Quote:
Well the epic ATs do not trade harder play for higher rewards, and it there is a certain amount of sense to having people learn and play a game instead of just slamming their fists on the number keys and hoping for the best
|
Originally Posted by Bosstone
Absolutely, as an Epic AT. Those should be the Advanced Classes, the ones that are harder to play but allow the experienced player to reap more dividends. It certainly should not be an AT that's available out of the box to every player immediately and theoretically has its own niche that makes players want to play it over any other AT.
Blasters are popular. Newbies like them. That's not a good position to put a difficult-but-rewarding AT. |
Quote:
As Reiska mentioned, it's latency, not a bug. It's an interruptable power, if you click it after you think you finish moving but within the duration of your latency you are likely to be interrupted. Happens to me too. Giving yourself a half a second (or whatever your latency is) after you land next to an enemy will allieviate the issue.
|
Originally Posted by TwoHeadedBoy
I noticed that for some reason, I'm terrible at using AS while in hide. For some reason, about every third time I go to use it I'll que it in perfect position, go into the little AS stance, but then the power just won't work and I'll still have to pay the endurance cost. I'm not sure if this is WAI and I'm just bad at Stalking or if it's buggy.
|
Quote:
I dunno, AR/Energy has pretty good synergy, with the cones and Boost Range, plus EM adding the good ST damage that AR is missing.
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
If I was going to run a test like this pacing a Blaster against a Scrapper, I would probably pick AR/Energy vs BattleAxe/Invuln. They are probably about as close to average performance in each archetype and comparable to each other in damage types as you could get. Its a bit too much AoE on the blaster side, but the better equivalent from that perspective and damage mitigation perspective would probably be radiation blast, but that's a completely different damage type with no easy comparable melee side set. Electric melee has drain which complicates the comparison: that drain is almost useless against minions and Lts which would dominate the early parts of the test.
I don't have the time to dedicate to this type of testing at the moment, but that's probably the combination I would use if I did. No combination would be perfect, though, so a better test would probably pick a few combinations to test against each other collectively. |
Global @Diellan - 5M2M
Mids' Hero/Villain Designer Lead
Virtue Server
Redside: Lorenzo Mondavi
Blueside: Alex Rabinovich
Got a Mids suggestion? Want to report a Mids bug?
Quote:
Just because one of the current EAT concepts was executed poorly making for an extraordinarily difficult AT that doesn't provide amazing returns and the other is a pretty easy AT that's just fantastic all around doesn't invalidate the theory behind epic ATs. Epics are supposed to be Hard Mode; that's why they're locked until you reach a certain level, so that you've gained at least some experience with the game before you try them. (Yes, I know they're unlockable on the Market now. That doesn't change how they were originally conceived.)|
Originally Posted by B_L_Angel
Well the epic ATs do not trade harder play for higher rewards,
|
Quote:
| and it there is a certain amount of sense to having people learn and play a game instead of just slamming their fists on the number keys and hoping for the best |
All out-of-the-box ATs should ideally provide a similar game experience. Not in gameplay; of course a Scrapper or Defender or Tanker will play differently from a Blaster. But there is absolutely no reason someone who picks a Blaster should have to experience a harder game than someone who picks a Scrapper or Defender. There's no justification for it beyond "the AT was designed poorly."
De minimis non curat Lex Luthor.
[QUOTE=Diellan_;4173929]
Quote:
Let me see if this sounds familiar.|
Quote:
Quote:
|
The devs sample the state of the game and see how players are perfoming at various tasks. They see that the players are doing better at some than they would like and worse at others than they would like. They take the statistics and make adjustments according to them, introducing an entirely new set of problems.
Well amazing, If that isn't what gave us defiance 2.0, and a merit rewards system that over rewards hero task forces and under rewards.
It's actually a thank god moment that they don't iterate the system more often as it would likely throw the whole thing into a state of complete chaos.
Just to ask, what would it take to convince you, you are wrong on this matter ? You keep holding forth ever more wrong statement and each time they are refuted you make a greater stretch to support them.
