Things you Love, Things you would change

[arcane]

2 minutes ago, Skyhawke said:

Jesus dude, pull the stick out.

Maybe just don’t join dogpiles when you haven’t the faintest idea what’s going on

[Psyonico]

9 hours ago, arcane said:

pumping out numbers in excess of 700 DPS.

Please show me the evidence that HEATs are putting out consistent 700+ DPS and I’ll retract my statement.

[PeregrineFalcon]

2 hours ago, Skyhawke said:

Jesus dude, pull the stick out.

Not disagreeing with you, but is he wrong?

 

And can anyone prove that alien sparklebugs only do "mediocre DPS" with the cheat? Or am I just supposed to take peoples' word for it?

[Psyonico]

1 minute ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

And can anyone prove that alien sparklebugs only do "mediocre DPS" with the cheat? Or am I just supposed to take peoples' word for it?

I have never explored it, but I’ve watched players use it and it “feels” to me like average scrapper damage.

 

like I said, I’ll change my tune if someone brings numbers showing it is wildly over powered.

[skoryy]

I'll interrupt this broadcast to tap into the microphone for my one real airing of grievance.

 

Fix the rassafrassin' text editor.

Missing text, backspaces that go straight to the top of the box, character count that doesn't match up. We've been here six years now. Cryptic figured out how to put a competent text editor into their other games, why can't we?

[arcane]

58 minutes ago, Psyonico said:

Please show me the evidence that HEATs are putting out consistent 700+ DPS and I’ll retract my statement.

Pylon times such as by Lauci and others. If we run every scrapper powerset combo through the same testing parameters, I am comfortable betting money that anyone who thinks that the entire upper half of the scrapper performance spectrum is over 700 DPS is being untruthful. My guess at where that narrative came from? A couple people interested in protecting the exploit managed to barely surpass that bar, with probably a BA/Bio or EM/Bio, and then they decided to wildly exaggerate.

 

As someone with a lot of old pylon test data, I can assure you that 700 DPS is an insane amount of DPS, at least for non-pet classes and standard no temps no geas etc rules, and especially for a class with near Tanker mitigation levels.

 

My understanding of the numbers based on broader testing experience is that 700 DPS puts you far ahead of the median Scrapper or Blaster. Unfortunately you’d have to test a lot of powerset combos to fully demonstrate that whereas the HEATs only have one character to test. But I’ve tested enough high damage characters to know if something is failing the initial smell test.

Edited July 8 by arcane

[SeraphimKensai]

Going on the record, that although I do have an infinity changeling PB that I enjoy playing (I usually limit it to solo unless the team is alright with the shape shifting explosions which I let them know about ahead of time), I'm merely here to try to get a better understanding of dissenting opinions and not looking to pour kerosene on any fires. I'm effectively Switzerland.

 

Generally, I find relying on pylon times to be an inaccurate snapshot of DPS that one can realistically achieve in game. Trap door/Mission Office simulator times I think get a better approximation but rely on RNG for mission layout. If I'm not mistaken the higher end DPS pylon times that were tested were on the Closed Beta server with buffs that aren't normally accessible in regular game play.

 

In my personal experience having an infinity changeling, it can move like I said a decent scrapper or low tier blaster as far as damage goes, but it comes down to the driver, their binds, and also connection speed to the game. I personally don't find it to be game breaking by any means, but would fully support increased max damage/damage scalars/human form mez protection at the expense of a 0.5 second CD on shape shifting which would effectively end the changeling exploit that is being discussed, while making all three forms of a PB or WS viable.

 

Anyways I wish everyone well and hopefully you can find something about the day to enjoy.

[Chance Jackson]

Love the incarnate system i still want the other slots filled though.

 

Want to change the costume creator so parts can accept more than 2 colors

[skoryy]

I'll just say that having seen a changeling dominate in arena PvP, the words 'APM of a Korean Starcraft player' came to mind.

[arcane]

11 minutes ago, SeraphimKensai said:

Generally, I find relying on pylon times to be an inaccurate snapshot of DPS that one can realistically achieve in game.

I knew someone would say this but (1) is there any other established alternative for testing S/T DPS? and (2) it’s not like the pylon test’s problems are going to overestimate one AT’s performance and underestimate another - the skew is in the same direction. If it’s apples to apples testing, what better way is there?

