thunderforce
-
Posts
459 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Articles
Patch Notes
Posts posted by thunderforce
-
-
There's a fair bit of its/it's confusion in First Ward.
Also, Blind Makwa:
Midnight siezed the Midnight Mansion and all the artifacts and sorcery the Midnighters had accumulated over the decades. That sorcery includes The Book of Binding and The Dust of Chains, and I need your help to get it.
"siezed" is definitely wrong. It also seems at least odd that this doesn't say "Those artifacts include ...".
-
5 hours ago, Tahliah said:
This thread is crazy town. If devs say the suggested/suspected level 99 recipe choke can't happen, it can't happen. The end.
I wouldn't go that far! I, and I'm sure many of us, have sat at the keyboard contemplating the following:
- such-and-such can't happen, I am absolutely sure of it
- nevertheless, such-and-such has happened.
I think we're mostly missing #2 here.
-
On 5/6/2021 at 7:03 PM, Faultline said:
I know the next question: "but veteran levels give you rewards". Well, strictly speaking, no, they don't. Those rewards are handled by badges. Every 8 seconds, every badge in the game checks its own requirements to see if it should award itself. The Veteran badges just have a requirement that the overleveled stat be >= their given number in order to award. Badges can then trigger a reward table to grant you other stuff, which is how you get the Empyreans in veteran badges, but also respecs and costume changes in level up badges and a bunch of others. The veteran badges stopping at 99 is irrelevant, it just means that there's no badge that checks if the overleveled badgestat is higher than that.
I am absolutely not saying this has happened, or is likely, but surely it is theoretically possible that something on the rewards side looks at what badges you have got and happens to do something inappropriate if you have the level 99 vet badge?
(Again, I am absolutely not saying this happened. I expect the answer, if Faultline indulges my curiousity, is that the reward side doesn't look at what badges you have got at all, or in very limited ways).
-
I think the most obvious way to make this work would be if, combining two patterns, if either the primary colour trumped the secondary, or vice versa.
-
59 minutes ago, qaz1qaz1qa said:
Is that appropriate to advertise another server? Seems very uncool
Victory's quite friendly with Homecoming (you'll notice the Wiki is run off Victory's systems, and Victory runs the same version of the game).
-
Coordinates
in Forum
Thanks.
-
Coordinates
in Forum
I've just seen Faultline on Discord complaining we can't quite decide if coordinates are x,y,z (as in the Coordinates page) or x,z,y (as in one Demo Editing page and the Location Header template). The two points of view seem to be that a triplet of coordinates should always be x,y,z (which I agree with, and from what Faultline is saying, seems to be the internal representation) versus an idea that the Z axis is always vertical.
I've changed this since I hope a decade-old convention amongst demo editors might now be dead... but this is a pretty drastic move and if anyone hates it, say so. But we should surely be consistent in any event.
-
-
9 hours ago, despyzer said:
I play a lot of toons who buff other characters. Even with the color-coding, it can be difficult to quickly discern if everyone got the buffs I wanted them to or when those buffs begin to drop off. Is there a way to turn off all other buffs, so that I can just see mine? If not, any suggestions on making my buffs easier to pick out of the crowd?
I remember a discussion about this a while ago with at least some HC developer participation. As I recall, that's not practical, but something that might be practical is to have buffs that you _can_ apply sorted to one end of the list, so (for example) if you're an FF defender you'd see anyone's Deflection Shield at the left-hand end whether you or another FF defender applied it to the target.
Another way the ordering could be more useful is if they could be sorted by how they are applied - by which I mean, imagine that single-target ally buffs always appear on the left, shorter duration ones first (so Clear Mind (90s) appears before Fortitude (120s)), then AoE buffs like Deflection Shield, then Leadership auras...
It doesn't matter so much what the ordering _is_ (although I think "ally buffs that run out" should be right at one end of the list) as long as it's constant. I don't care if Deflection Shield sorts before or after Sonic Barrier, but what I do want is that any time an ally has both, they appear the same way around.
This might be a relatively modest amount of work. It doesn't need every buff classified, it works off the buffs' existing properties; the "tie-breaker" for identical type and duration (like the 4-minute FF and Sonic shields) could be anything (eg alphabetical order) just as long as it's consistent.
