Bopper

Thank you for this follow up. This one has left me very puzzled. When I tested, I'm almost certain I was always at range. I'll need to see about what happens when at melee distances. I dont know how confuse will play a part, it seems it has a chance for a mag 3 that doesn't stack, and you mentioned Bosses (Death Mages) flying...but i don't think they'd succumb to the confuse effects. If confuse is playing a part, is it possible the confused enemies are doing KB, causing these effects? I dont know how Disruption arrow would trigger it, but who knows.

Could be, in which case it's something that is so nitpicky and unrelated to the context of the discussion that it doesn't really bear the need for pointing out. But it's really the over-escalation that followed that was grossly unnecessary. So I dont know...I'm left confused by it all. Luckily I have a reaction I can use to express that without commentary. All this being said, it's fairly obvious the developers will NEVER add a feature that is solely used for derision. And seeing as how this discussion has gone on too long and has only sparked flame wars, I would suggest this topic to be closed. It is no longer useful based on the back and forth I've seen.

Can we get a screenshot of a daytime image? I can barely see anything in that image.

Do we want real guesses or silly guesses? Real guess: TW redesign (we can call it a nerf, but i bet we'llsee damage replaced with differentbuffs or debuffs), one of the remaining Origin pools (utility belt probably), Dark Melee re-introducing AoE tweaks with Dark Consumption, Power Boost/Up getting flagged to ignore buffs, and a sweep of power cleanups (like Tanker melee attacks still having a radius when Gauntlet was changed). Edit (follow on): I expect a bunch of simple bug fixes. Things like Scrapper's Savage Melee not having a critical hit effect attached to Shred, and how Stalker's Savage Melee has silly dumb effects on Hemorrhage (resulting in tons of unintended damage).

Before you jump all over him for requesting you to clarify something you quoted, you can try to actually answer what about his statement is a false assumption. Personally, I have never assumed Confuse (which is the reaction Replacement is referring to in that quote) meant the person using that reaction is making a dumb declaration. I assumed they are simply confused about what was stated (I tend to use a lot of numbers, so I'm used to people being confused). With your response, you are actually making the false assumption that the Confuse reaction is only used as a "declaration of the poster making a dumb declaration". If you think that is what the Confuse reaction is only used for, you are incredibly wrong.

Worth keeping in mind, Cross Punch has only 5% crit chance against everything. You don't get 10% against Bosses. Both are good though.

Very interesting find. I never thought to try this. But for those who are not in the know, Power Boost is not flagged as "ignore buffs", this is why Clarion Radial + Power Boost (in that order) is a multiplicative boost. But if you go Power Boost + Clarion Radial (which does ignore buffs) is additive. I never thought to try to power boost a power boost, but it makes sense. You will buff up a previous boost and it would multiply with the new boost, and you can perpetuate that to fantastic numbers. I could not see the numbers in your video on my phone (not enough resolution), but my guess is your defense capped out at +300% (4x strength) of whatever toggles you had, plus your set bonuses. You'll find that defense buff powers cap out at that number (+300%). This is why when I use Clarion Radial + Power Boost + Farsight, it caps at 50% defense (12.5% is base, 4x stronger is 50%). Kudos to you for finding this. There is an easy fix for the devs...simply flag Power Boost as "ignore buffs", just like they do Power Buildup. Maybe if they do that, they won't nerf the power boost + farsight synergy :). Please devs, don't nerf PB + Farsight.

First thing I'd do, I'd replace the Damage/Recharge in Focus with pure Damage. The reduced recharge will help with your FF and Apoc proc, and you have a gap anyways so have two small gaps is no different than one big gap. And if you get buffed by a teammate, the gap will close. Gaussian in Followup isn't doing a whole lot for you (but does well enough). Currently, you have an 11.66% chance to proc every 3.96s (if gapless. 4.686s with gaps) for 80% damage buff that lasts 5.25s. So on average, that equates to 12.37% damage buff (if gapless, 10.45% with gaps). So, for one slot that's good. But if you could reduce the slotted recharge (which would increase gaps) and fill your attack chain with another fast attack or improve your global recharge further, you might like those numbers more. These numbers strictly analyzed for your mentioned ST attack rotation, not AoE. As for Burn, you already saw my previous work with the 3.5 PPM resistance debuff proc in an aura, which equates to 30.7% chance to proc for an average of 6.14% resistance debuff over time (20% x 30.7% x 10s / 10s). If you slot the resistance debuff proc in Burn, I see a cycle rate of 9.9s (2.244s+7.66s), which is similar to the cycle rate of Blazing Aura (10s). The proc probability given your 89.92% recharge slotting gives you a 46.65% chance to proc. However, the power can only hit up to 5 targets whereas Blazing Aura can hit up to 10. So if you're farming, you might prefer Blazing Aura, but if it's normal content I doubt you'd rarely ever hit more than 5 with Blazing Aura anyways. But I digress... So we show Burn has a better chance to proc (46.7% vs 30.7%) with nearly the same cycle time as Blazing Aura (9.9s vs 10s). However, Burn also summons a pseudopet, and I am willing to believe that pet also will give you a chance to proc with 30.7% chance (same radius as Blazing Aura, it would use the 10s activateperiod time). I would need to test this to be certain, but I would suspect Burn gives you 2 proc chances when you cast it...the initial damage from burn, and the pseudopet. The pseudopet lasts for 10s (according to City of Data) so your only proc chance would be on the summoning, and no additional checks after that. Now...the 5 target max of your burn damage, and the 5 target max of the pseudopet does not necessarily mean both effects will HAVE to hit the same 5 targets, but given the fact target selection is based on distance from you (for PBAoEs) and an Immobilize accompanies the Burn effect, it's safe to assume you will hit the same 5 targets with both effects. Given that...and knowing that the Resistance Debuff proc can't stack, we can calculate your probability to be 100% - the probability of neither effect procs. Probability to Proc in Burn = 100% - (100-46.65%)x(100%-30.7%) = 63.03% So your average resistance debuff would equal 63.03% x 20% x 10s / 9.904s = 12.73% Please, take all of my Burn analysis with a grain of salt. I'm basing this entirely off of other things I've tested in the past and assuming these multiple effects as all having their own proc chances (like how Glue Arrow procs off of a single target, then can proc again from the pseudopet). I highly recommend someone (maybe myself) to test this first. But I believe this should work as described...

