Jump to content

Lord_Of_Sith

Members
  • Posts

    114
  • Joined

Reputation

10 Good
  1. Beyond looking at the raw numbers, I think it would be far more helpful to look at the hps in an actual rotation. I don't know how the AI actually chooses a rotation, but for the sake of rough math to make a point I'll assume it goes soothe->mending->ameliorating force->ameliorating force-> sooth->ameliorating force->ameliorating force. This would be a sustainable, repeatable rotation lasting ~15s. Doing the math for the actual hps (based on your numbers and giving a % comparing to original) comes to: Original: 7064 hps (100%) Nerf: 2087 hps (30%) Current: 5185 hps (73%) Again, probably not the exact order that companions would use (actual rotation probably sub-optimal,making these numbers a bit high), but also not account for crit (meaning these numbers a bit low), but it should be a rough estimate good enough for a thread like this. For 1 target healing, that means the original 4.0 companions could heal about as well as a fully min-maxed pve healer utilizing all cds. Clearly too high for a companion, which is why people were kicking average healers from hmfps/tacticals and replacing them with companions.. However, 2k hps is easily attainable by a dps offhealing, so clearly too low. I'd personally say 5k hps is too high, but not high enough that people will kick healers out of gf content to intentionally replace them with companions (particularly with the lack of ae healing ability), thus healer comps should now be usable but not game-breaking the way they were. Problem solved.
  2. Bump.. and first post updated with links to a few other threads.
  3. On my Juggernaut I have had no problems with my AE taunt. But on my PT, since 4.0 hit, i can often click the AE taunt button (either through keybind or actual clicking with mouse) repeatedly and not have it trigger.
  4. In the new loot system (at least in groupfinder story mode), each boss other than last boss drops the following: 1 gear token, rolled upon by all members of the group. 2 MK-2 items (same as hmfp drops), which are preassigned to 2 random members of the group and match their class, but not necessarily their role. The final boss of the operation drops the following: 1 gear token, rolled upon by all members of the group. 1 random MK-2 item, rolled upon by all members of the group. 8 MK-2 items, with one preassigned to each member of the group.
  5. This is a purely visual bug. For example, if the platform has dropped and you can't see it, you can still jump onto it and you won't fall through. This applies to at least Soa and Gharj, and presumably to any other areas of the game that involve falling objects. Work around: Look at the object that you want to see fall. For some reason, the animation will not trigger until you look at the object. For Soa, this means look up at the platform you are waiting to see drop. For Gharj, this means look up at the Stalactites on the ceiling. Just keep in mind that physically they may have already dropped, as the animations do not match up with the server's physics.
  6. That is correct; the cybertech earpieces are functioning correctly; reverse engineering the 216 does grant the proper 220 schematics. It is just Biochem that is broken as far as I know.
  7. This is due to auto-loot. It seems that when you loot two quest items simultaneously, it only gives quest credit for one of them. If you turn off auto-loot and click the items off of a corpse one at a time, it should credit you for each one.
  8. The new conquest schematics for biochem are bugged. The second RE of them does not provide an upgrade; it provides a schematic with a new name but identical stats to the item being RE'd. For Example: Defiant Bastion Package MK-16 (208) reverse engineers into Defiant Bastion Package MK-26 (216) which reverse engineers into Exarch Bastion Package MK-26, which is supposed to be 220 rating but instead is bugged and providing a 216 rating identical to the previous 216 item. Defiant Bastion Package MK-16 (Item Rating 208, 282 Mastery, 331 Endurance, 137 Shield, 154 Defense) Defiant Bastion Package MK-26 (Item Rating 216, 313 Mastery, 369 Endurance, 152 Shield, 173 Defense) Exarch Bastion Package MK-26 (Item Rating 216, 313 Mastery, 369 Endurance, 152 Shield, 173 Defense) The 3rd item that is supposed to be 220 rating is instead completely identical to the prior 216 item except in name; however, the materials required to create it are consistent with other 220 items (i.e. 3 strategic resource matrix among other components), and if you have RE'd that far you have already wasted valuable materials expecting to find the 220 item that is supposed to be there. Update: Plenty of other threads popping up about this issue; it would be nice if a dev would give a response that you're at least aware of this. http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=846084 http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=849743 http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=849602 http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?p=8578424
