T_Immortalus

First Ward is a clue, like "the lower 9th ward" of New Orleans we all heard about with hurricane Katrina. It's around New Orleans. The low-lying watery areas also are a clue to that.

Emperor Cole's official bio has a timeline and track of where Hamidon emerged and the "final battle" it and Cole had. They fought in the general area of New Orleans and established Praetoria right there on the spot, according to the official word:
http://wiki.cohtitan.com/wiki/Emperor_Cole
I think in game plaques explain the part about establishing the city on the spot of Hamidon's "defeat".

Wouldn't that make altitis worse?
Also, I'm picky about my concepts. Mainly I just am changing names and power set combinations too much.

....incarnates(including Mender Ramiel's first mission)
....teamed with a kinetics character(pretty common in high levels)
....teamed with empathy characters too(Fortitutde)
....the "Keeper of Coral Lore" end mission from Vincent Ross in Sharkhead isle
....any time you pop enough red inspirations and/or use Soul Transfer(or whatever damage buff from drain like the Warshade one)
....are a kehldian teamed with the proper archetypes

It's common enough to make that short list.


And actually, it's incorrect even before the damage cap, depending on how much you have enhanced a power for.

It's a mess. It's not intuitive.



I just want to see it be more intuitive.

I either want to see an actual "damage cap" listed in Combat Attributes in addition to the "buffs" or I want the "buffs" cap to be reduced to compensate for "the expected enhanced value of fully enhanced powers".


Is it too much to ask for a little clarity within the game instead of having to ask the forums to argue about it for hours or go to the wiki and get even more confused because there is no ability to ask questions to get help understanding it?

EXACTLY!

It is how it should work.
It would make things much more clear IN GAME rather than requiring testing and earning bug reports form people saying:
Come on!
This is such a headache all because the number does not display the actual value in common enough situations such that it screws up logical calculations of damage totals.




What would you do if you didn't already know that enhancements count against buffs?

Would you add 100% base + 100% enhancements + 300% buff = 500%?
Or, would you "psychically knowing that the number isn't accurate" add only 100% base + 300% buff & enhancements = 400%?

That is my point.




Where has common sense and simple math gone out the window???





Edit:
@Zombie Man

That is my point.

I'm not adding in enhancement values because I just feel like it. I'm adding them in because the "buffs" in Combat Attributes "invisibly add them in" because they do not actually add up to 300%(in the above example blah blah) on a fully enhanced power due to the damage cap cutting off the top enhanced value if the "buffs" are capped.


Either the game, in the calculations, deletes the buff values to below the cap by the amount enhanced per power, and doesn't display it for obvious reasons, or the game deletes the enhancement values without showing that at all.


The game shows "100% base + 300% buff plus enhanced value per power" and never tells you "the damage cap cuts off a big chunk of that".
Players think "I enhanced my power to an extra 100% damage and I have 300% in buffs, that makes 400% extra damage for 500% WOOHOOOO!", but what they really get is only 400% in that situation.

It's absolutely stupid because the cap should not truncate that much off your powers' "obvious performance listed".
If they are going to do that then they may as well just reduce the Combat Attributes listed buff cap by 100%, to compensate for the truncation of value above the cap for a "fully enhanced to ED cap" power so that all powers' damage is easily and obviously calculated.

I AGREE
I AGREE
I AGREE
I AGREE
I AGREE

YOU ARE RIGHT!


BUT, the number for "damage buffs" in Combat Attributes DOES NOT CHANGE with the enhanced value of a power, but the DAMAGE TOTAL BEFORE CAP CALCULATION CHANGES.

300% is not always 300%
It is only 300% for unenhanced powers.

How often do you use unenhanced damage powers?
How often do you use enhanced damage powers?

Why display the number that only applies when people use the least used powers?
Why not display the number they use when they use their most commonly used powers?






Why not display 200%, which applies to all powers, instead of a "not correct very often" 300%?




Edit:

Buffs = 300%
Attack1 = unenhanced
Attack 2 = 50% enhanced
Attack 3 = 75% enhanced
Attack 4 = 100% enhanced

Attack1 = 400% damage
Attack2 = 400% damage
Attack3 = 400% damage
Attack4 = 400% damage

Why the hell bother enhancing at all?
The number is never correct unless your damage buff is under 200% or less.



Buffs = 200%
Attack1 = unenhanced
Attack 2 = 50% enhanced
Attack 3 = 75% enhanced
Attack 4 = 100% enhanced

Attack1 = 300% damage
Attack2 = 350% damage
Attack3 = 375% damage
Attack4 = 400% damage


See how much more accurate that looks?
Everything adds up perfectly and all Combat Attributes has to show is 200% with the same hidden 400% number and enhancements totaling to the exact same amount.



