nzer

This is so absurdly hyperbolic. I've personally never spent more than five minutes coming up with a name, and I've made several characters in the last week alone. Regardless, the correct solution to this problem isn't to take away people's names, it's to allow people to have duplicate names. An easy way to do this is to append a random numeric sequence to the name that gets hidden when the name is displayed in the UI, which is a system tons of other games have used for years.

There are not enough GMs to police copyright infringement across a playerbase that has no idea those copyright violations are against TOS. Of course we should be telling new players to not do that.

Do they? It's been four years, and they still haven't turned the name release policy on. I don't even think the position is wrong. I personally can't think of a single MMO I've played over the years that released character names due to inactivity. It's well understood that you might not get the exact name you want.

Something I find notably absent from this thread is acknowledgment that the vast majority of the game's content is extremely easy in pretty much any full team, regardless of composition or coordination. That's partly because the content just isn't that difficult to start with and partly because Homecoming specifically has a good amount of power creep compared to live. So I would ask people to consider the possibility that the person rushing ahead to engage a new group isn't doing so because they're a moron, but rather because they'd like to be able to use more than two abilities before the pack is completely obliterated.

Those are just the basic camera controls, all they let you do is rotate the camera and zoom in/out. I want to be able to move the camera up and down and side to side. Not just rotate the view up and down and side to side, but actually move the camera's anchor point such that it's no longer pointing directly at your character at all times. That God of War screenshot is a good example. You can't orient the camera that way with CoX's camera controls, if you zoomed it in that far the character would completely block your view. The camera in that screenshot has been moved horizontally so that it points past the character rather than at the character.

I look forward to your post, because I can't find anything that does this in the options menu 😐

As far as I can tell all the game supports is changing the camera's orientation and distance. What I want to be able to do is apply a vertical or horizontal offset so the camera can be made to look over the character rather than directly at the character, as is the case in almost all third person games.

For sure. I don't want to ask anyone to relearn how to use anything.

Movement in hover and fly is always totally relative to the camera. W sends you in the direction the camera is pointing, space sends you toward the top of the screen, X sends you toward the bottom of the screen. These controls are not ideal if you're moving the camera around to get a better view of things around you, since in order to move in a particular direction you may need to rotate the camera to an appropriate orientation first. In most games with 3D movement, the movement directions are only relative to the camera yaw, not pitch. All WASD movement would occur only in the X/Z plane and would never move you vertically regardless of camera orientation, and space/X would only ever move you along the Y axis. I think this would be way more intuitive than the current flight controls, and should be offered as an option.

The character being directly in the center of the field of view is visually obstructive. It would be cool if there was an option to adjust the position of the camera. This is mostly an issue in enclosed spaces, and especially with hover/fly.

If you're selling purples you already have everything you need to make as much inf as you want. Sell a purple, spend the inf crafting uncommon set IOs and converting them to rares with converters, and sell the rares. The margins on this are so absurd if you know how to pick the recipes that I often make back the initial investment before I've even listed everything, and even if you have no idea what recipes to pick it's still practically impossible to not make a profit.

I have a 12 button mouse, and I bind hotbar 1 to 1-12, hotbar 2 to shift+1-12, hotbar 3 to alt+1-12, and hotbar 4 to ctrl+1-12. It would be nice to be able to have all of those hotbars in a 3x4 layout to match the layout of the thumbpad on the mouse. Unfortunately, the 3x4 hotbar layout puts the hotbar number in the top left slot, which throws the whole thing off. The Naga tray doesn't suffer from this problem and works perfectly, but I can only have one Naga tray as far as I can tell.

Upvoted as well. Pet names are incredibly annoying and there doesn't appear to be an option to disable them. I'll also mention, pet health bars appear to be controlled by the Villain Health Bars setting, which is similarly annoying.

Necroing because I was searching the forum with the same question, but reading your guide and looking through the options file, there does not appear to be an option for pet names. Pet health bars seem to be linked to ShowVillainBars, but I can't find anything anywhere that touches pet names at all.

I would say the best way to "preview" a powerset is to just start playing with it. Leveling is quick, respecs are a thing, and you have 1000 character slots. It's not a huge deal if you don't end up liking something.

I'm sure OP doesn't need any more recommendations at this point, but I just wanted to jump in and say masterminds really are not that hard to play and don't need any micromanagement, even at high levels. In fact manual control is usually going to be worse than the default defensive follow orders, because of bodyguard mode. As was said before, bots/force field is impossible to screw up and pretty much plays itself even with cheapo enhancements. Thugs/ and demons/ are also good, and you can go /time on any of the three if you want something more active. A lot of the other combos do require more investment to shine though. I also probably wouldn't recommend mastermind for a first time player, just because it's so different than everything else in the game. But it's not a bad choice by any means.