[Psyonico]

1 hour ago, arcane said:

Pylon times such as by Lauci and others

Can you link to the results?

 

I’m fine with pylon times because I know that it inflates everyone’s DPS.  I will say that pylon times do inflate differently for different ATs though.  Blasters get more inflation than Tankers, for example, because against enemies that fight back, the blaster has to do more strategizing/planning than a tanker.

[Snarky]

One other thing I would change, and (i believe) this is a simple change….   Make EVERY contact also be a Ouro/TF type contact so you could run all content on a 50.  You would be exemplar down to the mission level.  That would open up a ton of story arcs and side missions to established characters.  To “go back in time” and run this stuff.  Let the contact keep track of everything you do for them just like normal 

[arcane]

1 hour ago, Psyonico said:

Can you link to the results?

 

I’m fine with pylon times because I know that it inflates everyone’s DPS.  I will say that pylon times do inflate differently for different ATs though.  Blasters get more inflation than Tankers, for example, because against enemies that fight back, the blaster has to do more strategizing/planning than a tanker.

I'll see what I can find. 

 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1rSgjI4tZ19_jLQi3kOjq0phnOC9LlQ-eOjO6O6qm68M/edit?gid=0#gid=0 

Division 4 bans temps and signature summons, so I primarily looked at those. Not a fan of including Geas in pylon runs so maybe round those DPS numbers down a smidge. But I see America's Angel and Laucianna both doing obscene numbers in Division 4. 

 

Lauci has commented on her DPS on page 1. 

 

Clam was close here. He would've needed to record the alleged 62 second run he mentions to pass 700 DPS though.

 

I could've sworn Koopak did some Kheld runs himself but I'm not finding the data anywhere.

 

That's what I got for now I'm going back to work.

 

I recall it being cited that a couple of people outdid changelings with scrappers so changelings must not be that good. IIRC one of the testers mentioned in that post was Ratch. I see Ratch's *Titan Weapons/Bio Armor* scrapper (not exactly the median we were talking about) did not quite beat Lauci in Division 4. 

Edited July 8 by arcane

[Neiska]

Warning - possible unpopular opinion.

 

You want to know a reason why Pylons don't matter? I can give you a few!

 

1. It doesn't resemble actual combat. It is literally a target dummy. Actual enemies move, fight back, buff, debuff, heal, and all kinds of other things. All you are presenting is a race, and a very narrow visioned one at that. DPS is but a small slice of the COH combat pie.

 

2. It doesn't compare ST to AOE. I don't think I really need to elaborate further on this, do I?

 

3. It doesn't take things like Brute fury-build up into account, and so on.

 

4. A person can say to heck with things like defense, resist, debuff protection, etc etc and build full out for DPS and DPS only, and perform awesome on a Pylon. When such a build might very likely fall flat elsewhere, especially on harder difficulties when things fight back, and especially solo.

 

5. I don't recall who, but someone once set a record with of all things... ...wait for it.. ..a Crabbermind. This was awhile ago mind you, 2-3 years I am thinking. But I recall at the time people were very surprised by how good of a time it was. It wasn't FIRST, but it was certainly up there. More than most expected. But I doubt anyone here would argue that Crabbers need DPS nerf, especially when they enjoy the infamous reputation for being "meh" dps to begin with. Not to mention that on anything harder than +3/8, its hard to keep all your pets alive for any duration longer than your barrier wearing off.

 

6. Lastly, the "but meh DPS!" mentality is a trap. And frankly it irks me that its the only measuring stick that people seem to care about. What do I mean by "its a trap?" It reminds me of the days of yore, back during raids when some people would just stare at the DPS meters and go "IM WINNING!" when they are standing in the fire, or messing up the raid mechanics, and wipe the raid. But are utterly convinced that since they were "top of the charts" they could do no wrong and it was everyone elses fault. How DARE people expect them to move, swap targets, click the thingy, and so on. That would drop them to number 3 at least, possibly even number 4! THE NERVE!

 

Now I hasten to add that I make no accusations that anyone here is of that same mentality, only that some remind me of such. When in any content that actually matters, frankly, DPS is at best, a 3rd or 4th concern. At most. 

 

On any hard content, the questions usually asked are - "do we have the right debuffs?" "do we have the right debuff protection" "we good for the purple patches" etc. I am hard pressed to think of a single solitary time was the question asked "do we have enough DPS" on any hard content. 

