je_saist
-
Posts
4197 -
Joined
-
Packages for Transgaming's GameTreeLinux are now available through the Gametreelinux Developer site: https://gametreedeveloper.com/linux
Binary Packages are available for:- 64bit Debian
- 32bit Debian
- 32bit RedHat / Fedora
- 32bit Gentoo / Slackware
Assuming the old CoHupdater.exe launcher still works, CoH may still be playable.
As a note: you will need to have a GameTree Account to download the Cedega packages. An account is free of charge, and there is no financial cost associated with downloading the GTL packages. -
Quote:We don't have to put words into your mouth.Originally Posted by CactusBrawler
Please don't put words into my mouth, I'm not complaining about the size of the raids, merely that there is no solo progression, and that I entirely despise the 'Daily Quest' method of keeping a subscription base.
You are complaining that there is no solo-progression. Fine.
This is Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game.
The developers do not have to provide a solo option for anything.
The developers SHOULD not have to provide a solo option for everything.
The developers SHOULD not have to rework their development plans to accommodate whiny and obnoxious players.
Let me be clear. The developers have already stated, very explicitly, that methods are in development to enable additional methods of incarnate progression
You, and many other players, are whining like weedwackers because those methods are not yet implemented.
You, and many other players, are for some reason hung up on the idea that the Trails are all there is, and there ever will be.
You, and many other players, are for some reason hung up on the idea that you are entitled to play the game your way, and how you like.
Let me clue you in. You. Are Not. -
More lore pets were already confirmed by a developer in the past couple of weeks. The first set of Lore Pet expansions is expected for Issue 21.
It has also been confirmed that not all future pets will be Praetorian based. The first sets were Praetorian based as the first interactions with the Well of Furies was through the Praetorian world. It has already been indicated that eventually the Well's influence will be felt on other groups.
Whether or not the addition of further lore pets will accompany updated story-arcs or missions is, as of yet, unknown.
Quote:Completely different development team segments here cybermitheral.Originally Posted by cybermitheral
New MM Pets costume options before Lore Pets please.
The problem with MasterMind pets is they require changes to the costume-overlay tech, as well as exposure of costume-overlay components to end-users.
While some development resources, such as UI and artwork, are relatively shared between each, the bulk of development work required to implement the UI work for summoning animations of Lore pets has already been accomplished. The UI work to actually MAKE changes to costume-overlays has not been done, nor has any of the underlying database work, nor any of the client-side modifications.
Maybe I can put this another way.
Paragon Studios has several teams of developers.
Team A does one thing
Team B does another thing
Team C does something else
Team D does yet another different thing.
What you want with your request is the equivalent of telling Team B that it can't do anything until Team A does something. That's bad resource management. -
no.
if it says you have to be on the ground... you have to be on the ground. -
/unsigned.
Most of the major points against this horrible idea have already been addressed, such as basic balance. Higher-level enemies are generally balanced against the player having access not just to to additional powers in their upper tiers, but also to having additional slots for those powers. Ergo, as mobs scale in level those mobs gain access to a wider range of buffs, debuffs, mez effects, resistances, defenses, and attacks.
Creating a "flash forward" system would require the developers either re-balance the capabilities of each enemy mob based on the prospective level of the flash-forwarded player; or alternatively create a system that allows the player to act as though they have a higher level complete with slot adjustments and power selections. Either way, both options would require massive changes to the underlying engine code to create solutions for a problem that does not currently exist.
Now, I realize that the engine consideration arguments will largely fall on deaf ears for a numerous amount of reasons. For example, there will no doubt be the lower-level player with a full set of IO's who will step in and point out that they joined a higher level team, were SSK'd up, and were still fully capable of soloing effective +5/x8 mobs. I also imagine that such players would argue that the SSK system is already in place and all the developers would have to do is simply make a faux-SSK team for the player to join when presented with a flash-forward trial. Afterall, current task-forces already bump players up to the TF level on start.
