je_saist

Actually, due to the way Wormhole works, enemies will fire on you anyways. The Stun effect is only applied after the teleport effect... so for the whole time that the teleport is animating a mob can turn and unload on you.

Of course, since you can activate Wormhole without being in line of sight of said enemy... a simple corner or barrier will offer an effective solution to taking that alpha strike.

One of the major problems that many players have with the gravity set is the lack of any quick power to mitigate alpha strike damage. Ignoring the mass holds, all other control sets get some kind of power that offers an immediate alpha shut down on the part of the player: Salt Crystals - Sleep; Stalagmites - immediate stun; Static Field - Sleep; Smoke - perception debuff; Flashfire - immediate stun; Flash Freeze - Sleep; Mass - hypnosis - sleep; Spre Burst - sleep. Illusion gets a different alpha mitigation as Phantom Army can be launched while stealthed.

The problems with Gravity have been brought to the developers attentions. Colin was assigned to work on the set: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showp...1&postcount=11

Beyond that, there hasn't been so much as a peep.


Now, for my own Grav, I just tossed two teleport enhancements for the 8% regen boost and found better places to put slots.

After the devs pulled the stunt with making the door one-way... I'm half-expecting an Anti-TP field.

Anyways, I ran with a team that DID try this method, but the mine-layers came up to the door and blew us up anyways.

Also ran with a team that tried to do the fight with group fly in the rafters. The mine-layers hopped up to the rafters.

Tried to do it with a team that staggered TAOE's to try and keep the mine-layers in a defeated state: ill / storm controller with freezing / ice storm; ice blast / storm corr with ice storm / freezing rain; fire blast / cold dom corr with rain of fire / sleet; and an archery something. Somebody else had a rain, I think the main tank was packing Ice storm as well. That method failed as well.

Even tried with a team loaded down with blasters and controllers with auto on the immobilize powers in an attempt to fight D11 from range. Mine layers just where-ever they pleased.

Like Penny, I just don't see, or just can't think of, a way to get the Midnight Dodger badge without relying on temp pets to generate the sustained damage needed to topple D11 in under 30 seconds.

Not so odd.

Microsoft officially terminated support for Windows 2000 and there's been several API breaks between Win2k4 SP4 and WinXP Sp3.

No technical support staff wants to try and support a product the original vendor no longer wants to associate itself with.

The suspicion is that the D11 fight was balanced against Incarnate Abilities that have yet to be exposed to the player-base.

Question.

How exactly are you determining DPS?

Thing is, we just had a recent thread from last year that even F.Grubb weighed in on: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showp...4&postcount=49

The full thread is here: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=246895

I think you should read it, especially this post from Miuramir: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showp...3&postcount=45

Now, I'm not going to rehash that entire thread. It can be summed up in one sentence: DPS DOES NOT MATTER IN CITY OF HEROES

Very few players care if you can do 260 damage per second against a pylon or a hardened target such as an Archvillain. Most players realize you will never get that kind of DPS in a typical mob fight where you have to switch targets on the fly and your chain of attack is affected by enemy buffs / debuffs.

Now, I'm going to be blunt. Soft-cap on a regen is relatively pointless. You have no Defense Debuff Resistance. All it's going to take is one defense debuffing attack from an enemy... and you're out of soft cap and back to relying on your heals and regeneration.

As to which build you ultimately take? Well, that's up to you. Broadsword and Claws are completely different play experiences.

The mez's are delivered as a constant non-stacking point-blank-area-of-effect.

This means that the stun and fear auras will only deliver the exact magnitude of that effect to an enemy. If an enemy resists the magnitude of that effect, the effect will be ignored.


Dark's weakest points? Everything.

http://zerias.blogspot.com/2010/05/d...elee-tank.html



Okay, the biggest problem with Dark Armor is that the set has never really been revamped for the defensive aura changes. Dark Armor was designed for a time in the game when you could only activate one armor at a time and you had to pick which aura was best for whichever situation. The set was only ever really balanced to work with Dark Melee's Dark Consumption power as the aggregate endurance consumption of all possible enabled toggles is only numerically surpassed by the aggregate endurance consumption of Stone Armor's non-granite armors.

The set faces additional problems as a Tank armor. The mez mitigation effects that work well for scrappers or brutes run counter to the tasks of a tank. It's not really a big deal for a brute or a scrapper if an enemy wanders outside of melee range whiled stunned, or tears off down a hallway in fear. It is a big deal for a tank as effective aggro control is all but lost.

