iakona_NA

In honor of the one-year anniversary of the beginning of the Power Data Standardization project, I've decided to make all the AT/Rank/Class data available in .xls format. You can download the spreadsheet at http://www.sharebigfile.com/file/81959/classes-xls.html.

This spreadsheet contains all the base, minimum, and maximum values for all attributes for every player AT, and all 31 critter Classes. It includes virtually everything I've posted in both of the PDS threads, and much much more, all in one concise and easy-to-read format.

If you've ever wondered about the damage cap for a level 13 Blaster, or the Brawl damage for a level 38 underling, or the defense cap for a level 50 Scrapper, or the base perception of a boss turret, you can find the answer to all those questions and many more in this one spreadsheet.

As far as I can tell, the ticks are completely independent. I've seen nothing at all that would indicate any dependency between the seperate chances. So yes, Arcana is correct in where I got the 87.5% number, and no I didn't account for the minimum 5% chance to miss.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Probably the best way to answer this is to refer to comics -- When The Human Torch 'goes nova' he puts everything he has into it and pretty much knocks himself out. That's the 'feel' these powers are meant to reflect.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not questioning the conceptual validity of the crash, but rather whether they do enough damage given the crash.

I would suggest that this would represent the *lower* limit of how much damage nova should do: since a solo heroic mission can spawn a +1 LT, nova should be guaranteed to kill such a critter, if its designed to incapacitate the blaster completely.

Doesn't it seem reasonable, Castle, that if the big bangs are conceptually designed to incapacitate the blaster, at the very least they should be capable of delivering a *guaranteed* kill on a heroic solo spawn, assuming no extraordinary resistances? Extra damage beyond that would be extra damage beyond that: useful for people who run on invincible, for increasing the utility of the power in teams, etc.

Edit: assuming it hits at all: I'm not advocating for nova to be autohit

[/ QUOTE ]
Nova with 3 damage SOs + Aim + Build Up + 1 small damage inspiration = 87.5% chance of killing a non-resistant +1 Lieutenant. I think this is a perfectly reasonable amount of damage for the drawbacks of the power. I don't think there should be a guaranteed one-shot AoE kill for +1 Lieuts; I think it should stay as a high chance of one-shot kill as it is currently.

It's pretty obvious to me that these powers are not intended to be used as alpha strikes; just look at the way the NPCs are programmed to use these type of powers, and you can see that they are intended to be used as "oh <bleep>" powers, when you're losing a fight and need that extra boost to tip the scales in your favor.

By the way, as currently set up, Nova at the damage cap has an 87.5% chance of killing any non-resistant +2 Lt at any level, and +3 Lts for level 47-50 Blasters (this is due to the uneven increase of player damage vs. NPC hit points as you level).

[ QUOTE ]
Can you tell me how this information was acquired? How did Red Tomax get this info? Which file did he open and where was it located?

I am trying to independently verify the data used in the analysis. Any help you can give me would be appreciated.

Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]
I can't tell you how the information was acquired, but I can tell you that a large portion (if not the majority) of it is not stored anywhere in the game client; so not only would hacking your client be a violation of the EULA, it would not even give you the information you seek.

I can also assure you that RedTomax and his source did not acquire this information by taking any actions on any Cryptic/NCSoft servers.

Correct. Any category of powers that uses more than one AT's modifiers is not yet set up to display the correct effect values. You can see which AT modifier is used by looking at the line immediately above the effects, titled "Effects Source." If this source does not match the source you are expecting for that power, the effect data will not be accurate.

Also note that the Mastermind Pets category does not use the correct modifiers yet. It is currently using only the general Pets modifiers, when it should be using a different set of modifiers for each rank of henchman. I listed most of the Henchmen modifiers earlier in this thread, so you can find the correct effect values by swapping the proper Henchman modifier for the current Pets modifier.

Inherent and Pool powers are not yet set up properly. All powers in those categories are currently using Blaster modifiers for all effects. (Nova blasts, etc., display as 0 damage because Blasters have no SSDamage modifiers)

Hmm, those results are discouraging, as they seem to indicate that Fury is more broken than I expected. I don't think the problem is one that Castle is even able to fix; it looks like the engineers/coders would have to make some changes to the way the game engine works.