Well, whoopty-doo if you can take on +5/x8 mobs by yourself. Just because "you" can does not mean everybody, nor does it mean everybody should. I hate to break it to... well I don't really... but the number of power-gamers who can pull that type of stunt off would have problems forcing a zone-lock on Outbreak.
The SSK bump on TF's is also an artifact of setting the level of the TF by the team-lead. Changing the system so that it could set an arbitrary level regardless of the team-leads actual level... well. That actually isn't that bad of an idea.
In fact, it actually came up several years back when SSK was introduced, and before that with the old SK system. Implementing TF / Trial mission spawns based on the level of the Trial / TF rather than the star-holders level would have eliminated many of the problems faced by players... such as the leader disconnecting and the second in line of a much lower level getting the star. That the developers did not take this particular coding approach I think says more about the likely-hood of such a change being implemented now than anything else that can be said.
I'd also reiterate the subjective feeling already communicated in this thread. The request itself screams "I want to be level 50 but not have to do anything to get to level 50"
Whether or not subscribers like it... This is in fact a Video-Game. You do, in fact, actually have to play the game in order to progress in levels. Progressing in levels is what unlocks content for you to play.
Yes, there are systems that enable you to play content that another subscriber has unlocked. Just because there are such systems does not, and will not, mean that you should get access to start or run that content on yourown without having met the same criteria as those other players... be it completing a story line to unlock a Task Force (Hess, Katie Hannon, Mortimer Kal), or achieving a particular level rank for your character.
In other words, if you want to run higher-level content...
Earn your own higher level yourself. -
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/forumdisplay.php?f=578
I've really been too busy with class to offer advice on buying / building new computers, but I still mostly try to respond to pm's on the subject. -
have to add my voice to the list of "this patch is a turkey"
According to the in-game clock a BAF I was on spent around 16 minutes fighting Nightstar and Seige. According to the real-time clock on the wall, we actually spent closer to 35 minutes on that fight, a near two to one timing change caused by extreme server side lag.
Lag aside, I also question whether or not the rewards were actually reworked. I've still yet to see anything greater than an un-common drop on my stalker. Out of all of the Lambda's I've been able to run since the patch hit, only 3 players total have pulled a Rare. Nobody I've teamed with has seen a very-rare since the patch.
Now, I will grant this sampling is a really small percentage of the player base, and only represents a relative handfull of lambda trials across only a couple servers... It also only represents two separate avatars on my part, a brute and a stalker, hardly enough data to draw any realistic conclusions from.
Realistic conclusions aside, it still feels like something is REALLY borked with the rewards system when a player solos 8, 9, or all 10 of either the acids or weapons crates, then gets a common drop as an end-event reward.
The system also feels really borked when after a grueling lag-fueled Baf fight, numerous players received the 10-thread reward option... As best as I can figure the server-side lag allowed Nighstar and Seige to stack the sequestering power 3 times before the players were ever notified, causing the very real problem where players would be fighting with no red-rings, and suddenly there would be red-rings and everybody in melee range was held. the general idea was that the combination of the server-side lag and the sudden sequestrations caused the reward system to conclude that numerous players were not present, and thus contributed nothing to the event.
Okay, I realize that this patch only got shoved out with a minimum of testing... but I find myself agreeing with other players that it should probably be rolled-back until the lag and reward issues can actually be fixed. -
Quote:it does not, and no there should not.Originally Posted by Yogi_Bare
Does activating the device actually start a Rikti zone event? (If not, it should -and there should be more missions with that kind of impact).
Tying zone events to mission complete objectives can cause multiple possible problems. A good case in point is found in the Malta storyline. Players have used the Khronos titan spawn to grief low level zones, leading to the in-game modification where the Titan can only be spawned in specific zones. Another good case in point is Synapse task force. Create player groups can spawn Babbage in zones other than Skyway.
