Protip: SBE Decimation Build-Up proc

Besides there's an easy fix. Just replace all the in game IO drops with the market versions! (OK, "easy" might not be the word I'm looking for.)

Well, the in game IOs *may* still be the better option on AoE attacks so they're not obsolete.

Re-read what I said. The bigger your AoE is, the worse this compares to a standard proc. For a 10-target attack, your absolute maximum average works out to a 10% proc rate, even if your single-target PPM suggests a 100% activation rate, and even if you hit 10 targets every time you use the power.

If the recharge on the power is shorter than would go off 100% of the time in a single-target attack, it gets worse. An average of one target per activation is the absolute top performance.

Don't really care about that honestly. I'm not enough of a power gamer to actually calculate the amount of damage I'm doing or stuff like that. Most of the time anyway.

I'm just thinking it would solve all the problems with availability on certain levels if all IO recipe dropping across all levels would just end up in the same pool. That and the scaling would actually make me bother with IOs before level 50 (or 47.)

As an added bonus it'd remove a lot of market clutter, and give an opportunity to fix the typos and inconsistencies between recipe and crafted enhancements that bother me a lot more than they should. That'd make the AH a lot less unwieldy to use.

Purely anecdotal, but my experience with PPM and AoE is the SoA SATO on my crab. I slotted it on a a cone attack Heavy Burst with a 12 second recharge. If we go by the formula we believe is being used then it would look something like this:

((12/60) x 5PPM) / 10 targets = 10%

However, once again purely anecdotal, I see the terrorize mez go off VERY often, much more than 10%. Like seriously, a lot. My crab is my main so I'm using Heavy Burst all the time. My guess would be that the area of the AoE may have be a factor as well, or possibly even the type (cone vs spherical).

It's worth mentioning that we don't know that this is actually how the math works for PPM procs in AoE's (and certain evidence seems to say there's more to the story). Arbiter Hawk wasn't even sure of the exact formula when he explained it, but he did say that AoE size is a factor in addition to target cap. The jury's still out on exactly how it DOES work, but so far the evidence I've seen does not support that all it's doing is dividing the proc chance by the target cap.

But we do have evidence that it does do this, at least for some sets of conditions: the testing of PPM procs placed in "single-target" Tanker powers. In practice there are no single-target tanker powers, since even the ones that we think of that way have a target cap of five. 4-PPM procs slotted in powers with 15s or greater recharge are working out to 20% chance to proc ... which is 1/MaxTargets of what they "should" be if they really were single-target powers.

We know that area of effect should be factoring in somehow, but it's possible that area is somehow applied stepwise (e.g.: radius < 10' = no effect), which could explain why the Tanker attacks would be working out to exactly 1/MaxTargets instead of something else.

What is and isn't broken has always been a matter of opinion the devs decided xyz was good enough, I agreed enough to invest time there; if they wanna nerf xyz I'm going to be pissed afterall I've already invested in that. I'm already pissed that sets like Mercenaries remain trash tier and take only a small amount of effort to fix.

This is almost certainly wrong, my tests on beta put the odds of the results I saw given this formula as essentially impossible. For example, in 791 hits with Barb Swipe and a 2.5 PPM ToD proc I saw 134 procs, over 12 standard deviations from the mean expected given a normal approximation of an underlying binomial distribution with the proc chance given by the above formula. Another 491 hits with the 3 PPM Mako proc produced 102 procs, 11+ sdev off itself. And that's just the last two test sets I ran to test the hypothesis that it's actually...

(Base Recharge + Cast) / 60s x PPM

With that formula every single one of my test series fell within the 95% confidence interval and the total testing over 2768 hits was 0.38 sdev high.

My tests with the Tanker attacks are not working out to MaxTargets. For example, in 134 hits against a single target with Tremor (14s Rech, 3.3s Cast) using a 5 PPM proc I saw a 43.3% proc rate, despite a 10 target cap. That's an error of a whopping 9.5 sdev assuming the MaxTargets modifier (11.4 sdev if you use the incorrect Rech only formula). The AoE mod for a 15', 360 deg, 10 tgt attack appears to be pretty close to 3, not 10.

Not snitching isn't the same thing as being deceitful if those in those in the know/independent discoverers misled the devs and community about performance that would be deceitful; if that group kept quiet instead that would just be good policy that thread put pshifter on synapses radar so things took a turn for the worse and will get worse there and now it's all what's next?

That's good to know. I was going off of someone else's posted reports.

Yes, and vice versa. The game considers the SBE and the crafted versions to be the "same" enhancement with regard to exclusivity and also set bonuses.

It should also make them function "exactly" the same.

If you feel the need to form secret societies and conspiracies in the community just to protect something that might or might not be OP or bugged from getting fixed/nerfed, you're investing a bit too much of yourself in the game imo ...

Savy? Are you a pirate? I'm assuming you're referring to me, since I actually got Synapse's attention. The reason I spoke out immediately upon discovering the Performance Shifter procs dramatic difference in performance is as follows:

If Synapse said it was WAI and wasn't going to change, I'd go ahead and buy a bunch while they were on sale (the ability to slot them starting at 18 isn't that appealing to me - i've got 5 or 6 level 21s in circulation right now).

If Synapse said it WASN'T WAI, (and he would find out, sooner or later) then I would save myself some money.

Originally Posted by Shubbie Im very good at taking a problem and making it worse.

no one's forming secret societies or conspiracies to my knowledge then again just cause I don't know that such groups exist doesn't mean they don't lol; what i'm talking about is independent discovery. When X person discovers D sbe has G amazing effect in J power he should keep quiet so that Y and Z persons can stumble upon the same and look into other sbe independently.

Once I became aware of how awesome decimation could be in an app hold I immediatly wondered if Gausions had ever been available on the market I even asked the triumph community without indicationg why I wanted to know and thats how it should be

Things can work as intended and also be outside of parameters xyz dev would like; look at regen I0 version was WAI but then some devs didn't like it's performance lvl and they would contiue to weaken it over the course of multiple issues. Far as i'm conscerned you only gave synapse incentive to change his mind as to how great the sbe should be.

If a nerf is inevitable, later is always better.

I was opposed to them selling IOs before, but this is ridiculous.

Nerf this to hell and back, please... so that the Proc% is equal to the IO version.

This is... absurd. The sooner a nerf can happen the better, fewer people get used to the unintended performance of a power or IO. Making the wrong results last longer just gets more people upset:

• If the power is working too good, they will be mad it got nerfed because they got used to it being really good.

• If it is working too poorly, folks will get madder and madder the longer it remains unfixed.

Wrong. The sooner the better. A lot less bleating from people like you after the fact like that.

i'd rather have the benefit as long as possible most would

The rate of buffs to poor power sets, enhancements sets to anything is far far below the rate of nerfs their is no comparison at all. Mercs sucks just as bad today as it did 5 years ago and probably since it was released, the medec still has far less range than the rest of the t1s, the sets survivability is just as poor as its always been, its damage is just as poor, serum sucks just as much let's not pretend adjusting up has anywhere near the same priority as nerfing.

Lots of garbage is dealt out in terms of low performing power sets, io sets that offers worthless set bonuses like 2.5-4% dmg in both VR pets sets cause one wasn't enough of an insult. When was the last time an io set got buffed? Never? When something good comes along keep it to yourself maybe if they do less nerfing we'll see tiny tiny bit more buffing.