Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

383 Excellent

About aethereal

  1. Yeah, it's not ideal. I'm not a huge fan of the stance system for that reason. So. You can make two versions of your primary costume, which differ only in terms of their stance (one normal, one ninja run). Then you can make binds or macros like this: /macro on "powexectoggleon super speed&&cc 1" /macro off "powexectoggleoff super speed&&cc 0" Assuming that costume 1 has ninja run stance turned on and costume 0 has ninja run stance toggled off.
  2. Does superspeed override ninja run stance? If not, you can get ninja run animations with superspeed, albeit clumsily.
  3. So for example, here's a somewhat clunky proc system that preserves some of the basic intent and logic behind PPM but unwinds a lot of its ridiculousness: Powers have a proc schedule (let's say A, B, C, D). Procs have their own schedules (call them 1, 2, 3, 4). You can cross-reference power schedule and proc schedule to find a chance to proc. So A1 might be 90% and D4 might be 10%. Convert the old PPM rating of a proc into a proc schedule, so something that was PPM 2 might be proc schedule 4, something that was PPM 7 would be proc schedule 1. Use recharge time and AoE to roughly set the power schedule (so short-recharge time and/or AoE powers would be schedule D, long-recharge time single target powers are schedule A). But then... everything's static at that point. You can use recharge -- global or local -- freely. There are no questions about whether a power uses a pseudo-pet behind the scenes. It doesn't matter, the power just says, "Hey, I'm schedule C." People don't have to do math to figure out a proc rate, they just look at a simple chart. If procs are overpowered (or underpowered) in a given power, we just straightforwardly reduce its schedule, we don't initiate a bunch of second-order changes by fucking around with its recharge time or area.
  4. That would help but not resolve the legibility situation, since part of it is "understanding why the numbers would change in one way or another when I do certain things." It wouldn't change that the system remains a nightmare, arbitrarily rewarding and undermining certain strategies for no real reason, creating way too much incentive to build in weird ways, and, hilariously, offering Yet More Reward For Global Recharge. (It's impossible to imagine who looked at the state of CoH at like i23 or whatever was right before PPM and said, "I think that what this game needs is more emphasis on achieving higher global recharge.") What PPM tried to do was "make procs roughly equally good in all powers" what it actually did was "make procs good in a small subset of powers that were already some of the best powers in terms of overall damage," this both inflating the power level of the game and putting increased focus on an ever-smaller number of powers.
  5. The old way certainly gave advantage to some powers over others -- though perhaps less overall advantage than the current system does to people who have invested in learning it. The old system also had the advantage of being basically legible: it was much less complex and much easier to understand how it worked without investing a few hours on forums learning from secondary and tertiary sources. But I'm not necessarily advocating for going back to pure percentage chance procs. I'm just saying that PPM is a disaster.
  6. It's so that you don't have another place to put the stealth ios or botz kb reduction.
  7. So, it, what granted you a temp power that you could then use, presumably once, to do recall friend? That seems kinda redundant in today's game of having several P2W teleport options and also just people not being super desperate for recall friend in general.
  8. Combat Teleport's to-hit bonus is 5 seconds after a 0.5 second delay and does not go away when "used." EDIT: Hah, no, I'm lying, it does go away when used. cancel_events "Attacked." God, I wish they had made this power better.
  9. That set seems, at first glance, overtuned to me. It's hard to tell with buff/debuff sets because they're so accumulative, and maybe I'm missing something that would actually play weaker than it looks, but it seems like it's a laundry list of "power" buffs/debuffs, including defense buffs, resistance debuffs, recovery and regeneration buff/debuffs, a seemingly quite powerful AoE confuse, and several sources of KD. EDIT: Actually, on second read, it doesn't seem so bad. I missed that one of the big defense powers was ally-only, the confuse is super short duration per pulse, and some of the powers are difficult or impossible to perma.
  10. I don't have a big issue with Sent durability (they're certainly plenty durable for "ordinary" content), but if you're going to have a class that's kind of at its best in long, drawn-out fights against single hard targets, it kinda sucks to be a bit less durable than Scraps and Stalks as well as lower damage than them.
  11. I agree with @oldskool, and also add to the list of issues: ST/AoE incoherence. Sents have their inherent currently tuned to be strongly ST-focused, and their AoE target caps (and lack of ability to cluster enemies) obviously punish their ability to be a premiere AoE AT. However, in general, in order to excel as a ST-class, because of the general dominance of AoE, you need to have really strong ST damage, which Sents don't, and their lack of durability compared to other armored classes hurts their ability to handle very hard targets (tough EBs, AVs, GMs). The can compensate to some extent for their lack of durability by hover-blasting, but that's kind of an obnoxiously narrow way to have a role. In addition, word of @Captain Powerhouse is that they're supposed to be "sustained AoE"-oriented. I remain unsure that "sustained AoE" is a useful role -- burst AoE seems like the only AoE that matters, at least on teams.
  12. You're right, Fury does do that. I wonder if it's some kind of hardcoded exception or if my info is wrong. So I looked into Ruby's Power API, and it suggests that there is some kind of hook set up for this: "requires": [ "target.EventCount>AttackedByOtherClick > 0" ], So that seems like it's a hook you could use for other powers.
  • Create New...