Nor is such abusive behavior a thing of the past. In recent times players have used the event spawns from the Lady Grey Task Force and the Halloween Salvage to grief zones during Numina Weekly Strike Target periods which requires street hunts through multiple zones.
Creating more zone events, or more triggers for more zone events, that are bound to commonly attainable missions, would also require more work to limit those zone events as to not impede existing content. -
.... what Pet A.I.?
Pet's don't have A.I.
Pet's have a scripted behavior. that scripted behavior basically consists of a short yes and no checklist. That checklist basically consists of the following entry points:
1: "Am I close enough for a ranged attack?"
yes / no
yes - fire ranged attack
no - move closer
2: Am I now close enough for a melee attack?"
"yes - fire melee attack" -cycle to next power
"no - goto 1
* * *
And that's basically it.
Now, that script is affected by things such as:- pet perception: how far the pet can "see" into the world
- pet power list: what powers are currently available
- recharge time: what powers are in the recharge state
Now, would it be nice if there actually WAS an A.I. sub-routine?
Yes, it would. It would be really nice. -
Quote:Just a bit of history.Originally Posted by Calvin-
Ok so for question one
Battle axe
And
War mace
What's the difference other then onces and axe and ones a mace
The powers seem pretty much the same one gets a attack the swoops them up and the other gives u you simple hit
Or is there something I'm missing big time!.?????
Way back before Issue 11 there was no such thing as power customization: http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/pat...es_112807.html
Back then, if you wanted to have an Axe instead of a Mace, you needed a completely new power set that featured an Axe instead of a mace. The Cross-over between Axe and Mace can also be seen in Broadsword / Katana. At some point they were the same power-set with different animations.
Over the years the developers have implemented changes to each set to try and make each set different. However, those changes are limited by the cottage rule: http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Cottage_Rule
... yes. they do.Quote:Ok for the 2nd question
Yes I know tbat tanks get better def and res states comparing to brutes
Do Does brutes deal more Dmg because of there fury bar!.???
According to various forum posters Brutes only need to generate 63% fury to do the same average damage as a scrapper... a less than trivial task since the major buff Brute's received to Fury Generation: http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Patch_No...0-08-16#Brutes
This means that in casual play a Brute can average more damage than a scrapper.
In team play, the situation changes: http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Damage_Cap#Damage
Brutes have a maximum damage cap of 775%
Scrappers have a maximum damage cap of 500%
However, Scrappers can critical, which gives them a 2X modifier, meaning scrappers can turn in 500x2% damage... which means an impressive 1000% damage increase.
This creates the teaming situation where Scrappers can easily out-damage brutes. In practical effect, Scrappers gain a larger benefit from Damage Buffs because of their Critical Capability.
The only class that can do more damage than a Scrapper is the Stalker, which has the best burst DPS... however that DPS is all-front-loaded due to Assassin's strike.
Right now the Archtypes largely line up as:
Stalkers: highest burst dps - front loaded, lowest survivability
Scrappers: highest sustained dps - average delivery, average survivability
Brutes: High Sustained DPS - ramped delivery, higher survivability
Tanks: Medium Sustained DPS - average delivery, highest survivability
To directly answer the question you did not ask, no, a Tanker's Bruise effect is not enough to make up the single target damage difference compared to the other archetypes. -
Quote:.. a Fully Functional Soong Android?Originally Posted by Golden Girl
I wonder is he intends to use his robot making skills to try and make a physical form for Numina? There are already a few examples in the game of a spirit or consciousness inhabiting a machine, and a project like that could be a perfect symbol of their relationship, merging sceince and magic.
-
Quote:I think the line is based on announcements from NCSoft back in 2007: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2...use-for-it.arsOriginally Posted by Sharker Quint 0I
I really don't think that the devs would spend so much time on incarnate stuff if they felt the game only had 2.5 yrs left. Could you provide a link to the post though so that we may read it.