I can give all kinds of examples with dynamic systems where taking statistics of how the system is behaving at a given point in time and making adjustments based on them would produce completely undesirable results.
However I get the feeling from your argument that watching the statistics of when a television picture was bad would let you fix it, that there is nothing in the world that would convince you that it is an inappropriate method.
Anyway I will have my little laugh at your and and Arcanavile's twisting of the history of science in a combined post.
Quote:
When you say telescope you mean|
Originally Posted by Diellan_
Sure it did. People used it to predict things like when and where Venus would appear in the sky. That's why it wasn't until telescopes came around - thus increasing the amount of data available and allowing for early scientists to compare it to the predictions of the Ptolemaic - that alternative theories supplanted it.
|
This very large quadrant ?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
To be more specific, Kepler discovered his laws of planetary motion by in effect data mining them from observations, particularly Tycho Brahe's after he died. It was the accurate data of Tycho that allowed him to determine that planetary motion was elliptical, and not circular. Kepler's biggest indictment of Ptolemy was not just on geocentricity, but on the conclusion that planetary bodies moved in ellipses. This was a serious blow to the notion that heavenly motion was "perfect" and "perfectly architected" by God. Instead, it was imperfect, and not designed to be beautifully arranged.
|
I suppose Ptolemy also had that voluminous data of Tycho's when mars was given the largest number of epicycles.
Quote:
Also, aside from the fact that none of that is relevant to Kepler's laws of motion, which required Tycho's observations, as I stated. Kepler had access to *other* data which allowed him to do all those other things, but that data was not accurate enough to formulate a precise model for planetary motion. It was that lack of accuracy that stymied Kepler, and by his own actions he illustrates the importance of that accurate data, by pursuing Tycho for years just to get it.|
Originally Posted by Another_Fan
Well aside from the fact that Kepler formulated his heliocentric model and determined the distances of the planets from the sun and predicted the existence of a planet between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter (where oddly enough the asteroid belt sits) all before he ever met Kepler, You would have to guess he had invented a time machine so he could get the data before he knew they existed.
I suppose Ptolemy also had that voluminous data of Tycho's when mars was given the largest number of epicycles. |
If Kepler's models actually worked, he would not have needed Tycho. He needed Tycho because he realized his data wasn't good enough to make a good model of planetary motion. Because good models require good data to base them on.
I have no idea whatsoever what you mean when you mention Ptolemy. Why would he need Tycho's data to invent epicycles? Epicycles are what you can get away with without sufficiently precise data. Tycho's data contradicts epicycles, not encourages them.
Twisting of scientific history indeed. I often wonder if you happen to exist in a place where you're convincing and that encourages you to attempt the same thing on the internet, or if you don't happen to exist in a place where you've convincing and that forces to you attempt this on the internet by default.
[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.)
I'm working on other stuff so I'm not going to be able to do my usual runs for this today. Regularly scheduled program returns tomorrow.
[QUOTE=Arcanaville;4176076]Also, aside from the fact that none of that is relevant to Kepler's laws of motion, which required Tycho's observations, as I stated. Kepler had access to *other* data which allowed him to do all those other things, but that data was not accurate enough to formulate a precise model for planetary motion. It was that lack of accuracy that stymied Kepler, and by his own actions he illustrates the importance of that accurate data, by pursuing Tycho for years just to get it. [quote]
Kepler formulated his work off the motion of Mars. Data which Tycho had freely given him to keep Kepler busy and from Tycho's perspective pursuing a blind alley.
Quote:
It is very hard to determine the eccentricity of a planetary orbit without observations. | If Kepler's models actually worked, he would not have needed Tycho. He needed Tycho because he realized his data wasn't good enough to make a good model of planetary motion. Because good models require good data to base them on. |
Just predicting the motion of mars would hardly have converted anyone to his view. Mercury already had a special means of calculation within the Ptolemaic system.
