Activating all Armor Toggles

[Starhammer]

On 2/23/2021 at 10:40 AM, Nerio72 said:

It would be much easier to hit one button for my combos also, can we do that too?  I don't really want that, just trying to show how once you start doing things like this where we're headed. Pretty soon we just log in and all the enemies fall over "arrested"? I have toggle heavy toons and yes it's a pain sometimes but I'm my opinion, I don't think it should be that easy, that's the trade off for having those powers. Again, just my opinion...

Heh, I hit one button for most of my combos. Press the A button on the controller and it triggers a power and sets another power to auto. Release it and it triggers a 3rd power (or activates Combat jumping if it's not already on) and sets a different auto.

To some people I may be autoing the game, to me, I'm making use of the keybind infrastructure to offset physical impairments resulting from a mild stroke. It's not always about finding a way to leave the game on and farm to 50 while you go to bed.

Oh, also, if my Dark/Rad tank were to log in in the midst of enemies, they'd fall over and despawn to The Zig 😛 So, done that.

 

--------------------------------

I'm not interested in implementing the OP's ideas for some of the reasons already mentioned. There are ways that, *for me* are easy enough to accomplish this. My toggles turn on as I jump (queue House of Pain earwig... you're welcome). But others may have found a shortcoming, and it may have nothing to do with how any of us insist others are *supposed* to play. Let the conversation happen. The initial negative responses to this suggestion just came across as snide and condescending. That makes me not want to take part in the conversation, or post my own ideas, knowing somebody's bound to come into the thread not only to disagree, but try and derail the whole concept. There are almost certainly people potentially much more useful to this community than me who have thinner skin, and should be made to feel welcome and valued, even - perhaps especially - when we don't like their ideas. The whole argument that making a change to code is enough reason to discourage an idea should be a non-starter, of course it will require changes to code. The idea that developer time is a limited resource and only so many changes can be made may be true, but using it as an argument to avoid changes that don't appeal directly to what we want smacks of selfishness. And "Strawman" dismissals have no place in these conversations, this isn't the debate team.

If someone can't handle being disagreed with, maybe they shouldn't be posting, but at the same time, but if we can't disagree without trying to drive people out of the community by disagreeing with them in a way that is dismissive and harsh, maybe we shouldn't be here either.

[Hyperstrike]

1 hour ago, Starhammer said:

toing the game, to me, I'm making use of the keybind infrastructure to offset physical impairments resulting from a mild stroke. It's not always about finding a way to leave the game on and farm to 50 while you go to bed.

No.  You still have to perform multiple key-presses and wait for the powers to cycle up.

Also, you put the work in, specifically, to script this function into your client.
Nobody just gave it to you.

And there's nothing stopping these people from doing the same thing.

They just don't WANT to do it.  They want it served up to them on a silver platter.

[Starhammer]

1 hour ago, Hyperstrike said:

No.  You still have to perform multiple key-presses and wait for the powers to cycle up.

Also, you put the work in, specifically, to script this function into your client.
Nobody just gave it to you.

Well, you see it that way. I have received criticism showing not everyone recognizes the same merit in my efforts. It's for those who don't understand that I point out the process and reasoning behind it.

 

1 hour ago, Hyperstrike said:

And there's nothing stopping these people from doing the same thing.

They just don't WANT to do it.  They want it served up to them on a silver platter.

 

Where our viewpoints differ here is that I'm not going to assume their reasoning. For many people, moving the cursor and clicking on the power tray is perfectly sufficient as a way to play this game. For me it isn't. For them, there might be something unrelated to the game that is affecting what works and doesn't.

If someone wants for something to be different, they aren't wrong for wanting it, no matter why they want it. We don't need to commit to making it happen, or agree with them. But the conversation is worth having... or if it isn't, it's on us to not take part in it rather than expect them discard views and desires not in line with our own.

[arthurh35353]

First, insomnia sucks...

 

Stuck thinking in a squirrel cage, it occurred to me that the current devs in homecoming have literally worked recently on toggle exclusivity in just this last issue creating new powers that are mutually exclusive, modifying existing powers to become exclusive.

 

So while I don't think it would be trivial, I don't think changing the armor sets to allow most of the toggles to be activated by the first power would be super onerous either.

