Luminara

So is poop. Usually.

7012f91c-e25f-4cfc-adbf-30b9ba166b42.mp4

Some environmental graphical and audio effects are applied to players by granting them a power which is, in essence, a pseudo-pet. This is a work-around which exists because the ability to apply global effects without an "owner" wasn't coded into the engine. Everything has to have a source, and in many cases, the source is a pseudo-pet assigned to the player. There are interdependencies buried in the way things function. This is what people mean when they talk about "spaghetti code". Changing one thing can inadvertently lead to something else changing. Making one thing subject to player control could, potentially, make other things function in a similar manner. So although it should be theoretically possible to flag all "owned" pseudo-pets as being player-controlled for the purpose of despawning, it's possible that that flag would unintentionally transfer to other "unowned" pseudo-pets, or pseudo-pets created for "mission owner". I'm sure one of the HC team would love to find out how this would work, or if it would work at all, if only for geeky interest, so make a note to yourself to ping one of them after the holidays.

You're tanking now? b05c88ad-f2af-4992-9636-bb3f9bf57f8e.mp4

In ~30 years, we've gone from spam which was easily discernable due to the broken English and atrocious grammar... to spam which is easily discernable due to the broken English, atrocious grammar and obvious copypasta detritus. Well, at least they learned how Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V works. Should only take another 30 or 40 centuries to pass the Turing test.

A broad implementation would affect all pseudo-pets, and pseudo-pets are the functionality behind far more powers than people realize. The game is packed with pseudo-pets. Powers. Graphical effects. Ambush lures. Sound sources. They are, quite literally, everywhere. So the implementation would have to be done on a case by case basis to prevent, for example, a Grav/TA typing /petcomall dismiss and suddenly cancelling not just Singularity, but also Oil Slick, Glue, EMP, Disruption, PGA and any pool/*PP powers which he/she has taken, like Enflame, as well as special pseudo-pets, such as Overpowering Presence's Energy Font pseudo-pet, and some of the graphics and audio effects, and various others which happened to be out at the moment. Theoretically, it might also dismiss mission-assigned Hero/Villain pets, NPC hostages and escorts and other things critical to mission completion. So before this could even be started, a precise list of pseudo-pets to be included and excluded would have to be compiled. An inclusionary list will be significantly smaller than an exclusionary list, but the exclusionary list would also be necessary because if the functionality could be limited to the inclusionary list, the likelihood of bugs and unexpectedly dismissable pseudo-pets popping up would be extremely high. A worst case scenario would be something in a mission being despawned and either granting the player a ridiculously easy victory or crashing the client, or causing something just plain weird to happen, like a different pseudo-pet or a contact spawning in its place. Even if it were as simple as assigning a single flag to each pseudo-pet which everyone agreed should be affected, it's still going to be a lot of powers affected. Some of the pseudo-pet powers have multiple versions in existence (one for defenders, one for controllers/corruptors, one for *PPs, one for critters, etc.). There would certainly be a sizeable number missed in the first few passes, as well as the potential for exploitable bugs (imagine being able to neuter Cabal bosses simply by typing /petcomall dismiss and shutting off their Lightning Storms, or the Caltrops dropped by Knives of Artemis, because that pet wasn't on the exclusion list, or the critter was using one of the player versions and for some reason, it responded to the command). I'd expect the "easy" implementation to take at least a few weeks, and the "hard" implementation to take several months, potentially more than a year.

Can I have a "stomp on @Vanden's hat" emote, too?

Please note that I am not the doll. Do not use me to indicate anything.

There's a combat log parser somewhere around here. I've seen references to it, but haven't pursued it. For posterity, mixing single-target powers with AoE/PBAoE powers throws a monkey wrench into the works. The streak breaker prevents misses for single-target powers and for sequential checks in AoE/PBAoE powers (meaning, the next critter in the target list for the power), but it does absolutely nothing to prevent a miss when mixing single-target with AoE (meaning, using a single-target power, followed by an AoE/PBAoE, or vice versa). You can, in fact, miss an infinite number of times by staggering the vectors. I frequently encounter miss streaks of this nature, typically three but sometimes extending to five or six, because I rely heavily on both vectors on all of my characters, and I suspect that's the norm for players, since so few sets are perfectly suited for either. Frequent tabbing between targets can also create the illusion of miss streaks. You'll use a power on target A, immediately Tab to target B and queue a power, miss target A and tab back to that target while the power on target B is animating, queue power on target A again, tab to target C, miss on target A and immediately tab back, et cetera. Because the streak breaker is only countering your misses, not your misses on specific targets, you can continue to miss on target A until your head explodes from the irritation as you hammer on the keyboard and scream, "DIE DIE DIE FUCKING DIE!". The streak breaker is working, but it's applying the break on target B, then target C, and so on. These two flaws in the hit check mechanic are what lead to posts of this nature. You can have +1000% Accuracy and +1000% ToHit and still miss several times in a row when using single-target and AoE/PBAoE consecutively, and you can also miss a specific target several times when you're changing targets with each power. This information dump brought to you by the letter 4, the color & and sponsors like you.

