concidering how disgustingly effective I was with it.

lots of people to reply to, but you first

[ QUOTE ]
It's up to me to do nothing. You are not someone that I need to prove anything to.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am assuming you were trying to contribute something to the conversation and that you are one of the people saying it was bugged pre-I6. As such you must prove it. I have already stated that I did not see the bug pre-I6.

[ QUOTE ]

How many people have to tell you that you're wrong before you accept it?


[/ QUOTE ]

Don't tell me I am wrong prove it. As I stated earlier, I never take my users word for it at face value. Its a fact of the business. Try developing some time, and you will see what I am talking about.

[ QUOTE ]

The Devs are not the angels you clearly want to make them out to be.


[/ QUOTE ]

I am not trying to put them up on a pedistal. I never said anything that even comes close to that. I am attempting to help both you (the blaster comunity) and the Devs find the problem. That is all. Anything on the side was just an attempt to not de-rail this thread, something wich you seem to excell at.

[ QUOTE ]

They've treated the Blaster community like [censored] since launch and it hasn't changed.


[/ QUOTE ]

I did not create my first blaster until I4, so I can't speak to how "they" treated us before then, but I can assure you that I have seen no such evidence. I would say calm down, think for a second, and tell me what your problem is...but in a PM. Or start a new thread. This is not helping anyone. This is the reason why "nothing gets done". The real issues are being drowned out by off topic posts.

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

You should really do some homework before posting.


[/ QUOTE ]
See post right after yours...


[/ QUOTE ]
And my point still stands.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I have stated, I did not see the problem pre-I6. It is up to you to find me a post that shows the problem did exist pre-I6. (IF your goal is to get me or the Devs to acknowledge this). As a developer myself, I find it hard to trust users on their statement of what is actualy going on and regularly rely on Historical data to prove or disprove said statements.

I have begun to try and search for it, but am getting frustrated because all of what I have found so far has been statements to the effect that Deffiance is bugged because of its effect, not an actual bug more a unsatisfied player.

[ QUOTE ]

You should really do some homework before posting.

[/ QUOTE ]

See post right after yours...

[ QUOTE ]

Yes it did.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not so sure about that. I was regularly playing 2 blasters when Defiance came out. Both over lvl 25 (one lvl 39 I think). I never had this problem, or at least don't remember having this problem. Show me a post that says it existsed from Pre-I6. This would be helpful information for the Dev team in order to find the bug...or at least find the cause of the bug (I.E. what patch did the problem get introduced).

I will attempt to find one using the Search feature...but I don't have much time to devote to this right now.

[ QUOTE ]
Defiance was before I6.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes, but I assert that this bug did not exist before I6.

[ QUOTE ]
If this was the FIRST post about bugs with Defiance then I would have participated, or not, as was approrpiate, but in truth this is a VERY old issue. I'm just one of the few who have come to realize that we can post whatever we like and very little will be done about it.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is actualy the first I have heard of the Defiance problem. That is to say the "Lag" of effect or persistance of effect after Hosping. As I stated in a prior post though, I haven't played any of my blasters since I6. I got on a Controller kick and CoV kick heh heh.

I guess its possible that any actual problems got drowned out by people complaining about the actual Deffiance power itself (calling it a bug).

The issue can't be that old since issue 6 release wasn't that long ago...or was it. Heck, I can't even rememeber. Either way, I will attempt to recreate the problem tonight and post my results tomarrow.

[ QUOTE ]
Lastly, something I'd like to point out is that I complain the way I do, sound jaded and bitter becuase... well, I am! But more than that, I complain about the way the dev team treats the community, with their tyrannical and almost draconian methods and approach to the way the game works, their roller-coaster design philosophy, their complete disregard for anything even remotely resembling a static game experience because I feel that that is the thing that needs to be changed and looked at more than any broken power set. Those things are the things that are causing the larger issues with the game.


[/ QUOTE ]

What can I say...this is simply not true. There is nothing "Draconian" or "Tyranical" in thier methods...Not that I have seen anyway. I don't even get how you can say this. Please either give us a link to a thread that shows this. Give hard examples. I know there were some issues with scrappers where it seemed like they were "Ignoring" our results. This was a mistake. They weren't ignoring our results, they just used their results because that is what they saw. Unfortunatly there was a comunication breakdown (From what I remember) and they were using different builds. Again, show me exactly how you believe they are being Tyranical. And please don't turn this into yet another ED thread...in fact please respond via PM or start another thread and PM me or post what it is. I don't want this thread to become a bloated thread that misses the goal of tracking down this bug.

