tidge

If the GMs are marked on the map, it won't take anyone 30 seconds to see if one is in the zone. Multi-boxers typically don't wait for other players. Even when a multi-boxer announces something like an upcoming summons of Adamastor, I don't see the same player announcing it every time they summon Adamastor. Aside from Adamastor, the multi-boxers for other GMs generally have to look for a GM in the zone, and once it is found the alts pop out of the SG Base, get Incandescended to the GM and one (or more) pop Lores... the fights generally do not last long. The only thing slowing this down is the need to look for the GM in the zone. There are a handful of GM that are HARD (but not impossible) to multi-box with 3 characters: Lusca (because multiple GMs attacking), a multi-spawn of Paladins (similar reasons as Lusca), and nuEochai... ironically, nuEochai should be easier (because Fire) for certain characters that spend a LOT of time standing around in "fire" content... but Eochai can chew through typical roll-the-face-across-the-keyboard play, and it can be especially cruel to Lore pets. The Giant Monsters are NOT trivial, but they require a certain type of focus on a build... and some small amount of strategy...and like a LOT of content Incarnate powers make them much easier to deal with. Prior to the multiple rounds of GM upgrades, the design space for solo defeating GMs was a LOT wider than it is now. The folks who regularly solo GMs already have this down to a science... giving them (us!) a tool like a GM tracker would make it even easier. There really is no "chance", except in the opposite direction of what you are considering... there is a chance that a solo GM hunter will waste their time searching a zone for a monster that isn't there. If we got monster trackers, the solo GM hunters won't have to waste their time cruising zones... it is literally just going to be a pop-in to check. We already have "GM hunters" who don't reset things like the vale event, that is pretty much the measuring stick for just how lazy a GM hunter can be. During Halloween season, the only real rate limiter is travel between spawn points, and the occasional dim bulb that doesn't clear an entire spawn. I exaggerate (but only slightly) as the GM corpse has to de-rez and there is a slight delay before the next one spawns.

Re: "knowing where to go" When I solo GMs without Lores it takes me 5 minutes or fewer (not Lusca or Goliath War Walker). I mention this not because this is a fast time... multi-boxers go MUCH faster... but rather to establish what I consider to be the maximum amount of time I'll wait for someone else. I used to always broadcast (monster, zone, location) and it would often take players 5+ minutes to get to the zone. I can of course 'turn down the heat', so I'd start to work on the GMs... and players still took a long time, and started getting resentful that "I didn't wait". I'm now one of many players that simply doesn't announce or wait. The only difference between me and the multi-boxers is that I'll Broadcast in zone the location and the fight and that I take slightly longer than a multi-boxer. If the GMs showed up on the map, I am convinced they wouldn't stay on the map for very long. When I am NOT playing a solo GM hunter, I see the GM hunters pop into zones plenty quick after a spawn message. I suspect this original request is coming from a sense of FOMO related to the 1-month only, semi-restrictive spawns of the Winter Lord from special gifts. I get it... but if all monsters appeared on maps, it would simply make defeating the GMs extremely easy. The PI ToT leagues would do nothing but fight GMs. EDIT: I want to add this... FOMO is the reason why I support putting a marker for the Arachnos Flier. It's a rather unique GM in that you don't know which one spawned, you don't know where in the zone it *is*, it moves, and it is invulnerable and regenerates between stops, and it leaves the map.

My objection is that that it would make hunting for GMs even more trivial; it is not predicated on me personally enjoying zipping around zones to discover if the GM has spawned. Think about this in the context of Adamastor: It always spawns in the same spot, with a timer of no more than one hour. People who are inclined to multibox the rewards only have to log in for the < 2 minutes to defeat Adamastor. The daily limit on rewards doesn't discourage this. Recall also the situation with Ghost of Scrapyard: because it could only spawn in one of two locations, people were camping and spawning it endlessly for rewards. This is a case where the daily limits did stop the behavior. We don't need daily limits on GM rewards, as long as their timers are as long as they are and they aren't trivial to find. If GMs were marked on a map, a multiboxer only has the additional complication of moving all their toons to a zone, and get the one close enough to port the team into (the known) location. Solo GM hunters could trivially get to more than one zone GM while a single Lore summons is up.

You are having a conversation with voices in your head. I have merely pointed out that if it is trivial to travel around a zone to check fixed spawn points for Object A, it is the exact same process to travel around a zone to check the fixed spawn points for Object B.

I used to keep a release pets macro in my tray... and I ended up clicking it enough times (EDIT: accidentally) that I removed it.

There really isn't a disadvantage to clicking Domination "early"... unless it is psychologically uncomfortable.

The Domination icon will begin to flash before the power expires (if buff icons are being monitored). As a practical matter... It is not trivial to get much time before Domination will expire... So if it is ready, there is no harm in hitting it ASAP.