Back then NCSoft stated they had about a 5 year plan for City of Heroes. If Going Rogue had launched in Spring 2010 as the Autumn 2009 Hero-Con convention indicated, it would have launched close to the 2.5 / 3 year mark that NCSoft had set, leaving the game with only 2 to 2.5 more years.
However, many of those statements were taken out of context. NCSoft basically guaranteed they would back City of Heroes, as it was from Cryptic, for 5 years. However, that 5 year plan was not a kill-date or a due-date.
NCSoft made it clear that the 5 year plan was a targeted plan for goals that both NCSoft and NCSoft NorCal, now Paragon Studios, wanted to meet. At the end of those 5 years, NCSoft would re-evaluate the position of Paragon Studios game in the market. While not said outright, NCSoft did indicate that should the City of Heroes game continue to be profitable, they would continue to back the game for the forseeable future.
As far as I am aware, City of Heroes is still profitable for NCSoft.
Nobody does.Quote:I don't know how long an mmo has for lifeblood
Anybody who tells you that an MMO has a certain amount of life-span is talking out their rear-end.
Thing is, games like Meridian 59, Ultima Online, and Everquest still have sizeable player-bases. When a game like UO or EQ can still be profitable decades down the line, that sort of torpedo's the idea that any MMO has a pre-determined life-span.
MMO's go for as long as they are profitable to operate. As long as City of Heroes has a player-base that can cover the bills, I have little doubt that NCSoft won't shut the studio down, nor turn off the servers.
That being said, I wish there was some plan that was in place should City of Heroes be rendered un-profitable. E.G., opening up the server client under an restrictive license, but permitting users to download and host their own game servers. -
Quote:yeah.Originally Posted by Lazarillo
It's more fun not to let 'em live it down.
This pretty much sums it up.
Whenever you need to make your villain just a bit more ebil, add grand-daughter who will do anything. -
Quote:That would only intensify the howls of players screaming that the Judgement powers render Blasters obsolete.Originally Posted by Noyjitat
Personally I think they should make them all affected by damage buffs. Especially in incarnate trials but that's just me.
-
Canine: I think it's more player comfort than a cultural thing.
The method you describe is the general master of method that many organized groups in the US pull off.
For the most part groups in the US will tend to go a step further given that exp and drops are not shared across the league (yet). The #8 players on Team 1 and 2 will go deal with add-ins along with Team 3, while Team 3's Player #7 and #8 will split up to go to Siege and Nightstar.
On several of the servers I play on, p.u.g. groups are far too disorganized to pull off synchronization. That is also presuming that the p.u.g. groups bothered to look at the chat during the event. I've been on several b.a.f.'s where players simply have not read the chat boxes. In one particular case a player expressed confusion as to why they should even pay attention to anything else on the screen while beating down an AV.
Given this, I highly doubt there is a cultural context. It seems to be a context more derived from players willing to listen and be flexible in the events. I suspect that the smaller EU player-base forces players there to be more comfortable in dealing with each other, which leads to better cohesion in a group. -
something else that also helps when trying to grab either is to use Darkest Night with proc, like the chance for recharge slow.
That being said, don't forget that there are extra badges / astral merits in the BAF for fighting Seige and Nighstar at their spawn points, rather than fighting them together in the tennis court. -
Quote:...Originally Posted by Residentx_EU
Why should I not run both at the same time? I want to hear this...
For starters: NETWORK BANDWIDTH
Then there's also the issue of the actual patcher. While the PlayNC launcher seems to leverage Xdelta: http://xdelta.org/ :: http://xdelta.org/xdelta3.html :: Xdelta is not exactly known as a processor light tech.
Now, I don't know (for a fact) that CoH now uses Xdelta. In the past CoH has used it's own internal engine for downloading and "compiling" updates to the .pigg file format used for data storage.