As far as

[ QUOTE ]
...it comes from me is actually a genuine attempt to improve the game and the community.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't doubt that is your goal, but understand that posting stuff like this

[ QUOTE ]
They're too busy doing things like giving us temp 1-10 powers (as a solution to what problem, exactly? Who complained about this? Who said we needed this?) and defiance to actualy fix the real problems with the game and the powersets. How long have we been complaining about blaster secondaries as an entire set?

"We're looking at blaster secondaries" Yaya, whatever, I expect to see fixes to those around the same time as the SSOCS. Anyone remember that? "Shelved" Thanks.


[/ QUOTE ]

or this

[ QUOTE ]
I'm just one of the few who have come to realize that we can post whatever we like and very little will be done about it.


[/ QUOTE ]

Does not help create a sense of comunity. (Especialy in cases of that second quote as that is a very false statement) In fact, they don't even belong in a thread like this that is trying to solve a problem. All it does is attempt to drive a wedge between the players and the developers. Do you remember what the forums were like just after release? There wasn't nearly as much "Us against Them" attitude. For the most part I blam the comunity and not the Devs. Thats not to say that they certainly do have to work on thier known issues list and "Stealth Nerfs" (Stealth Nerf = flaw in the proccess of keeping trake of release notes).

[ QUOTE ]
If I could just clarify?

In this case, Shadbolt is talking about "fun". We understand the dev team is a little tunnel-visioned but I think it safe to assume that when Shadbolt says "fun" in this case that he's not actually looking for something harder. Again, say it with me now... "Fun does not necessarily have to mean hard"

That's right, States... while one does not necessarily preclude the other, the two things are actaully mutually exclusive.

[/ QUOTE ]

You and others that post remarks like this are not helping the "Blaster Comunity". In fact you damage the overall comunity. Please stop posting inflamitory remarks.

This thread exists to track down any Defiance bugs. It was not intended to garner any kind of suport to change the overal effects of Defiance. (Which works awsome. See a previous post made by me earlier in this thread.) If you want to debate the point, PM me. Lets not de-rail this attempt to track and fix the real problem.

/agree

The issue here isn't how to make Defiance better (IMO it doesn't need to be better). The issue is, why are some people having problems (I.E. defiance kicking in at near 100% health, defiance not kicking in at 1 HP.)

If you can recreate the problem, then please take a Screen Shot and post it along with what was going on at the time.

I never had this problem before. But I haven't played my blaster since I6 was released.

Forgive me, I haven't read the whole thread but I am running short on time. I just wanted to pipe in that pulling off Defiance is an art form. I have several mid-high level blasters, and absolutely love Defiance.

Combined with a controller or a tank that knows what they are doing. You simply get defiance to a range it is usefull (I usualy end up somewhere around +200%) retreate and let your teamates do what they do best (controll the agro). Once that is good to go, you simply snipe\blast away from a safe distance. Sure you WILL die every once and a while, but you will also be getting XP at an incredable rate as well as finishing missions faster...

I suggest you spend more time at the debt cap practicing.

Oops, I didn't have all of my music qued up for that...here is another:

1.) Theme for Another Enlightened Rogue (Ominous Seapods LIVE...not sure what show)
2.) Lay Your Burden Down (Gov't Mule Live...not sure what show)
3.)Revolution (Beatles)
4.) Some Days (Ominous Seapods)
5a.) Encore Intro to MOE. 2000 new years show...I won't count this as an actual song...
5b.)Little Queen Of Spades (Eric Clapton)
6.) The Grand Vizer's Garden Party (Pink Floyd)
7.) Mother (Blind Melon live...not sure what show)
8.) Polly (Nervana)
9.) Hi & Lo (MOE. Live, not sure what show)
10.) Otherwise Formles (Sound Tribe Sector 9)

I'm So Afraid (Fleetwood Mac)
For Now (Ominous Seapods)
Gepetto (Addison Groove Project)
Snake Eyes(God Street Wine)
You Can't Always Get What You Want (The rolling Stones)
Cymbaline (Pink Floyd)
I fell in love at the port-a-poty line (Keller Williams)
Po Black Maddie (North Mississippi Allstars)
Black Eyed Pea (Galactic)
Plastic Jesus > Fall Line > Spring Wind [greg brown cover] (Jack Johnson)

i believe it is ;palidinrise or something like that

[ QUOTE ]
It's all part of an evil plot to colonize us, and turn us all into NHL fans.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

[/ QUOTE ]

OH NOESS!!!11!! Its working

[ QUOTE ]
Is it just me or is this whole "it'd be hard to code" thing a hollow excuse?