As noted by @Mystoc ...we had this early in HC and it ended up having an undesired effect on the in-game economy. I feel that there are several stages of 'Inf Relationship' in Homecoming... it is up to individual players to progress (or not) through them: Very new/Live nostalgia is a stage where visits to vendors are common to 'gear up' with enhancements, or the "Upgrade" button looks so very tempting. A review of the Auction House, often after reviewing someone else's build... a common reaction is "zOMG, that's liek a BILLION INF!" (it isn't) Selling junk to vendors, and auctioning other items to make inf Converting those merits and other drops into stuff explicitly for the Auction House, and/or running a favorite level 50 through content (AE or not) for drops/rewards Eventually, after some level 50 play... there really isn't much need to worry about Inf. Below level 50... there isn't much need for Inf. By the time characters have a lot of slots and are at a level when enhancements start to make a real difference, it is possible to buy IOs from the AH for relatively little Inf, since crafting and selling 25/30 and 45/50 are tied to badges + rewards. It is really only when seeking extremely high levels of individual performance that the set pieces and high-level enhancements border on necessity... and even for such content well-played teams mitigate such a concern.

I have maybe as many as two players on my ignore list, but they really earned it because of global/LFG bastardry. I'm on at least one other player's ignore list 🙄 for which I accept my part in being in a moment during which I was doing my thing (with others, on a team) and that player came out of the blue to be very public about how we were doing it wrong. I should have let it go, but yeesh.... my bad. My own measure of 'tolerance' shouldn't apply to everyone, so I don't think having/managing an ignore list is a bad thing. There are a handful of players that endlessly jibber-jabber about the most trivial in-game things... including one multi-account person who conducts public conversations between the accounts who probably should be on my ignore list but I can't bring myself to look away.

On Controller/Defender types: I'd much rather slot Poison Trap for set bonuses, recharge and hold. The only %proc I'd add is the Superior Entomb %Absorb. I can put %damage in other AoEs, like Wall of Force.

Re: Poison. I find Poison to be a good set for (targeted) offense. The Ally effects aren't really needed, given that Inspirations exist. You can use them as mules of course. Alkaloid: Skippable, although I usually add it back in very late as a mule for the %Absorb piece Envenom: useful, and can also take %damage procs for some early offense Weaken: I tend to skip this. It comes early when my Controllers want to take a pool power to be able to take a third pool (attack) power asap. Neurotoxic Breath: Not bad, but I tend to skip. I either need a second pool power or I want to focus on the primary. Elixir of Life: Delay/de-prioritize since it can mule Resistance pieces Antidote: Skipable/Delay/de-prioritize Paralytic Poison: Important for single-target hold, and %damage from procs. Poison Trap: Important for Hold, not important for %damage. Venomous Gas; Skip. My T9 recommendation gets a negative reactions, but I am not alone. This was discussed to death in the Defender subforum. The short version: A character doesn't need this to solo or for team play, and it requires slots and other build considerations to make it work (for both solo and team play). It's one of those powers that looks good on paper but doesn't really speed up clear times except in very limited circumstances... and the fraction of those circumstance that involve single, hard targets... the single target powers (including Weaken Resolve) eliminate the need for something like Venomous Gas.

Low-level Controllers are IMO easier to tolerate when I pick up the S.T.A.R.T. prestige attack powers and some temporary attacks as well.

This has no practical effect on me, unless the order of powers are incorrect or sets are missing. As noted, beyond the level availability of powers the most useful thing about City of Heroes is seeing what powers pets/pseudopets have, in case I want to try to leverage something slightly 'unusual'. I always check the 'detailed info' of powers I am unfamiliar with or are behaving in unexpected ways.... but I also level up by playing content, so testing is just a natural part of understanding character performance. In many character-building dimensions... it is probably fair to say that I've 'petrified', so a resource like CoD lets me see a base value of a higher-tier power for something like 'Defense plus something', which helps me judge which attributes are really worth enhancing. In the past it wasn't uncommon that (an up-to-date) CoD led me to believe some power ought to be enhanced one way, but in-game testing revealed far better options. MIDs would have led me along the same path as a review of CoD. With respect to the major changes to Controllers... I think its only been my Plant control ATs that really needed a respec, otherwise the recent changes haven't motivated me to make updates. Again: I think testing, unslotting and respecs are the way to best evaluate characters... so I don't need much from a 'character builder'. I've made no secret that I deprioritize Hasten, or that I think Venomous Gas and Fold Space are something of a performance trap with respect to power picks, and that damage aura toggles can be extremely misleading in terms of what they are actually doing for many characters... and I'm biased to think that reliance on something like MIDS as opposed to playing/experimenting has got some number of folks thinking things are really good 'on paper' but haven't actually tested alternatives in-game.