 

I mean, walk disables almost every power currently except AT inherents and some accolades. And those may be things that were just missed and no big deal.

 

So that makes me think it could be very feasible. And desirable, as activating 8 to 10 toggles is a pain in the ass. Dark armor and fighting is pretty common. 

[Hyperstrike]

5 hours ago, Starhammer said:

Well, you see it that way. I have received criticism showing not everyone recognizes the same merit in my efforts. It's for those who don't understand that I point out the process and reasoning behind it.

 

Would I script things this way myself?
No.
But I recognize the effort you've put into "labor savings".

 

5 hours ago, Starhammer said:

Where our viewpoints differ here is that I'm not going to assume their reasoning. For many people, moving the cursor and clicking on the power tray is perfectly sufficient as a way to play this game. For me it isn't. For them, there might be something unrelated to the game that is affecting what works and doesn't.

 

There's a significant difference between labor reduction and essentially eliminating toggles.  That's not an assumption.  And the manner in which this person is selectively arguing further reinforces this.

 

5 hours ago, Starhammer said:

If someone wants for something to be different, they aren't wrong for wanting it, no matter why they want it. We don't need to commit to making it happen, or agree with them. But the conversation is worth having... or if it isn't, it's on us to not take part in it rather than expect them discard views and desires not in line with our own.

I didn't say they're "wrong" for wanting it.
They're wrong for the attitude of "I don't care for your reasoning, I WANT...therefore..."

[Hyperstrike]

1 hour ago, arthurh35353 said:

First, insomnia sucks...

 

Stuck thinking in a squirrel cage, it occurred to me that the current devs in homecoming have literally worked recently on toggle exclusivity in just this last issue creating new powers that are mutually exclusive, modifying existing powers to become exclusive.

 

So while I don't think it would be trivial, I don't think changing the armor sets to allow most of the toggles to be activated by the first power would be super onerous either.

 

I mean, walk disables almost every power currently except AT inherents and some accolades. And those may be things that were just missed and no big deal.

 

So that makes me think it could be very feasible. And desirable, as activating 8 to 10 toggles is a pain in the ass. Dark armor and fighting is pretty common. 

1: Deactivating toggles through exclusivity is NOT the same thing as an armor flipper

2: An armor flipper, by its very nature, has to ASSUME which powers you have, or it has to flood the system with commands for literally DOZENS of powers.

3: Maybe speak with Starhammer about how he scripts his click-reduction macros.  It doesn't do things EXACTLY the way you want it.  But it DOES reduce the amount of clicks you need to a more manageable level.

[SwitchFade]

@Starhammer

 

Rather than quite multiple posts of textwall...

 

Flippant Quips about "debate team" are immaterial to the fact that the colloquial term is a straw man argument when an individual fabricates something, assigns it to another and proceeds to refute it; an indication of flawed reasoning and lack of actual sound proof their supposition has merit. Recognizing it may be frustrating for the individual who relies on such a social tactic, however, this does not mean it shouldn't be highlighted. Allowing falsehoods and blatant misstruths to flourish does everyone a disservice, for truth is essential to lucid communication.

 

Assumptions that anyone is using the premise that "change to code is bad" for a diatribe about how ideas are summarily dismissed ignores the very clear and lengthy details many have attempted to convey about HOW the particular change is very undesirable. No one used an excuse of "developer time" to avoid anything; it's a very real LIMITED resource being discussed, and rightly so.

 

No one is "derailing a whole concept," many are very clearly outlining that it's a not a concept that is necessary, has dramatic consequences and the perceived problem it seems to solve has been revealed to be no where near an issue, as described in the OP.

 

Now, it may be their personal desire to have what they want, but this is not an indication of a problem we face collectively.

 

I understand your feelings, but keep in mind that they may very well be discrete from facts and soap boxes can be notoriously frail.

[arthurh35353]

2 hours ago, Hyperstrike said:

1: Deactivating toggles through exclusivity is NOT the same thing as an armor flipper

I didn't say it was the same thing. But it is relatively similar and it shows that powers can be individually or in mass turned off by the click on one power. It is not actually that far of a concept that it could be extended to turning on a set of powers either.

