UberGuy
-
Posts
8326 -
Joined
-
Quote:Left under conditions where they won't die or be heavily interrupted for their duration, Cimerorans can put out more sustained DPS than probably the vast majority of characters in existence in the game. (Taken individually, of course.)Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane
Especially since Cimeroran or Warworks Lore pets probably put out more damage than the Tanker themselves. -
Quote:And the short cast version should totally use the flying disc animation.Originally Posted by Rangle M. Down
Give Trip Mines the Stalker Assassin's Strike "fix". Maybe even the same with Time Bomb.
When you're "Cloaked" it's a longer set up that does more dmg. When you're not "Cloaked" you can drop a less damaging, faster dropping version... -
It's definitely possible. People have been doing it for some time.
Back in the days before Inventions, there was at least one person who posted about doing it with, I think, a Claws Scrapper of some kind. Claws/Regen, I think, which would then put it before ED.
I can't remember if anyone did it between (when we got ED) and I9, when we got inventions. Once Inventions really got rolling, though, it became increasingly common to see posts about it. (Note that doesn't mean it's common overall, as the forum population is small compared to the player base, and probably a bit more likely to have the know-how and motivation to try such things.)
Today it's probably better to ask what difficulty people do it on, as they might not be doing it at +0. -
Nope.
-
Personally, I'm finding it fantastic, when it's up. When it's not up, obviously it does nothing for me, which isn't exciting at all. I'm not a fan of it working like that, but then, given the mileage I'm getting out of picking the right one of my characters, I guess I'm not surprised.
Really, the only hybridizing Hybrids, at least IMO, are Melee and Control. Assault doesn't really hybridize anyone, as everyone is capable of doing damage, and Support isn't that much more hybridizing than taking Leadership. (Obviously it's more powerful in general.) Mostly, I've been sticking Melee on my melees and Control on my already control-centric characters.
That said, I might grab Control Radial on at least one melee who has some trouble with runners and for whom I don't feel Melee Radial is the right fit. -
Quote:So then we get into the question of what does "any build" mean? Does that mean played on x8 using SOs? Against completely arbitrary foes including things like Arachnos, Malta and Longbow?Originally Posted by PRAF68_EU
Okay, I will quantify that with - all those I've played, I've never had any problems fighting x8s on melee ATs (which would exclude stalkers, since I've never taken one past level 18) - and I'm no buildmeister and don't consider myself skilful.
I'm honestly don't want to ride this into the ground, but it's such a general claim, and honestly so contrary to my own experience (when taken at its full generality), I feel compelled to dig for more clarity.
(How AoE centric your attack set is matters a whole lot, too. +0/x8 is much easier for someone who can readily mow down foes en masse than someone who has to take them, say 1-3 at a time.) -
Quote:I just took a look on RedTomax, and it's using MeleeOnes, so it's not using any AT mods.Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison
Careful, that might just be a difference between the AT modifiers.
I don't know either way. Just saying it's something to check first.
To be honest, I don't think there is an AT mod for EndReduction. Of course they could always hijack some other mod and use it for that, but it doesn't look like they did here.
The other forms are the same way, by the way. -
Quote:Yeah, I'm with Strato. That's not true. You have to specify what kind of build and what kind of foes, and then maybe it's true. And then you still really need qualify what "without breaking a sweat" means.Originally Posted by PRAF68_EU
It doesn't require skill or a build. Most melee ATs with any build can fight x8 spawns without breaking into a sweat.
-
Quote:Good luck with that. Both statements.Originally Posted by T_Immortalus
It works for other games, but I know the risks and have already planned simple ways around the problems.
I'm a bit more clever than I may appear.
Having read the general tack of your posts today, I won't be reading further. Take care. -
Quote:Look, you asked a question, and didn't specify context about the answer you were looking for. All I did was lay out clearly the info needed to provide that context. I didn't analyze anything. I looked at your question and determined that, in the scope of ways we could answer, you didn't provide enough info to know what answer you wanted.Originally Posted by Xzero45
Yeah, dude, you're over thinking and over analyzing. Good as in "survivable and playable". As in, with SOs, the endurance isn't an issue that requires IOs to be fixed in order to play Dark Armor at all.
And you still basically haven't. The orange part, above is completely qualitative, and subject only to subjective answers. Playing on what difficulty, at what pace? "Survivable and playable" aren't measurable. Compared to what?
People did play the set for years before IOs hit the scene. I have a MA/DA that I got to 43 on SOs before IOs came out. She still has SOs slotted, though I've added a few IOs here and there. The character hasn't gotten playtime to speak of in the last four years or so. That's not because of any issue with DA. It's just because I have too many characters and that wasn't one of my top favorites. -
Quote:Yeah, I realized that after I posted it. I figured I'd fix it when I posted these images, but nooo, you had to go and reply.Originally Posted by Hopeling
The proc chance uses cycle time, but the proc damage uses just recharge time.
