Jump to content
Issue 28, Page 3 is now live. Click here to read the patch notes!

tidge

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5991

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    22

 Content Type 

Posts posted by tidge

    So long -1

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    2 hours ago, Hedgefund said:

    No, difficulty setting affects mob level, not player level.  If a player (and mission) is level 30 and set to -1 they should see 29 and 30 level enemies.  The player will be 30 and sidekicks will be 29 just as for any difficulty level.

     

    That's Numberwang!

    Random pet recipe option removed

    in Suggestions & Feedback

    Posted

    I'm unconvinced that the Sally recipe ever drops. I did a LOT of testing upon release, and I never got it to drop... and I got all the other zone monsters to drop recipes (although never tried the Rikti Dropship solo). I think it is because Sally doesn't give rewards. I 'defeated' Sally easily 100+ times with no recipe drop.

    • Thumbs Up 1

    What's your plan when Page 3 goes Live?

    in Mastermind

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Jacke said:

    I've found that on Assault Rifle Blasters, my Robotics Mastermind, and some other ATs while I can't remember at the moment.  And like other things, the Costume System is rather complex and fixing the issue is very non-trivial.

     

    I remember it happening with Soldiers of Arachnos as well.

    • Like 1

    What's your plan when Page 3 goes Live?

    in Mastermind

    Posted

    On 11/25/2025 at 11:02 AM, Arbegla said:

    The LRSF only has 1 giant monster in it that I can remember (the kronos titan) and I've solo'ed it before. The hardest part will be the end I think, with all of the AVs pounding on my facebones.

     

    I slow-soloed the Dr. Aeon SF today, specifically to see how I'd do on even-level against the 5 Council AVs...  I had 4 deaths total, at least three of them because I had sacrificed bodyguard mode. One death came in the Council fight. My character didn't feel any different in it, except that it seemed to take longer (probably by the 20%, but it has been years since I did that SF solo.

     

    49 minutes ago, UltraAlt said:

    Oddly enough, the first one I logged into ... I went to a tailor to do one-thing-or-another and had a costume part error message. For whatever reason, it didn't like the weapon I had picked on that robotics mastermind. No idea when that started. I haven't tried to do anything to their costume for a longtime.

     

    This problem (specific to Robotics MMs) has existed for years. There are a handful of other primaries for other characters that this happens... each one I encountered was because of a hand weapon. I want to say that the renaming/renumbering of the "guns" is the issue.

    • Thumbs Up 1

    +0

    in Mastermind

    Posted

    1 minute ago, Maelwys said:

    Therefore in my mind it's really only the players who have the capability to play at higher difficulties but choose to run at +0 (especially if they're built well enough to never be in any danger of their henchmen dying) who are actually going to be inconvenienced by the changes... but even then, we've had multiple examples of people simply not seeing any noteworthy difference in clear times. So I'm definitely leaning towards the Devs having found a reasonable balance for establishing the new baseline performance.

     

    This is me... on both counts: I prefer "even level" solo (not just for MMs) because I've done elevated difficulty as proof-of-concept, but I find it boring. I can also 'survive' whatever content.... although Lusca is now firmly in the category of difficult and boring to solo, so I'm not ashamed to admit that she was just boring to solo before.

     

    IPerhaps it was just my (lack of?) reading comprehension... but on Open Beta I didn't see many people posting time differences. I posted mine for GMs, for Tips @ 50 and some Incarnate content. And mine was only for a single MM.

     

    8 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

    Soloing GMs though, I'll 100% accept that's taken a noteworthy performance hit. However those characters tend to not really be hurting for performance in the first place (AFAIK MMs were and still are the strongest AT for soloing GMs. Illusion Controllers and Crabberminds can dish out a lot of damage too, but they both have issues focusing their pets attention onto a specific target and the latter has a much harder time keeping their pets alive).

     

    And as mentioned previously... there are further changes due shortly. Not SoonTM but soon.

     

    I'm not salty about the changes... but because of the level-less effects, they hit *me* in what I do most with my solo MM. I can believe that the Devs would prefer no one be able to solo a Giant Monster... but that appears to have simply pushed people towards multi-boxing them... with some irony is that it is both easier and more rewarding to multi-box GMs.

     

    The current round of changes don't seem particularly inspiring to get more people to play MMs... as @Maelwys notes... there is no shortage of suboptimal builds and playstyles, and eventually that catches up with the enjoyment. It will be new primaries that drive the real excitement.

    • Thumbs Up 1

    MiDs continues it's years long downhill slide

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    1 minute ago, Derek Icelord said:

     

    Given what Zed has gone through to keep the existing program up-to-date and (mostly) accurate, I feel rather confident in saying it's more than "just a database". At the very least that glosses over a lot of complexity. Otherwise, I have to imagine someone would have built an alternative already.