I figured it out, it's the rainbow path aura

I'm coming back to the game after a few years, and I wanted to reuse an aura I had on one of my characters on another character but wasn't sure which one it was. But when I opened the original character to check, I got a message saying the costume had invalid parts. Can someone help me figure out what aura this is?

No, they're not. Even if you accept that a premium power set should be more powerful than a free power set, which you shouldn't, those power sets aren't premium anymore. It's not part of the "integrity of their original design" to be overturned relative to all the non-premium power sets. Quite the contrary, that's an affront to the integrity of their original design.

Having thought about this some more, I think the solution is actually really straightforward: we need something that can multiplicatively modulate an attribute's resistance without also modulating its value. I can see two possible options: Change strength to not affect resistance, and add a second strength modifier that only affects resistance Add flags that can be applied to sources of strength that restrict them to affecting either the attribute's value or the attribute's resistance Either solution would allow the team to handle these problematic interactions directly rather than with kludges like "ignores external buffs." For example, if damage inspirations were flagged to only affect attribute value and not attribute resistance powers with enhanceable resistance wouldn't have to be flagged to ignore external buffs in order to prevent those inspirations from boosting their resistance values. This would allow for abilities that both have enhanceable resistance and are affected by power boost.

Not if the scale factors are set appropriately, as increasing enhanced recharge also increases the effective PPM of the proc. Eliminating the behavior you're referring to is actually the primary goal of the change. I'm not sure what PPM you're using, but there's really not any reasonable way to stop long recharge powers from capping proc chance when PPMs are as high as they are on the high end (meaning >4). You could do it, but it wouldn't really be a PPM system any more. Ideally PPM values would be lowered across the board, and L and E would be set such that fast recharge abilities get enough of a boost to counteract that. The values I used actually aren't too far off what you'd want, as they nearly double effective PPM for very fast recharge abilities and nearly halve it for very long recharge abilities. In the absence of lowering PPMs across the board, you could get the same effect by leaving L at or near 1. That would leave effective PPM nearly the same for fast recharges and heavily nerf it for long recharges. I don't recommend that though, as it makes the listed PPMs misleading.

Since a couple people have mentioned my "solution" I'll explain it in a bit more detail. The gist is to add a couple scale factors to the proc chance formula such that powers below a certain level of recharge proc more often than the listed PPM and powers above that level proc less often than the listed PPM. Here's the current proc chance forumla for a click power: ProcChance = PPM * (ModifiedRechargeTime + CastTime) / (60 * AreaMod) And here's the modified formula: ProcChance = PPM * (L * ModifiedRechargeTimeE + CastTime) / (60 * AreaMod) ModifiedRechargeTime is the power's recharge time after enhancements and alpha, but before global recharge, and the additions are obviously L and E, where L is a constant value greater than 1 and E is a constant value less than 1. What the values are set to controls at what recharge time the actual PPM is equal to the listed PPM and how strong the deviation is above and below that recharge time. Here's a graph to illustrate. In this example L is 2.51, E is 0.6, CastTime is 1 second, and PPM is 2 procs per minute. The green line is the current formula, the red line is the modified formula. As you can see, the modified formula boosts proc chance below a 10 second recharge time and lowers proc chance above a 10 second recharge time. The current formula hits the maximum proc chance around 26 seconds for this PPM, but the modified formula doesn't hit it until after 47. Here's a graph with all the same values except PPM, which is at 3.5: The primary thing to see here is that the curves still intersect at a 10 second recharge; this is the point at which the actual PPM and the listed PPM are equal. This consistent intersect makes the formula both easy to tune relative to the current formula and easy to explain to less mathy players; abilities with a ten second recharge get the listed PPM, abilities with a shorter recharge get more than the listed PPM, abilities with a longer recharge get less than the listed PPM. Here's a link to an interactive version of the formula so people can fiddle with the values. I'm not suggesting the above values for L and E, or even these specific modifications to the formula, are what we would actually want to go forward with; this is just a proof of concept to demonstrate that if the goal is to lessen the effectiveness of procs on abilities with long recharges and increase their effectiveness on abilities with short recharges we probably don't need to do anything more involved than modifying the proc chance formula. I don't think there's a need for a fundamental redesign of the proc system like other posters have suggested.

All I'm saying is that I don't find "I don't see it much" particularly compelling when the available data clearly demonstrates that it's tremendously popular.

Would you notice if someone was using it? It's not a particularly flashy set.

It's the most popular Scrapper set at level 50 by a huge margin...