To be blunt, Dark Armor for Tanks... SUCKS.

With that being said, if you scrap the idea of playing like a Tank, things can get interesting. Dark Armor might be a lousy set for traditional tanking and aggro control. It might be an outright horrible armor set on the Single Origin Enhancements the developers balance the game against.

It's a power-house on IO's and Incarnates.


To put it this way, with the base Cardiac Alpha enabled on my own Dark / EM Tank, I use less endurance with Super Jump running than I use without the Cardiac and Super Jump turned off.

Dark is also easier to soft-cap than it's resistance cousins with a few points of defense in Cloak-of-Darkness. It's not much, but it's enough. You'll still run into the problem that any enemy with a defense debuff will rapidly take you OUT of soft-cap, but a few seconds may be all you need to get Dark Regeneration off.

Which brings up the high-point of Dark Armor. With capped ED slotting, you'll only need about two enemies to drive a 2000 point heal. As you increase recharge and endurance recovery, and decrease endurance consumption, Dark Armor really does approach the point of being unstoppable. All you have to do is survive long enough to trigger Dark Regeneration


Now, is Dark / Fire / Pyre really the best way to go?

yes / no / not really.

Dark / Fire isn't a bad combination. I've got one. Granted it's not my play Dark Tank, but I've got one.

The biggest problem with Dark / Fire / Pyre is that it made sense up until Going Rogue when one little power was made available: http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Soul_Mastery#Darkest_Night

Darkest Night is hands down the most useful power you can take. Period.

Granted it wasn't available for Tanks when I did my walk-through in May 2010. It's on the current build though.

My eyes hope it is...

The suggestion has been made to the developers to convert the existing audio system to leverage OpenAL: http://connect.creativelabs.com/openal/default.aspx

OpenAL, while not entirely vendor neutral standard, was licensed under LGPL prior to version 1.1. It is currently promoted as an "Open Standard" by Creative and other Vendors, but has not been accepted by the Khronos.

Currently there is no official Architecture Review Board for OpenAL itself. Development of the API does continue through the public mailing lists: http://opensource.creative.com/piper...ry/thread.html

One of the rumors that pops up every now and then is that Khronos wants a proper OpenSL release to complement it's other Vendor Neutral API's, but certain hardware vendors (*COUGH INTEL COUGH CREATIVE COUGH*) are not interested.

Actually saying "ya know, I think I could make the game work from a First Person viewpoint" might actually GET you hired.

I suspect several players remember the atrocious version of the NCSoft launcher that was in use back when Tabula Rasa launched, and that most of the vile and bitter hatred directed at the launcher stem from past versions.

My own "hatred" of the launcher is largely caused by the underlying technologies used to power previous versions launcher. A common saying in the programming circles I travel in runs something to the effect of this: "If you want something done quickly, use Microsoft. If you want something done right, don't use Microsoft"

Setting aside Linux / BSD compatibility for a moment, Microsoft has constantly proven to be an untrustworthy company. They have been caught, and in many cases convicted, of implementing secret backdoors, deliberately sabotaging code, and of collecting information without the users permission. In terms of security Microsoft is only able to remain competitive with other products by refusing to release information on bugs and obfuscating reports that do make it out.

Case in point is Internet Explorer. Microsoft loves to trumpet when Internet Explorer has less bug reports than Mozilla Firefox. Slight problem, Mozilla has an open Bugzilla located at: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/ Microsoft does not have an open bug tracking system for Internet Explorer. So Microsoft can name any number they choose to. There's no proof that any number Microsoft cites is accurate.


Then there's the problems of deliberate API breakage. Referring back to Tabula Rasa, all during the beta period Destination Games used a set of Microsoft API's that were identical across Windows 2000 SP4 and Windows XP SP1. As the beta drew to a close and retail launched approached, Destination Games suddenly switched to a library update in Xp Service Pack 2, an update that was supposed to be in the canceled Windows 2000 Service Pack 5. That change killed compatibility with Windows 2000. It did not matter that Windows 2000 had the same kernel, same driver model, same DirectX version, same everything else. All it took was one tiny file in an API update that wasn't released for Windows 2000... and that was it.

Right now Windows 7 and Windows Vista are going through a similar breakpoint. Windows 7 has received Service Pack 1. The corresponding Service Pack 3 update for Vista is still Missing in Action, and Microsoft would love to kill the Vista association so much they may not actually do a Service Pack 3 or a Platform Update like they did to synch Vista SP2 with Windows 7 Launch.

