je_saist

Pretty much correct. AMD's original plan was to not even bother having a 6700 series to help separate the add-in cards from the upcoming Bulldozer / Fusion processors. I think the only reason AMD finally did a 67xx release was to appease vendors who weren't happy with trying to explain to consumers that no, that 5770 was indeed the card just below the 6850. Given that OEM link, you'll probably actually have difficulty finding a 67xx branded card on the store shelfs. The series is supposed to be an OEM part only, but I don't think that will stop vendors like Asus from producing add-in cards. Granted, I have yet to see any 67xx branded cards in retail channels.

If you ask official marketing sources, you'll probably be told that Juniper has been massaged to support the following OpenGL extensions: GL_ARB_cl_event; GL_ARB_debug_output; GL_ARB_robustness; GL_ARB_shader_stencil_export; GLX_ARB_create_context_robustness; WGL_ARB_create_context_robustness

Technically, both true and not true. Support for these extensions was already in the Evergreen hardware family... but since OpenGL 4.1 was finalized about 9 months after the 5770 family hit the market, I don't think those cards were ever submitted for OpenGL 4.1 certification. The 67xx cards, as well as the 68xx and 69xx cards have been certified.

not... quite true.

It was a rebadge on the 9800 GTX+, which was a die-shrunk version of the 9800 GTX: 65nm process to 55nm.

The 9800 GTX+ was introduced in June 2008, which was the same month the GTX 260 and the GTX 280 were introduced. The GTS 250 rebadge wasn't until March 2009.

Nvidia rebadged the 9800 GTX+ for... several reasons.

• The chips cost less to make than GTX 200 series chips
• Nvidia had loads of 9800 GTX+ chips sitting around in warehouses
• AMD's price / performance placing was forcing Nvidia to sell chips to vendors for up to $50 less than Nvidia's actual cost

Nvidia needed something moving on the market, so they cratered the price on the 9800 GTX+ and rebadged it as a new card. Thankfully for Nvidia, the strategy worked. The company bought enough time to last until a massive cash infusion from Volkswagon / Audi that kept Nvidia from declaring bankruptcy last year.

Surprisingly, I thought I already had them in there, but you're right, I don't.

This is exactly what I meant with my post. The more enemies focused on a brute, the more fury will be driven, and the more damage bonus a brute's Fury will Return.

Depends on who you ask. Lightning field is actually a good place to use the set Obliteration at pump 5 or pump 6 for the set bonus. I'd have a very difficult time advising you or telling you that proccing up a Taunt PbAOE is a good idea. In the cases of brutes the mob will likely be dead from all of the other powers before the procs ever contribute meaningful damage (tested with Hero Stats and my own elec brute and my own spines / fire scrapper, proccing up the damage auras contributed no meaningful damage to overall combat figures).

Proccing out a taunt pbaoe may or may not grant more damage when used against Tanks, where the player will likely have more time spent in a mob, and thus have more time for the procs to go-off. On my own Fire Tank, proccing out blazing aura bounced back and forth between doing more damage than just slotting blazing aura for damage, and doing less damage than just slotting blazing aura for damage.

Overall, if you want to go the proc route, you can, there's nothing stopping you... but you'll probably be better served by checking out set-bonus's and going for a straight set bonus buff coupled with damages over relying on procs.

Lightning Field is your PbAOE taunt aura.

If you don't want to have your Fury bar filled, don't take it.

If you happen to like having your Fury bar filled, which most Brutes tend to appreciate, you'll be taking it as early as you can.

Defined as an average of ~25+ frames per second, the point at which the human eye can generally be fooled into thinking it is seeing motion.

Ultimate graphical fidelity choice is up to the user. Some might like to trade off frames per second for more detail. Others may not.

I'm gonna call bull-crap on that unless you follow that up with a resolution of 1024*768 or lower. I seriously doubt subscribers are going to be looking at such a low resolution when buying a new computer. Hence specifying the resolution: 1680*1050 which is more likely to be encountered.

Probably would have helped if I had specified which cards and specifically what Intel Processor I had on hand when Ultra Mode launched. When Ultra Mode first hit these RadeonHD 5000 series cards weren't exactly in abundance. My original tests were done with the 4850 and the GTS 250 512mb card. The processor was the Core 2 Duo E6400. The motherboard in use was the Intel D97XBX (version 1). Yes, that's the one that Intel sold as a gaming / overclocking board, but you have to physically mod the board to unlock the bios options unless you used an Extreme branded processor.

The Core 2 Duo E6600 is a 2.4ghz chip, so you had about a ~200mhz base real clock speed advantage, as well as an extra 2mb of cache, both which would have helped tip that architecture over the breaking point.

Also, it's probably very likely you had a 1gb memory configuration for graphics on the 5670, which would have helped overall performance.