-
13 hours ago, golstat2003 said:
I'm not seeing this as a major issue since most respecs don't fail. I don't think I've ever had one fail in all my time (including 5+ years on live) in COH.
"Most respecs don't fail" is... kind of what I've been saying all along; it seems to explain the observed facts (go away and change something and, hey presto, it works).
But also "GMs shouldn't tell players things which are known not to be true" is not a major request. When I started, I would not have expected that anyone would disagree with it.
-
17 hours ago, Ukase said:
I think dev time is better spent on other things than fixing something that seems to have an easy solution. Train up before doing a respec. Perhaps it should be written into several different places so more people are aware of this prior to doing a respec. Like a pop-up window that says "Be sure you're leveled up before you're trained".
I don't think I've asked that the devs do _anything_ (although now I think about it, it does seem like a bit of logging would very rapidly shed light on what the causes are, if it's anything but bad luck).
Your proposal is obviously bad since it will only increase the confusion for VEATs.
17 hours ago, golstat2003 said:I'd prefer if the GM team tells players to try things they know may then make sure the next attempt at a respec doesn't fail.
"Try these steps and see if they work" sounds reasonable enough.
But that's not the same thing as telling players something which is known not to be true, is it?
If the current guesswork is wrong, telling people to train is useless but harmless (other than confusing VEATs). But doing that doesn't have to involve saying it "always fails".
-
3 hours ago, tidge said:
I can see that this topic has become somebody's white whale.
Guilty as charged, but honestly when I swore I'd take that whale in tow, I anticipated a considerably shorter conversation along the lines of "it doesn't always fail, it probably doesn't often fail" "oh, we'd better not tell people it always fails".
-
1 hour ago, Mr. Vee said:
So not having been trained up isn't a necessary condition for failed respecs. Nor is it always a sufficient condition as you rightly have pointed out. Sure it'd be great if there were a necessary and sufficient condition for respec failure that could be found and fixed. But given the range and general wonkiness of the things known to sometimes affect it, coupled with the far-famed spaghetti code, it might be too much work to expect from a volunteer crew to go diving for what may turn out not to exist, especially since they already have a list of things to suggest to fix the problem when it arises.
That seems a bit besides what I'm saying right now, which is that ideally that volunteer crew wouldn't tell players things that are definitely not true. (And not harmless; of course, it's pretty confusing for the VEAT player...)
-
24 minutes ago, Mr. Vee said:
What do you mean you can't point it out? You pointed it out in the OP. No one's had any quibbles with that point, including the GMs who responded.
I mean that yesterday a GM said on Discord that it quote always unquote fails, I pointed out that wasn't true, and my remarks were removed from Discord while the untrue statement from a GM was left. Furthermore, said GM absolutely did "quibble" with that point.
QuoteFor some reason if you try in a base (occasionally) or while you have levels outstanding (always) the server throws a wobbly that resolves itself when you go away and come back
This ("always") just isn't true. Ideally, "GMs shouldn't say things that are known to be untrue" shouldn't be controversial. I've not quoted the quibble since I'm kind of torn between this apparently being a forbidden topic and the sheer absurdity of the situation.
-
We've now reached the state where a GM can say on Discord it "always" fails with untrained levels, even though that is absolutely unequivocally known not to be true, and I can't point out that it isn't true. I despair.
-
5 hours ago, Cinnder said:
Then again...those Carnies are still probably fighting the Arachnoids in that lair. But if someone were to go in there and finish them off...well, that would be less Carnies around to keep their leader, Vanessa DeVore, powered.'
Not a typo; the briefing NPC simply doesn't know or care about the distinction, as many people do not.
-
22 hours ago, Shred Monkey said:
Yeah... i've probably done 50 respecs in my base in the last 2-3 months. I have never had a fail. I didn't even know failing respecs was a thing. My base is very small, if that matters.
Well, again, most respecs work. Does a large and busy base matter, or is it just that if a player is in a base and has a respec fail, they are more likely to be in a large and busy one because more players are in busy bases than empty ones?
