Rudra

This is probably just a 1-time thing, but I'm posting it just in case it isn't. Doing the "Just How Evil Are You" alignment mission, "Help Subdued Heroes" version, and a level 53 Voretx Cor Leonis Grenade did something interesting. He fired his grenade 6 times non-stop. Normally, there is a bit of a pause before he can fire another grenade after firing one, but in this instance he just kept launching grenades until he decided to close and punch me with an energy fist.

No you don't. When I'm soloing Crimson's arc with a character that can't take GMs and the titan spawns, I sit inside the tram terminal. If it looks like it isn't coming, I go find it and lead it to the terminal. Or any closer point with drones. And it goes away.

Is an assault rifle a weapon? Yes. (And while there aren't any assault rifles that shoot shotgun shells, there are assault rifles that fire grenades and there are flamethrower rounds that can be loaded into guns. [They are called Dragon's Breath.]) That defines the set as a weapon set. That is what I am saying. However, I'll accept your argument. So okay, the tommygun needs to be removed since it isn't an assault rifle and no, there can be no integrated weapons options added.

Stop arguing about how you think something should work as opposed to how it actually works and is designed to work on the Bug Reports forum and take it to the Suggestions and Feedback forum. I'm done with you. Bye.

You either do care what the exact name is or you don't. Otherwise it's a double standard and you're trying to justify your personal opinion. It is in the name though. Assault Rifle specifies a weapon. It doesn't specify what that weapon looks like, other than it is some sort of weapon launching projectiles; presumably bullets. That rifle can be hand held. That rifle can be mounted on a frame you are wearing. That rifle can be incorporated into your cyborg or robot body. That rifle can be some weird extra-dimensional creature that spits high velocity bullets. It can be a magical musical instrument like a saxophone. (I think there is someone that plays a saxophone to shoot people?) Regardless of what that weapon is or how it is used.

I don't see why the game wouldn't be able to handle it. It is just that in order to keep the emanation points linked with what you want, it would need to be a weapon choice from the weapon drop down menu. Palm Gun? Okay, that has its set firing animation and emanation point linked to it. Finger Gun? That has its set animation and emanation point linked to it. In order to link what you want, it has to be done through the weapon selection menu. Trying to add it to alternate animations the player chooses from the Custom tab of the character creator is introducing a whole slew of complications. And can still wind up with mismatched emanation points and animations. (Edit: You can see this with the current rifle options. Depending on what model you choose, the emanation point is shifted to match that specific weapon model's barrel.)

This is City of Heroes. Not "other games" or "most games". It is City of Heroes. So yes, if you want to use the AE, then you need to understand how it works. This is the Bug Reports forum, where we report things the game is supposed to be doing but isn't or report the things the game isn't supposed to be doing but it is. This sounds more like you are pitching a suggestion and those should be posted on the Suggestions and Feedback forum available from the site's Home page under the Development and Testing section. You can also just click this link: https://forums.homecomingservers.com/forum/45-suggestions-amp-feedback/ The devs don't have the option, they make it. They have to sit down and configure the mission(s) the way they want to do what you are asking for. And then they have to work through all the ways the game breaks trying to do that. Not something that can just be thrown into AE for the rest of us to use because we aren't going to sort through the game code to find out why the game is breaking for trying to do what we want. Again, this is not most games. This is an over 20 year old game with notoriously bad code. Yes, I have. Thank you for the insult. No, you aren't. You are complaining that an ancient game with notoriously bad code that still allows us to make our own story arcs using our own missions and our own enemy factions with our own enemies is broken and needs to be fixed because it is working the way it is designed to. And what I am telling you is how the game works, how AE is set up to work, and what you need to do in order for your presented objectives to work within how the game is set up to have it work. Then make a suggestion to have it changed to work that way instead of claiming that the way it is designed to work is a bug. And thanks again for being derogatory. Then make a suggestion on the Suggestions and Feedback forum instead of claiming you found a bug. AE is working the way it was designed to and what you are reporting is not a bug, it is how AE is designed. We are not game devs making game content. We are players making use of the tools the devs were able to make for us to create our own content. So any attempts to compare what AE does to what any game developer for any game does is a failure of a comparison. We don't have to deal with trying to sort through game code to find out why what we implemented failed. We don't have to sit down and go through the game's code and write whole new scripts for our AE missions/arcs. So the tools provided to us players, not game devs, are going to be much more limited in the scope of their function. Except it isn't. Because to do what you want the way you want requires 3 separate objectives to be loaded and run. Objective 1 is to find and free the escorted NPC. Objective 2 is to spawn the destination when the escorted NPC is freed. And objective 3 is to lead the escorted NPC to the destination. However, how AE is set up, you cannot do that with the existing escort objective. Because if the escorted NPC is to be led to a destination other than the mission exit, then that destination has to exist in order for the escort objective to work. The game cannot partially load objectives, and your destination that the escort objective is looking for does not exist at the time the escort objective is called for by the game to be spawned. If you were a dev working your way through the game's code to make your mission work, then with a fair amount of headache to get it to work, you can get it to work. As a player using premade objectives that we just fill in the available variables of, you cannot do that because the game does not process the objective in a manner that lets you. Again, I am telling you how AE as it exists works. If you want to propose a change to AE, then you need to submit a suggestion on the Suggestions and Feedback forum instead of pretending to be reporting a game bug.