2 hours ago, Hyperstrike said:

2: An armor flipper, by its very nature, has to ASSUME which powers you have, or it has to flood the system with commands for literally DOZENS of powers.

You make that sound like it's a super impossible thing or even super hard.

2 hours ago, Hyperstrike said:

3: Maybe speak with Starhammer about how he scripts his click-reduction macros.  It doesn't do things EXACTLY the way you want it.  But it DOES reduce the amount of clicks you need to a more manageable level.

Click-macros by default are just make one button that is attempting to activate a sequence of powers. And I know already that on a large set of toggles that sometimes it will interrupt the activation of some long activation toggles and cause it to be skipped or untriggered.

 

You seem to be thinking that I'm unable to activate a large number of toggles, rather than I'm suggesting something to make it simpler and nicer.

[arcane]

14 minutes ago, arthurh35353 said:

You make that sound like it's a super impossible thing or even super hard.

Why don’t you volunteer your expertise to the devs since you know exactly what to do...?

[arthurh35353]

Just now, arcaneholocaust said:

Why don’t you volunteer your expertise to the devs since you know exactly what to do...?

At least I'm not telling them everything is impossible.

[SwitchFade]

@arthurh35353just thought I would say...

 

I'm glad you're here and engaged and posting 😉

 

After all, we aren't we without YOU, and it takes all of us to make a family. While you may have disagreement with an idea, it's not a judgment of you; I'm quite certain that anyone here who has a different perspective than yours absolutely is grateful you're here. So, keep up the good work! We need your voice!

 

Just like @Hyperstrike,  @Replacementwill challenge me (and others as well), we may engage with you in discourse. Ideas are necessary, and while this one may be ill received (I've had some shit ideas myself 🤪) we all are Heroes together.

 

Except @Bill Z Bubba... He's a ne'er-do-well. 🤯🤪

 

And, nerf regen. Twice.

Edited February 25, 2021 by SwitchFade

[Techwright]

On 2/21/2021 at 4:10 PM, PeregrineFalcon said:

People who've been on the forums for awhile are just saying that this would likely be a huge amount of work for something that has almost no real benefit.

Wait, I am confused. I am not drawing sides in this, but the "no thank you" side has repeatedly said this is trivial and suggested a macro could do it. Yet, at the same time said it is too much work. So which is it?

 

And if it is a macro, why don't one of you constructive types with good macro skills write it and share?  Those who feel they can benefit from it will be grateful and those who prefer the current method will still have their challenge.

 

[arcane]

19 minutes ago, arthurh35353 said:

At least I'm not telling them everything is impossible.

I’m afraid you didn’t answer the question 🙂

[Hyperstrike]

22 minutes ago, arthurh35353 said:

I didn't say it was the same thing. But it is relatively similar and it shows that powers can be individually or in mass turned off by the click on one power. It is not actually that far of a concept that it could be extended to turning on a set of powers either.

 

Superficially similar.

 

Turning on specific armors without spamming "Turn on EVERY power or every ARMOR is significantly different.

 

22 minutes ago, arthurh35353 said:

You make that sound like it's a super impossible thing or even super hard.

 

I didn't say this.  Welcome to Strawman Quest.

I said YOU are underestimating the "simplicity" of developing such a power.  And you consistently fail to look at how such a thing would alter gameplay.
You just know "You want..."  therefore...

 

22 minutes ago, arthurh35353 said:

Click-macros by default are just make one button that is attempting to activate a sequence of powers. And I know already that on a large set of toggles that sometimes it will interrupt the activation of some long activation toggles and cause it to be skipped or untriggered.

 

Translation, it's not exactly what you want,and you're not willing to put the effort in and deal with not having exactly what you want.  So no, MUST HAVE WHAT YOU WANT.

 

22 minutes ago, arthurh35353 said:

You seem to be thinking that I'm unable to activate a large number of toggles, rather than I'm suggesting something to make it simpler and nicer.

No.  I think you're unwilling to put the work in.
And I think that no matter what arguments are raised, you'll simply roll right over the top of them.

[Hyperstrike]

15 minutes ago, Techwright said:

Wait, I am confused. I am not drawing sides in this, but the "no thank you" side has repeatedly said this is trivial and suggested a macro could do it. Yet, at the same time said it is too much work. So which is it?