I think the only official word that ever came down was... "not yet"

That being said, David N. had something... interesting... here: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showp...&postcount=878

I suspect that when / if a broadsword is brought to tanks it will be a two-handed claymore or BusterSword type weapon with the appropriate stances and animations.

Knockback.

Basically it supposed to serve the same purpose as powers like Repel, Repulsion Field, or Force Bubble. It would buy somebody in melee time to get out of melee and to safety.

Uh.

NO!

Formatting consists of Erasing the Drive Completely.

Microsoft Windows will only save previous installation data in Windows.old if you install WITHOUT... repeat... WITHOUT... formatting the drive.

This is one of those: don't bother, their the same damn thing.

The only reason(s) you'd want to crossgrade (now) from Vista to Win7 are as follows:

• NT6 is not compatible with a legacy application and you need the virtualized NT5 Mode.
• You want the updated User Interface
• You have a Vista Basic Edition and it's going to cost you the same to unlock all of the stuff that's included in the install but turned off.

That's pretty much it. Keep Windows up to date and from a Kernel, DirectX, and Driver viewpoint, the stuff that actually matters, Vista and Windows 7 are the same exact operating system. No difference.

Now, this doesn't mean this will always be true. At one time Windows 2000 and Windows Xp were synched with same kernels, same DirectX, and same driver modules. Then Microsoft killed Win2k Service Pack 5, forcing users who wanted to stay up to date on patches and software changes to purchase a Windows Xp license for software they already had bought at least once before.

This history is a concern with Vista / Win7. It is very likely Microsoft will stop releasing service packs for Operating Systems with Vista identification, but continue to maintain updating that same exact code on operating systems with Win7 identification.

... ... I know what I want to say, but I'm not sure how to say it.

The basic problem you have is this: You have raised expectations that the developers have no intentions meeting.

The developers do not WANT every defensive armor to be god-like and unstoppable in combat conditions. Ice armor is DELIBERATELY weak to Fire and Psionic damage. Tanks, by and large, ARE NOT SUPPOSED to be undying machines.

Tanks, by and large, ARE DESIGNED to take aggro and manage damage BETTER than other archtypes. This does not, and has not, and will not, ever mean that Tanks will be completely invincible to any and all combat situations, NOR SHOULD IT MEAN that Tanks SHOULD BE completely invincible to any and all combat situations.

Now, before you start whining that Stone Armor: Granite proves this design wrong, keep in mind that Stone Armor: Granite has a nasty native damage debuff, a nasty recharge debuff, and no Psionic Protection. In addition the developers admit that the rest of the Stone Armor set is under-performing level per level compared to other armor sets SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE GRANITE IS SO OVERWHELMINGLY EFFECTIVE

So here's what you can do with your whining that you can't be Tank-Almighty: Stuff it in a rubbish bin.

According to game developers John Carmack, and Gabe Newell, there is no performance difference between OpenGL and DirectX as of DX11 / OpenGL 4.1.

Part of this is because the specifications of which each API are more clearly defined, and there is less room, or need, for proprietary extensions. Part of this is down to maturity. Microsoft hasn't been sitting still on graphics technology and they made up performance ground while OpenGL languished under SGI. Khronos deserves credit for catching OpenGL back up with DirectX.

As to why OpenGL is surging... the real fact is market percentages. Microsoft's market-share outside of OEM computers is... zero. Outside of Microsoft Windows and Office Microsoft has never posted a profit for any other project. The Home and Entertainment Division, responsible for the Xbox branding, only appears to be profitable as Microsoft wrote off several billion as non-recoverable operating losses.

The high-growth technology markets these days are in smart-phones, tablets, and low-power laptops... where architectures like MIPS and ARM reside... markets that are dominated by *nix-type operating systems such as BSD_Mach / IOS and Linux / Android. For the average publisher, OpenGL is the only way they can target these high-growth platforms.


Now back to the Original Poster
Hmm? Okay, ignoring the 11.1 alpha, the 11.1a hotfix seems to have fixed these issues.

Fair enough. I can't argue this point. I don't think Nvidia will have a choice in supporting OpenGL... not after their announcement that they were integrating Fermi with ARM and entering the central processor business. Nvidia's insane if they think Microsoft is ever going to have a market in the ARM world.

Specifics on your hardware would help.

Also, again, some operations such as Ambient Occlusion use a lot of performance but may or may not have a visual benefit. Sometimes graphics features are like that.

That sounds like a problem with your computer, not with the game. We'll be glad to troubleshoot those issues.

Okay, I really don't have time to finish this. Class is going back into session, and I have to learn more about pastry sanitation.

Cookies soon!

War Witch has confirmed that because she has a say in it, Praetoria will be revisited for future story content.

At this time the indications are that there will be no more Resistance / Loyalist content added to the game. You will have to leave Praetoria. You will have to decide to become a Hero or a Villain.

