[ QUOTE ]
I think people are getting hung up on the comparison to AOE "rain" powers. Let me put the OP's thought as I understand it in different terms. Right now on live, Lightning Storm's attack has a cast time of 1.17 seconds and a recharge time of 4 seconds. What would happen if you changed that to a cast time of 5.17 seconds and recharge time of 0 seconds, leaving all other power parameters unchanged?
[/ QUOTE ]
That's a good question. And the answer is, if its a totally immobile pet, I believe probably what you want: it would fire about every 5.17 seconds (probably plus a small AI tailgate), and be immune to recharge.
If you tried to do this to a mobile pet, that could be a different story. Rooting wouldn't be a problem because that is handled by the animation system, but actually making moving decisions itself could get screwed. If the game actually waits the cast time before asking the critter to make decisions on next course of action then a power like that could either prevent or seriously impair the critter's ability to make reasonable motion decisions. Its hard to say at the moment because that would depend on very specific implementation details.
It also goes without saying you could only do this for critters with only one click power.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hey I want to move past this issue personally.
Can anyone point out a pet/pseudo-pet class that is benefiting from this change a lot?
I've played thugs, necro, and ninjas into the 30's and I make heavy use of binds so I never had issues with them getting stuck really. I did however really enjoy being able to make brusier, knights and jounin cycle their attacks faster.
I've also done earth and never had stoney really get stuck in hurl spam.
So what pet class is really going to notice an improvement that would be applicable to me?
keep in mind I DO spend a lot of time IO'ing and would like the toon to improve considerable like all the other archtypes get to enjoy. Or is it a matter of that optional system put in place to add value not applying to pet classes anymore?
Any pet/pseodo-pet heavy toon you guys can suggest? or should I just roll a ss/wp brute or an sr scrapper and be done with it?
thx
[/ QUOTE ]
My Io-less pet users are exactly the same as they were before.... good. It eludes me completely as to why you would think an enhancement designed to reduce the recharge of a single power should have an effect on the powers of pets as well.
Like if they made a MM set that gave enhanceable sonic bubbles and this happened would you be crying that you were no longer able to through Io's to increase the inherent resistance of your pets through a loophole? Or if putting in a heal effected the regen? Or end mod effected the end regen? The answer I'm seeing is yes, that you would consider (as a group, not sure about you in particular) that pets were completely and utterly gimped and that this was worse than ED, GDN, and all nerfs in general.
Sorry, I never tried to exploit the loophole so I'm pretty much going to be the same as (which apparently was gimp? 
).... and I will prob still use the Pet recharge set on my toons ..... but as it was intended.
[/ QUOTE ]
thanks for telling me how you enjoy the game. I take it you have no advice for me then based on how I enjoy the game?
Forgive me for exploiting the game and having no idea I was doing it. You are smart enough to realize that if you put a rech SO in a fire imp the detailed power widow tells me it is attacking faster right?
Same for lightning storm...
How the hell was I supposed to know they weren't and only by slotting a thunderstike dam/rech was LS actually benefiting?
I guess I should have asked the devs to send me the code to know I wasn't supposed to be benefiting...
Anyway, anyone with advice of any value? I am honestly wanting to play a pet/pseudo-pet class, but I do enjoy heavy IO'ing. So Im just curious if there are any left that notice an increase near the significance that all the other AT's get to enjoy through IO's..
thx
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How long did it take for Castle to buff Hover after BABs nerfed it by fixing the bug regarding KB? I wonder if the buff was because data-mining said the number of people using it dropped off, or just because Castle decided it needed it? I hope the latter, because I'd rather not wait for data mining to confirm the obvious.
[/ QUOTE ]
Completed unrelated. The two things had absolutely nothing to do with one another.
[/ QUOTE ]
I assume that's the KB change and the buff that are unrelated, not the buff and whether or not you thought it needed it. Though I suppose one of the other power guys might have been allowed to make that call.