You need to view the logic question from a game code perspective. If the ally/escort requires an objective as its destination, even if that objective is to be spawned by just freeing the ally/escort, you still have a circular logic problem from how the game operates. The game cannot partially load objectives. It loads your requested objectives. Your escort/ally objective must be partially completed in order to spawn the objective you want the ally/escort to go to. The game cannot do that. It looks at the objective and sees that for the ally/escort mission, it also needs another objective that does not exist yet. It checks that other objective and sees that other objective requires the ally/escort objective in order to spawn. Because the other objective requires the ally/escort objective to spawn, and the ally/escort objective requires the other objective to spawn, because again the game cannot and does not partially load objectives, the game sees that the ally/escort objective requires the other objective to be a valid objective and the other objective requires the ally/escort objective to be valid, and that renders both objectives invalid because they are dependent on each other in order to exist.

That it is a weapon is in the name. I don't care what weapon it is. You can ask for a living soccer ball your character holds out that says "pew pew pew" as it fires bullets and I wouldn't care because it is a weapon. My whole point is that power sets are built on themes. So take Dual Blades for instance. There are weapons players can select from Dual Blades that are not blades. Oh no. Who cares. They are still weapons and even sticks can be used to cut as evidenced by real world martial arts. If you try to completely take weapons away from power sets that are defined as having weapons, you take away that power set's given identity. If you add weapons to power sets that are not defined as not having weapons but simply as a specific force or type, like Fire Blast, then you are not taking away the set's identity but are instead adding options for players to choose. Something that only defines what it projects getting a different source of projection does not change it. Something that defines the source of projection having that source removed changes it. And our whole argument makes absolutely no sense since what you said you wanted were integrated weapons and I gave possibilities for how those integrated weapons could be added to the power set without breaking the animations and having disconnected emanation points nowhere near what you say you want your character to do. Adding a No Weapon option and claiming it is for your shoulder gatling or your finger gun or you palm-fired arm gun or your nose gun or whatever body part you want to pick gun breaks what you say you want because your character is still going to be animating firing a gun the character does not have with an emanation point nowhere near your character's shoulder, finger, palm, wrist, or any other body part. So why are you so hung up on having to strictly remove the weapon model if your entire justification is that you want integrated weapons which require weapons with emanation points aligned with where you have the weapon integrated and using animations that illustrate the integration being used?

I just did the Investigate the Warehouse (A Broken Nemesis Jaegar) mission. My difficulty setting is +2. I do not have any incarnate abilities. Not slotted or even crafted. I'm playing a Crab Spider SoA. When my doppelganger appeared, my doppelganger was level 52. However, all the pets my doppelganger summoned were level 54.

It is in the power set name. Fire Blast is fire, not body blasts that happen to be fire. That is why the request for adding weapons like staves works. Assault Rifle is a gun. If it was the Bullets power set, then it would not also include a grenade, a beanbag, a flamethrower, and a napalm area denial power. That is almost fully half the power set's powers that have nothing to do with bullets. You are conflating things that are not linked. Even the Beam Rifle power set is about the gun. A gun that only fires beams, but still a gun. So integrated weapons for Beam Rifle would have to be implemented the same way. You select Palm Gun, Finger Gun, et al from the weapons drop down menu to get integrated weapons for the set. If you want to not be using a weapon at all? Then you use Energy Blast or Radiation Blast. Dual Pistols? Same thing. Archery? Same thing.

