Luminara

Why didn't anyone tell me about this before I turned into a recluse living in the woods? I could've been playing moms instead! Bunch of jerks. I HATE ALL OF YOU.

FSAA is full screen anti-aliasing. Because pixels are square or rectangular, whenever a line isn't perfectly vertical or horizontal, the individual pixels used to draw the lines create little saw blade edges, FSAA renders each frame at 2x, 4x, 8x or 16x the resolution, then scales it back down so the jaggies become less noticeable, or disappear entirely (settings above 4x). How visible the jaggies are depends partially on display size and resolution. The higher the resolution, the finer the pixels and the less noticeable the jaggies... but extremely large monitors counter that. On my laptop with a 15" display, running at 1920x1080, jaggies aren't so distinct that they catch my eye, so I can use 2x FSAA. If I had a 50" external display, they'd be very distinct and I'd want to use 4x or 8x, maybe even 16x, or run the 50" display at a much higher resolution. FSAA isn't related to anisotropic filtering. Anisotropic filtering improves texture rendering when viewed at a sharp angle, to make textures sharper and clearer . If you disable anisotropic filtering, you'll see a band of blurriness on the ground a short distance away from your character. With each level of anisotropic filtering applied, that band of blurriness is pushed farther away, and with enough anisotropic filtering, it's too far away to differentiate the blurriness from normal gradience (level of detail).

Bug Hunter is generally awarded for finding exploits or game-stoppers, and showing the steps to reproduce the problem. And the reason it's less likely to be given to people who ask for it is to avoid accusations of favoritism or prejudice. They'd either spend every waking moment trying to explain why Player A got the badge but Player B didn't, or they'd be forced to hand it out for the most trivial things to prevent infighting and hostility.

I'm definitely going to have some "hold my beer" moments in there.

Turn off SG mode.

I thought this was going to be about a clown named Stitches who felt that the only people who understood his humor were snitches.

That name sounds familiar. Was he the horribly misused and blandly written Maxwell Lord in Wonder Woman 1984? *does the Goog* He was. Eeeeeeeehhhhhhhhhhh...

What just happened? Did someone... not explode in an argumentative temper tantrum when he/she wasn't patted on the head and told what a brilliant suggestion it was? I... I... *faints*

So... this isn't about eating babies? Goddamn it.

It's always a good day when I can do something I like, and I really like logistics. I have a natural aptitude for it. That's all an attack chain is, a logistical problem to be solved. Animation and recharge times are supply, key presses are demand, the chain is delivery.

Neither of them have filler missions, and they're both available as Flashbacks, so you could've continued.

I like her.

The question proposed in the original post was how to understand the process behind creating a seamless attack chain. @EnjoyTheJourney didn't ask which sets were easier to make attack chains with, or for advice on selecting sets for face-rolling without bothering to make attack chains, he/she very specifically asked to be educated on the process of making attack chains. After the question was answered, you interjected the following: I politely invited you to expand on the assertion that there was something wrong with the answer. If my information or methodology was inaccurate, it should be corrected so that misinformation doesn't spread. Inquiry, not defense. Are you, perhaps, trying to say that certain sets are "better" than others for attack chain optimization due to generally lower animation times? Because if so, that would be misinformation in need of correction. Attack chain optimization is independent of sets. Whether or not an attack chain can be made seamless relies only on two mechanics, animation times and recharge times. The choice of primary or secondary is purely preferential, not a mandatory element of seamless chains. If you scroll up and review my first post in this thread, you'll note that I have a character with an attack chain which uses one pool attack (Cross Punch) and two APP attacks (Fissure and Seismic Smash). The attack chain mentioned, Cross Punch/Fissure/Cross Punch/Seismic Smash, is perfectly fluid, despite none of those attacks coming from the primary or secondary. So, clearly, neither primary nor secondary sets have anything to do with whether or not an attack chain is seamless. Furthermore, sets with almost all fast animations actually make it harder to create seamless attack chains, as those short animations create more potential for gaps in the chain. What that means is unless the set also has almost all attacks with very short recharge times, the attacks with longer recharge times force the player to either develop a lower DPA attack chain, or an attack chain which uses some attacks non-sequentially (randomly tossing in an attack with a short recharge time to fill the gap), or requires attacks from outside the set (pools, *PPs, temp powers) to achieve viability. Using one or two attacks with comparatively slow animations is mathematically better for making an attack chain perfectly fluid than trying to hammer together a lot of rapidly animating attacks, and can often be the factor fixes an attack chain which would otherwise be interrupted by a recharge time gap. /Martial Assault provides a perfect example of this problem. It isn't possible to create an attack chain with fewer than 5 of the attacks, and even with 5, it's a stretch, requiring non-sequential attack use and more than 175% global +Recharge in addition to slotting every attack with maximal Recharge Reduction and using the Spiritual or Agility Alphas... or throwing away the highest DPA attack, Masterful Throw. So, clearly, a set with a lot of fast animations is not better suited for building a seamless attack chain. Fluidity is reliant on either incorporating enough animation time to allow attacks to recharge when or before they're required, and the brute force "THROW MOAR RECHARGE AT IT" approach is not only inelegant, but fails as often as it works.

Did you have some insight into the mathematics and methodology of creating perfect attack chains that you wished to share? Were my calculations erroneous? Was my approach unworkable? Please, enlighten us. Which addresses the question of designing and implementing a fluid attack chain... how?

It will be filmed on location, just like the originals. We'll spare no expense.

We're all our own worst enemies. Not to be confused with wurst enemas. Though some people are that.

The AH sorts enhancements from level 1 (top) to level 50 (bottom). It sorts recipes from level 50 (top) to level 1 (bottom). That's an entry barrier to the player market. Pick a sort order and apply it universally.

Heads of state are assassinated. Religious leaders are assassinated. Powerful figures in organizations are assassinated. I'm a nobody, and nobody wastes a bullet on a nobody.

Buffs and heals never reduce other player characters' XP and won't pull aggro off of the target. As long as she doesn't deal damage, she's not depriving other players of XP with debuffs/controls, either. Deceive will actually increase the potential amount of XP the stranger can gain, but it's probably better not to use it since Confuses aren't well understood by most players. This, though, you might want to curb, at least until you're certain she's cognizant of the con system. There are some missions which spawn open world ambushes, and those could be deep purple to her. Being pancaked by a level 50 ambush squad in three seconds is a learning experience, but as Cryptic and Paragon discovered, not one that most people enjoy.

So... that would be a no to the request that you be less combative and provide test results instead of armchair patch note analysis?

Who is a defender, not a mastermind.

I believe that this development team should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a character on the Moon and returning it safely to the Earth. No single content project in this period will be more impressive to players, or more important for the long-range exploration of the game, and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish. But why, some say, the Moon? Why choose this as our goal? And they may well ask, why climb the highest mountain? Why, 20 years ago, fly over Steel Canyon? Why does Lumi play Savage Assault? We choose to go to the Moon. We choose to go to the Moon... *pause for applause* We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one we intend to win, and the others, too.

If it moved, it'd have to be changed so using the power again would replace the existing one, instead of the current summoning of another. We'd only be able to have one out at a time, instead of two or three. Going to have to pull out the nope on that. Nope.