Edit 2:
If that is not obvious and simple enough for you, to show you what I am trying to say should be done, then there is no hope for you.

I agree.
Sorry if I came across as argumentative or something. I assumed you knew "odd" was a personal opinion.

I have been saying in different ways:

So, are the devs being honest and obvious with us? Is the 'buff cap" on combat attributes IN ADDITION TO base and enhancements?

Or, are the devs hiding the truth from us, even unintentionally? Is the "buff cap" on combat attributes not accurate because enhancements SUBTRACT FROM buffs?

1) 100% is about what Enhancement Diversification caps a power's enhancement total at. I used that as a "typically slotted damage power" for calculations.

2) Reread the first page.
UberGuy said: Why the hell does it display 300% "buffs" when any enhanced power only gets 200% "buffs" because enhancements count against the "buff cap"?

200% != 300%
(that's "does not equal")


The combat attributes are lying.
It is not "buffs only" when it really is "buffs plus enhancement number that is not listed here but somewhere else and makes this total a lie".

DO YOU UNDERSTAND YET?!?



I'm saying:


Make the combat attributes cap 200% and make it display JUST BUFFS, not enhancements displayed somewhere else taking away from the buffs displayed without showing that they do.
(Edit: "We're sneaking in a -100% to your buff total that you can't tell is there unless you compare your power's damage to what you think it should be. HAHAHAHA!"

Is that so hard?

If enhancements really do count against your buff total then your buff total in combat attributes needs to show that somehow....by being accurately lower and having enhancements not go against that lower cap.




Edit:
That is all assuming that UberGuy was correct in his "damage cap = base + combat attributes, and enhancements count against the combat attributes cap for buffs" instead of the much more logical and simple "damage cap = 500% = 100% base + 300% buffs tallied in Combat Attributes plus maximum 100% enhancement".

No, I want it to be DISPLAYED as it acts.

Show a 200% BUFF CAP instead of 300% that includes 100% enhancements that invisibly subtract damage buffs listed until damage peaks when the buff cap says 200% and still keeps counting to 300% even though players gain no benefit.


Combat Attributes is apparently not displaying "just buffs" but is displaying "enhancements + buffs, but you can't see the enhancement numbers".

It's like taking a photograph of two people on each side of a scale(total 4 people) so that the photograph shows the entire scene minus one person on one side(showing only 3 people).
"How do we get to 2 people worth with only one person?"
The game may know there were "2 people on both sides", but players are deceived as far as the "photograph"(combat attributes).



Edit:
I don't know if that analogy works the best.

Players know there are enhancements and the base damage and the damage buffs they think are 300%.
It's like the game is showing us 500%, because of base damage plus enhancements plus 300% "buffs only", but then the actual performance is only 400% due to the enhancements countign against the 300% "buffs only".

If the "buffs only" total on combat attributes is 100% too high then why is it 100% too high?
Why not show an accurate value or "total buff" that does not invisibly include enhancements invisibly counting against the total?

So the enhancements detract(count against any buffs listed) from the buff cap listed in combat attributes?

100% base damage + 300% buff = 400% damage cap
400% damage cap - 100% enhancements - 100% base damage = 200% buff cap


So which is combat attributes displaying?
1) damage cap minus base
or
2) damage cap minus base minus enhancements


See my problem yet?

Either enhancements are completely separate, meaning the buffs listed in combat attributes would be in addition to enhancements....
....or, enhancements are "invisibly" counted in combat attributes such that damage stops increasing when combat attributes is at 200% and not capped.


Therefore, if "enhancements are 'invisibly' calculated to drop the buff total of combat attributes" then....

....why not just drop the buff max shown in combat attributes by 100%, to show how much you actually benefit from buffs, and have enhancements calculated separately per power as they currently are anyway?


You and game: A + B(+ "invisible C") = A + B
100% + 300%(+invisible 100%) = 400%

My idea: A + F(= B - "invisible C") + C = A + F + C = A + B
100% + 200%(= 300% - 100%) + 100% = 400%

It may look more complicated my way, but it is far more clear and simpler than having "invisible C" for the players.

Is the calculation 1 or 2 here? :

1) 100% base damage + 300% buff + about 100% enhancements = damage cap(NOT "buff" cap) = 500%

2) 100% base damage + (400% buff - about 100% enhancements) = damage cap(NOT "buff" cap) = 400%


If #2 is true then the system is "invisibly" factoring enhancements(because they're not listed on combat attributes) into the "damage cap" calculation.

Number 1 above is my idea if number 2 is how the game currently handles things.



Instructions:

1) Separate enhancement value from the damage cap.

2) Delete 100% from the combat attributes damage buff cap to account of the loss of enhancement values in the calculation due to separation.