I'm not sure if that was something that was actually removed, or if it never existed at all. I suspect folks had a misunderstanding of what it does and it propagated as fact when it was likely false. I can't explain why it works the way it does, because I agree with you, expected behavior would be a replacement of the buff (thus refreshing the 5 second timer at the time of replacement). How it works now almost seems broken...but without seeing the code or knowing more about this odd mechanic (if it's intentional) I can't really say.

I'm working on something else at the moment, but I will certainly come to your aid later this afternoon (Like...give me an hour). I will read the thread later, but basically I'll just need to know your build, your attack rotation, and finally I'll need to look up Burn because I think it has some unique proc mechanics that I want to make sure on before I dispense information.

My experience has been when an FF proc buff is active, if I get another FF proc to fire, the effects of that 2nd FF proc don't go into effect until the 1st FF proc buff wears off. I can guarantee that happens from my testing. However, I dont know what happens if a 3rd FF proc goes off in that 1st FF proc buff window. I suspect it does nothing, but I haven't attempted to test that. Edit: I also don't technically know what happens if a 3rd FF proc goes off within a delayed 2nd FF proc's buff window. That is something else I'd have to do focused testing on to be sure.

Its been awhile since I looked at it, but do you have Pet Damage on?

You're not the first to see this.

I feel personally attacked. But to be fair, also did it for the recovery, accuracy, and F/C resistances.

You know, I used Arc = 34, as that's what showed in City of Data (the only data source I have when all I have is my phone), but there have been times in the past that their Arc reporting was off by a degree. You're good. I was wrong for using bad data.

If someone is broadcasting their misinformation as if it is correct information, I like to nip that in the bud. Otherwise, you risk that propagating. As for me, when I'm wrong, I want to know it. And I dont take offense. I try to correct my own misinformation when I can, typically not as an edit that corrects it, but more of a strike through so people can learn from my mistake and that what I said was wrong, and here is the correct information. Two things that I've been wrong about that come to mind was my understanding of enhancement/set bonus effects when exemplared and Hami-Os working when exemplared. I had wrong info, and after a few attempts, I finally understood it correctly and I appreciated the corrected knowledge. Overall, just don't belittle people and don't be arrogant. It's not a good look, and it makes you look like an ass if it turns out you're actually wrong.

Math looked mostly good, but my calculator shows 40.54% chance of procing when only 33% recharge is slotted. But i could have fatfingered it

The 90% chance to proc is clamped on a per target basis only. When FF is used to hit multiple targets, it only needs to proc off of one. So having multiple chances will allow you to exceed 90% chance to proc (as you get more chances to hit). I haven't checked Dr. Casualty's math, but I trust he's correct. Let me know if thats not clear. I can write something up to help explain it better. But ultimately, its Binomial Probability where we have X chances to proc, and we need to calculate the probability of not missing on all X chances.

It's very strong. Especially for a proc build that wants to be self sufficient (Conserve Power is a life saver...well, a blue bar saver). You get nice exemplaring builds having PBU available down to level 30. Only downside, Soul Drain with Hail of Bullets and Bullet Rain is such a nice AoE pairing, especially given how Time likes to play as a tankmage. That is hugely missed when I play the /Power build. But...that's why we get 3 builds. I play /Power if I get exemplared to level 30-36, and above that I can go either way but probably stick with /Power to level 44. Level 45+, I'm almost certainly playing /Soul. I had to fix my /Soul build to match nearly the AoE capability of /Power (excluding Soul Drain) while retaining the ST damage. I just liked /Soul too much but had to justify playing it over /Power. In fact, I think I'll finish up some tweaks tonight and do a respec.

I would recommend two slotting Swift with +5 Run IOs. It'll give you more speed than one of the 3% speed bonuses

When you say softcap, are you referring to Damage Cap? So let's say you are a Tanker who has a 500% damage cap, are you asking if you hit 500%, do set bonuses add on top of that (make them 504%, for example)? In that case, you can't go over 500% so the set bonus would be wasted. Or are you talking about Enhancement Diversification, where you reach certain points in a power's slotted enhancement strength that causes diminishing returns of your enhancements? In that case, if you had 100% enhancements slotted (which reduces to 95% after E.D.), then adding a 4% damage set bonus will make the power 99%. So, in other words, the set bonus is not impacted by E.D. *E.D. is Enhancement Diversification, which is the mechanic that reduces the strength of an enhancement when you reach certain strength thresholds.

You'd be surprised how often that happens. You're not even the first Booper to Bopper edit this week haha.

Those +6% movement speed bonuses are passive (always on), whether you're in granite or not. The only run speed power that remains on while in Granite is Swift. The sprints will never be turned on when you're in Granite.

It is buggy and not reliable. No promises, but there may be a fix down the line. As for now, consider it not working.

Shame on me, but I should have added that. I limited my inclusion to Paragon City and Rogue Isles with a few extras thrown in, but excluding Praetorian content was a miss on my part. If I could have a 4th question in a poll, I would add that to it.