I have vague plans to do a similar, but far less detailed, analysis. Report every 5 levels or so (after the first 10 or 15) by clicking an "M"-name NPC: hours patrolling, debt incurred (measured by badges).
I'm watching this one eagerly!
Mini-guides: Force Field Defenders, Blasters, Market Self-Defense, Frankenslotting.
So you think you're a hero, huh.
@Boltcutter in game.
Quote:
I am as well.|
Originally Posted by Fulmens
I have vague plans to do a similar, but far less detailed, analysis. Report every 5 levels or so (after the first 10 or 15) by clicking an "M"-name NPC: hours patrolling, debt incurred (measured by badges).
I'm watching this one eagerly! |
I have started my own blaster project. Level 7 so far. I hope to hit level 12 tonight.
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.
I am a neglectful, bad divine creator of one sad Stalker and one sad Blaster. I wasn't able to find the time to play them today, and Sundays are usually busy for me. Monday at the latest is when I'll be resuming this project, sorry to anyone who was looking forward to the next batch of results. I promise I'm not abandoning this, my COH time has just been absorbed working on other projects.
Sorry for the delay, here are the latest results:
Dp/Dark Blaster
Total levels: 1
Total defeats: 1
11:18 defeat Arachnos Patrol in Port Oakes
11:22 Go to University
11:24 Defeat 10 Luddites
11:29 crosscuts plan
11:36 Omnicore's plan
11:42 lv 12
11:45 killing game
11:55 Lost defeat boss newspaper
12:03 defeated (hospital 12:05 return)
12:08 Hellions defeat boss newspaper
12:16 complete
Elec/Ninj Stalker
Total levels: 2
Total defeats: 0
12:24 Crosscut's plan
12:31 Omnicore's plan
12:37 killing game
12:41 lvl 12
12:46 Lost glowie newspaper
12:53 Hellions glowie newspaper
1:04 Gold Bricker defeat boss newspaper
1:13 King's Row Bank
1:21 complete
1:22 lvl 13
1:24 complete
I'm guessing an Aberrant caught ya napping.
One bit of advice, I have breakfree's bound to the back button of my mouse for Blasters, one quick click and I'm back in action without even opening my tray.
/bind button4, inspexec_name breakfree
It's set for Respites on everyone else though. 
Maestro Mavius - Infinity
Capt. Biohazrd - PCSAR
Talsor Tech - Talsorian Guard
Keep Calm & Chive On!
Quote:
I actually just got cocky and aggroed two groups at once. I'm very very bad at playing low level characters, totally unable to see the appeal of not having all of your powers yet, so sometimes I attempt to ease the pain by pretending I'm playing a real character. >.> In my defense, I pulled it off several other times.
|
Originally Posted by MaestroMavius
I'm guessing an Aberrant caught ya napping.
One bit of advice, I have breakfree's bound to the back button of my mouse for Blasters, one quick click and I'm back in action without even opening my tray. /bind button4, inspexec_name breakfree It's set for Respites on everyone else though. |
Time from level 11 to level 12:
57 minutes, 2 defeats (Blaster)
45 minutes, 1 defeat (Stalker)
Cumulative time from level 3 to level 12:
246 minutes, 5 defeats (Blaster)
227 minutes, 4 defeats (Stalker)
Also, its potentially worse than that (for the Blaster) as the Stalker has approximately 10 extra minutes due to a defeat all that appears to have taken an extra ten minutes searching before it was autocompleted (extrapolated based on the blaster time and other mission times).
Interestingly, factoring that observation the blaster is actually already progressing 13% slower without actually dying significantly more often yet. Its difficult to ascertain why, but that gap seems larger than the margin for error would be in this case. Question: is the mission difficulty slider identical for both players? It actually seems like the Blaster is needing to run slightly more content to keep pace with the stalker, but that makes no sense when debt is almost identical (and in fact, the stalker has slightly more defeats after 10).
[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.)
I would imagine some of it has to do with the ability to Hide, making stealthing such a viable option on the Stalker, bypassing some mobs more than the blaster.