[/ QUOTE ]

clearly you have never programed professionaly before. If you have you would have quite a bit more sympathy. I would be very suprised if this was just a hollow excuse. I speak from expierience.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Why is this the conceptual solution? Wouldn't it make more sense to make MELEE attacks, regardless of source, immune from range debuffing?

[/ QUOTE ]

/agree

is this a coding issue?

[/ QUOTE ]

heh...I guess I should have read the rest of the thread

[ QUOTE ]
Why is this the conceptual solution? Wouldn't it make more sense to make MELEE attacks, regardless of source, immune from range debuffing?


[/ QUOTE ]

/agree

is this a coding issue?

looks like you have a parity error in there some where

I friggin love Defiance....but of course I am at the Debt Cap :-) Seriously tho, I can see why a lot of blasters don't like it. I spent all weekend playing around with it and discovered that you truly can't rely on it.

I decided that I didn't care about debt untill I could use Defiance effectively. In a solo environment it actualy works very well against even cons. You can one shot Lts. The real problem is that you have to expect to die if you want to use it.

I used defiance to Solo the keep 30 fir blogs from entering door mish. I wouldn't have been able to do it without it, however I died 4 times.

Statesman,

I want to start by saying [braces for the flames] I am glad you are doing something to stop the PL “problem”…though I personally don’t care if someone does PL. However, I see some valid arguments from many of the people who have posted responses. I will not address those concerns here…there are a million posts that already do.

I have posted a LvL Threshold suggestion for the XP Range “issue” before, but after talking it through with a bunch of people I have refined it even further. I am now posting this here to see what you think. The first section is an overview. The Second section is kind of a set of “Use Cases” where I explain exactly what is going on. I was going to have another section showing a technical break down of the conditions, but ran out of time. It is probably not needed anyway.

-------------------------------overview--------------------------------------------
The following is an overview of my proposed “XP Leash”:

IF AT ANY TIME YOU DO DAMAGE YOU GET FULL XP

When outside of XP range the system looks to your Original Combat LvL (combat lvl before any SKing…not security lvl) to determine how much XP you get. If your Original combat lvl is within the the LvL threshold your XP gain is not limited at all. If your Original Combat Lvl exceeds the Lvl Threshold you will either receive XP based on a LvL Cap or won’t receive XP at all (depending on how low you are. If you wouldn’t get XP in live you wouldn’t get XP here.)

Using the original combat LvL will take care of the “SK Bridge” issue.

When inside of XP range the system looks to your SKd Combat LvL to determine how much XP you get.

As far as the “while dead” rule …
2 suggestions:
- they get treated like the guy camping out by the entrance to the mish or the train station (I.E. treated like he is outside the XP range). This means some people SKd will get no XP when dead depending on how low there original combat lvl was but other people will have the LvL Cap on there XP gain.

- or use some form of the “Death Exemp” rule I have seen suggested by NewScrapper…I think that was his name.

-----------------------------use cases------------------------------------

The following are the use cases of my proposed “XP Leash” using 3 lvls as the threshold and 3 lvls as the lvl cap these can obviously be adjusted as desired. Some people I have talked to feel that the LvL cap should be +0 (even conned XP):

You have the following all on the same team:
a Lvl 27 blaster
a lvl 24 tank
a lvl 13 scrap SKd up to the lvl 24 tank
and lvl 20 Def are all fighting lvl 26 mob.

A lvl 20
a lvl 25
a lvl 10 character all hang back at train.

The Lvl 20 character at the train only gets xp as if the lvl 26 mob was really a lvl 23 mob (+3 lvl cap while outside of XP range and lvl difference exceeds the threshold of 3 lvl difference).

