A crazy suggestion.

[srmalloy]

3 hours ago, Forager said:

They have a chance to fire. The "procs per minute" is a very inaccurate and unhelpful estimate, because it doesn't consider any of the variables that impact the rate at which it fires.

And this is the problem I have with putting percentage numbers into the proc description -- the proc has no idea where it will be slotted. You can say that the proc will go off an average of X times per minute, but the chance of it going off in any given power is a function of the proc rate, the base recharge of the power, how much recharge reduction you have in the power, and the power's area of effect. 

 

With enough programming time put in, you could enable  a function that would be active in the enhancement slotting screen where you could drag a proc over a power and (assuming the proc is slottable in that power) it would give you a popup showing the percentage chance per activation that the proc would fire based on the power's current slotting. On the one hand, this would give you information that would affect your decision whether or not to slot the proc. On the other hand, it's at least partially self-defeating in that, to drag the proc in the enhancement screen, you would already have to have the proc in your inventory, which means you would have to have either crafted or bought it, and the information you get from the mouseover is information you would want to know before you bought/crafted the IO. The gripping hand is that I don't see this as adding enough value to be worth the amount of programming time it would take to make it work.

[Forager]

8 minutes ago, srmalloy said:

 I don't see this as adding enough value to be worth the amount of programming time it would take to make it work.

 

How much time is that?

[Psyonico]

On 6/2/2025 at 5:56 PM, Forager said:

This thread itself is evidence that this should have been changed a LONG time ago. You have people who who post on the forums that really think that the PPM information is true. Imagine what the less interested playerbase thinks.

The thing is, the PPM is true.  The chance to proc is variable and the most accurate way to explain how often it will proc is through PPM.

 

If you have a ST power that has a recharge of 30 seconds and you slot a 2PPM proc in it, the chance that proc has to fire is at the proc chance cap.

 

if you then slot enough recharge that the same power only has a 15 second recharge, well then that same proc will have about a 50% chance to proc in the power because if you can activate the power 4 times in a minute, but the proc is set to 2 PPM, well then 2/4=50%. Hence the PPM is accurate.

 

I’m not against the idea of being able to see the actual percentage chance a proc goes off, assuming that is possible to display, but you are stating false information.

[Rudra]

https://homecoming.wiki/wiki/Issue_24

 

• Invention Procs will be converted from flat rates to Procs Per Minute (PPM). Additionally, the PPM mechanics will undergo significant adjustments.[1]

 

 

Arbiter Hawk (From several posts on the Official Forums)

This is a bit of a trick question - these procs that you mention function like store-bought IO procs, so their chance to proc with any given power activation fluctuates with the power's recharge time and some other factors. The long and short of it is that you should put the proc in a power you like to use, but this Proc-per-minute functionality does not advantage, say, Neutrino Bolt over X-Ray Eyes, if you like using X-Ray more. Slot the procs into attacks that you use, and you'll see them go off fairly regularly.

It is not limited to its displayed number of procs per minutes - that is representative of the average number of times it will proc over a minute if you use a single-target power every time it comes off recharge. You can still "get lucky", roll high numbers on the under-the-hood dice, and get many more than 4 procs in a minute. Its just that instead of a flat 20% chance to proc (which gives higher proc uptime per minute to a power that can be used more times per minute), the chance of proc'ing is now variable with the recharge (and other special factors) of the power that you're enhancing.

It's base recharge time. If you have a single target attack slotted with a 2 ppm IO, the power would need to have a 30 second recharge to have a 100% proc chance. You could then IO it to ~100% recharge and combine that with 100% global recharge bonus to get the power's recharge down to 10 seconds, and it would still have that 100% proc chance. This is how all of the store-bought IO set procs work, as well as the ATO procs that are not global bonuses. This changes the math on "optimal proccing" significantly from the traditional "flat rate" approach, and causes the performance delta of optimal and non-optimal to be much smaller, so you can really slot these in any power you use and you will see them be effective.

 

Edit: So basically, slot the procs into whatever power(s) you want. It will average out. (Edit again: Or into your slowest recharging powers to max out their chance to trigger per activation at the cost of possible activations.)

 

Edited Thursday at 12:51 AM by Rudra

[biostem]

I mean, if being affected by speed boost from a person you aren't even teamed with, affects your recharge, which in turn affects how frequently a proc triggers, how can you provide any meaningful  metric, (not to mention that, if you haven't used that power in well over its PPM, then it should always go off when that power is used, regardless of other factors)?  TBH, I'm surprised they didn't just make them all persistent effects, and just adjust the magnitude or damage values, accordingly...