Now, on my own multi-core systems, I don't really see a performance impact on processing time in running multiple launchers, either under the Crapware .NET NCSoft Launcher or the older CoHupdater.exe
I do see a noticable bandwidth increase attempting to run multiple launchers at once. It is entirely possible that automatic cut-offs / bandwidth caps, could be applied when running multiple launchers on some ISP's. -
Quote:Well, the thing with that is that the Trial Events are not... technically... a typical instanced mission. As far as I am aware they leverage the open-zone event technology first seen in the Praetorian Zone Events.Originally Posted by Lobster
I've slotted in mission at least once.
I crafted & changed T2->T3 Lore the other night after Marauder's cutscene in the Lambda trial.
So, there may be funky things like the trial hospitals and cutscenes (things that reset some kind of "in combat" flag, perhaps) which will allow it.
My suspicion is that reslotting is "allowed" by a flag reset after cut-scenes or death in the trial to give players a chance to swap to an Incarnate Power that might be more useful. Case in point is the B.A.F. The Gravitic Core side of the tree offers a movement speed debuff, a power effect that would be incredibly useful in the Prisoner Escape fight. -
Quote:Probably is not possible.Originally Posted by JohnnyKilowatt
Hmm, someone really needs to change the error text if that's the case. Every time I try to switch mid-mission, it says I need to wait, not that I can't switch at all ...
as far as I understand the underlying system the developers decided to pursue the least bandwidth intensive solution to tracking the state of a player's ability to re-slot Incarnate Powers. As I understand the system it is a binary state:- State A: The player can slot an Incarnate Enhancement
- State B: The player cannot slot an Incarnate Enhancement
Adding explicit text to indicate that the player cannot re-slot while inside of a mission would (likely) require setting a third state:- State C: The player is inside of a mission
Now, my own personal opinion is that an additional state would be a nice quality of life upgrade. However, Since I'm not sure what kind of work would be required for all of the other systems that leverage the (possible) existing binary state to expand and include a Ternary state, much less whether or not the re-slot flagging is indeed based on a binary state system, I'm not entirely sure if the cost in development resources to make those changes is really going to be worth the expenditure. -
Quote:That is because you can't switch in a mission.Originally Posted by JohnnyKilowatt
If you plan on changing your incarnate powers mid-mission, keep in mind there is a very large cooldown timer after you fight stuff. I have no idea how long it is, but it's so long that I've never been able to successfully switch while in a mission. It's _that_ long. I always had to exit the mission and switch outside.
Outside of a mission there is a 5 minute timer between changing out slots.
Now, that being said, I have been able to de-slot, upgrade, and re-slot while in the hospital during a Lambda Trial. -
Quote:bzzzt. incorrect.Originally Posted by fallenz
The Incarnate system was always a part of Going Rogue. It just got push back a bit due the reworking of the system. Pick it up I urge you and enjoy the free month and playing with the new toys. It's really not that bad.
The Incarnate system was never part of Going Rogue.
The Incarnate System was planned as ongoing result of Going Rogue. However, the development of the Incarnate System started well after the Going Rogue development Cycle. As best as the players can track, the Incarnate System entered a production cycle sometime in early 2010, around the period point when Going Rogue was originally supposed to be entering Beta Status as reported at West Coast Hero-Con 2009.
The actual announcement of a new end-game system was not revealed until after Matt Miller stepped down from the Lead Designer position as reported in Janurary 2010: http://www.guildportal.com/Guild.asp...8785795&Page=1
So... Going Rogue... originally revealed in March 2009 by an email release: http://www.warcry.com/news/view/9165...nsion-Revealed
End-Game content... revealed in January 2010 by an official press-announcement.
How in the world you get Incarnate System was always part of Going Rogue out of two distinct separate production dates is a pretty big question.
Now, where I think you are getting confused at is exactly what happened when Going Rogue kept getting delayed from it's un-official spring launch, to it's announced June launch, then to it's final August Launch.