My assumption was, and still is, that Hover was buffed because of PvP movement issues. But that's irrelevant. The point I was trying to make - but chose a bad example for - is that someone looked at the power and decided it needed a buff for whatever reason. You didn't wait for data mining to tell you that. Or maybe you did. I just hope not. I'd much rather have you looking at powers you suspect need balancing than have you wait for a statistical report to make you question a power's balance.
I think this particularly sweeping change should have you questioning the balance of at least a few powers.
Kosmos
Global: @Calorie
MA Arcs in 4-star purgatory: Four in a Row (#2198) - Hostile Takeover (#69714) - Red Harvest (#268305)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2 Phantasms, 2 Dark Servants, 9-12 Imps I think...oh how fire control was really crazy
[/ QUOTE ]
My Ill/Rad used to have three phantasms with three decoys, partially overlapping perma-PA, and however many spectral terrors I felt like at the time concurrently.
I think a speedy fire controller could get 15 imps out at once at least for a while.
[/ QUOTE ]
You could and I would pay EXTRA money to be on a server that was perma stuck in Issue 2 to Issue 5 complete with all the fun exploits and mega strong hamis.....*sigh*
Thanks, NC Soft, for closing my favorite game ever without warning and with plenty of life still left in it, and thus relieving me of the burden of EVER wanting to buy, try or even hear about another game from your company. Will my decision make a dent, or persuade them in anyway, shape or form? Nope, obviously not. Don't care. NC Soft is dead to me. ~ PsyFox
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am just saying now that you take away something that some MMs been enjoying (-recharge in pet's attack chain), are there gonna be some adjustments to make up for it?
[/ QUOTE ]
Fixing their pets' attack cycling generally makes up for it...
[/ QUOTE ]
You're assuming that the change really did that. From what I've seen only the Bruiser is behaving better.
It's sort of ironic that what is probably the best overall MM set is the biggest beneficiary of the change. Sort of like Gun Drone getting smacked the hardest (it took regular Recharge enhancements, so while you can say that was a bug, you can't say increasing its rate-of-fire was an exploit). That has to make you smile, even if ruefully.
Kosmos
Global: @Calorie
MA Arcs in 4-star purgatory: Four in a Row (#2198) - Hostile Takeover (#69714) - Red Harvest (#268305)
[ QUOTE ]
I keep waiting for Castle to snap and post something that gets modded.
[/ QUOTE ]
Castle hasn't really flipped out in a long time. Sometimes I wonder if NCSoft pumps Paxilon Hydrochlorate into the CoH offices, and that simultaneously explains Castle's posting behavior, and BaBs.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I keep waiting for Castle to snap and post something that gets modded.
[/ QUOTE ]
Castle hasn't really flipped out in a long time. Sometimes I wonder if NCSoft pumps Paxilon Hydrochlorate into the CoH offices, and that simultaneously explains Castle's posting behavior, and BaBs.
[/ QUOTE ]
Better posting through chemistry? What WILL they think of next? (grin)
Hunter's Forty-Sixth Rule: If your head explodes, you were thinking too much, otherwise you shouldn't worry about the possibility.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Slotting regular Recharge enhancements into Fire Imps or Lightning Storm will make their power info windows *report* a reduced Recharge for their powers, but that is only a display error, and it will *not* actually reduce that Recharge.
<snip>
[/ QUOTE ]
Wonder if they are fixing the display window? or if people are just supposed to know that it does nothing.
[/ QUOTE ]
Good question.
That's more of a pohsyb-issue than a Castle-issue, but it'd definitely be nice if the power info window was more accurate (it's not always trivial to get right though).
[/ QUOTE ]The issue is that the display window isn't wrong. The pet is still receiving that recharge buff, in the same way that a Willpower Tanker with Strength of Will still receives recharge buffs. The individual power just doesn't benefit from the recharge.
[/ QUOTE ]
Technically the pet doesn't get the Recharge (from slotted enhancements), it's the individual powers that do. 