Anyway here are the plots. Sorry that they're bare bones and not very pretty - I did them in a hurry.
Note: The x-axis in all graphs starts at 1 second, not 0.
First, damage vs. recharge time (not cycle time), at level 50.
Next, proc chance vs. cycle time (not just recharge time).
Now the product of those two plotted vs. recharge time and assuming a 1.2s activation time. (Longer activation times will increase the average damage.)
Finally, the same plot as above adjusted for the latest proposal we know of for I24's PPM changes assuming 60% slotted recharge. (Specifically, that includes: Increase PPM by 25%, adjust recharge rate for slotting, and cap proc chance at 90% instead of 100%.)
-
BL Angel's table on (what for me is) page one of this thread lists activation chance and also damage per activation versus cycle time for various integer cycle times.
One correction of my own previous post, where I said "recharge time" several times, I should have said "cycle time", which of course is the sum or recharge time and activation or cast time. I blame the hour at which I posted it.
Edit: Hm, having said that, BL's table refers to recharge time. I guess I'll whip something up just in case. -
Quote:Mentioned somewhere else. First, look at all Heal set enhancements: they are now Heal/Absorb on live right now. At the same time that appeared on beta, folks stumbled across the new, second wave of Archetype Enhancements, and the special/proc in the Defender set is "Chance for Absorb".Originally Posted by Hydrofoil_Zero
Is this a healthy spoiler or has it bin mentioned somewhere else.
Finally, I believe we knew to expect absorption in at least one of the new armor sets discussed at the latest Pummit. -
Quote:Core always provides damage that's proportional to your attack damage, which is a function of your AT damage scale. Radial provides damage that's not related at all to AT damage scale (like traditional IO procs, it uses a fixed damage mod) but is a function of recharge for both proc chance and damage when triggered.Originally Posted by StratoNexus
I am not sure that is true. Fast cycling powers also have lower base damage so Core is smaller as well (although it does become easier to maintain stacks for Core).
In other words, Radial follows a square law progression with recharge time. This is great for powers with long recharge times, but startlingly bad for powers with very low recharge times.
I've done the math using the spreadsheets in this thread, and for powers with around 5-second cycle times, Core adds more average damage per attack even for a Defender. If the I24 PPM changes affect Radial the same way that Synapse laid out that they will work for procs (which is not guaranteed, but is what both Hopeling and I put in our spreadsheets), this will also be true for powers with around a 6-second cycle time if you slot around 60% (or more) recharge in them.
If your attack chain is dominated by powers like that, you get more benefit from Core even if Core isn't that great. -
I love people who claim that things that are comparatively gimp should remain that way because they prefer the challenge.
No, actually, I'm lying.
Sorry, everyone else who plays a Blaster should have a chance to shine much more close to as brightly as the other ATs. For all their qualitative positives, Blasters have some fairly quantifiable issues. And as mentioned by others, the AT statistics are in line the interpretation that people are prone to give up on Blasters the higher they level them. That's an issue worthy of address, no matter that some people prefer the status quo.
And in any case, it's a moot point. Improvements of some sort of coming. -
Quote:Important!Originally Posted by BunnyAnomaly
I ended up moving to assault to try that and I might, if it continues to underwhelm, try out support to see if the constant -10% endurance cost is worth it, and the toggle 12% defence seems better than everything else anyway.
Support Core is only 12% defense for pets! It is 6% defense for players. Support Radial is 8% defense for all.
This is a problem with the real numbers info display for Support Core. -
Quote:It's never required IOs to be good. It just is so much ridiculously better with IOs, and this forum tends to gravitate towards high-end builds unless asked not to, specifically.Originally Posted by Xzero45
Can we get some folks chiming in here that run Dark Armor on SOs? If a set requires IOs to be good, then there's problems with the set.
But it also depends on what you mean by "good". The bar for "good" on SOs is not the same as the bar for "good" with Inventions. In particular, we didn't get the modern difficulty slider until I16, when Inventions came out in I9. (There were other inventions-related improvements in between those two, such as consolidating defense bonuses, which made it easier to build for soft-capped typed defense.)
So without shenanigans like padding, no SO build ever had to face much more than approximately what we would call +2/x1 today. That's unless they were off soloing spawns while on an actual team, which tends to be different than actually soloing the whole mission. (You usually get at least intermittent buffs, and people at least occasionally show up and help you.)
Oh, and the game used to spawn fewer LTs and bosses back then, too, at least when solo.
So what is your threshold for "good"? -
Quote:Yeah, games did that like 10 years ago. Do you know that leads to? Hacking. Massive, massive hacking. So the server ends up needing to do all that stuff anyway to make sure the client isn't sending it complete bogosity, so it might as well just to it all and tell all the clients what's going on. It really is the only way.Originally Posted by T_Immortalus
Games could save so much bandwidth(increasing speed while decreasing latency and not hitting data caps) by having identical enemies have identical numbers stored client side and calculated client-side such that the only information that needs to be transferred is "who fires what?" and "hit or miss?".