The Going Rogue retail product took so long to complete that the Incarnate Asset production team had time to complete the technical implementation of the Alpha Slot, as well as put that technical implementation through alpha-testing. Development of Going Rogue was further delayed, presumably on authorization from NCSoft to expand the scope of Going Rogue given the abysmal failure of a competitors product. The Alpha-Slot implementation reached a state where it was viable for a player-release. Hence the posts that an Incarnate preview was to be included with Going Rogue. Key word there: PREVIEW
However, as that planned launch date in August approached, it became clear that Going Rogue was not going to make the launch date. In order to complete on time the developers assigned to work on the Incarnate System and End-Game content where re-merged back into production of the retail client product. This halted the implementation of the Alpha-Slot as there simply were no time or resources to do finalize and QA both the Retail box release of Going Rogue and the Alpha-Slot.
The halt in the Alpha-Slot and Incarnate production cycle gave the developers some time to revamp the concepts of obtaining the alpha-slot, concepts that have continued to be revamped with the current Incarnate Trials. E.G. the Alpha Slot can now be unlocked through participating in Trials rather than having to complete the Mender Remial story arc.
Anyways, Matt Miller himself took to the forums to explain that the Alpha-Slot Sneak Peek was being pulled from launching alongside Going Rogue: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=229365
Now, yes, the Incarnate System was created with Going Rogue in mind, and the developers did make an intentional decision to make the Incarnate content only available to purchasers of the expansion. However, the implementation of the end-game system was only determined after players had already been informed about what Going Rogue would contain... in March 2010: http://goingrogue.na.cityofheroes.com/en/2010/03/Quote:We still want to do an Alpha Slot Sneak Peek, but we want it to happen once more of the system and content are closer to being ready for prime time. -
Quote:Forgive me then. I've been jaded by having to explain to multiple players that temporary powers are listed on their Power Bar, as well as explaining that yes, players could have more than one incarnate power effect crafted.Originally Posted by Lobster
Also, I'm quite aware that you can make multiples... I would have to be daft to be ignorant of that point. I just have no desire to do so for 30 separate incarnates. Heck, I'll be lucky to get singles on most of them.
I suspect most players will be in a similar positionQuote:So, I'm just going to focus on a few characters, only one of which I will bother to make multiple interfaces on.
As of this point I've only worked on getting a Dominator to higher levels of incarnate access, and my chosen path was for the resistance debuff, so I can't speak from direct experience.Quote:Back to the thread topic: Has anyone actually tested the gravitic radial branch of the Interface slot? Especially paired with elec/ - is the -recov noticeable? the -special might be more useful (thematically/debuffing) on a defender, so I may go that route too.
I suspect that the endurance drain would be noticeable even on an attack that doesn't natively drain endurance.
Now, as for the secondary debuff... my suspicion is that unless you have a large number of AOE attacks on hand, it won't be as noticable since many NPC's rely on stacking secondary debuffs (e.g. Arachnos, Cimerorans, Rularuu) through large mobs. Debuffing a single Cimeroran's abiltity to debuff defense won't matter when you have 15 others also debuffing defense on a single target. -
Kinrad: since I didn't see it brought up.
Sequestering is a Targeted Area of Effect Hold.
Everybody who is around a Sequestered Target will get sequestered.
It is possible that you were held by a tank, brute, or scrapper that had not cleared the area. -
Quote:Zwil has braved the forums trying to ask specific questions about PvP Play experience:Originally Posted by DaveMebs
War witch actually said they would take a look at it after the incarnates were released. Highly doubt it's actually true though.
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=253809
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=254064
The amount of information actually derived from those threads was minimal. What we do know from those threads is that the pre-I13 PvP experience is not coming back, ever. The developers have no intentions of doing a roll-back or re-implementing the Pre-I13 experience.
Now, as to whether or not PvP itself will ever be revisited... I think it is something that will get kicked around the Paragon Studios office, but I highly suspect NCSoft themselves will put the kibosh on funding any direct work. As far as I am aware NCSoft's policy is still to push PvP oriented players to current PvP oriented franchises Guild Wars and Aion. -
include another admission of surprise that the system didn't already work like that.