Anyway, the power info doesn't show the Recharge bonus of the pet, it shows the Recharge *time* of individual powers, and it's that time that is shown incorrectly.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
EE's are odd little things, and inherit some but not all buffs from the caster. They will inherit things like Hasten, SB, and the Mires, but not Eclipse or other +def/+res shields.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hm. I wonder if the buffs can be categorized as "offensive" or "defensive", and if that's how they tell them apart. If so, +recharge might be considered an offensive buff since it increases your damage, and thus it's considered the same as a damage or accuracy buff power.
It would be interesting to find a power that has both a damage, to hit or recharge buff, which we know is inherited, and the some other property which doesn't seem to be inherited, like defense, and see if it is applied. I actually thought Eclipse was both a Resistance and Damage buff... (not sure why, really)
[/ QUOTE ]
That's an interesting idea.
Mind Link should do it.
edit: Fortitude, Forge and Enforced Morale too.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm fairly certain all those will carry over to EE's (I'm 99% positive Fortitude does, less certain on the rest). Forge would regardless because it is only a +tohit and +dam buff (like a Mire).
[/ QUOTE ]
The "offensive" portion would definitely carry over, and thus icons should be shown for the powers. The interesting part is: What would it say about the "defensive" portions of the power info for the buffs that have been carried over?
edit: Yeah, I messed up on Forge. For some reason it triggered when I made a quick scan of potential powers.
Question:
Since this was never originally intended and is kinda lost in jargon in some weird ways, would this have even been able to just come out in patch notes as "Recharge Pet IO sets slotted into pets/henchmen are working correctly now" and never mentioned a word about the whole pet recharge adjustment.
I'm asking an opinion on this as I recall BAB mentioning something about unnanounced adjustments.
Keep in mind I'm just asking about if this *could've* happened. I'm not promoting or flaming about the recharge change.
[ QUOTE ]
Issue 7 patch note 06-06-2006
[ QUOTE ]
Many Location based powers (Such as Rain of Fire and Blizzard) can now be affected by the casters Buffs (for example, using Build Up will now increase the damage of Blizzard).
[/ QUOTE ]
I went through each pacth note between I7 and I8, there is nothing further. Certainly no specific mention of recharge inheritance.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well then I feel justified, since I certainly view Hasten as a caster Buff.
Anyway it doesnt matter. They are changing it and that's that. Make your choices based on the result. What else can you do?
Lewis
Random AT Generation!
"I remember... the Alamo." -- Pee-wee Herman
"Oh don't worry. I always leave things to the last moment." -- The Doctor
"Telescopes are time machines." -- Carl Sagan
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Castle himself said that being able to slot multiple type Enhancements in a power that doesn't take them is a "bug" and that it remains that way only because the fix is unacceptable. I wouldn't make the assumption that no other solution is ever going to come along.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wait... It's a bug that I can slot three of a set, that say gives me:
dmg
dmg/acc
dmg/acc/end
[/ QUOTE ]
It is a bug if that power does not TAKE Acc or End Enhancements. (I'm guessing it has to take Dmg, or it wouldn't take those particular IOs)
Or to be more precise, it is a bug if the power is effected by those Enhancement types that it doesn't take. It should be able to slot them, but the Acc and End just won't have any effect. (And obviously, if the power is autohit or costs 0 end it won't have an effect. The problem is if the effect is being disallowed for some reason, but if slotted it takes effect)
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, so far I don't see how my understanding differs from yours. Let me try again -- and I'm sorry in advance for being so verbose. The 'bug' is that slotting an enhancement, or more specifically allowing something to inherent it, requires that you use it's entire effect.
When you apply this logic to a pet power, anything that is not intended to enhance the power should be filtered out (not passed) to the pet. This is easy with ENH that only target one attribute, just don't copy them. However, when you have something that effects something you DO want to allow, but also effects something you do not, there is no way to avoid propagating it's entire effect. It's all or nothing. Hence a dmg/recharge unintentionally enhances the recharge of all the pets powers that 'take' dmg enhancements.