API breakage is a very serious concern when using Microsoft Software. There is no guarantee that any software produced using a Microsoft API or Microsoft Tools will continue to be compatible with the Microsoft Operating Systems.

All it's going to take is for one day Microsoft to say "no more .NET updates for Windows XP"... and poof, that's it. Developers either have to keep using an older and un-patched version of the .NET framework and tools, or just junk the platform.

Third party tool kits and API's, such as OpenGL, Webkit, QT, GTK+, OpenCL, and the like, don't have these API breakage issues. As long as the third party API's and their corresponding libraries are in place, software can still be compiled and updated. In some cases new versions of an API or Toolkit deliberately go out of their way to provide fallbacks or alternative operating modes to support previous versions (OpenGL).

This 3rd party support is one of the reasons why City of Heroes can leverage DirectX 10 class hardware under Windows XP. While Microsoft won't ever update Windows Xp to DX10, City of Heroes uses the OpenGL API. As long as OpenGL 3.x support is exposed in the graphics drivers, that support can be leveraged by the game. So hardware capabilities that are not, and will not ever be, exposed under DirectX, are exposed and usable on the same exact Operating System platform.


Then there's matter of Patents, a story that goes all the way back to 2003. Microsoft has several software patents on the .NET framework and API. Microsoft "says" that they will not use these patents to sue end users or the Mono-Project. Slight problem, Microsoft has said they wouldn't sue over patents and reverse engineered software before, then turned around and sued anyways. Those software patents are the equivalents of landmines.

Going back to deliberate API breakage... what happens when Microsoft stops releasing security updates for .NET on Windows Xp and Windows Vista and only releases those updates for Windows 7? A developer could get around those security holes by using a 3rd party implementation, such as Mono, that never had the holes to begin with. Of course then the developer is open to being sued by Microsoft for violating the patents Microsoft holds.


Now, I could keep going on and on and on about why .NET is an API / Framework that should be avoided at all costs, not just for multi-platform development, but for just Windows development alone. I could keep slamming a sledgehammer on the point that .NET is simply a bad business choice for any developer or publisher to look to accomplish any computing task.

The only way .NET could ever be trusted is:

• if Microsoft placed the entire API / Framework under an Open-License as defined by the Free-Software Foundation: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
• If Microsoft surrendered the patents to the Open Invention Network: http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/

Neither of these are likely to ever happen.

Now, does the potential use of .NET in NCSoft's launcher mean that I'll stop subscribing and go play another game?

No. I'm just one subscriber, and the number of players who actually care about this stuff the way I do probably would have difficulty capping the population on a single zone.

That does not mean that I'm going to sit back and simply let an event that I see as a critical risk to NCSoft, Paragon Studios, and the Players occur without raising bloody hell.

Maybe I'll get lucky and somebody who matters at NCSoft will look at this thread, then start asking the legal and programming department to give them a full run down on just what repercussions could result from using .NET software. Maybe I'll get lucky and somebody who matters at NCSoft will find out from the programmers that using non proprietary tool kits and API's will give every game a multi-platform advantage. Maybe I'll get lucky and somebody who matters at NCSoft will realize the potential of being able to hit entire separate ecosystems of system targets with relatively one code base.

Maybe I won't.

Intel Integrated graphics.

There probably is no driver update available since performance graphics are not exactly what Intel does.

... I'm going to bill you for the therapy I'm going to need from seeing that in print.

anyways, stuff that won't get you hired at NCSoft.

• So, I was thinking, we can port everything to run atop the Unreal Engine, and get this, we'll use Nvidia Physx!

you... are... aware that the devs already said Cross-Server teaming was on their list of stuff to do with the game... right?

This kind of leads into the question I want to see answered but isn't addressed.

In the past the NCSoft Launcher has traditionally leveraged Microsoft .NET, which is only fully available on Microsoft Windows platforms.

Currently, and for both the foreseeable and unseeable futures, .NET is only available on Unix-type platforms, such as BSD-Darwin and Linux, through Attachmate Mono: http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page

The implication that there will be a BSD-Darwin (OSX for those who don't know what BSD-Darwin is) Client indicates the possibility of an NCSoft launcher that either leverages Mono, or dumps .NET in a wastebin (where it belongs, but that's just my opinion now isn't it) and leverages a native multi-platform tool-kit or tool-kit combination, such as QT/Webkit to provide the program framework and user interface.