     

    My comments were NOT about the program "as is", my comments about the 3-piece architecture (so more than "just a database") were what was needed to fulfill the purpose of the software. In more detail:

     

    1) Database

    This is needed for the ATs, power sets, the powers, the enhancement sets, etc. Think "stuff we can look up on City of Data"

     

    2) The GUI

    This is needed to that users can make selections, and see options based on the selections... as well as the outputs of their selections

     

    3) The 'rules enforcer'

    This is needed to validate (in presentation, in choice) what the user can select under different circumstances. Levels of selectable powers, enhancements are the obvious things... but there are a wide variety of odd 'rules' about powers (VEAT paths, new 'pick one' powers) and of course restrictions on enhancements. I forsee this module keeping track of the net bonuses as part of its 'enforcement' (basically: allow/disallow and track, apply the ED formulae, etc) <- but information in the database feeds a lot of this.

     

    Most of the work happens in #3, ideally a well-constructed database can make the logic in #3 more straightforward and simple.

     

    Bootloaders and autoupdaters aren't necessary to do what people want the program to do...  those are fine to have as options, but a "check for updates" feature is often "good enough". With relatively few dependencies updates should be pretty smoothly. 

     

    As for "why hasn't someone built something else?" ... Frankly... there are only a small handful of players and forum regulars I think might have both the motivation and talent to tackle this. It is human nature to simply stick with the old tools. I'd like to develop myself further with database design and rules enforcing... but I simply have no motivation to do this just to have near-infinite levers to shift for tiny percentages of whatever. For me... those tiny differences in numbers don't affect my enjoyment of the game. The number one thing I track when I am planning a character is the number of enhancement slots... after that, I typically have a very good feel for what works best... and if I want to try something else in-game... I do it in game.

    +0

    in Mastermind

    Posted

    29 minutes ago, Arbegla said:

    One thing to consider is that +0 to you USED to be +2 to your T1s, and +1 to your T2s, but now its even level across the board. So, +0 to you is now +0 to all your pets.

    This makes the math kind of finicky but as others have stated, its about the same damage wise, and BETTER survivability.  

     

    This is true... except against leveless enemies, a level 50 MM had the T2 facing level 49s, and T1s were facing level 48s. Now the T1 and T2 are facing level 50s, but with lower base chances ToHit. The level-less have the same chance to hit as before, but now they hit like level 50s.

     

    +0

    in Mastermind

    Posted

    10 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

    If you don't have heals/regeneration/etc to top up their health bars, there's an argument to be made that reducing their damage output reduces their survivability (because they can't kill stuff faster than stuff can kill them!) but given that's not true vs +2s and above, IMO it's hardly a huge issue.

     

    I consider the current stuff on Live to be something of a wash... but you can't have it both ways: (a) It's not a big deal that solo +0x8 takes longer and (b) vs >+2x8 solo MMs do better.

     

    I didn't play MM solo against +3 content... not because my MM couldn't survive, it was because my MMs take too long to finish that content.... and not entirely due to the level shifts, The fact that the T1 and T2 need less net +Accuracy to fight >+2 enemies is true... but it isn't practical, at least not for me. I can't even bring myself to believe this without some sort of statement like "the game is balanced around +2 for solo play". I used to regularly take my MM through +3 content... just not solo.

     

    Maybe I'm the niche player by soloing GMs and content at +0/+1x8... but since that is the content I play all the time... It was easy for me to test in on Beta.... and it does take longer to do these things. It's not necessarily harder... just longer.

    • Like 1

    +0

    in Mastermind

    Posted

    18 hours ago, ElectricKnight said:

    Yeah, I think the "considerably more survivable" is getting overlooked.  I mean, I'll find out when I log in, but I suspect my MM will be better than before.  Those -2 and -1 levels really have an affect, so even level pets should be nice.  And if the tweaks to damage feel too bad, I'd hope they'll tweak it.

     

    I have some comments on "considerably more survivable".

     

    Because of the (previous, negative) level shift outside of Incarnate content... T1 and T2 henchmen were more likely to be hit by enemies that were even level with the MM (and T3). If the player had previously accounted for the level shift and had capped the henchmen defenses for certain content, the new changes haven't really improved survivability.

     

    Imagine if we gave all blasters a +3 bump in all defenses, but cut back damage by 3%... all Blasters would become "more survivable", but some wouldn't become "considerably more survivable."

     

    The sky isn't falling... but +0x8 content does take longer, per my tests. 

     

    Against level-less enemies... the T3 and T2 don't have a net change in how often they get hit, but when they are hit they are hit harder, and they hit back less often then before. Against this sort of content, it is more fair to say that they are "less survivable"... but this might be considered niche enough that TPTB don't care. I doubt most players would even notice, I expect when zone Invasions start up folks may notice their henchmen dying sooner but maybe not.

     

     

    Dumpster🔥Kings Row ↔ Perez Park Connection

    in Suggestions & Feedback

    Posted

    Just now, Acroyear said:

    I guess the main question I have is, was there a high demand for a connection between Kings Row and Perez Park? I've been playing the game since 2004, and I've never felt that it was needed, so I guess I'm just surprised one was added all these years later. 

     

    there was a long-ago public suggestion to establish the connection; that proposal had the gate in KR at the same spot but was going to recycle the connection point to Galaxy City in PP.