The suspicions at this time are that future Praetorian content will be focused on the Resistance City of Sanctuary, and that content will be flagged for the Villain, Rogue, Vigilante, and Hero factions.

Point conceded. Inherent fitness does mean activity between dom bursts is easier to sustain... toss a miracle unique into Health and a single stamina recovery.

I also had another thought. I could fit another LoTG 7.5% mule into the build I made by dropping Boxing / Tough / Weave, and taking Stealth / Grant Invisibility. That would be pushing ~98% recharge by 36, and into ~104% by 37.

Yes.

Basically if you have a recharge rate of 140% with Hasten, you can double stack Domination.

If you have a recharge rate of 160% with Hasten, you can generally keep Domination coming back around.

So once you start hitting around 70% base recharge you'll be closing in on perma with Hasten up.

You might have had a point here aside from one little factor: Ultra Mode. Pretty much any add-in GPU for sale today can max the "dinosaur" settings of the game with no problem.

Ultra Mode introduces a completely new rendering structure.

Have you ever tried to design a user-interface?

Have you ever tried to design a user-interface that hides components that could have a hidden state to the end user?

Well, let me direct you to some people who have: http://www.kde.org/ http://www.xfce.org/

The fact is this: all of the settings in the game are exposed because it is the simplest way to handle the structure of presenting coherent and recognizable data to every player. When developers try to hide system components, options, or settings, based on detections of what the user has, such systems create issues on the back-ends of troubleshooting, bug filing, regression testing, and every other aspect of development.

Don't take my word for it. Go hop on the KDE and XFCE mailing lists and suggest those guys start hiding program options and settings based on whether or not a user has a certain level of hardware detection.

Or maybe it's because some of the things the developers implemented are computationally heavy for the potential graphical benefit they may or may not contribute.

Again, you almost had a point here. Nvidia has been backing off of OpenGL support, and AMD's performance OpenGL support is... adequate. Single card performance is generally equivalent with DirectX, but multi-gpu support is... abysmal. Commercial use of OpenGL for video games is rising, mostly on the strength of the *nix platforms BSD_Mach / IOS and Linux / Android. Whether or not the mobile revolution will have an impact on the typical PC market also switching to OpenGL, well, is yet to be seen.

Well, I'm always for more gamers telling vendors to support Open Standards.

Okay, putting the brakes on you again. For starters, some of the ultra-mode options are fairly CPU intensive... not GPU intensive. If you couple a RadeonHD 6890 against an AthlonXp, you aren't going to get high frame-rates in Ultra Mode no matter what you do.

The fact is, even a RadeonHD 5770 can push Maximum Shadows, Maximum Reflections, and Ultra Water in 1920*1200 with ~4x anti-aliasing and maintain a playable frame-rate, providing it's coupled with a decent enough processor.

Some of the performance killers for City of Heroes are Ambient Occlusion and Bloom... both of which are questionable as to whether or not they actually improve graphical fidelity: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=219534

Don't dance around the topic. Just say, Sony Online Entertainment DC Universe Online. Nobody is going to shoot you.

Again, you almost had a point here... except you didn't.

DC Universe Online is not in the same genre as City of Heroes. It is a completely different type of game that needs to be compared to quasi-MMO's like Phantasy Star Online or Borderlands. Trying to compare it to a full-blown MMO like City of Heroes tells me one thing. You haven't ever actually played DC Universe Online.

Anyways, something to keep in mind is that DC Universe Online is built atop the Unreal Engine, and there's already complaints being lodged that textures aren't as sharp as they should be, and that the game has a neon edge to models that just won't go away. In other words, it looks like a game that was built with the Unreal Engine.

Is DC Universe Online visually stunning? Oh hell no.

Is it graphically comparable to any other game?

Again, no. No other game has tried to do what SOE is doing with the Unreal Engine and using it in a contiguous and persistent map configuration... well aside from early Huxley demo's. For what it attempts to do DC Universe Online is impressive.

Ignoring for a moment the completely different genres of City Of Heroes and DC Universe Online, should DC Universe Online's highest rendering mode in Windows be compared to the highest rendering mode in City of Heroes?

Well, let me ask this: Would you say that Gears of War should be graphically compared to Super Mario Galaxy? Would you say that Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess should be compared to Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2?

I hope that answer would be: NO

Slotting enough recharge for perma-dom by 35 can only be done on a few select builds and generally requires sacrificing all other aspects of being a dominator in exchange for recharge. Case in point:

Villain Plan by Mids' Villain Designer 1.91
http://www.cohplanner.com/

Click this DataLink to open the build!