Edited Thursday at 12:58 AM by biostem

[Psyonico]

3 hours ago, biostem said:

if being affected by speed boost from a person you aren't even teamed with, affects your recharge, which in turn affects how frequently a proc triggers

In that case it does not affect proc rate.

 

only base and enhancement recharge (and therefore spiritual or agility alphas) affect proc rate

[Forager]

9 hours ago, Psyonico said:

The thing is, the PPM is true.

 

It's just... not? This is such a weird thing to say. It has been explained ad nauseum that it doesn't work this way. The procs have a percentage chance to go off. People have shared methods you can use to calculate it. This is a well known, well documented fact. I do understand how confusing this can be, given that the enhancement descriptions are inaccurate.

 

10 hours ago, Psyonico said:

The chance to proc is variable and the most accurate way to explain how often it will proc is through PPM.

 

Uh... no. If the chance to proc is variable... the most accurate way to explain how often it will proc would be it's chance to proc.

 

How can you say it's variable and then say the most accurate way to explain it is a number that never changes?

 

PPM is not real. We know this. I also can't understand the motivation for wanting it to be real. Read your own post. Your examples dismantle the idea of "procs per minute." You've provided more evidence against PPM descriptions than anyone.

[Psyonico]

5 hours ago, Forager said:

You've provided more evidence against PPM descriptions than anyone.

i literally explain how PPM is true, I’m not sure how you get the opposite of that.

 

the chance for a proc to fire is not a static percentage.  It is based on an average PPM.  It takes into consideration base and enhancement recharge to average out to the stated PPM.

 

I don’t know how to make this more clear.

[Forager]

20 minutes ago, Psyonico said:

I don’t know how to make this more clear.

 

I can make it very clear. 

 

Procs do not proc a certain number of times per minute. They have a percentage chance to proc.

[Psyonico]

1 hour ago, Forager said:

 

I can make it very clear. 

 

Procs do not proc a certain number of times per minute. They have a percentage chance to proc.

Except that percentage is not set in stone it is based on an average procs per minute

[Forager]

25 minutes ago, Psyonico said:

Except that percentage is not set in stone it is based on an average procs per minute

Ok

[macskull]

18 hours ago, Psyonico said:

The thing is, the PPM is true.  The chance to proc is variable and the most accurate way to explain how often it will proc is through PPM.

 

If you have a ST power that has a recharge of 30 seconds and you slot a 2PPM proc in it, the chance that proc has to fire is at the proc chance cap.

 

if you then slot enough recharge that the same power only has a 15 second recharge, well then that same proc will have about a 50% chance to proc in the power because if you can activate the power 4 times in a minute, but the proc is set to 2 PPM, well then 2/4=50%. Hence the PPM is accurate.

 

I’m not against the idea of being able to see the actual percentage chance a proc goes off, assuming that is possible to display, but you are stating false information.

A few problems with this example:

1. Even if the 90% proc chance cap didn’t exist, a single-target power with a 30 second recharge would not have a 100% chance to trigger a 2PPM proc unless that power also had a zero-second cast time.
2. You can use the PPM value of a proc to get a rough idea of how often a proc will trigger in a single-target power (again, because cast time affects proc rate), but what about an AoE?

1 hour ago, Psyonico said:

Except that percentage is not set in stone it is based on an average procs per minute

That percentage is a fixed number for a given proc slotted in a given power with a given amount of slotted recharge.

 

Here’s the rub: while the PPM value shown by the game for a given proc is true, it isn’t usually useful on its own and rarely provides enough information for a user to make an informed decision. Showing the actual chance a proc has to trigger would be far more user-friendly.

[Psyonico]

12 minutes ago, macskull said:

That percentage is a fixed number for a given proc slotted in a given power with a given amount of slotted recharge.

That’s a lot of “givens” but yes, that is accurate.  My point is that unless you get as specific as you just got, it’s not fixed.

 

Also, I’m not arguing that a percentage shouldn’t be shown, I even said as much several posts back…

 

18 hours ago, Psyonico said:

I’m not against the idea of being able to see the actual percentage chance a proc goes off, assuming that is possible to display

 

[Forager]

30 minutes ago, Psyonico said:

That’s a lot of “givens”

 

Lol it's at least one less than the number of givens for PPM to be true or accurate. 

Edited Thursday at 06:53 PM by Forager

[Chance Jackson]

On 6/2/2025 at 8:44 PM, Rudra said:

Yes, they do, on mouse over. Which is why my post further up says

 

Which makes me wonder what information the author is left having to guess over since the proc' itself says what it does and how often.