If you have two objectives that are triggered off of each other, then yes, it is circular logic. Going by what it looks like you were doing, you had an objective to free an ally or escort and freeing the ally/escort spawns a glowy that is the destination of the ally/escort. The problem, and what makes it circular logic, is that just freeing the ally/escort does not complete the ally/escort objective because you have that ally/escort set to follow the player to the spawned objective. So the ally/escort objective both creates the glowy and cannot be completed until the glowy is reached. That objective cannot do that. That makes the glowy objective dependent on the ally/escort to exist because it is spawned by the ally being freed, and it makes the ally/escort objective dependent on the glowy to exist because that is the completion destination. That is the circular logic. A creates B and B creates A. (Edit: To be clear, what is going is: The escort/ally objective requires the glowy objective to exist in order to function. The glowy objective requires the escort/ally objective in order to function/exist. They both require the other in order to work. That is circular, not linear. Yes, the escort/ally objective does not require the glowy objective to exist, but it does need it to function because that is the escort/ally final destination, and that destination is part of the escort/ally objective itself. A destination that does not even exist when the game goes to create the ally/escort objective because it can't until the ally/escort objective is already partially completed. And the escort/ally objective needs its destination to exist to properly spawn the escort/ally objective, which it can't do because the destination cannot be spawned until you have already started the ally/escort objective.)

They do. They want to use Superadine to help the Destroyers and they want to use Fixadine to help the Trolls. However, they can't just switch them over to the other drug because they will react very negatively to the switch. Think of the Tsoo Rage drug arc blue side. It looks like Superadine. It is even labeled to be easily mistaken as Superadine. And chemically, it is almost identical to Superadine. However, if you use Superadine, you really, really don't want to try Rage. I can't remember the name of the blue side scientist, but he is looking at Fixadine and Superadine because they are virtually identical (like Superadine and Rage) but have radically different results on the body. And he is trying to figure out how the differences between the two may be used to help the Destroyers recover from their Fixadine addiction and the Trolls regain their lost intellect and maybe even their pre-Troll bodies. (Though in the arc, he is more focused on the Trolls.)

Because like I said back then when you made that post, the theme of Fire Blast is fire. The theme of Robotics is the artificial constructs. The theme of Nature Affinity is nature. The theme of Assault Rifle is the gun. So it doesn't matter where the fire from Fire Blast comes from or how it is used, as long as it is fire. It doesn't matter what constructs are fielded for Robotics, as long as it is a construct. It doesn't matter what nature-based elements are used for Nature Affinity, as long as it is related to nature. And it doesn't matter what weapon is being used with Assault Rifle because it is a weapon. Alternate animations do not change what a power set's theme is. Minimal FX does not change what a power set's theme is. No FX changes what a power set's theme is, and I will oppose it. Removing the weapons from sets defined as being weapons changes what that power set's theme is, and I oppose it. Adding integrated weapons into the available list of weapons for players to choose from does not change what the power set is, it just changes the related animations and emanation points. Removing the weapon from the weapon set completely rather than adding integrated weapons to choose from changes what the power set's theme is.

I think you like to say no to things just to argue with people Because I've never agreed with any suggestions on these forums ever. Uh huh. (Yes, I've supported several suggestions.) (Edit: Hells, I support the OP of this thread. I even pointed out to the author that his/her/their request for staff animations for non-weapon power sets is already partially feasible because it already exists to an extent among the lower level CoT mages.) Your question if I am upset by how the bots get summoned to compare to my opposition of taking weapons away from weapon sets is a false comparison. How the bots get summoned is as much a who cares thing as how characters get their weapons. Who cares. How you get your bots and how you get your weapons is not relevant to the discussion because they have nothing to do with it. Now if you had asked how would I feel if the bots were able to be removed from the Robotics MM and yet still have the bots doing their attacks, that would be a good comparison to taking away weapons from weapon sets. (Note that I mean simply removing the pet models, not allowing different models to be used. Because allowing different models to be used is adding weapons to the weapon list, as opposed to a No Weapon request.) Like I said multiple times across multiple threads now, I oppose any suggestion that attempts to take away the theme of a power set. You want alternate animations? Got your back. You want alternate weapons/pets made available? I'm there with you. Stripping a power set of its identity though? Never.