The Blaster on the other hand, would have to approach each mob more carefully and in the end, that adds time that the Stalker doesn't have to take.
Maestro Mavius - Infinity
Capt. Biohazrd - PCSAR
Talsor Tech - Talsorian Guard
Keep Calm & Chive On!
Quote:
Not exactly. Kepler eventually came to the conclusion that Mars' orbit was elliptical from the data initially provided by Tycho. However, Kepler's formalized (three) laws of motion, which was being discussed, were not derived until after Tycho's death, and were based on Tycho's larger data sets. Every astronomical history text I've seen credits Kepler "acquiring" Tycho's data after his death with his being ultimately able to formulate the laws of planetary motion. Even his first law - that planetary bodies move in ellipses - postdates Tycho's death.
|
Originally Posted by Another_Fan
Kepler formulated his work off the motion of Mars. Data which Tycho had freely given him to keep Kepler busy and from Tycho's perspective pursuing a blind alley.
|
[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.)
Honestly a lot of it is probably that I'm playing the Blaster first and playing the Stalker directly after, doing essentially all the same things. I've already memorized exactly where everything is having just done it on the Blaster by the time I do it again on the Stalker... Especially the Dr. Graves missions and the Bocor arc so far. The difficulty is exactly the same. Another thing is that the Blaster has Hover and Combat Jumping, and I still haven't set up binds yet to switch between those and Ninja Run. The Stalker doesn't have any conflicting toggles. This might not seem like it would be a big deal, but I think the time toggling back and forth is adding up. Next, the Stalker has much more defense than the Blaster, so the Blaster uses rest more often. I find I'm getting a bit more "bang for my buck" inspiration wise on the Stalker. Finally the Blaster has to take a more indirect route to missions to avoid aggroing enemies on the streets sometimes (like was mentioned above) which may be leading to longer transit times between missions, but I haven't really felt a noticeable time gap there. All that being said, as of right now both characters are within 2 XP bars of each other, so while the difference might be noticeable it's hardly a large discrepancy when it comes down to it, at least at this point.
Quote:
Doing the Blaster first doesn't seem to be incurring a high penalty, but if the Stalker continues to overtake the Blaster this will null out because eventually the Stalker will be seeing the missions first even though the Blaster is played first in any given day. Once that happens, any advantage doing one first and then the other will shift to the Blaster, and it will also weaken somewhat either way (due to being separated by more time).
|
Originally Posted by TwoHeadedBoy
Honestly a lot of it is probably that I'm playing the Blaster first and playing the Stalker directly after, doing essentially all the same things. I've already memorized exactly where everything is having just done it on the Blaster by the time I do it again on the Stalker... Especially the Dr. Graves missions and the Bocor arc so far. The difficulty is exactly the same. Another thing is that the Blaster has Hover and Combat Jumping, and I still haven't set up binds yet to switch between those and Ninja Run. The Stalker doesn't have any conflicting toggles. This might not seem like it would be a big deal, but I think the time toggling back and forth is adding up. Next, the Stalker has much more defense than the Blaster, so the Blaster uses rest more often. I find I'm getting a bit more "bang for my buck" inspiration wise on the Stalker. Finally the Blaster has to take a more indirect route to missions to avoid aggroing enemies on the streets sometimes (like was mentioned above) which may be leading to longer transit times between missions, but I haven't really felt a noticeable time gap there. All that being said, as of right now both characters are within 2 XP bars of each other, so while the difference might be noticeable it's hardly a large discrepancy when it comes down to it, at least at this point.
|
[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.)
This kind of test possibly won't be conclusive. I did 2 lvl 50s, one a TA/A Defender and one a A/TA Corrupter, built the similarly. Gave them the same arc, and alternately played them, each doing a mission for the first time etc. My conclusion was that it was harder to solo a Defender and since Defenders have been buffed since; that's not a bad conclusion considering:
1) For each character the missions did differ despite being the same name, setting etc.
2) I did not try out other Defender/Corrupter combos with the same test.
If you so much as give different travel powers things differ.