-
Quote:Well, one reason I can think of is that it's not actually wrong very often. Very, very few characters operate at the cap with any frequency. By being wrong in that particular case just doesn't come up that often. If you happen to be, say, a Kinetics Defender or Controller, sure, it might come up regularly. Pretty much no one else has that issue. (About the only other folks would be Super Strength Tankers, and it's far more rare for them to have builds that allow that.)Originally Posted by T_Immortalus
Why not display 200%, which applies to all powers, instead of a "not correct very often" 300%?
In contrast, your solution would be wrong for almost everyone below level 22 ... where, you know, a huge chunk of the characters in the game exist. -
Quote:The game is not going to change. These mechanics are part of the most basic foundation of the combat mechanics. They work. What you are asking for is like asking for the foundation of a skyscraper to be rebuilt while people keep working in it because you think the existing one is ugly. It's not going to happen. Not on the grounds that the resulting mechanics are difficult to display in a concise way. Probably it won't change for any reason, but I would bet my life's savings that it won't change for that reason.
"We, the developers, do not want damage over 400(percent), so we are capping buffs at 200% whether the power is enhanced or not, in order to avoid a complicated calculation, using non-obvious numbers that people will argue about on the forums incessantly until somebody actually tests to see how things 'really work', that we were not displaying properly."
I won't be surprised at all if you respond to this with a long exposition on theories about what they could do, how it might work, standard code rants that you then largely ignore in your own posts, and so on. You take those sorts of positions in these forums pretty consistently. I'm not going to debate it with you. This is how it works today and I'm confident that, in broad terms it's how it'll work the day they shut the servers down. -
Quote:Dude.Originally Posted by T_Immortalus
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
The damage buff cap is not +200%. It's +300%. (400% total) Period. End of story. If the monitor turned blue at 200% it would just be wrong in a new way.Quote:100% base damage + 300% buff = 400% damage cap
400% damage cap - 100% enhancements - 100% base damage = 200% buff cap
If there's a design error here, it's trying to get the monitor to show the cap. The number it is displaying is just global damage. You have to think of the blue text and numeric cap as just a warning that "hey, you are definitely over the cap here". The truth is that you almost certainly reached it before, but you are at/above it now without a doubt.
There's just no one number it can show here that's right.
Here. I'm going to make your brain hurt even more. There's no such thing as "+damage". There are actually eight different attributes:
- +Damage (Lethal)
- +Damage (Smashing)
- +Damage (Fire)
- +Damage (Cold)
- +Damage (Energy)
- +Damage (Negative)
- +Damage (Toxic)
- +Damage (Psionic)
Back before it was changed to more of a critical-hit-like mechanic, Fiery Embrace gave +Damage(Fire) that lasted longer than all the other damage bonus types. The combat attribute had no way to correctly display that, because it shows one number for all damage types.
You really need to accept that the game's attribute system is more complex than can be displayed with universal correctness with a single value. -
Quote:That still lies to us. It just lies to us in a way you personally prefer.Originally Posted by T_Immortalus
Just cut off 100% from the combat attributes so it doesn't lie to us.
You probably really don't want to know about the ToHit chance monitor. -
Quote:See my example above, but the short answer, assuming 100% damage enhancement, is the second option you list.Originally Posted by T_Immortalus
Is it "enhancements + 300% = 500%(including base)" or "enhancements + 200% = 400%(including base)"?
-
Example time again. We're going to use a Defender once more, but we'll be specific and use one of my own as an example.
My personal level 50 Dark/Dark/Power Defender has +14% damage in set bonuses and +18.75% from Assault. When solo, she has +30% damage from Vigilance. She has Power Build Up, which is +80% damage for its duration.
Without using PBU, the attribute monitor shows 62.75% (I think rounded to 62.8%).
This Defender has Gloom slotted with the five non-proc pieces of Apocalypse in it. That adds +101.86% damage after ED. This number is never accounted for in the attribute monitor, but the damage boost to her Gloom is the sum of the number in the attribute monitor and the benefit of her enhancements - a total of +164.61%
Now let's assume I pop four small reds. That's +25% damage each, or +100% for all four. That means her Gloom deals +264.61% damage. But the combat attribute monitor will show +162.75% damage, because it doesn't know about the enhancements.
Now I also pop Power Build Up. My total in the attribute monitor will jump to +244.61%. However, because of enhancements, that would put Gloom at +346.47%, which is over the buff cap of +300%.
So according to the attribute monitor, I can still benefit from more +damage, but in reality, at least my Gloom power cannot. The combination of damage enhancement for that power and global damage buffs has already overshot the cap. -
Quote:It isn't.Originally Posted by T_Immortalus
So why is the enhancement value "invisibly" factored into the Combat Attributes value?
The effect of enhancements is not accounted for at all in the monitor.
All it is showing is the total of all global damage buffs affecting your character. Enhancements aren't global, and they aren't factored into the number shown, period.