No. Why would it? The bots are the theme of that power set. Not how they are called. And the gun is the theme of Assault Rifle.

No, Superadine is sufficiently different from Fixadine that it would not work as a replacement. The composition of them is extremely similar, but there are slight differences. And in the game, Superadine and Fixadine are being studied by... I can't remember who... to see if their differences can be used to find a way to cure the Trolls and the Destroyers.

For like the bots my some of my MMs use? For the one that is supposed to be using a forearm computer, I put a bracer that looks like I am using a forearm computer. Otherwise, no. The animations are what they are, and forearm computers like the Praetorian police use has already been requested to be available to players. There is a difference between making use of existing animations/requesting new animations, and stripping a power set of its identity by taking away what makes it what it is.

Setting aside the whole "No Weapon" argument, as far as the OP itself goes for giving the option of using staves for your attacks, it would be as difficult as adding a weapon menu to the various ranged power sets. That menu would have 2 choices, Default (nothing) and Staff with a second weapon drop down menu that comes up if you choose Staff to select which staff you want. (It would also require the CoT staff animations to be duplicated and modified to encompass all the existing attack animation times.)

Except you are saying "No Weapon" and I am saying "Palm Gun", "Finger Gun", et al. Because a No Weapon option is exactly that. It would just take away the weapon and I oppose that. Adding a Finger Gun, Palm Gun, Shoulder Gun, Elbow Gun, Wrist Gun, or whatever option is still adding weapons to the weapons list for players to choose from. Because you need those weapons on the list to be chosen in order for the game to apply the effects you are asking for.

Fine, so add finger gun to the weapon drop down menu. You're still going to need to add these to the weapon drop down menu so the attack animation and emanation point link up to what you are portraying.

Thorny Assault: You have a device implanted in you that generates and projects the thorns. You have a device that portals/teleports the plants at the target aggressively. You have a nanotech device that creates (choose material desired) and projects it at the target. Plant Control: You have a device that commands the plants. You have a device that creates fake plants that do what you need. You have a device that portals/teleports the plants at the target aggressively. Just 3 examples for each off the top of my head.

Yes. Yes, it does. And I use it. That does not change that in combat, AS uses its quick version under most circumstances. Thank you for quoting me without reading what I posted. Like I said: Snipe can be interrupted by being buffed, by being damaged, and by simply moving any little bit for any reason when used in long form. Snipe uses the short form during combat, and you said Snipe uses its short form mid combat. And the short form cannot be interrupted.

So you ask for an alternate animation where the character opens up the arm to fire the weapon like he does. (Edit: Yes, having a hand gun, as in a hand that is a gun, or an elbow gun/rocket works. Those are still weapons though and call for new animations for them. The rifle from the drop down would not be used, and instead you would choose Hand Gun or Elbow Gun from the list.) Uses a megaphone shaped handgun. https://en.touhouwiki.net/wiki/Reisen_Udongein_Inaba So that would be a megaphone added to the weapon list. Converts his arms to blasters and pops machineguns out of his butt. So for the arms, that would be an alternate animation that uses a gun arm for firing. And that gun arm cannon would be selected from the weapon drop down list. (Edit: And the machineguns would be like Franky from One Piece where the weapons pop out of the appropriate location. His butt for Astro Boy and the knuckles for Franky.) In all cases. just like I said, they are using weapons. Edit again: And the alternate animations would be linked to the appropriate weapon chosen from the weapon drop down menu to have the emanation points properly line up with what is going on. (I don't get why you and the others are so opposed to my responses. My responses give you what you say you want. You say you want shoulder guns, so have shoulder guns added to the weapon list so the animations line up. You want wrist guns? Have wrist guns added to the weapon list so the animations line up. You want bullets coming from your palms? Add palm guns to the weapon list so the animation and emanation points work for it. In all these cases, you would no longer be wielding a rifle of any kind, your weapons would be integrated. So why are you opposed to this and so fixated on No Gun which leaves the attack animation and emanation point not linked to what you want your character doing? I am giving responses that let you make what you are asking for.) (Edit yet again: Even the Grim Reaper's 0.1 caliber finger gun would need to be in the weapons drop down list to be chosen in order to have the correct animation and emanation point.)

It's an assault rifle set. Why would I accept a single-shot weapon that has maybe 5 feet range as justification?