 

So I take any claims of Pylons or DPS with a very large grain of salt. Which is to say, I utterly disregard a lot of it unless it's from a voice that I respect, of which there are many.

 

But the funny thing? For all the outcries of "X NEEDS DPS NERF!" Or "look what I can do! LOOK AT MEH NUMBAS!" I can take a build that does half that and solo things that your shiny glass cannon can only dream of. Soloing AVs, GMs, entire TFs, etc. Anyone built only for DPS and DPS only isn't soloing any of those. 

 

Which makes me wonder why DPS seems to be the only measurement that people seem to go on crusades for.

 

However, I do want to add that I don't entirely disregard Pylon data. Only that I don't think its a good metric at all to compare different ATs. What it IS good for is rough ballpark estimates, as well as comparing different powersets on the SAME AT. NOT different AT metrics or balance arguments.

 

As far as the Changeling thing specifically? I'll throw that into my "who cares" bin. What they do doesn't affect me. If they found a way to make an underperforming AT at least mediocre, then I say the onus is on the admins to fix it so such things aren't necessary or even an option. I only played one once, years ago, a Warshade and got to level 30ish. I remember it being so painful I regarded it in the same category as petless MMs. Granted I know much more about the game now than I did way back when, but I am skeptical that they have really changed all that much except with the change specifically cited.

 

And I scoff at any claims of "but the DEVS want..." or "the DEVS said...!" without specific direct quotes. I can claim they think Santa Clause is a IRS agent who vacations in the tropics, but that doesn't make it true. So, until I see an actual Dev post that directly addresses an issue, I will take what people claim what they said with a very large pile of salt. As in entirely disregarded altogether.

 

Just my two cents

 

PS - if people wanted to compare actual combat data in a more realistic situation, they would be using a specific map on the AE where other combat features are also a concern. Not just how much damage you can do against a non-moving standing target with no powers or abilities.

Edited July 8 by Neiska
Added a PS

[Scarlet Shocker]

I wouldn't change too much - I would not remove, retcon or otherwise bugger about with what has gone before for a myriad reasons, not least that people have played and enjoyed a lot of this already and to change something is ultimately going to piss a few people off to no good end.

 

I would move the story forward in significant ways:

 

• FINISH the fucking Praetorian arc. It's been dangling going nowhere for over a decade and it was so close to being done then Matt Positron Miller got bored and decided to move on to the next shiny without finishing what he'd started.
• Bring some of the less well known signature characters into the spotlight. There's a habit of creating new important NPCs characters when we have perfectly viable existing characters who could do that job and it would flesh their stories out significantly.
• Hero1's story needs finishing properly. Poor zombie bastard's been in hellish limbo for a very long time and deserves either fixing or putting out of his misery at last.
• Who is Lady Grey really and what's her deal with Nemesis? Interesting plot points abound.
• Bring Back Statesman and Sister Psyche. No don't just bring them back as if they'd never been gone but update their stories, give them new, exciting and different roles in light of past arcs. Nobody in comics is dead forever, why should they be different?
• Scirocco and Frostfire also deserve some story love. Where are they going? They seem to be seeking redemption (a mistake in my opinion) but they're also stuck in limbo.

There are so many loose ends that need tying up. I know we've got limited dev time for new stories and arcs but some of this stuff is important.

 

Also:

 

Where are the Praetorian signature characters? Are they alive, dead, in gaol, or a different dimension? Similarly, Reichsman. What is Praetorian Hami doing? With Praetoria in disarray why hasn't he decided to destroy it after Cole broke his word? Who can stop him?

 

 

[arcane]

11 minutes ago, Neiska said:

Warning - possible unpopular opinion.

 

You want to know a reason why Pylons don't matter? I can give you a few!

 

1. It doesn't resemble actual combat. It is literally a target dummy. Actual enemies move, fight back, buff, debuff, heal, and all kinds of other things. All you are presenting is a race, and a very narrow visioned one at that. DPS is but a small slice of the COH combat pie.