Level 48 Magic Dominator
Primary Power Set: Mind Control
Secondary Power Set: Fiery Assault
Power Pool: Speed
Power Pool: Leaping
Power Pool: Leadership
Power Pool: Fighting

Villain Profile:
Level 1: Mesmerize -- Decim-Acc/Dmg(A), Decim-Dmg/EndRdx(3), Decim-Dmg/Rchg(7), Decim-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(7), Decim-Acc/EndRdx/Rchg(9)
Level 1: Flares -- Decim-Acc/Dmg(A), Decim-Dmg/EndRdx(9), Decim-Dmg/Rchg(13), Decim-Acc/EndRdx/Rchg(13), Decim-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(15)
Level 2: Dominate -- BasGaze-Acc/Hold(A), BasGaze-Acc/Rchg(3), BasGaze-Rchg/Hold(5), BasGaze-EndRdx/Rchg/Hold(5)
Level 4: Incinerate -- C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg(A), C'ngImp-Dmg/EndRdx(15), C'ngImp-Dmg/Rchg(17), C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(17), C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx(21)
Level 6: Confuse -- Mlais-Acc/Rchg(A), Mlais-EndRdx/Conf(23), Mlais-Acc/EndRdx(23), Mlais-Conf/Rng(25), Mlais-Acc/Conf/Rchg(25)
Level 8: Mass Hypnosis -- CSndmn-Acc/Rchg(A), CSndmn-EndRdx/Sleep(27), CSndmn-Acc/EndRdx(27), CSndmn-Sleep/Rng(29), CSndmn-Acc/Sleep/Rchg(29)
Level 10: Hasten -- RechRdx-I(A), RechRdx-I(11), RechRdx-I(11)
Level 12: Telekinesis -- Empty(A)
Level 14: Combat Jumping -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A)
Level 16: Maneuvers -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A)
Level 18: Total Domination -- BasGaze-Acc/Hold(A), BasGaze-Acc/Rchg(19), BasGaze-Rchg/Hold(19), BasGaze-EndRdx/Rchg/Hold(21)
Level 20: Tactics -- AdjTgt-ToHit(A), AdjTgt-ToHit/EndRdx/Rchg(31), AdjTgt-ToHit/Rchg(31), AdjTgt-EndRdx/Rchg(31), AdjTgt-ToHit/EndRdx(33)
Level 22: Vengeance -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A)
Level 24: Boxing -- C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg(A), C'ngImp-Dmg/EndRdx(33), C'ngImp-Dmg/Rchg(33), C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(34), C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx(34)
Level 26: Tough -- Empty(A)
Level 28: Weave -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A)
Level 30: Terrify -- DarkWD-ToHitDeb(A), DarkWD-ToHitDeb/Rchg(34), DarkWD-ToHitdeb/Rchg/EndRdx(36), DarkWD-ToHitDeb/EndRdx(36)
Level 32: Mass Confusion -- Mlais-Acc/Rchg(A), Mlais-EndRdx/Conf(36), Mlais-Acc/EndRdx(37), Mlais-Conf/Rng(37), Mlais-Acc/Conf/Rchg(37)
Level 35: [Empty]
Level 38: [Empty]
Level 41: [Empty]
Level 44: [Empty]
Level 47: [Empty]
Level 49: [Empty]
------------
Level 1: Brawl -- Empty(A)
Level 1: Sprint -- Empty(A)
Level 2: Rest -- Empty(A)
Level 1: Domination
Level 4: Ninja Run
Level 2: Swift -- Empty(A)
Level 2: Hurdle -- Empty(A)
Level 2: Health -- Empty(A)
Level 2: Stamina -- Empty(A)


As of level 37 this particular build would have 96.3% base recharge. Factor in the 3 slotted Hasten and this particular mix will likely be perma'd.

However... I'd have absolutely no endurance reduction on maneuvers or weave. I would also only have attacks slotted for damage; Mesmerize, Flares, and Incinerate.

Is that trade-off worth it? Almost no damage and not much in survivability? Well, that's up to the player to decide for themselves.

I can verify not all on the 5770. I have not been able to duplicate, replicate, or simulate the errors reported on the 10.10, 10.11, or 10.12 drivers across Windows NT5 and Windows NT6 with RadeonHD 5770, 4850, or 4650 graphics cards. 11.1 alpha was the first Catalyst driver that I've been able to reproduce any kind of problems with.

As far as I am aware City of Heroes has never had a defragmentation utility, so there isn't one for just the game files.

You might be getting the Cryptic / NCSoft City of Heroes game confused with Valve Software's Steam Platform Service which DOES have an option to defragment the cache files stored on the computer.

Valve's Steam Defragmentation Utility is NOT an official utility for City Of Heroes.

Now, if you are looking for a way to defragment your files and you don't want to use Microsoft's defragmentation utility because it makes a whirring sound most often associated with Hoovers or Electrolux's, look up UltraDefrag: http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/