The only way to mitigate this, is to make the powers unaffected by that class of enhancement. The value is still there, just not considered (the SoW treatment, we are calling it), which sadly effects their global +recharge buffs as well. This is why SB AM etc, will no longer be useful. Since recharge is a single effect, making a power immune to it also makes it ignore debuffs of that kind -- hence we can no longer debuff that attribute of the power either.
On non-pet powers, this isn't an issue, since you can generally just lock that type out, or make it immune to attribute buffing in the extreme case (SoW, and melee cones are an example of the latter, and Mind Link an example of the former).
My problem here is that i feel it's unacceptable to break pet buffs by globally applying the 'norechargebuff' flag to all of their attacks (which is the solution posed on test).
Why can't the pet spawning code (which is not in the 'fast path' i assume) be burdened with creating some kind of virtual enhancements for each of the pet powers from the set of allowed values in the players power? We obviously have the ability to have continual buffs from IOs/sets, maybe they could be kludged together as those types of 'continual buffs' instead...
That might require updating pet powers to explicitly state what enhancements they take. Or it might be easy, since that's already the logic they use to decide which enhancements get copied over...
I'm starting to speculate a lot about how the code is written now though -- and since my background is not MMOs that's maybe not the best thing to do. I just cannot for the life of me believe a better solution cannot be created. One that stops the unintended effect, without breaking something players expect to be able to do -- buff their pets! (and debuff others player/NPCs pets!)
(Hey Castle, how about posting the code for the power activation system so we can stop guessing how it works 
)
--
mu
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Issue 7 patch note 06-06-2006
[ QUOTE ]
Many Location based powers (Such as Rain of Fire and Blizzard) can now be affected by the casters Buffs (for example, using Build Up will now increase the damage of Blizzard).
[/ QUOTE ]
I went through each pacth note between I7 and I8, there is nothing further. Certainly no specific mention of recharge inheritance.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well then I feel justified, since I certainly view Hasten as a caster Buff.
Anyway it doesnt matter. They are changing it and that's that. Make your choices based on the result. What else can you do?
Lewis
[/ QUOTE ]
We wait for another 1.5 to 2 years for the next datamine to determine that some of the pets that never had any ai issues and some psuedo-pets are in need of a buff.
If you mean what to do in the meantime.
Grow some agave. There is a good chance it will flower before they get around to correcting the wrongs 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
EE's are odd little things, and inherit some but not all buffs from the caster. They will inherit things like Hasten, SB, and the Mires, but not Eclipse or other +def/+res shields.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hm. I wonder if the buffs can be categorized as "offensive" or "defensive", and if that's how they tell them apart. If so, +recharge might be considered an offensive buff since it increases your damage, and thus it's considered the same as a damage or accuracy buff power.
It would be interesting to find a power that has both a damage, to hit or recharge buff, which we know is inherited, and the some other property which doesn't seem to be inherited, like defense, and see if it is applied. I actually thought Eclipse was both a Resistance and Damage buff... (not sure why, really)
[/ QUOTE ]
That's an interesting idea.
Mind Link should do it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Update:
When using Mind Link on a Warshade before summoning a Fuzzy, the ToHit buff will carry through to the Fuzzy, but the Defense will not (checked with a Power Analyzer, so not going only by visual cues).
That'd seem to confirm that it's handled on a per-attribute basis rather than a per-power basis.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The ability to slot def/rech in Mind Link is not a bug. It was known throughout Beta and is working as intended, IIRC.
[/ QUOTE ]
Honest, curious question here: If having recharge slotted in Mind Link is acceptable by the devs, why doesn't it just accept recharge enhancements directly?
This leads to complicated and confusing scenarios like the one with the pets, where you can slot recharges into them and they get the benefit, but that's not working as intended so they change it.
I don't want to wake up one day and find that my ML recharge time is fixed at 240 seconds when I worked to have it perma (and I'm rather squishy without it being perma, considering low HP, no RES, no heal).