 

2. It doesn't compare ST to AOE. I don't think I really need to elaborate further on this, do I?

 

3. It doesn't take things like Brute fury-build up into account, and so on.

 

4. A person can say to heck with things like defense, resist, debuff protection, etc etc and build full out for DPS and DPS only, and perform awesome on a Pylon. When such a build might very likely fall flat elsewhere, especially on harder difficulties when things fight back, and especially solo.

 

5. I don't recall who, but someone once set a record with of all things... ...wait for it.. ..a Crabbermind. This was awhile ago mind you, 2-3 years I am thinking. But I recall at the time people were very surprised by how good of a time it was. It wasn't FIRST, but it was certainly up there. More than most expected. But I doubt anyone here would argue that Crabbers need DPS nerf, especially when they enjoy the infamous reputation for being "meh" dps to begin with. Not to mention that on anything harder than +3/8, its hard to keep all your pets alive for any duration longer than your barrier wearing off.

 

6. Lastly, the "but meh DPS!" mentality is a trap. And frankly it irks me that its the only measuring stick that people seem to care about. What do I mean by "its a trap?" It reminds me of the days of yore, back during raids when some people would just stare at the DPS meters and go "IM WINNING!" when they are standing in the fire, or messing up the raid mechanics, and wipe the raid. But are utterly convinced that since they were "top of the charts" they could do no wrong and it was everyone elses fault. How DARE people expect them to move, swap targets, click the thingy, and so on. That would drop them to number 3 at least, possibly even number 4! THE NERVE!

 

Now I hasten to add that I make no accusations that anyone here is of that same mentality, only that some remind me of such. When in any content that actually matters, frankly, DPS is at best, a 3rd or 4th concern. At most. 

 

On any hard content, the questions usually asked are - "do we have the right debuffs?" "do we have the right debuff protection" "we good for the purple patches" etc. I am hard pressed to think of a single solitary time was the question asked "do we have enough DPS" on any hard content. 

 

So I take any claims of Pylons or DPS with a very large grain of salt. Which is to say, I utterly disregard a lot of it unless it's from a voice that I respect, of which there are many.

 

But the funny thing? For all the outcries of "X NEEDS DPS NERF!" Or "look what I can do! LOOK AT MEH NUMBAS!" I can take a build that does half that and solo things that your shiny glass cannon can only dream of. Soloing AVs, GMs, entire TFs, etc. Anyone built only for DPS and DPS only isn't soloing any of those. 

 

Which makes me wonder why DPS seems to be the only measurement that people seem to go on crusades for.

 

However, I do want to add that I don't entirely disregard Pylon data. Only that I don't think its a good metric at all to compare different ATs. What it IS good for is rough ballpark estimates, as well as comparing different powersets on the SAME AT. NOT different AT metrics or balance arguments.

 

As far as the Changeling thing specifically? I'll throw that into my "who cares" bin. What they do doesn't affect me. If they found a way to make an underperforming AT at least mediocre, then I say the onus is on the admins to fix it so such things aren't necessary or even an option. I only played one once, years ago, a Warshade and got to level 30ish. I remember it being so painful I regarded it in the same category as petless MMs. Granted I know much more about the game now than I did way back when, but I am skeptical that they have really changed all that much except with the change specifically cited.

 

And I scoff at any claims of "but the DEVS want..." or "the DEVS said...!" without specific direct quotes. I can claim they think Santa Clause is a IRS agent who vacations in the tropics, but that doesn't make it true. So, until I see an actual Dev post that directly addresses an issue, I will take what people claim what they said with a very large pile of salt. As in entirely disregarded altogether.

 

Just my two cents

 

PS - if people wanted to compare actual combat data in a more realistic situation, they would be using a specific map on the AE where other combat features are also a concern. Not just how much damage you can do against a non-moving standing target with no powers or abilities.

The point of the pylon test is not to capture realistic combat. The point of the pylon test is to isolate a variable. The fact that it ignores other variables is why it is a valuable and good test in the first place. 

[skoryy]

10 minutes ago, Neiska said:

Which makes me wonder why DPS seems to be the only measurement that people seem to go on crusades for.

 

I went to Champions Online after the sunset to get my superhero MMO itch fixed. They had public events there much like, say, the Council War Walker or the Vale War, but with a noted difference: The game kept track of how much you 'participated' in the event and displayed the scores at the end. Oh, the forum drama over healers not having their heals scored or controls scored or that this build was always dominating and ... sounds familiar, right? 