One of the reasons why this is directly important to me is that running .NET applications in a *nix environment tends to be a rather large pain in the rear-end, largely a result of Mono support lagging behind the Microsoft .NET point releases, and the (debatable lack of) quality of .NET itself. The subject becomes critical in the case of games that are run with emulation or code conversion techniques, such as through W.I.N.E. or Transgaming Cedega / Cider.

So far NCSoft / Paragon Studios haven't clarified if the relationship with Transgaming to provide support for *nix platforms is still ongoing. If Transgaming is continuing to help provide development resources for managing the City of Heroes executable through Cedega / Cider tech, then the requirement of the NCSoft Launcher may not be quite a critical issue for gamers who do use a Linux Platform to play City Of Heroes, at least not with the Cedega tech going free of cost through GameTreeLinux.

* * *

Is it possible then to get a clarification on what technology is being used to back the "new" NCSoft Launcher then?

Is it possible to get a clarification on NCSoft's / Paragon Studios relationship with Transgaming?

The suggestion has come up before. It's also been shot out of the sky with a howitzer.

The simple answer is: the game engine doesn't work like that.

Here's the complex answer:

Technical Hurdle #1: Keyboard Input

There are a couple of engine requirements for mini-games inside of an outside game to work. One of those is the ability to capture and re-route the input commands from the player. Currently there is no exposed method for the developers to capture player input and map that input to I/O commands for a sub-game.

Technical Hurdle #2: Indirect Video Capture and Re-routing

Nor is there any particular method to capture the player's camera and zoom in on a specific object. Yes, the game does have cut-scene capabilities that can take control of the player's camera. However, you can still activate keyboard commands, such as text macro's, while in a cut-scene, and your own personal text will render into the camera viewpoint. Nothing like shouting "Fuzzy Furry Purry Kittens will Kick Romi Tail!" half a dozen times during the Romulous / Nictus cut-scene.

Technical Hurdle #3: Mouse Capture and Re-routing.

Mouse driven interaction isn't a solution either. Currently in the game objects that can be interacted with by the mouse, such as glowing boxes, computer panels, train doors, and the like have a three dimensional depth and are surrounded in a bubble. Why? Network latency. In terms of processing time and network transmission, it is much easier and much less performance expensive to create a bubble effect that can be clicked on and simply change the object rendered inside of that bubble effect.

The bubble effect on objects effectively makes mouse-driving mini-games impossible. Mouse driven effects are only given full precision for certain portions of the User-interface that are localized on the user's client and don't require transmission back to the server. E.G. selecting a text field in the Auction House Interface, interacting with the options menu, or clicking in the text box. None of those mouse movements or clicks have to be transmitted back to the server, although they can create events that ARE transmitted back to the server. There IS a difference.

These are just 3 of the technical hurdles the developers would have to overcome in order to produce a viable mini-game experience, and as of right now, there's no particular need for the developers to implement these kinds of changes in the existing engine.

Yes, Sony got around many of these hurdles with their Sony PS3 Home project. Sony also had a much larger budget for command processing, as well as a much larger network budget. Each Playstation 3 has a multi-core PowerPC processor with a high clock rate and a requirement of broadband internet. Sony didn't have to worry about somebody with a Socket A Sempron and a Geforce FX 5200 trying to run PS3 Home on a 56k connection.

Paragon Studios DOES have to worry about players with Socket A Sempron and a Geforce FX 5200 trying to play this game, City of Heroes, on a 56k connection, since a not entirely insignificant number of players still use that class of hardware and network support (Brighthouse cable and AT&T DSL, I'm glaring at you here) to play the game.

So, nice idea. Would be nice.

But it's not happening.

If it helps, the best way to think of the Alpha Slot is that is an extra Single Origin Enhancement for each power. If you are capped into Enhancement Diversification, an extra Single Origin Enhancement isn't going to buy you much performance enhancement.

This is one of the reasons why the Endurance reduction global is so potent. No IO set (that I'm aware of) will cap the endurance reduction of a power. Players running on SO's / Crafted IO's likely won't be spending the slots on 3 endurance reductions either. This means that power effect for power effect, a player is more likely to benefit from an additional Endurance Reduction effect compared to other powers.

This is also why some of the effect buffs are the levels they are. All of the Alpha Buffs follow the Schedule Enhancement table from when Enhancement Diversification was implemented.

Since most players slot for damage, recharge, defense, resistance, or accuracy, they won't notice as large as an effect from those buffs until they hit the Rare / Ultra rare where more of the extra enhancement ignores the Enhancement Diversification Limit, up to the level of a Single Origin Enhancement (66& of 45 is 30%).