 

And if it is a macro, why don't one of you constructive types with good macro skills write it and share?  Those who feel they can benefit from it will be grateful and those who prefer the current method will still have their challenge.

You've misunderstood.
Something SIMILAR could be accomplished via macros.  And would require a rotating macro bind and still have multiple key-presses (just, fewer), as macros allow you a maximum stack of two power activations.

And turning all powers off isn't the same thing as turning on a selective group of armors, as one CANNOT assume what powers are actually available unless you re-engineer how these powers exist in the DB or simply spam a huge list of "Turn *THIS* power on and flood the server with erroneous requests.

[arthurh35353]

55 minutes ago, Hyperstrike said:

No.  I think you're unwilling to put the work in.
And I think that no matter what arguments are raised, you'll simply roll right over the top of them.

Nope. I stated I can do it, I would just prefer that it be improved as a quality of life to be a one-click power that activates all of your armor toggles.

 

It was stated as very likely to be way too hard until I pointed out it was mechanically very similar to something that the developers have already done or worked on just this last issue. Even then, you stated that it would be too hard (I actually stated it sounded like it shouldn't be too hard, but would probably not be trivial either.)

 

Now it's suddenly 'I'll ignore your points' except for the fact I've brought up counter points and poked holes in the supposed points that it's too hard.

Edited February 25, 2021 by arthurh35353

[PeregrineFalcon]

2 hours ago, arthurh35353 said:

At least I'm not telling them everything is impossible.

And this is where you straw-man everyone in the thread that's not agreeing with you.

 

People aren't saying "everything is impossible", people aren't even saying "this is impossible", people are just saying that they're against your idea. Some think it'd be too much effort to code for the very small benefit. Some think it'd just make the game easier and they think it's already too easy.

 

Straw-man and Ad hominem attacks aren't going to convince anyone.

 

By the way, a lot of people in this thread have offered good suggestions to help you. I think I even saw one poster say that he could write the macro that would turn your armor toggles on for you. It's not what you want, but it's all that we, as players, can do to help you. People here will even offer you build advice so that you don't have to keep turning your toggles on so often.

 

So do you really want a solution? Or do you just want to beat everyone until they agree with you. Newsflash, that's never going to happen.

[Starhammer]

50 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

So do you really want a solution? Or do you just want to beat everyone until they agree with you. Newsflash, that's never going to happen.

So, you know this goes both ways, right? What is your desired outcome? Do you want to beat the OP until they give up and go away?

Accusations of strawman and ad hominem are only relevant if the person you're accusing has agreed to not use them, as if in a formalized debate. There's no "unspoken social contract" demanding all of us use the same rule and techniques to communicate... and to me at least, these accusations come across as trying to bully someone out of the conversation. Maybe that's what you want. Maybe you don't care, and just want to show off how much better you are at communicating by your rules than those who don't. Ultimately, it only seems to make the forums a more unwelcoming and unpleasant place.

[The Chairman]

32 minutes ago, Starhammer said:

Accusations of strawman and ad hominem are only relevant if the person you're accusing has agreed to not use them, as if in a formalized debate. There's no "unspoken social contract" demanding all of us use the same rule and techniques to communicate... and to me at least, these accusations come across as trying to bully someone out of the conversation. Maybe that's what you want. Maybe you don't care, and just want to show off how much better you are at communicating by your rules than those who don't. Ultimately, it only seems to make the forums a more unwelcoming and unpleasant place.

Perhaps I am not understanding you correctly. Strawmen and Ad Hominem attacks are logical fallacies. That is to say, they are errors in logic that either undermine their own arguments or are irrelevant to the discussion at hand. If one were to have a conversation/discussion/debate with another person who relies on logical fallacies in support of their position, how can that conversation be fruitful when the other person isn't actually providing a coherent argument? It seems that pointing out errors in logic would be necessary in order for the conversation to progress.

 

As always, correcting error ought to be done charitably. That said, even if one were to do so uncharitably, the fact remains that logical fallacies are invalid arguments on their face.

Edited February 25, 2021 by The Chairman
Typo

[arcane]

41 minutes ago, Starhammer said:

So, you know this goes both ways, right? What is your desired outcome? Do you want to beat the OP until they give up and go away?