 

Or, alternatively, ever see The King of Kong? High scores are serious business.

[Neiska]

1 minute ago, arcane said:

The point of the pylon test is not to capture realistic combat. The point of the pylon test is to isolate a variable. The fact that it ignores other variables is why it is a valuable and good test in the first place. 

 

Hold up. So you are "isolating a variable" (in this case, dps), using a situation that is not replicated in 99% of the rest of the game, using uncontrolled measures and dubious metrics (such as ignoring all survivability stats entirely in favor of more DPS) and then some people present such data as "evidence" that some things need to be nerfed?

 

That would be like me entering a bike race, with a motorcycle, that I used illegal upgrades on, and then made the augment that since people swim too fast bikes need to be nerfed.

[arcane]

9 minutes ago, Neiska said:

 

Hold up. So you are "isolating a variable" (in this case, dps), using a situation that is not replicated in 99% of the rest of the game, using uncontrolled measures and dubious metrics (such as ignoring all survivability stats entirely in favor of more DPS) and then some people present such data as "evidence" that some things need to be nerfed?

 

That would be like me entering a bike race, with a motorcycle, that I used illegal upgrades on, and then made the augment that since people swim too fast bikes need to be nerfed.

I don’t understand know what you’re saying. Do you seriously think tested DPS is not correlated with overall performance and that those numbers have no bearing on balance?

 

And can you please tell us what the alternative is for testing DPS? Is there a better standard we’re unaware of?

 

You also brought up survivability as if changelings are doing as much damage as Scrappers and Blasters at the *expense* of survivability, but the exact opposite is true. Kheldians are easily the most durable of that bunch *and* they’re leaving them in the dust on damage. So your argument about what the pylon tests neglect actually works in my favor.

Edited July 8 by arcane

[Billbailey96]

One thing I would change is I want to be able to customize my pets when I play a mastermind. For example maybe more Vazlok style zombies for necromancy.

[Neiska]

Just now, arcane said:

I don’t understand know what you’re saying. Do you seriously think tested DPS is not correlated with overall performance and that those numbers have no bearing on balance?

 

And can you please tell us what the alternative is for testing DPS? Is there a better standard we’re unaware of?

 

I never said testing DPS isn't a good thing. But if you are going to present data for augments that things need to be changed or fixed, then I think testing it in a more realistic game situation has far more weight to it than a niche and almost never repeated situation.

 

You want to test DPS in a more realistic scenario? All you testers should use the same AE map. That way enemies fight back, enemies run, enemies do things and don't just stand there. Your test disregards even things as simple as them running away which would lower/impact the "actual" dps than if it was just standing there.

 

I never said pylons should be disregarded entirely. Only that their actual value for things like game balance and tuning to be dubious at best. If the game was everyone standing around fighting stationary targes that don't do anything, then you would have a good measurement there. But that's not the game.

 

So why not take your pylon builds and go run tests in actual game situations and use that instead when making arguments for balance changes. Methinks its because certain things can be controlled or even omitted entirely and thus don't arise during the re-balancing discussion, but that's just me musing. I mean, this isn't even taking things like "bad agents" into account. People who want to deliberately nerf some ATs/powersets and use pylons as their bible to present their point. Or people purposefully underperforming to try and argue that their at/build/setup needs a buff.

 

I look at data professionally. Not this kind of data mind you, I am more on the finance side of the house. But everything presented in pylon discussions as arguments to change things never made sense to me. At all. Not as a standalone anyway, which is what it seems to be most of the time. A comparison of pylon times as far as what's good or bad. Now some big brains here have done their due diligence and compared different setups in different situations and scenarios. But only using pylon times as a soapbox to stand on, well, strikes me as lazy data-generation. If you are going to compare different points of data, in a context that has more than two points, then you need to use more than two points as referance.

[arcane]

23 minutes ago, Neiska said:

 

I never said testing DPS isn't a good thing. But if you are going to present data for augments that things need to be changed or fixed, then I think testing it in a more realistic game situation has far more weight to it than a niche and almost never repeated situation.

 

You want to test DPS in a more realistic scenario? All you testers should use the same AE map. That way enemies fight back, enemies run, enemies do things and don't just stand there. Your test disregards even things as simple as them running away which would lower/impact the "actual" dps than if it was just standing there.

