SwitchFade

Faultline is a perfect example of how to refresh a hazard zone. Faultline is 15-25. Perez refresh similar, range 1-10 Boomtown refresh similar, range 10-20 Creys refresh, range 30-40 Eden refresh, 40-incarnate.

Sure. Here... Any/any Pin away 🤪

Super reflexes Broadsword (not a device, a tool) Battle-axe (not a device, a tooll Katana (not a device, a tooll Martial arts Acrobatics Combat jumping Gymnastics To name a few 🤪🤪

Yeah... Warriors are boring... Right up to the point that a warrior boss lands a hit... Lights out. They are powerful. Try fighting 2 warrior LTs in the 20s on a squishy in Talos, they hit HARD. I'm all for making them look cooler, but I like how they are now, set and power wise.

Gone to the americans! BBQsauce

Because... Fun.

On the bowl of porridge? You want it just right, eh? How about the bed? 🤪

Penelope Yin's set. Has this been mentioned?

Sorry, no vote. Scraps are fine in my view, as is.

Devil's advocate: not true, I'm here for the fun.

To be fair, your OP had pretty substantial observational bias, which prompted an ask for actual sample set, yet to be disclosed. I look forward to your data, I would love to find out that buried in the code the OG devs made a math/typo and we've all been to-hitting bugs 😀 Also, your simple postulation that you should only miss 1 out of 20 is a bit of an oversimplification, it's more like 1.7 out of 20. On the average. Because statistics, 'n stuff 🤪

Tohit isn't a corner of the game, it's universal. Please let us know when you have your sample and are ready to post it and your analysis. Be sure to include potential error factors, and your method of calculation. If you choose to convert to z score, please also include the unconverted data. Until then, tohit is functioning as normally as =RAND will allow, being that a computer can't actually choose a random number, it's fake.

Depends. Factors affecting results are, Survivability Recharge Primary set in question Damage type Level range Stalkers, on average, would most likely have slightly higher DPS at the high recharge end of the spectrum, sliding to equal as recharge lowers. Stalkers will see a wider swing in dps output alo g a curve, where scrappers would be a smoother, sustained output. Survivability will play a key factor, certain secondaries on stalkers may not allow facetanking for long periods; insps run out, buffs drop, etc Level will be a large factor, as a stalker at 35 and 50+ are different, whereas a scrap is a smoother evolutionary power curve. If we were to average everything? Stalkers favored for ST by a small margin, scraps favored for AoE by a small margin. If we drill down, certain combinations will be outliers.

Which validates that a sample set of that size is valid. Additionally, I included instructions on how to eliminate error and bias. Please post your results here 😄

+2s happen occasionally, also depends on content.

Hi. Sorry, this data is inconclusive; what arc, what zone what mission? Some of the zones have content that is harder, some legacy content is easier. 0/0 is the same as 0/1, the /1 means spawn size, as I am sure you know (mentioning it for other readers). All missions spawn MOBs 0-1 level higher than your diff setting, for example at the mentioned lvl 6, and at 0/ missions would spawn 6-7 with a rare 8. If you were in kings row, that content is harder. Hollows would be fairly even and atlas park would be the old easy legacy content. It's always been the norm that at 0 level shift, MOBs will spawn even to +1 con, with occasional +2.

500-1000 is actually a large enough dataset to be statistically valid. Go to AE, make sure you have 95% and no buffs or debuffs are present and auto-queue a ST attack. Let it run for 1,000 attacks. Plot.

1. Perform said actions 500-1,000 times 2. Log data into excel 3. Perform analysis 4. Post results here My assumption is, it's fine. Be sure to account for debuffs, streak breaker and buffs.

I don my cape and fight crime as... Econodrowser! Battling the scurrilous ne'er-do-wells spreading economic mischief, by spewing nonsensical word-vomit, inducing a mind-addled drowsy-state! System architecture thingies 'n stuffs is my mild mannered secret identity, Trent McBoringson Hey... There's your new power set, word vomit 🤮!

The animation for fly is baked into the power. The flyposes are emotes. On live it was basically ruled out as making them alt animations. If nothing has changed, unfortunately, they would not be able to be made animations.

@Piecemeal, your product is admirable, in my estimation you did a phenomenal job. Much of what I do is system analysis and design from a business and user perspective, bridging the gap between user and programmer, basically an architect of system logic. Much of this has to do with vast system design that touches every aspect of a business, from supply chain origins to end user, on the way touching every aspect of ERP from sales, finance, engineering, marketing and production. Building even a small comprehensive system from both programmer and user perspective that is FUNCTIONAL is a feat in and of itself. Bug free and perfect is never possible on a live 1.0 release/launch. Being that you analyzed, programmed and diagnosed from all three roles in majority is commendable. Be proud! And if anyone tells you it's too hard, tell them to go play OG nintendo games. Further, if their critique is decidedly negative... Well, that's a reflection of them, not your work.

It's your job to convince people to change, not our job to convince ourselves. Your audience likes the system, so don't berate them for liking it. "This isn't a problem" is 100% valid, we're good to go, YOU'RE the one who wants a change, work harder to convince us, because right now, your case is unconvincing.

Again, your claim and supporting data are unconvincing. System is good as is, I don't need to make a case why, bec8ause I'm not the one arguing for change. I went out of my way to provide evidence disproving the THEORY that SKing is systemically not working. It is conclusively working well. Using argumentative fallacies such as straw men, unsubstantiated data, personal attacks and hyperbole are not evidentiary, terribly sorry. I understand and accept your opinions; however, I find your argument uncompelling, unsupported by any valid data and your choice of argumentative tactics highly suspect, therefore I cannot agree with your opinions. I'm glad you have them, as the world needs all kinds. Hard no vote on your proposed change 😄

Please keep in mind, the onus of a persuasive argument is on the person making the case for change... Hence, working as intended is absolutely legitimate, because those of us who are fine with it have absolutely no burden to even justify it or argue anything. The burden lies on the person who is advocating change. Convince me, or... No vote, working just fine 😋

If, by this, you mean that in this particular argument, you perceive that my claim lacks data or merit in your OPINION, I respect that. I, too, do not see credible evidence in your claim. Regardless, your perspective is immaterial to the fact that the SK system does work well. The problem statement in the OP was one of fighting beyond +4. This is directly caused by.... Drum roll.... The team lead setting his personal difficulty at +4, thereby making all SKs -5. Now, if we ASSUME that the SK system is not functioning properly, we must gather EVIDENCE. Fine. Evidence: What if the team lead lowered the difficulty to +3... Would there be an issue of -5? No, issue resolved. Because the system works well when used properly, this is not a systemic issue, but operator Error. Chainsaws work well when used on wood, safely. When used on feet and kneecaps.... Not the chainsaw at fault there... Is the SIDEKICK system intended to be a PEER system? No, it is intended to bring along a lower level player as a sidekick. System working as intended. No specific issue with the system, so a change cannot be attributed to systemic failure; change would be attributed to design preference. Or a more colorful narrative, "Hey there Robin, would you mind being my sidekick and... leading the way? Here's all my stuff, you're now my equal." 🤪 Not so much... I'm sure we can inspect much more evidence and it would all lead to the same result, the -sidekick- system is exactly what it should be. Working not only as intended, but as it rightly should... Sidekicks get b-slapped when they get overly confident (that's why they're the bottom b@tch 😂) and a bad team lead can get his whole team wiped.