This is how I understand Fury is currently set to work:<ul type="square">[*]Fury is actually comprised of 4 seperate powers: Rage, Rage Buff, Rage Strengthen, and Rage Dampen (Note: none of these are related to the Super Strength power Rage. Rage is the name used by the powers database for the power known as Fury; it is also the name of the Attribute used for the Fury mechanic).[*]Rage Dampen is the power that decreases your current Rage attribute level; it ticks every 1 second, decreasing your current Rage attribute by 2 points each tick.[*]Rage Strengthen is the power that increases the Strength (essentially a pseudo-enhancement; uses the same mechanics as enhancements or Power Boost) of powers that modify the Rage attribute. It ticks every 10 seconds, and adds 100% Strength for 10 seconds if there are any entities within 10 feet that are not Minions, Underlings, Pets, or Swarms; it also adds an additional 100% Strength for 10 seconds if any of the entities within 10 feet are players, ArchVillains, or Monsters. The current tick interval is problematic, as it requires you to be within 10 feet of these entities for up to 10 seconds before the Strength increase occurs; however, this point may be moot currently, as this power does not seem to be having any effect at all on Fury generation, if the tests in this thread are correct.[*]Rage Buff is the power that converts the current level of your Rage attribute into a damage buff. This power ticks every 1 second, and adds 0.02 * Rage to the current Strength for all damage attributes.[*]Rage is the power that adds to your current Rage attribute. Of the 4 powers that make up Fury, this is the only one that is set to be affected by the Strength for the Rage attribute, meaning higher Strength should equal higher Rage generation. Each time the Brute attacks, 5 * min(((100 - Rage) / 20) ^2, 1) is added to the current Rage attribute value. Each time the Brute is attacked, 2.5 * min(((100 - Rage) / 20) ^2, 1) is added to the current Rage attribute value. Based on the test results reported in this thread, it appears that this power is not properly using the Strength values for the Rage attribute. My guess is that it has something to do with the effects being Expressions, instead of the usual Magnitude or Durations, and that the engineers/coders never set up Expressions to use Strength values; that's purely a guess, though, so I could be completely wrong.[/list]

That'll be up to Red Tomax to decide. We initially had all the raw variables displayed when CoD was in an early beta version, but we decided that the current display would be more useful to the majority of users. I understand that there are people out there (myself included) who like to know all the underlying raw variables, so there may be an alternate version of CoD that includes that information someday, but it will likely be a while before that happens, if at all, since Red Tomax is rather busy these days.

[ QUOTE ]
Will an EMP Glove work Iakona or does the attack have to be part of our primary/secondary/pool?

[/ QUOTE ]In theory, any attack should work, regardless of where you got it, but I haven't tested to verify that.

I have a theory about the PvP fury problem, but I don't currently have a brute with which to test it, so here's what I need from the Brute community:
1) The tester needs to be a Brute with a ranged attack. Any ranged attack will do, as long as it can be activated more than 10 feet from the target.
2) The target needs to be a stationary player. Location doesn't matter (arena or zone pvp is fine).
3) Tester stands at max range for the ranged attack (ensure that NO other players or critters are within 10 feet of the Tester), and fires at the caster. Report in this thread how much your Fury meter increases upon activation of this attack.
4) Tester moves into melee range with the target (ensure that NO other players or critters are within 10 feet of the Tester), waits a minimum of 10 seconds, then fires another attack (any attack will do). Report how much your Fury meter increases upon activation of this attack.
5) Repeat steps 3 and 4 against a Minion (preferrably a held target, to prevent any fury from incoming attacks)
6) Repeat step 5 against a Lieutenant or Boss (either is fine, as both should give equal result)

If the data matches my expectations, I think I know how to fix the PvP Fury bug.

For those of you who don't know already, up-to-date and exact power data can be found at The City of Data. This page replaces the old page at RedTomax's site that I linked to in my original post in this thread, as this new link is much more complete and accurate.

Choking Cloud has a normal to-hit check, with 1.0 base accuracy. Each tick that hits a critter has a 50% chance of applying a Mag 2 Hold, and a seperate 80% chance of applying an additional Mag 1 Hold. Each tick that hits a player has just an 80% chance of Mag 2.

Most AVs have no inherent protection against Taunt (Statesman, Synapse, Captain Mako, and Lord Recluse are exceptions). The purple triangles have no effect on taunt.

Debuff resistance on AVs is always active, regardless of the direction the triangles are pointing.

On a related note, all Brute Patron Power attacks (and Mastermind Web Envelope) have an inherent taunt effect, but it is subject to the same restrictions as Brute Primary powers.

[ QUOTE ]
So, iakona, what about the Epic Pools? If Epic Pools still have it too, then we've solved another problem: Tankers stealing Hamidon aggro from the Taunter, when using an epic power (and probably in combination with a pool attack).

[/ QUOTE ]Tanker Epic Pool attacks all have inherent taunt that works on all critters.

A new twist to add to this thread, which explains the results seen by Dersk against Eochai: the inherent taunt of Pool Powers (Air Superiority, Kick, etc.) works on all critters for tankers. Brutes do not get any inherent taunt from these powers.