[/ QUOTE ]
Stuff like this is part of why people are upset. The dev team throws out stuff with no internal consistency.
The went on the record saying it was ok to sneak rech into ML for f-sake, but apparently that is NOT ok in a different group of powers.
I have no desire for ML to be nerfed at all, they should just change it to accept normal rech.
A lack of consistency from them and decisions that make me question their thought processes just leave a bad taste.
[/ QUOTE ] If they let Mind Link take normal recharge enhancements, it WOULD be nerfed. It was desinged to allow recharge buffs, and as a known side affect due to how the system works, franken-os would also work. The only way for them to block the multiaspect IO would be for them give it the SoW treatment - at which point hasten and other global recharge buff would not affect it.
IIRC.
[/ QUOTE ]
I find it hard to believe that the power is too powerful if allowed to use generic IOs but not if you use the more powerful set IOs.
[/ QUOTE ]
As far as pure recharge is concerned, Set IOs do not buff more (except possibly through set bonuses, but there are ways to simulate that) than pure recharge SOs/IOs.
And you are asking them to balance around IOs! It's balanced against SOs & buffs, so it's fine.
Orc&Pie No.53230 There is an orc, and somehow, he got a pie. And you are hungry.
www.repeat-offenders.net
Negaduck: I see you found the crumb. I knew you'd never notice the huge flag.
[ QUOTE ]
Again: they are not doing this because they think these powers are overpowered. They're doing this because those powers currently are broken. Strength has nothing to do with it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure "contrary to our vision" is the best definition for "broken."
Shortly after Issue 6, heroes discovered they could add villain costume parts at the tailor, contrary to intended design, by using a certain slashcommand. Had the devs simply treated that as being "broken" and stripped the functionality, the game would undoubtedly be worse off. Instead, the unintended functionality was used as the basis for a new and better design.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I keep waiting for Castle to snap and post something that gets modded.
[/ QUOTE ]
Castle hasn't really flipped out in a long time. Sometimes I wonder if NCSoft pumps Paxilon Hydrochlorate into the CoH offices, and that simultaneously explains Castle's posting behavior, and BaBs.
[/ QUOTE ]
About ten seconds after I scrolled past this, I got it.
Bravo. Embedded Serenity references ftw
My postings to this forum are not to be used as data in any research study without my express written consent.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure "contrary to our vision" is the best definition for "broken."
Shortly after Issue 6, heroes discovered they could add villain costume parts at the tailor, contrary to intended design, by using a certain slashcommand. Had the devs simply treated that as being "broken" and stripped the functionality, the game would undoubtedly be worse off. Instead, the unintended functionality was used as the basis for a new and better design.
[/ QUOTE ]
Cool, so the devs are willing to incorporate unintended features into the game.
Means there's probably a reason they don't want this particular unintended feature in the game, don't you think?
De minimis non curat Lex Luthor.
[ QUOTE ]
Cool, so the devs are willing to incorporate unintended features into the game.
[/ QUOTE ]
Haha, no. The floodgates were opened and there was nothing the developers could do but instigate a server wide rollback which would have pissed off too many of their paying customers even for them. Being forced to do something isnt giving.
[ QUOTE ]
Means there's probably a reason they don't want this particular unintended feature in the game, don't you think?
[/ QUOTE ]
of course, Castle being the math and spreadsheet worshipper that he is see that in a particular instance with a particular build with a particular set while being under the influence of particular external buffs a pet MAY be summoned that deals fractionally more DPS than he could stand for.
Gamebreaking = player benefits
Inconsequencial = player detriments
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2 Phantasms, 2 Dark Servants, 9-12 Imps I think...oh how fire control was really crazy
[/ QUOTE ]
My Ill/Rad used to have three phantasms with three decoys, partially overlapping perma-PA, and however many spectral terrors I felt like at the time concurrently.
I think a speedy fire controller could get 15 imps out at once at least for a while.