We don't know.
22 hours ago, Shred Monkey said:The untrained levels thing catches my attention. I know I always train before respec'ing because if I don't, I may not be able to put the slots in the place I want. For example, if I'm going to 6-slot the power I just took.
I had to think about this, but I see what you mean. No bad habit to be in if you like slotting patterns that would have been impossible on live.
22 hours ago, Shred Monkey said:I wonder if there's something goofy about trying to respec before/after leveling without zoning first (because you know how zoning fixes stuff).
I mean, that doesn't seem implausible. (We could just as well be in the situation where everyone tells people to zone on a respec failure because we "know" that works, and I'm asking if _that_ is pure coincidence). If anything it seems more plausible, since zoning does fix a lot of things and Soldiers of Arachnos aren't all forced to respec without zoning at level 24.
-
On 3/21/2021 at 8:22 AM, Ignatz the Insane said:
What if the problem is untrained levels combined with a specific IO slotted? Or some other obscure combination? We know there are occasional respec failures, and we know that the three solutions are 99% effective in solving the problem.
We don't know that at all, both because "99%" is a number pulled out of nowhere and because, as detailed upthread, everything we see is consistent with the idea that respecs almost always work and so stopping whatever you were doing the first time will seem to be effective.
On 3/21/2021 at 8:22 AM, Ignatz the Insane said:The one example in this thread with a confirmed failed respec involved untrained levels.
Again, as detailed upthread, it's no surprise that when respecs fail, we tend to find things which you'd expect to be true anyway - being in a busy area is the obvious example. Most players are in busy areas; that what makes them busy areas.
18 hours ago, Call Me Awesome said:While I have no clue what may cause respec failure I've done them in Atlas City Hall, an abandoned corner of a zone and, most often, in my SG base. Offhand I only recall one failure ever, and simply doing it again the same way worked.
I just put it down to random connectivity glitches.
That seems as likely a scenario as any.
-
Well, it's been a while, but today I tried "in a busy area" - ie, Excelsior, next to Ms Liberty, in the evening on Saturday. Four respecs in a row all succeeded. Hence, I suspect "busy area" is as much of a red herring as "untrained levels".
-
1
-
-
I have little to add to this, besides that Discord user Grey Rellik identified the bug; I am just reporting it.
-
28 minutes ago, SuperPlyx said:
@thunderforce I have never done it, is there a tutorial ?
The bottom right of the front page has a link to the available help, but also - assuming someone is basically coherent and well-intentioned, almost anything they might write in that page would be better than nothing.
-
49 minutes ago, SuperPlyx said:
The page for info on the temp power from P2W, Signature Summons page is blank.
Indeed. Why not register an account and create it?
I'm not being snarky here. The Wiki is edited by a handful of people, a few of whom are very dedicated and the rest of whom (like me) look in now and then. There is more to do than that number of people can _possibly_ do. At least one Wiki admin (me) reviews all edits by new users; if you make a mess, it'll be cleaned up. A brief stub would be better than nothing.
-
1 hour ago, firelightx said:
So I don't know if I'd go calling Mighty Leap 'better' per se.
Better overall? I dunno. But it's arguably better at travelling around by jumping - certainly no worse - which is unfortunate if Super Jump is meant to be better at "the core thing it does". Conversely both Fly and Super Speed offer clear improvements on their Origin Pool equivalents now for that core purpose.
This would be very easily fixed by making Mighty Leap's speed cap slightly lower, with Takeoff putting it even with Super Jump.
-
It's unfortunate, I think, that Super Jump isn't really better than Mighty Leap now, in spite of the stated aim that classic travel powers should "be better at the core thing they do (running, flying, jumping)". If anything, I think Mighty Leap has come out better, since jumping still faster and further seems more generally useful than slightly fiddly vertical mobility, the latter being available in a number of ways from the P2W Vendor.
Report Typos Here!
in Bug Reports
Posted
I do think it's a pity that Homecoming isn't in a position to just get one or two of us pedantic gits to go through fixing these. In particular, there's a huge amount of low-hanging fruit which can be found very quickly just by grepping the strings in the game for common typos.