3) Profit from clearer correct information on how much damage is being buffed rather than lying to players about their buff numbers as if their buffs were giving them 300% in addition to enhancements.




Edit:
My point was:

Yes, "enhancements are not calculated in the monitor", BUT they do detract from the supposed total amount of buffs the monitor says you can have.(according to another posted above, possibly you UberGuy)

Enhancements should not mean "you benefit less from damage buffs than you think".
That is what you mean if enhancements are considered a "damage buff" limited by the "100% base + 300% buffs = 400% damage cap" you are apparently saying is how it works.

It should be:
100% base + 200% buff + 100% enhancement = 400% cap
That is if 400% is the cap the same as the above.


Just cut off 100% from the combat attributes so it doesn't lie to us.

I was just expecting a screenshot(easy enough to get) or two and a little photoshop wizardry.

I guess you were thinking "video" earlier than you let on.

Exactly!

So why is the enhancement value "invisibly" factored into the Combat Attributes value?

Why not "cut 100% off the Combat Attributes value" and just let enhancements be a separate "per power" modifier that performs almost exactly the same, just without the "how much of my exterior damage buffs am I losing?" calculation hazard?


I'm talking about simplifying the calculations for people and making them more obvious, without going to an outside resource. It would be a negligible change in functionality if any change.

/raises hand
"How about Mystic Fortune?"

Just make it a self-target call with a button click required to close or a time-out cancel.
cope-paste-switcheroo-done.

Where is my 5 seconds of pay for solving that problem?

Edit:
Btu yeah, it should be auto-fire from email claim.

The farmers, the ones beating things up and creating the missions, are not the problem with farming.
The devs want people actually out in the world experiencing the content or doing the stories for fun, not rewards.

You want people in AE, or out in the world, for the stories and not the rewards?
Make the rewards less common than the stories.


Also, if you push back the point at which people can benefit from AE farms then they either need to move out of Atlas to populate ordinary farms, and rely on drops and INF rather than AE tickets to get what they want, or spend more money to get up to the point at which they can benefit from easy AE farms.
After all, it doesn't take that much money to do a Fire Farm, once it is created by somebody else. The hard part would be if you had to create it yourself.

It makes sense to me.
The only way your scenario of "encouraging people to pay up to be able to create farms" would work is if AE missions were impossible to share with others so that they couldn't find a farm mission unless they made it themselves.



It's a win for the devs against farmers while giving players creation tools earlier to keep them interested more than ever(I spend more time creating in games than actually playing, including too much time in the tailor here) while giving players fun with creation, which also slows them down instead of just plain hard leveling.

win/win



Edit:
Essentially, you're talking about disposable farmer accounts right?
They don't invest much because the rewards are all they care about. Other people created the farm missions for them.

Making the rewards be a late tier thing encourages those disposable "gold farmer" accounts to spend a lot more money to reach that point(if they bother with AE), as well as not allowing very new players to get farmed up right away and bored of the game so fast(unless grinding the old fashioned way is too boring). They all would need to spend more money to do things that extremely easy(with Atlas having an AE, right out of the tutorial).
Also, aren't tickets used to unlock special enemy groups or mission maps or costume pieces for your custom enemies? There is encouragement to get to tier 6 for rewards to build better missions then.(sadly, that would exclude me from using costume pieces I definitely purchased that I should have access to in AE because I purchased the player version, but I still want creation access)

Having mission creation, especially only limited to one or two arcs, is not a problem. It encourages staying with the game and spending more money for what the game offers, while also enticign them with "you can get rewards for this too" stuff.
It doesn't help them make the game less interesting or less worth money. It makes it more worthy of time and money.

And I meant I want it to not be red at all unless I have an actual email from another player or myself, not items that I have not claimed and may never claim on that character.

Edit:
Can we claim the base items more than once?
If not, I will most definitely be sitting on those until the end of time because I will never be sure I have found the correct super group to claim them and use them on.

I preferred the old way of claiming multiple use items, and single use items. The email method is clunky with it being too easily for my mouse(with wearing buttons) to register a double-click and unintentionally click two items possibly on the wrong character.

It still has the read email notifier. I don't want the items hidden, just the darn red email button unless I have an actual email.

...in team.

HERMIT!
Somebody find me a picture of a hermit crab hiding in its shell with a "do not disturb" sign out front.

I just find it funny that Arcanaville apparently "can't show her character's face" on the live servers. She's like a shadow, a wraith, a half-remembrance.

What UI team?
All we have is more mess rather than trimming unnecessary stuff consolidating things into one less obtrusive elegant interface that allows us to better enjoy the pretty Issue 17 graphical enhancements and particle effects of our powers.

"Mythical" is right.

Scarlett Johansen(?) ready to watch the show.