"If i put proc A, in power B, with recharge C what is the chance of proc A going off during an activation?"

 

Having that in game would be very useful. I have a spreadsheet with a formula that seems to be acurate but I have to modify that each time i consider a new combination of Proc A in Power B, with Recharge C & that formula does not account for how AOEs/Cones affect activation rates or how powers that actually act like pseudo pets affect the formula.

 

My understanding of OPs' suggestion takes care of all of that for people.

[Rudra]

6 minutes ago, Chance Jackson said:

I have a spreadsheet with a formula that seems to be acurate

Calculating Chance to Proc

The current formulae used by the game:

If power is a click: PPM × ((Enhanced Recharge Time + Time To Activate) / (60 × Area Factor))

If power is not a click: PPM × ((Activate Period) / (60 × Area Factor))

Note: For this calculation, "Enhanced Recharge Time" includes reductions from enhancements and Alpha slotting, but not from Luck of the Gambler bonuses, other enhancement set bonuses, Hasten, or other recharge buffs. The calculation uses activation time, not Arcanatime.

When accounting for powers that potentially can effect multiple targets and the proc potentially hitting off each target, the game discounts the probability of proc-ing off any one target by an Area Factor. The current way to calculate this number:

• Single Target Area Factor = 1
• Sphere Area Factor = [1 + (0.15×Radius)] × 0.75 + 0.25
• Cone Area Factor = [1 + (0.15×Radius) − (0.011×Radius×(360−Arc)/30)] × 0.75 + 0.25

Area Factor applies regardless of how many you actually hit. When using AoE and cones on single targets, proc performance will be significantly lower than with comparable single target powers.

The final chance to proc is clamped between a minimum and a maximum.

• The minimum chance to proc is (PPM × 1.5%) + 5%.
  • For example, a typical damage proc, with 3.5 PPM, has a minimum chance to proc of 10.25%. It will have at least a 10.25% chance to proc per target, even if the power has a large radius and short recharge.
• The maximum chance to proc is 90%.
  • Procs that always happen, such as Kismet's to hit buff and Miracle's recovery buff, ignore this maximum, and proc 100% of the time.

 

Cone/Area of Effect

The formula for calculating the required recharge + activation time to achieve a 90% proc chance is (54 × Area Factor)/PPM, where Area Factor is [1 + (0.15×Radius) − (0.011×Radius×(360−Arc)/30)] × 0.75 + 0.25.[1] Note that when Arc is 360 degrees (which is true for any non-Cone AoE) the Area Factor simplifies to [1 + (0.15×Radius)] × 0.75 + 0.25.

 

 

8 minutes ago, Chance Jackson said:

My understanding of OPs' suggestion takes care of all of that for people.

The issue I have is with how it could be done. Because the chance to proc' is fluid, it does change depending on how you have the power slotted for recharge reductions and if you have recharge reduction Alphas slotted, how would you simplify it to something the proc' can show for ease of reference? Say you

 

11 minutes ago, Chance Jackson said:

put proc A, in power B, with recharge C

and then you gain or change your Alpha. And now because you either added more recharge reduction from your Alpha or you took away some recharge reduction because of your alpha, that proc's chance to trigger has changed. Now the information you used to slot the proc' is/was wrong. The PPM didn't change though. That stayed the same. Just how complicated of a display do you want the proc' chance to be? And why is going to a wiki to get more detailed information for anything such a bad thing? Especially if the player is trying to make a min/max character. If the devs want to open this Pandora's box and make the change? That's their choice. Always was. Saying PPM isn't accurate though? When it is the basis of the calculations for chance to trigger? And is the one thing you can count on to not change just because you changed your slotted enhancements and/or Alpha?

[macskull]

Saying PPM is the basis of the calculations for the chance of a proc to trigger is no more true than saying power activation time or AoE radius is the basis of the calculations. They’re all just parts of the equation.

 

At the end of the day, this discussion is entirely irrelevant, since the lead powers dev has already said they want actual proc chance to be displayed ingame.

Edited Thursday at 09:26 PM by macskull

[Rudra]

3 minutes ago, macskull said:

Saying PPM is the basis of the calculations for the chance of a proc to trigger is no more true than saying power activation time or AoE radius is the basis of the calculations. They’re all just parts of the equation.

Yes and no. The PPM is the only part of the equation that doesn't change. It is also the only part of the equation the proc' has available to even do the calculation until the proc' is actually slotted into the power to the best of my knowledge.