Sorry. Cheeseburgers with everything, for bacon! P.S. People aren't bacon, they're long pork.

There was a comment in another thread about pillars of the community. One of those pillars has fallen.

Those toes. THOSE TOES. *squeesplosion*

I've been moving his dentures around, too. He fusses when he has to totter across the room to get them. It's hilarious.

Food for thought: Back in the day, shortly after ED was implemented, I began leveling a Kin/Elec defender with no ranged attacks beyond the T1. I used pool melee attacks, and at level 41 and onward, Thunderstrike from the Elec APP. And I took Provoke, because I was experimenting with the Presence pool (mez was a constant source of grief when i played this character, and i'd hoped having a PBAoE Fear and a single-target Fear to stack with it, on lieutenants and bosses, would alleviate the problem (it didn't)). On a TF with my SG, I decided that I was going to tank the AV. The tanker Taunted. I Provoked. The tanker Taunted again. I Provoked again. This continued for a couple of minutes, and I repeatedly peeled the AV off of the tanker, until the tanker finally gave up and allowed me to tank the AV. And I damn well held that AV's attention. Even when I was briefly mezzed multiple times, I had so much aggro on that AV that it never turned away. If a defender can do that, with nothing but Provoke and a 1.0 Threat scalar, and absolute shit damage output (defender melee damage scalar is only 0.55. and this one had no Damage enhancements slotted, it was entirely reliant on Siphon Power and Fulcrum Shift), there's no reason a sentinel can't do the same. But we aren't dipping into the Presence pool with our sentinels, and we don't have Gauntlet, we don't even have a PBAoE damage toggle in every primary or secondary. Our aggro is, essentially, only the damage we deal... and even with a higher Threat scalar, our target caps are lower, as @Gobbledegook notes, and our ranges are lower, so we can only hold aggro on two thirds of a max-sized spawn, or as little as a third, even if we're trying. The target caps and the lack of native aggro generation are the critical failures which will prevent sentinels from functioning well as off-tanks, much less primary tanks, in any team consisting of more than 2-3 players. On larger teams, the best we can manage is some of a spawn, and we'd need Provoke to ensure we retained aggro. So if the archetype is expected to tank, it needs higher target caps for aggro (only for aggro), and it needs a native Threat generation solution like Gauntlet. Without those two adjustments, it'll never fill a role in tanking. That's not to say that a sentinel can't tank. As evidenced by my anecdote, any archetype can tank, if the player is determined and the power sets are complementary (Kinetics is especially well-suited for this, since Siphon Power and Fulcrum Shift apply -Damage, and Transfusion is critter-targeted). But very few players are going to take their sentinels as far down that crazy road as I took my defender. It's a lot of damn work. A lot of damn work. And not much fun beyond doing it just to see how far one can bend the rules before they start making that annoying whining sound. I think the better direction is to improve the archetype in other ways. The archetype just isn't well suited to tanking with low target caps and no built-in aggro generation.

Sentinel base Threat is 2.5. https://cod.uberguy.net/html/archetype-data.html?at=sentinel

Hide their walkers. *hides @Bill Z Bubba's walker* NOT GOING ANYWHERE NOW, ARE YA, OLD MAN?! HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

He'll tell you to talk to Doc D at level 20. If you get to him at 19.99, you can go through his entire arc, then on to the others, without flashing back.

I'm a pillar! Oh. No, I'm a pill. Damnit.

I disagree. 🤣

Negative reactions have no impact on reputation totals, and in my experience, they have no impact on other peoples' perceptions of what you post. Most of the people on these forums look at your words, not the pictures under your words, and they don't tend to react positively or negatively simply because someone else did. So ignore the bullshit, keep on keeping on.

Which is why the post began with a suggested +/-Special change to Opportunity, which would improve the contribution of all characters, and raise the potential value of support characters without urging players to alter their style. +Special would emphasize support's contribution by increasing the effectiveness of various buffs, such as Heals, Regeneration and Endurance Modification. -Special would be less of an emphasis specifically on support's debuffs and more of a general "sentinels make teams better all around" improvement by increasing the effectiveness of everyone's secondary effects and support's debuffs/controls. The latter half of the post, which was what you appear to feel would present an issue, was, as noted in the opening word, an alternative. Specifically, it's proposed as an alternative because it's the least work-intensive approach to making the archetype contribute to teams more than it currently does and simultaneously improving the experience of playing one. In other words, if they can't be bothered to do anything else, they could do that with a few keystrokes and call it a day, and we'd have something, however slight, to offer to teams beyond second-rate damage output and occasional off-tanking. +/-Special would be my preferred approach, as it reflects the concept behind sentinel design, and it's both team-friendly and of some value solo. It would create a real, appreciable role for the archetype, and resolve the Opportunity issue. Make everyone on the team better just by being on the team and doing what you do (hit things until they stop moving). Everyone wins, no-one's obviated (or forced to pew-pew when they don't want to).

Proteins, carbohydrates and fats in the appropriate proportions, and some leafy greens for minerals. Cheeseburgers with everything, for everyone!

I told you K-Y wasn't a cleaning solution.