I use Excel, and City of Data. I also use experimentation in-game (and checks of power details) to optimize. Full-disclosure, having played the game for a long time and having played a wide variety of ATs and power sets, 90% of what I care about in a final build is: The order in which I can take powers The total number of slots I have to use Global Recharge (Recharge makes the game smoother) Global Accuracy (I tend to overvalue Global Accuracy, but I do enjoy fighting +level mobiles on low-level PUGs) I know which sets are available for each powers (and for complicated cases... pets/pseudopets/henchmen... I verify with City of Data) so I don't need a program to help me pick. I've more-or-less internalized what the 'sweet spots' are for Regeneration and Recovery, and for many game effects I can tell when a character has something past the point of diminishing returns. The Defense softcap is a thing, but I think it it is far less of a thing than many people make it out to be... just as pushing (and exceeding) resistance caps isn't nothing, but the content where such things matter are limited. I generally know the enhancement values and ED formulae, and I verify against CoD for base values (especially where "schedule B" is concerned). I know the other set bonuses that yield what I want (often: Knockback protection, Slow resistance). I know what boosters can do... and where they absolutely don't matter. I used to pay closer attention to %proc rates (also verifiable using Excel) but between the PPM value and the base power I've essentially internalized how well a piece should work in a power. Occasionally there is something about a power that makes them exceptionally good for some %procs, often it will be the revers... but like I wrote: I test in-game and I am not afraid of using unslotters or respecs. For a player like me... I can imagine getting extremely marginal improvements for limited content by leverage MIDS... but in my experience power picks and play styles have a much bigger effect on final results, no matter the content. In practical terms: I'd rather team with a player who knows how to play the content with the character they bring than a player who has min-maxxed some features but gets caught on some peculiar sharp edges of content.

YMMV... but I don't consider Giant Monster fighting something that "new players" should be expected to deal with.

It is neither condescending nor bullying to point out that if it is straightforward to check known spawn points for GMs, it is just as straightforward to check known present spawn points. *If* giant monsters were marked on maps, it would be extremely trivial for single players, or players on leagues, to simply zone in an find giant monsters with no effort beyond exiting a base portal. For cases where a player *thinks* there might be a giant monster in a zone, that player can pop into the zone and broadcast asking if anyone knows where the GM is. As a solo, non-multi-box GM hunter... if the Giant Monsters showed up on the zone map, I'd be able clear all the zone monsters in something like half as much time simply because I wouldn't have to look for them. It would become trivial for multi-boxers to do so. My negative reaction to the suggestion isn't based on "gatekeeping", it is motivated because right now Giant Monsters are something of a challenge... both to find and to fight. For players who don't find GMs to be a challenge... the only challenge left is to find them.

It sounds like the OP considers checking established spawn points as a challenge.

This function is needed for Lore pet summons? This seems dramatic.

This would make them too easy to hunt. The only GM I would support getting its own marker is the Arachnos Flier, because of its very limited time in zone and its peculiar mechanics (different flight paths, different starting points)

Please re-read @UltraAlt instructions/details. I use similar macros (and sometimes binds) to do exactly what the OP ask is. I often have multiple of hem set up on characters, I don't think I've ever felt the need to have more than 3 powers set up this way. One word of caution (that would work against the "global setting plz" is that some maps and geometries don't have legitimate places for placement.... even if it looks like the ground-based power should work *there*. Some are in the open world (e,g, Grim Vale, Croatoa) some are in instanced maps... base builders can construct maps that have this (annoying) feature. I mention the above, because in such areas, the powers would appear to simply not work... which would be more of a headache that just about anything else power-related.

I don't think this is a poorly motivated suggestion, but in general I feel like it is not necessary. We can already siable XP, and we can have a limited form of 'banking' from both patrol XP and the 'in mission disable XP' option that sort-of does these things. I will write: I see the concept of 'bank XP' to be offer more utility (at least for my solo play) between levels 30 and 45. There are usually only 1 or 2 arcs in those levels I feel like doing on any give character, and then would like to 'ding' up to the next round of arcs.... but this is such a narrow scope I wouldn't ask for a new feature.

I can't check on beta now, But it felt like that Group Fly + Fly + Evasive Maneuvers seemed to have its flight speed reduced, unlike currently on live. Specifically.. it felt like toggling on Group Fly slowed down the MM, untoggling it and flight speed was as expected.

The current release on Open Beta opens up a lot more options for all players, it even looks like it makes some alternate slotting choices for my main MM (which is highly optimized for my purposes. The one area that now looks like I can make modifications is with that MM's focus on +MaxEnd, Endurance Discount, and Recovery... because of the reduction in Blue spend for MM primaries and secondaries. I play this MM through some long, drawn-out combat: multiple GMs, multiple AVs, etc. while using the MM to try to keep aggro on it (instead of on the henchmen)... so running out of blue would be a real problem. Minimally: I should be able to repurpose one slot from Stamina, and I think I should be able to change at least one enhancement set. The henchmen haven't achieved there (prior to current Live) levels of damage output on (current) open beta, but they easier survive content.

I didn't see any place to post feedback for the continued MM updates... Henchmen seem to survive easier... but the bad henchmen AI with (turning off) Group Fly continues. Even telporting teh henchmen to me (with the T1 power) keeps them frozen until I toggle group fly on again.