The tester could be more skilled with a Stalker and certainly as playing a Blaster correctly solo is so much less obvious so I will go with that anyway. Blasters need a team to truly be able to unleash their true power safely it is written.
A Stalker being able to solo easier than a Blaster would be as expected given the archetype description of a Scrapper talking of which a Stalker closely resembles.
There will be opportunities to make a Blaster pull out in front of a Stalker solo, but which Blaster versus what Stalker or will the factions that unwittingly produce these opportunities be faced? Will the Blaster be built to make hay with the factions limitations?
He will honor his words; he will definitely carry out his actions. What he promises he will fulfill. He does not care about his bodily self, putting his life and death aside to come forward for another's troubled besiegement. He does not boast about his ability, or shamelessly extol his own virtues. - Sima Qian.
Well of course it won't be conclusive. When all's said and done, this is a single data point (DP/Dark Blaster levels X times faster than a Ninja/Dark Stalker, or vice versa). It can, however, be a useful illustration; if we know or suspect that Blasters have a harder time leveling than other ATs, maybe a close examination can show us where and why. Even then, it would probably take a few comparisons to start getting a clear picture.
De minimis non curat Lex Luthor.
Quote:
The error between the predictions of Ptolemaic system as calculated in the Almagest, and Mars's actual position peak at roughly 30 arc minutes. Kepler indeed needed to be driven crazy by the problem but that was mostly just being directed at it by someone who wanted him spinning his wheels. He needed Tycho's data to get other people to agree and to show the behavior was "Universal".|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Not exactly. Kepler eventually came to the conclusion that Mars' orbit was elliptical from the data initially provided by Tycho. However, Kepler's formalized (three) laws of motion, which was being discussed, were not derived until after Tycho's death, and were based on Tycho's larger data sets. Every astronomical history text I've seen credits Kepler "acquiring" Tycho's data after his death with his being ultimately able to formulate the laws of planetary motion. Even his first law - that planetary bodies move in ellipses - postdates Tycho's death.
|
You have to remember even after he published his full work, which IIRC was post his conversion to Catholicism, Tycho's Geo Helio model was still picking up steam. Just on the basis that it kept the earth in the center of things even if it had planets orbiting the sun, and corrected the predictive problems that were in the Copernican model, and the Ptolemaic model. It's a really a great example of how large volumes of data can be completely deceiving.
Quote:
hehe, I can't be the only one amused that a thread about blaster performance contains posts about the extent to which Kepler's physics discoveries were influenced by Tycho.
|
Originally Posted by Another_Fan
The error between the predictions of Ptolemaic system as calculated in the Almagest, and Mars's actual position peak at roughly 30 arc minutes. Kepler indeed needed to be driven crazy by the problem, what he needed Tycho's data was to get other people to agree and to show the behavior was "Universal"
You have to remember even after he published his full work, which IIRC was post his conversion to Catholicism, Tycho's Geo Helio model was still picking up steam. Just on the basis that it kept the earth in the center of things even if it had planets orbiting the sun, and corrected the predictive problems that were in the Copernican model, and the Ptolemaic model. It's a really a great example of how large volumes of data can be completely deceiving. |
Thoroughly enjoying this thread. I have played this game since the beginning and have made two blasters total (one was a viking with dual pistols which made me laugh for some reason) so I have zero vested interest in the outcome of this simulation.
I think THB's work has value as it is uncovering details about the leveling progression for both AT's that could be looked into with data mining of logs. The anecdotal comments made by THB are quite valuable and provide insight.
Does it have value for answering the question whether one levels slower than another? No, inferring a distribution off a single point measurement (which the leveling time for a level is or the total leveling time) and then comparing that distribution to another distribution inferred from a single point will not yield a significant answer unless the distributions were vastly different. I wouldn't expect the signal, i.e. the difference in leveling times, to be that large. Just my opinion, as stated, I don't play blasters so I defer to the intuition of the blaster community.
Please keep sharing your results, I am learning a lot.
Have fun.