 

I never said pylons should be disregarded entirely. Only that their actual value for things like game balance and tuning to be dubious at best. If the game was everyone standing around fighting stationary targes that don't do anything, then you would have a good measurement there. But that's not the game.

 

So why not take your pylon builds and go run tests in actual game situations and use that instead when making arguments for balance changes. Methinks its because certain things can be controlled or even omitted entirely and thus don't arise during the re-balancing discussion, but that's just me musing. I mean, this isn't even taking things like "bad agents" into account. People who want to deliberately nerf some ATs/powersets and use pylons as their bible to present their point. Or people purposefully underperforming to try and argue that their at/build/setup needs a buff.

 

I look at data professionally. Not this kind of data mind you, I am more on the finance side of the house. But everything presented in pylon discussions as arguments to change things never made sense to me. At all. Not as a standalone anyway, which is what it seems to be most of the time. A comparison of pylon times as far as what's good or bad. Now some big brains here have done their due diligence and compared different setups in different situations and scenarios. But only using pylon times as a soapbox to stand on, well, strikes me as lazy data-generation. If you are going to compare different points of data, in a context that has more than two points, then you need to use more than two points as referance.

If the enemies are fighting back you are no longer testing DPS….. if either player is clicking heals or hiding or even moving, DPS is no longer the thing being measured.

 

This is turning out like the time Mez said you can optimize DPS and defenses in the same build simultaneously and instead of providing supporting evidence he just kept challenging me to a radio mission clear time race… which doesn’t…. even…. measure…. DPS…

Edited July 8 by arcane

[Neiska]

1 minute ago, arcane said:

If the enemies are fighting back you are no longer testing DPS…..

 

Then what value is such data in an argument, gathered contexts that don't exist or if they do only exist very rarely?

 

If no other game activities involve hitting a target that doesn't fight back, then what does it matter what the data says? Since the actual data could be quite different?

 

1.) "Against a single target that doesn't fight back, move, run, or do anything then X is best dps."

A.) "Alright. But what about every other aspect of the game?"

2.) "Oh, then it would be different. But I still think it should be nerfed."

B.) "But the data you use for your argument only exists in your single situation, and only exists in context? And you want to use this data to prove your argument that X needs to be nerfed?"

3.) "Yes."

[arcane]

1 minute ago, Neiska said:

 

Then what value is such data in an argument, gathered contexts that don't exist or if they do only exist very rarely?

 

If no other game activities involve hitting a target that doesn't fight back, then what does it matter what the data says? Since the actual data could be quite different?

 

1.) "Against a single target that doesn't fight back, move, run, or do anything then X is best dps."

A.) "Alright. But what about every other aspect of the game?"

2.) "Oh, then it would be different. But I still think it should be nerfed."

B.) "But the data you use for your argument only exists in your single situation, and only exists in context? And you want to use this data to prove your argument that X needs to be nerfed?"

3.) "Yes."

I think your argument that the actual game isn’t testing so nothing useful can be extrapolated from testing is kind of absurd. Do you seriously think anything other than “controlling for other variables is a completely normal way to collect useful data”? I don’t understand why we should be testing something besides DPS if we’re trying to observe… the variable called DPS. 

[Neiska]

Just now, arcane said:

I think your argument that the actual game isn’t testing so nothing useful can be extrapolated from testing is kind of absurd. Do you seriously think anything other than “controlling for other variables is a completely normal way to collect useful data”? I don’t understand why we should be testing something besides DPS if we’re trying to observe… the variable called DPS. 

 

My objection is not observing DPS. My objection is using DPS in a specific situation that don't exist in the game outside that single situation, as any kind of data to lend weight to any kind of "nerf" argument.

 

If those numbers "only" exist in pylons, and NOPLACE else, but ONLY in pylon tests, then what do those numbers matter? If anyone playing the actual game doing anything else wouldn't achieve those numbers? 

 

That's not even comparing apples to oranges. That is comparing apples to the price of pineapple seeds. I never said testing wasn't useful. Its people presenting pigeonholed data collected in certain circumstances to make changes that don't exist except in those certain circumstances.

 

Another example - "During a leap year, A fire melee scrapper is best. They should be nerfed"

                               "But a leap year only happens once every few years? Why are we treating leap years as the normal?"

                               "Doesn't matter. They are best. They need to be toned down."