macskull

Sprint and CJ is enough to get the gold medal on both slopes. A running start can help but isn’t necessary.

I'm kind of in the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" camp. If one of the devs gets a sudden burst of motivation and decides this is a thing they want to devote time to, I won't complain, but I also think it's a good chunk of work for no real gain. The game's not really bringing in new players and if we're really wanting to focus on improving things for the ones we do get there are far more obtrusive things to focus on.

So, on this topic specifically - prices on the D-Sync Provocations have come way down for a few reasons: They were originally only dropping from the ASF if the player elected the D-Sync roll instead of merits, and at the time all possible D-Syncs had equal weighting in the drop table I27P7 changed the ASF drop tables so the 9 "new" enhancements have a 2:1 weighting in the drop table, so a player is almost twice as likely to get one of the new ones (almost all of these are worth a decent chunk of inf, even if they're not all as high as the Provocation) I27P7 also added the HM LGTF which gives the player the option for a synthetic Hami-O roll with the same 2:1 weighting for "new" enhancements as the ASF I28P3 added the ZTF which gives the player the option for a D-Sync roll. I'm not sure whether this one has even weighting or 2:1 weighting for stuff but it's still another source of supply Basically, multiple new ways to earn them and a higher chance of them dropping from the content that potentially gives them as a reward. For the math: There are 20 total D-Sync/Hami-O/synthetic Hami-O enhancement combinations 9 of them were added originally as D-Syncs with the ASF These 9 having double weighting in the drop tables means you have a ~62% chance of getting one of the "new" enhancements as a reward from the above-mentioned content (math here is that 9 of them have double weighting while 11 do not so you have a total of 9*2 + 11 = 29 possible rolls, 18/29 = 62%) The chance you'll get any particular one of the "new" enhancements is around 7% (math here is that double weighting on the drop tables gives a 2/29 = 6.9% chance). Your guess is about half of what the actual rate is, but is pretty spot on for the old enhancement combinations. You, like me, are probably just a victim of colossally bad luck - I've run countless ASFs and HM LGTFs and have only ever had one acc/threat/rech drop.

Only incarnate content (i.e., content where you also get the level shifts from Lore and Destiny) has enemies that will spawn at +6 and +7. This does not include the new TF, as that is not incarnate content. The entire reason any of the new difficulty settings exist is to allow level 50+ players to return to actual +4 difficulty: The Alpha level shift is active all the time, so even at +4 difficulty you were only ever getting +3 enemies The Lore and Destiny level shifts are active during incarnate content in addition to the Alpha level shift, so even at +4 difficulty you were only ever getting +1 enemies (aside from level-shifted enemies but those are a different matter) As I said earlier, the only reason there are now higher difficulty settings is to allow players to fight actual +4 enemies again after the introduction of level shifts. Historically, the highest difficulty setting meant players were fighting enemies 4 levels above them, and that's what the new settings achieve. The new settings weren't at all meant to widen the range of enemies you can fight.

Believe me, the person you're replying to is one of the last ones who'd be complaining about that. I was very clear in my earlier responses that I'm more than willing to not take a statement like "all the time" at face value and understand there's implied hyperbole there, just like when people say "nobody does xyz" or "everyone does xyz." Even giving some leeway for said hyperbole, I'd be a lot more willing to buy the statement "stuff is fixed in Tuesday maintenance patches all the time" if it were even approximately true. As it stands, something like 85% of "maintenance Tuesdays" in 2025 have had no patch at all. If someone had said "stuff is sometimes fixed in Tuesday maintenance patches" or "on rare occasions stuff is fixed in Tuesday maintenance patches" I wouldn't be wasting my time talking in circles right now. I mean... sure, you could argue that of the seven patches this year all of them have been on Tuesdays and therefore 100% of Tuesday maintenance patches have bug fixes, but that's an absurd position to take.

If you're going to try and use a dictionary to justify your interpretation of a word or phrase it would help if you used the actual definition of that word or phrase, which from that same dictionary is: : at all times : constantly Even using your example from that dictionary (which, for those watching at home, comes from a section of that page which comes with the disclaimers "Examples are automatically complied from online sources" and "Opinions expressed in the examples do not represent those of Merriam-Webster"), it's clear the author meant the same thing as the actual dictionary definition and not whatever intellectually dishonest interpretation you're deciding on to suit your argument. I'll bite, though. You interpret it to mean "happens with some degree of consistency." What exactly is "some degree of consistency?" If it happened zero times out of 47, that's definitely consistent, so by extension does that also mean none of the time is actually "all the time?" What about one time? Five? Ten?

If bugs (or whatever you’re defining “small things” to mean) were getting fixed as part of Tuesday maintenance there would be patch notes for them. The last example of that happening is almost five months ago. Have there been some under-the-hood changes that didn’t affect gameplay and thus didn’t get patch notes? Yep, but that’s not what we’re talking about. Re: “all the time” (since you made the edit) - there have been 47 Tuesdays so far in 2025 to go along with 7 patches. That’s less than 15% of the time, assuming all those patches were even on a Tuesday. Even if you acknowledge “all the time” to be hyperbolic, no reasonable person would be able to interpret 15% as anything more than “rarely” or “occasionally.” If you exclude the two Page updates which were launched on Tuesdays that number is more like 10%. It’s even a little embarrassing once you add some context: the Therm rez bug was fixed during beta but the branch that had the fix got rolled back until the mid-page update - in other words, they had a fix in and made the intentional decision to push it back a few months.

Conveniently skipped over the second part of my post, I see. Also not sure how pointing out examples of long-standing bugs that render key powers literally unusable is “heavily biased” either, especially considering I have zero characters affected by either of those bugs.