The lvl 25 character at the train gets xp for a +1 mob (the way it works in live)
If the lvl 25 exemps down to the lvl 20 he gets debt reduction as if the mob was +6 whether he is in range doesn’t matter(no lvl cap because his lvl difference does not exceed the lvl threshold of 3 lvls)

For better or worse this also means that if the lvl 27 blaster Exemps down to the lvl 24 Def and they are on a team fighting lvl 31 mobs he gets debt reduction at +3 if he is out of range (out of xp range and exceeds LvL threshold of 3 lvls) and at +7 while in range.

The lvl 10 that hangs out at the train gets no XP. If he SKs up to 20 he gets nothing. If he SKs up to the lvl 25 he gets nothing. (with no SK this is the same effect as on live. With a SK he gets nothing because he is outside of the XP range, so the system is checking against his combat LvL and not his SK lvl.)

Lvl 20 Def buffing\debuffing while within range gets full xp (+6 to their lvl). While out of range gets the capped XP (+3 to their lvl) unless he did damage at which point he gets full XP even if he is out of range.

(speeking to the “If damage is done rule”. Arguments can be made here that Defenders and Controllers don’t do damage so this is unfair to them, but the reality is that both ATs can do damage. The real problem here is that it’s less risky for Tanks and certain Scrapper builds to do damage as they won’t get one shotted.)

Lvl 13 scrap SKd to the lvl 24 tank gets +2 while in range (he is SKd to a lvl 24 fighting lvl 26 mob) and nothing while outside of range, Unless he did damage.

Lets say the lvl 13 scrap SKs up to the lvl 20 Def. Because his original combat lvl is 13, he doesn’t get any XP while he is out of range unless he did damage (very dangerous for a combat lvl 19 scrap to do against a lvl 26 mob.) If he SKs up to the lvl 20 and is inside range he gets full xp (+6 to his original combat lvl)

The Lvl 27 blaster and lvl 24 tank get xp as normal even if they are outside of the XP range because they are under the +3 lvl threshold.


Let me know what you think.

yeah...fixed the problem lastnight. It was the Quatation marks.

However it seems I still need the +down$$-Down for some reason. I am not to concerned with it tho.

the bind works like a charm, except that for some reason I am spaming my chat window that displays system messages with a /bind error msg. I am only getting the message on the up event, and only for the forward key. Left, Right, and back don't get the message.

I am not to worried about it as the bind still works, but one of these days I intend to debug that.

I have moddified this bind to work with another toggle bind I have.

in essence the other toggle bind is a toggle mouse look on and off. When toggle mouse look is on the movement keys do not turn mouse look of when at rest. when toggle mouse look is off the movement keys turn mouse look off while at rest.

I have also developed another bind that is an On Demand Mouse Pointer bind. This allows me quick access to my mouse pointer while moving. Once CTM is officialy out it will also act as an On Demand Click to move.

I have tested this bind [ QUOTE ]
I thought of another related bind that I will test tonight. It is similar to this concept combined with Speed On Demand.

while you are moving, the mouse look mode is turned on. when you are not moving, mouse look mode is turned off. pushing the "on demand mouse look" button will have the opposite effect while moving.

[/ QUOTE ] and it crashes the client.

here is the file contents:

DwnFMOD.txt [down keypress event file]:
JOYSTICK1_Up +down$$-down$$+forward$$canlook 1$$bind_load_file C:\kb\UpFMOD.txt

UpFMOD.txt [up keypress event file]:
JOYSTICK1_Up +down$$-down$$-forward$$canlook 0$$bind_load_file C:\kb\dwnFMOD.txt

does anyone see anything wrong with this?
can someone test to see if this crashes on there machine?

I thought of another related bind that I will test tonight. It is similar to this concept combined with Speed On Demand.

while you are moving, the mouse look mode is turned on. when you are not moving, mouse look mode is turned off. pushing the "on demand mouse look" button will have the opposite effect while moving. (This last part may be impossible without an If Statement, and may be somewhat unwieldy to use even if it is possible)

The big difference between this bind and the previous one would be the previous one acts like "rotate Camera" while moving (a side effect of on demand mouse look while moving using on demand click to move), where this one acts like "mouse look" while moving.

P.S. I already am using a bind that is a "On Demand Rotate camera" bind that resets camera on the key up "Event" (another very useful bind. If anyone is interested ask using global chat and I will either post it, or tell you how to bind it.)