    • Like 1

    Open Beta for new content

    in Suggestions & Feedback

    Posted

    I can really only speak to the most recent round of MM changes, as that is what I tested.

    • There was one proposed change that got rolled back (henchmen HP reductions) that was well-recognized as being a step too far.
    • For even-level content, MMs take up to ~20% more time to accomplish what they used to.
    • Everything else MM-related (general changes) is pretty much a wash(*1).

    The first would have been a brutal nerf to both the survival of MMs, and their damage output... so hopefully that is no longer under consideration.

    The second is one that we pretty much have to *shrug*, because of a promise of some future improvements <-- and I am only commenting in this thread because those improvements are supposed to roll out before 2026(!), so I hope we can test them in Open Beta.

     

    (*1) I didn't test content (solo +3 or higher) that justified the changes... basically, "address purple patch for henchmen"... stuff I wouldn't MM solo anyway,,, so I'm disappointed in the performance change right now, but I have an atom of hope because it was more-or-less recognized that MMs would have to get something more, it just wasn't announced what.

     

    I saw General comments in game (from a player that isn't well-known for play performance) that was ga-ga over the henchmen getting 40% of (most of) the set bonuses. I am not skeptical about their excitement, I skeptical that the 40% (while in Supremacy range) are doing much... MMs tend to have to franken-slot (my main appears to do far less franken-slotting than most) which means fewer bonuses... and most bonuses (that can be inhereted) are rather small even before the 0.40 factor). Of the items "on the table" for a future update: I suspect that henchmen will end up inheriting 100% of the same set bonuses, because the 20% performance reduction is real... and set bonuses won't affect that at all... except possibly those 15% +Accuracy bonuses that are possible from sets.

     

     

    MiDs continues it's years long downhill slide

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    2 hours ago, Derek Icelord said:

     I can only assume it's actually a lot more complicated than just a GUI, database, and rules enforcing. 

     

    Without a GUI, and and minimal rules-enfocing, I think it could be done in Excel. It would be HIGHLY painful, but possible... at least for something like a single AT.

     

    With an actual database, many programs run SQL under-the-hood, there can't possible be anything more complicated that have a GUI to present the possible choices (starting with ATs, then primary/secondary/pools/epics, then powers) enforced by rules.

     

    I almost started this as a proof-of-concept... what stopped me was that I simply don't use/need MIDS.... I am comfortable checking City of Data and/or in game for power details. I 'know' the ED scales. I know the sets and their bonuses... and then there is my personal iconoclasm,,, it is really hard to get me to care about 'set bonuses' and stats, especially once certain personal 'point of diminishing returns' is past. This point varies depending on AT (and power picks).

    • Like 1

    Auction House Question

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    38 minutes ago, UltraAlt said:

    No threat powers are autohit in PvP. Not that all that much PvP goes on.

     

    Also to expand:

     

    The threat powers from the Presence pool are not autohit (and at least one of those two must be taken to unlock the 4th/5th powers)

    Some (most?) aura toggles with a Threat component accept accuracy (and threat) slotting.

    There are a handful of powers in other sets that include pets/pseudopets that provide Threat, and pets/pseudopets typically also require Accuracy

     

    There are possibly more powers that accept both Threat and Accuracy than there are that accept both Defense and Resistance, or EndMod and Healing, or Defense and Healing. I mention this only because those combinations (of attribute enhancing) are occasionally mention as candidates for "HO/DS" treatment

     

    IMO the Provocations (Threat/Acc/Recharge) are in the same category as Cytoskeletons (End/+Def/+ToHit)... there are a LOT of powers that benefit from only two attributes, but relatively few that benefit from all three... but for those that benefit from all three, there aren't any pieces with those combinations, let alone pieces that exist at 50 that could be boosted. These pieces have something else in common: The powers that benefit from them typically don't need many slots to achieve maximum effectiveness, so missing out on set bonuses (when only 1 or 2 pieces will do) is an easy trade off for better enhancement values.

    • Thumbs Up 1

    MiDs continues it's years long downhill slide

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Since I don't use MIDS, my comments are more along the lines of wondering why spend the effort sustaining this and not refactoring it? I've worked with industrial solutions where the 'fear of $$ investment' that kept us supporting/maintaining/updating old code bases... but not to the extent it looks like is happening here. This is obviously a hobby software, but there are other pieces of software that fall into a similar category that have been maintained as 'one-person efforts' for long periods of time, and require far less overhead (in terms of external reliance, both in terms of software and network).

     

    I'm not unaware of the complications, but for what it does: it shouldn't need to be more complicated than a GUI, a database, and 'calculations/rules enforcing' module.

    • Like 1

    MiDs continues it's years long downhill slide

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    While I recognize that some of the suggested methods to help @Snarky diagnose the issue... I've lost track of all the extra software pieces suggested along the way... on top of connecting to Discord for help and updates. I'm trying to recall the last time I encountered a 'user-level' piece of software that required as much effort... I don't recall setting up old USENET newservers taking up as much effort, and even things like MUD/MUSH weren't as complicated.

    • Thanks 1
    • Thumbs Up 1
×
×
  • Create New...