Tanker taunt auras use the same mechanic as the inherent taunt in melee attacks, which check the target's rank to determine whether or not to apply the taunt effect. Currently, the taunt effects of Brute auras work on all NPCs, but the Tanker versions have the same restrictions as Tanker/Brute melee powers.

Tanker Taunt at level 50 lasts 41 seconds (increases with player level) vs. even-level NPCs (10.25 seconds vs. players, increases with level). As far as I know, most AVs don't have any innate resistance to taunt, so you should be getting the full duration out of it. Against a +1 foe, it becomes 36.9 seconds base. Against +2 is 32.8 seconds. Against +3 is 26.65 seconds. Against +4 is 19.68 seconds.

Inherent Taunt powers for a level 50 Tanker last 13.5 seconds (increases with player level) against regular NPCs. Against players, the duration is 6 seconds at all levels, and has a % chance of occuring, which is usually equal to the Damage Scale of the power divided by 10.

It seems to me that a simple solution to this issue would be to add AVs/GMs to the player target version of Inherent Taunt effects, so that the tanker has a set % chance of taunting with melee attacks.

Powers that have a Taunt effect apply a set Magnitude for a variable duration. The duration is affected by player level, relative level of the enemy, and taunt resistance on the enemy. Taunt is a boolean attribute, meaning the target is either taunted or it isn't; there's no middle ground. If your target is currently taunted to attack you, the only thing that can draw that target away is someone else accumulating a higher total Taunt magnitude on the target.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Brute attacks are subject to the same restrictions as Tanker attacks. They make a check to see if the target is an AV/GM/Hami/Mito/player, and if it isn't, the inherent Taunt effect is applied. If the target is one of those, the Taunt effect is not even applied to the target; t's not a matter of resistance or protection.

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't correct. My brutes can hold aggro of 8 +4 AVs 100% of the time, using their aura and nothing else.

My tanker couldn't hold aggro of one +2 AV more than 3/4 of the time, using aura and every attack power I had.

This is my experience since 3 months ago. I always thought tankers were bugged. If they're WAI and brutes are bugged, well... I'm glad my brute is SHOE'd out.

[/ QUOTE ]
I just rechecked this. It looks like Brute taunt auras (invincibility, mud pots) are exempt from this restriction. The inherent taunt of those powers apparently is set to work on all NPCs, but the Tanker equivalents do not. The inherent taunt of melee attack powers for both ATs does not work on AVs/GMs.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the Gauntlet change came in sometime after the CoV end-of-Beta event, as I remember the devs talking about how all the taunt effects basically shut down the AV/GM ability to attack.

[/ QUOTE ]

Waaaiiittt a sec. Do you mean the event where the Devs put on the tights as the signature heroes and invaded the Rogue Isles? They complained that they weren't able to attack the other players as they saw fit because of the taunt effects they had on them?

So, unless I'm missing the meaning here, an essentially PvP event has influenced a PvE game change? (In a way that I'm sure most of us would at least raise an eyebrow over....)

[/ QUOTE ]
Yep, that's the event I'm talking about. I can understand them changing it so that GMs are unaffected by inherent taunt, since there are potentially dozens of different targets applying the effect. However, it doesn't make sense for AVs that appear on mission maps, since there are normally only one or two players with an inherent taunt effect on any given team.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

3 days ago I stood in the middle of 4-6 members of the freedom phalanx on the last mission of the RSF, holding aggro with footstomp alone. When someone would sleet them, they would all run away, I'd go after the main target, hit them, and all the others would generally come back after me when they turned around, with the occasional encouragement of using mu lightning on a hero that deceided a corruptor looked like a better target (given that they are +4 Hero's and the AV/Hero targetting change, mu lightning should not distract them without taunt, right?).

[/ QUOTE ]

This one I can explain: Brutes have taunt in their attacks. They don't have gauntlet.

[/ QUOTE ]Brute attacks are subject to the same restrictions as Tanker attacks. They make a check to see if the target is an AV/GM/Hami/Mito/player, and if it isn't, the inherent Taunt effect is applied. If the target is one of those, the Taunt effect is not even applied to the target; t's not a matter of resistance or protection.

Basically, any power that has taunt added as a secondary effect will not taunt an AV/GM. Powers in which the only effect is a taunt still work as normal (although some AV/GMs also have resistance and/or protection to taunt).

[ QUOTE ]
Except AVs ignore threat rating as of I7, do they not?

[/ QUOTE ]Yeah, forgot about that. Post re-edited now.

I think the Gauntlet change came in sometime after the CoV end-of-Beta event, as I remember the devs talking about how all the taunt effects basically shut down the AV/GM ability to attack.

I've known about it for a month or so, and it's been around since at least this summer. Confirmed by an anonymous developer source.