 

4 minutes ago, macskull said:

At the end of the day, this discussion is entirely irrelevant, since the lead powers dev has already said they want actual proc chance to be displayed ingame.

If this is true, then it would indeed make the discussion irrelevant. To quote you though: show it to us.

[Forager]

2 hours ago, Rudra said:

how would you simplify it to something the proc' can show for ease of reference?

 

As a percentage.

[Rudra]

4 minutes ago, Forager said:

2 hours ago, Rudra said:

how would you simplify it to something the proc' can show for ease of reference?

 

As a percentage.

You misunderstand the question. You want that percentage to be visible to you before you slot the proc' so you can determine if that proc' is worth slotting in that power with its current configuration. The data to make that determination, to the best of my knowledge, is not available to the proc' to determine that percentage until after the proc' is slotted into the power to be affected. At which point the power's activation time and current recharge time sans global effects becomes available to make the calculation and find out what the chance to proc' actually is. If something is lacking the requisite data to make a calculation, then how do you propose it provide that final determined percentage? The simplest approach is the presentation of PPM, which is the one constant you can count on to not change regardless of what power you may want to slot that proc' into. So, with that in mind, how would you simplify the presentation for ease of reference?

[Forager]

1 minute ago, Rudra said:

You misunderstand the question. You want that percentage to be visible to you before you slot the proc' so you can determine if that proc' is worth slotting in that power with its current configuration. The data to make that determination, to the best of my knowledge, is not available to the proc' to determine that percentage until after the proc' is slotted into the power to be affected. At which point the power's activation time and current recharge time sans global effects becomes available to make the calculation and find out what the chance to proc' actually is. If something is lacking the requisite data to make a calculation, then how do you propose it provide that final determined percentage? The simplest approach is the presentation of PPM, which is the one constant you can count on to not change regardless of what power you may want to slot that proc' into. So, with that in mind, how would you simplify the presentation for ease of reference?

 

I don't think I misunderstand it...

 

The game knows the percentage. It has this data. It should show it to the player. It should show the percentage chance it has to proc. It's what we've been saying the whole time.

 

Or maybe you're asking like... the format? You drag the enhancement over the power, it should show what it will do before you drop it the same way it does for how much recharge it will add, or accuracy, or damage...

 

Then once it's in the power, it should display that percentage when you mouse over it.

[Rudra]

11 minutes ago, Forager said:

 

I don't think I misunderstand it...

 

The game knows the percentage. It has this data. It should show it to the player. It should show the percentage chance it has to proc. It's what we've been saying the whole time.

 

Or maybe you're asking like... the format? You drag the enhancement over the power, it should show what it will do before you drop it the same way it does for how much recharge it will add, or accuracy, or damage...

 

Then once it's in the power, it should display that percentage when you mouse over it.

If the devs are willing to put in the work to do it? Let it happen. The argument that PPM isn't accurate though? Is still garbage. (Edit: It may not be a format you like or prefer, but that does not render it inaccurate.)

 

Edited Thursday at 10:33 PM by Rudra

[Forager]

5 minutes ago, Rudra said:

If the devs are willing to put in the work to do it? Let it happen. The argument that PPM isn't accurate though? Is still garbage. (Edit: It may not be a format you like or prefer, but that does not render it inaccurate.)

 

 

No, its the fact that it represents what the average, unenhanced power does if it's clicked every time it's available. That's what renders it inaccurate... because that's rarely the circumstances when powers are used.

 

Amd as how much work it is for the devs... ooph. Like they can program the game to make this calculation and apply it, but they can't get the number on the screen lol.

 

The arguments around dev time and dev ability usually mean we've reached the bottom. I REALLY hope that's the bottom. 

[macskull]

2 hours ago, Rudra said:

To quote you though: show it to us.

Hi it's me, a person who does not make claims without the receipts to back them up. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

 

Edited yesterday at 12:04 AM by macskull

[Rudra]

1 hour ago, Forager said:

 

No, its the fact that it represents what the average, unenhanced power does if it's clicked every time it's available. That's what renders it inaccurate... because that's rarely the circumstances when powers are used.

 

Amd as how much work it is for the devs... ooph. Like they can program the game to make this calculation and apply it, but they can't get the number on the screen lol.

 

The arguments around dev time and dev ability usually mean we've reached the bottom. I REALLY hope that's the bottom. 

You again misunderstand what I am saying. I am not arguing dev time as a counter to the OP. I'm saying if they want to do it, they will.

 

Edited yesterday at 12:15 AM by Rudra
Edited to remove content to prevent derailing argument about bringing receipts.