  9. So to be clear, your problem with how they handled this exploit is based on a hypothetical group of people that may or may not actually exist? Show me a single person who accidentally sold >49 back before the launcher warning went up and received even a warning for it, and I might care. Not only that, but show me that person who was then denied sanction disputes. It's not worth arguing over hypotheticals like that. Yes, it would be bad if such people were disciplined- However, the people complaining aren't ones that fall into that category. The people complaining are ones that were warned, ignored the warning, and are upset that EAWare followed through with their threat.
  10. Yes, there is merit to that - there was about a 2 hour window between the servers coming up and the warnings going up. But of the 100+ pages in this thread, how many posts are from people who were logged in before the warning? Maybe there were 1 or 2 people who were legitimately excited about this chair and rushed to buy it the instant the servers came up, but I haven't heard of any of such people receiving as much as a warning. I agree that if you log in without a warning of a glitch, and perform an inconsequential act through the normal course of play, you shouldn't be reprimanded for whatever that act was. That's just not the case with 99.9% of players for this issue.
  11. How many warnings have they ever put on the launcher? Maybe they have before, but I can't remember a single time since launch that they have put a warning like this into the launcher itself. Hardly a requirement for customers to "constantly read warnings."
  12. I agree that in a 'normal' situation, buying 99 and selling back 49 would be 'normal'. I do that too; even if you couldn't sell them back, wasting 2 seconds on 49 credits simply isn't worth the time. However, this wasn't a normal situation. They put warnings everywhere and specifically said not to sell back a single chair. Context matters, and not all situations are equal. On a 'normal' stretch of road, I'll 'normally' go 5 over the speed limit without thinking about it. If I see a cop, or when I hit an active construction zone with signs saying tickets are doubled etc., I 'normally' go exactly the speed limit. The fact that they warned everyone about the exploit ahead of time makes this a not 'normal' situation. Given that they warned me that I could be banned for selling back a single chair, you can bet that I went and took the time to buy exactly 50. If you thought that it wasn't worth 2 seconds to avoid doing an action you were warned against, that's your judgment call to make but you have no grounds to complain.
  13. The original "310% post" is misleading for subscribers, it also forgot to account for the subscriber bonus. The original post said '200% base with 25% boost and 30% legacy, for 310% total". Corrected for subscriber bonus, but still in terms of what a subscriber would see: [normal subscriber xp] / [subscriber bonus xp] = [actual base xp] [actual base xp] * [double xp] = [double xp base] [double xp base] * [1 + subscriber bonus + boost + legacy] = [actual xp gain] 100/1.25=80 80*2=160 160*(1+.25+.25+.3)= 288 For a subscriber, the original post should have said 288%, not 310%. Following this, including a 10% guild xp bonus would make it: 160*(1+.25+.25+.3+.1) = 304 With all boosts and bonuses, a subscriber during double xp should get 304% xp. However, you could view this another way as 304xp/80xp base = 380% xp. A subscriber will receive 380% xp with all boosts in double xp, but compared to the normal 125% from the subscriber bonus, it will only seem like 304%. The 310% (and 330% numbers) are correct for f2p players: 160*(1+.25+.3)=248 -> 248/80 = 310% 160*(1+.25+.3+.1)= 264 -> 264/80 = 330% TLDR: The 310%/330% numbers are what f2p will see. At max boost, a subscriber will receive 380%xp, however it will only appear to be 304% if you compare it to the number including the innate subscriber bonus.
  14. This has been answered several times in this thread, the most recent being this: In the dev post when it says no boost xp is 56, they mean subscriber with no additional boost is 56. Meaning that the actual base xp (f2p without subscriber xp boost) is 56/1.25 = 44.8. The actual base xp is 45, not 56. Now, boost this with the 25% consumable (and 25% subscriber xp boost) and you have a 50% xp boost, so 45*1.5 = 67. This is the exact number in the dev post; there is no conspiracy to steal your xp. They probably should have used the f2p (actual base) numbers in the original dev number, but the number add up nonetheless.
  15. It lasts 3 seconds and is on a 10 second cooldown. If it isn't spammable, it's awful close. Anyways, the point is that (and I apologize for non-exact numbers) a ship with under 700m/s speed (such as a gunship) with barrel roll can nearly indefinitely outrun a scout with 850m/s+ speed without barrel roll.
×
×
  • Create New...