[/ QUOTE ]
wasnt 25 the theoretical cap? There was a "history of" thread around somewhere that people were claiming as such
[ QUOTE ]
You're not improving the game with this change.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is what it boils down to, IMO.
I regularly play a /kin corruptor and often team with MMs. I generally try to keep Speed Boost on a mastermind's t3 pet, which works better for some MM primaries than others - I would guess Bots works best given the proportion of damage coming from Assault vs Protectors compared to, say, Lich vs Grave Knights.
I'm not angry about the change, just disappointed. And I think it's darkly amusing that Voltaic Sentinel, a power that a significant number of players feel is underwhelming already, is being made worse.
[ QUOTE ]
It eludes me completely as to why you would think an enhancement designed to reduce the recharge of a single power should have an effect on the powers of pets as well.
[/ QUOTE ]
Probably because the help text of various recharge-enhancing IOs looks like this:
[ QUOTE ]
Thunderstrike: Accuracy/Damage/Recharge
Enhances Damage, Accuracy, and Increases Attack Rate
...
[/ QUOTE ]
"Increases attack rate" can easily be interpreted to mean that the pet's attack rate is being increased by slotting the IO. The people who thought this was a normal, expected result of slotting the IO didn't need to execute an epic logical long-jump to reach their conclusion.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2 Phantasms, 2 Dark Servants, 9-12 Imps I think...oh how fire control was really crazy
[/ QUOTE ]
My Ill/Rad used to have three phantasms with three decoys, partially overlapping perma-PA, and however many spectral terrors I felt like at the time concurrently.
I think a speedy fire controller could get 15 imps out at once at least for a while.
[/ QUOTE ]
wasnt 25 the theoretical cap? There was a "history of" thread around somewhere that people were claiming as such
[/ QUOTE ]
Theoretically, if you were at the speed cap and if you happened to get five imps in five casts in a row (usually you got three or four, but you could get anything from two to five). Never seen it myself.
Averaging 3.5, you were more likely to see a decently fast controller get about 14-16 imps out there, unless you were in a speed-boosted team.
(There was this one time I was in an eight controller team where all the controllers were either fire or ill, and either rad or kin, except for one emp. I4. Totally insane).
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
[ QUOTE ]
I'm starting to speculate a lot about how the code is written now though -- and since my background is not MMOs that's maybe not the best thing to do. I just cannot for the life of me believe a better solution cannot be created. One that stops the unintended effect, without breaking something players expect to be able to do -- buff their pets! (and debuff others player/NPCs pets!)
(Hey Castle, how about posting the code for the power activation system so we can stop guessing how it works )
--
mu
[/ QUOTE ]
If it helps, MMO construction includes some constraints that loosely resemble hard realtime embedded systems.
Yes, their servers are MUCH BIGGER than most embedded systems, and it isn't the sort of 'OMG PEOPLE WILL DIE' situation as most realtime deployments...
But here, a few extra lines of logic can easily add up and result in a significant cost to implementation that will live for months or years. Just consider for a moment how much a particular realm/shard must be processing at a given moment.. How many players, how many things those players are doing..
It's incredibly easy to spiral out of control. The 'right way to code' is often unacceptably expensive, so you have to do a lot of ugly hacks, on top of ugly hacks, because rock-solid logic with sanity checking would cut your player event throughput to a hundredth of what it might be otherwise.
And scaling up the hardware isn't terribly trivial either... It's a difficult line to balance.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Softcapping an Invuln is fantastic. Softcapping a Willpower is amazing. Softcapping SR is kissing your sister.
|
Castle, since you're still posting (and haven't cracked and been modded), could you share your thoughts on why recharge buffs for Voltaic Sentinel, Lightning Storm, and Gun Drone are so undesirable? I've played fairly extensively with heroes using LS and GD, only seen VS a couple of times. None of them struck me as PHENOMENAL COSMIC POWER (tm)... so I am frankly rather puzzled at some of your statements in this thread.
Hunter's Forty-Sixth Rule: If your head explodes, you were thinking too much, otherwise you shouldn't worry about the possibility.