Accusations of strawman and ad hominem are only relevant if the person you're accusing has agreed to not use them, as if in a formalized debate. There's no "unspoken social contract" demanding all of us use the same rule and techniques to communicate... and to me at least, these accusations come across as trying to bully someone out of the conversation. Maybe that's what you want. Maybe you don't care, and just want to show off how much better you are at communicating by your rules than those who don't. Ultimately, it only seems to make the forums a more unwelcoming and unpleasant place.

Yeah no if people can’t agree to abide by basic established principles of logic, communication is pretty useless and we should probably just delete this forum.

[SwitchFade]

53 minutes ago, Starhammer said:

So, you know this goes both ways, right? What is your desired outcome? Do you want to beat the OP until they give up and go away?

Accusations of strawman and ad hominem are only relevant if the person you're accusing has agreed to not use them, as if in a formalized debate. There's no "unspoken social contract" demanding all of us use the same rule and techniques to communicate... and to me at least, these accusations come across as trying to bully someone out of the conversation. Maybe that's what you want. Maybe you don't care, and just want to show off how much better you are at communicating by your rules than those who don't. Ultimately, it only seems to make the forums a more unwelcoming and unpleasant place.

Uh, basic social norms of communication that are accepted by the majority and expected are relevant.

 

Truth and honesty are universal, my friend, and communication that actively violates the social norms of a society one exists in are considered counter.

 

This isn't his rules, your rules or my rules, we all DO exist in a social network where our shared rules apply, whether you accept them or not is immaterial a to the fact that humans are social animals, communication exists and we all form context, symbols and norms.

 

Choosing to ignore them and then expect that it's ok to expect that mistruths and falsehoods are acceptable is dangerous and divisive. Truth and honesty are always relevant, straw men and ad hominem are counter. Always.

 

Everyone knows that making things up, pretending someone else said it and then attacking them is not ok, that's exactly what a straw man is; let's not debate the symantics of it. The reason that falsehoods and mistruths are so deeply offensive is due to that fundamental human precept of our social nature, when trust is violated I can no longer be safe around that person who is untrusted.

 

That's just human nature.

[Hyperstrike]

I think we've just about worn out this conversation (or whatever facsimile we've erected)...

Edited February 25, 2021 by Hyperstrike

[Sovera]

The reason I seldom visit this area of the forums is my inability to contain my snickering at non devs puffing their chest and saying no to suggestions, as if them saying no had any sort of impact on devs making a suggestion happen.

 

Not that I am really sure of the point in these part of the forums in the first place. Someone refresh my memory on suggestions that have been implemented? I could have used the no salvage recipe and being able to drop 100 converters at a time to the AH so I'm not repeating the same gesture 95 times as I did today.

[arcane]

1 hour ago, Sovera said:

The reason I seldom visit this area of the forums is my inability to contain my snickering at non devs puffing their chest and saying no to suggestions, as if them saying no had any sort of impact on devs making a suggestion happen.

 

Not that I am really sure of the point in these part of the forums in the first place. Someone refresh my memory on suggestions that have been implemented? I could have used the no salvage recipe and being able to drop 100 converters at a time to the AH so I'm not repeating the same gesture 95 times as I did today.

Haha, people giving opinions on a forum. What a joke. 🙄

[Hyperstrike]

3 hours ago, Sovera said:

The reason I seldom visit this area of the forums is my inability to contain my snickering at non devs puffing their chest and saying no to suggestions, as if them saying no had any sort of impact on devs making a suggestion happen.

 

Not that I am really sure of the point in these part of the forums in the first place. Someone refresh my memory on suggestions that have been implemented? I could have used the no salvage recipe and being able to drop 100 converters at a time to the AH so I'm not repeating the same gesture 95 times as I did today.

Occasionally suggestions do make it out of here in some form, and into the game in some form.

I can't really point to the examples, because there's so many over time.

At least the initial suggestions are valuable.

Not sure the rest, pro or con, are terribly useful.  Though an alternate implementation might be brought up.

I know, bitchy as I am, the Mids devs listen well, and I've had at least one suggestion taken up for a DB mod.