Like the Defender Therm rez that’s been literally unusable since the last major update? Or Mastermind Possess that’s been broken for a year and a half now? I’m also curious about your definition of “all the time,” since there have been a grand total of seven patches with patch notes in 2025, two of which were major updates.

In defense of the OP, the open beta for this one was definitely a rush job and it's not the first time that's happened. There's stuff missing from the patch notes and there are bugs that were present - and brought up repeatedly - the entire closed beta period that still made it through open beta and onto live. OP: Please do apply for closed beta access if you haven't already done that. Closed beta sorely needs more people that aren't just rubber stamping whatever gets put up there to test.

Yep, level shifts are only there for purposes of combat mechanics like purple patch, and don't affect your (or enemies') modifiers. An example: a level 54+10 AV would have the same hit points as a level 54+0 AV, and would have the same 87% debuff resistance as a level 54+0 AV. However, it would hit like something ten levels higher than it actually is. Level shifted enemies are kind of an advantage for players because they don't get the same stat boosts as enemies of that actual level would have. To put it another way, a level 54 enemy is going to be more challenging than a level 50+4 enemy.

What's the statute of limitations on that? The changes to +3/+4 XP modifiers from I27P7 never made it into the patch notes either and last time I asked the reply was "it's been too long for us to go back and add them."

Hi everyone! If you're like me and think moving the difficulty settings out of the chat bubble after more than half a decade of muscle memory was silly, this mod will fix that! It's the exact same menu you've been using since 2019, but now it has the extra +5/+6/+7 difficulties. Note one key difference between this menu and the now-standard menu in the "Mission" window is that this popmenu does not have badge checks so you'll always be able to bump your difficulty as high as the game will allow. If you don't want to do that, just... don't select those difficulties. Anyways, if you're already using CoH Modder this will show up in the list as "Classic QuickChat Menu." Otherwise the link is here. If you want to do this the old-fashioned way you can just install the attached .mnu file into <COH_INSTALL_DIRECTORY>\data\texts\<LANGUAGE>\Menus\ Happy hunting! quickchat.mnu

The way modifiers are affected by level differences means the critters themselves won’t really provide any meaningful additional challenge. The biggest problem to “solve” when fighting up-leveled enemies is ensuring you have enough acc/tohit to reliably land attacks because you’ll need to land a lot more of them to defeat a target. Like you can see in the below image, the modifiers for higher-level critters attacking you don’t go up all that much as their level goes up, but your stats for attacking them drop like a rock.

If you’re at the defense softcap (45% for non incarnate content) a +5 boss will have a 9.75% chance to hit you, while a +4 boss will have a 9.1% chance. That’s only about a 7% difference. On the other hand, if you have, I dunno, 200% defense, those hit chances will be… exactly the same because rank and level differences are handled as accuracy bonuses which aren’t countered by defense. TL;DR: Yes, you’ll be hit more often by +5 critters than by +4 critters, but not much more often. This does not require you to build for any more defense than you already do if you’re already at the softcap because of how this game’s attack mechanics work.

Then they’re still able to use the menu just fine, because the menu comes out of the right side of the button and the submenus expand properly. Sorry, telling people they need to redo their UI on every single character because a single dev decided to move a menu that didn’t need to be moved is a shit solution to a problem that used to simply not exist.

The seeded price of all tiers of salvage is, and always has been, well above the going rate for that salvage. If you’re buying salvage off the AH you’re almost certainly buying it from another player unless you’re bidding an exorbitant amount.

This is categorically false, the amount of defense you need to minimize critter hit chance at +5 is exactly the same as the amount of defense you need to minimize critter hit chance at +4 (and +3, and +2, and +1, and +0). Against most enemies a player or a team that is easily able to handle the current +4 difficulty will probably also be able to easily handle the new +5 difficulty. Players or teams that are having a marginal time getting through it are going to find it more difficult. Other testers’ experience during closed beta bore this out.

I brought this up when the change happened, was told “I guess we could move it to the left side of that window,” and then nothing ever came of it. Still don’t know why someone felt the need to undo six and a half years of muscle memory and move the difficulty settings menu to a completely different part of the UI.

It does not - the command has no function outside of that specific use.

This command sends messages to the chat of the arena UI while in the waiting room for an event before the event starts, not while the event is active.

The empowerment station perception buff (and the rest of the empowerment station buffs) does not work in PvP, so you'll need inspirations or teammates to reach your perception cap unless you have another source of perception like Targeting Drone). A perception-capped non-VEAT/Sentinel can see a stealth-capped Stalker from 10 feet and a stealth-capped VEAT from from about 300 feet. VEATs and Sentinels have higher perception caps which allows them to act as kind of an anti-Stalker since they can see a stealth-capped Stalker from around 120 feet. That seems like a lot, but when both characters are moving at high speed a Stalker will be in and out of that distance really quick. Again, it's not really that much of a concern because a solo Stalker presents very little threat to someone who's paying attention to their surroundings. If you are getting repeatedly killed by a solo Stalker you're either spending too much time in one spot or being too predictable with your movement, or the Stalker is fairly talented, which is a rare thing these days.

The only time this has ever been remotely true was right after Issue 13 when Spirit Shark incorrectly did insane damage. Outside of that one specific instance Stalkers have never really been a threat in PvP to anyone capable of using the WASD and space keys. The most common ATs in PvP are the ones that have the lowest stealth caps anyways.

Jesus christ this thread is an absolute dumpster fire.

Because if they were you'd either have critters aggroing on non-stealthed characters from halfway across the map, or you'd be completely unable to find enemy players in a PvP environment.