Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

Pathfinder Online will be ending operations on November 28, 2021. For more details please visit our FAQ.

All posts created by Bob

Bob
Bringslite of Staalgard
Bob
Nope, that was not my best choice of words there. You are correct that this process didn't reduce the strength of the original hex. A better phrasing would be "neighboring hexes used to boost each other's strength by a percentage of their own every hour."
@ Bob

Wouldn't that cause exponential growth? Is that something to look at when you consider reestablishing "spread"?

There were supposed to be some limits on growth, in that each escalation was only ever supposed to infect a specified maximum number of hexes, but one of the bugs was that they seemed to ignore that max sometimes. There was also a maximum strength for each individual hex, and that part was working.

However, it is true that because spreading didn't involve using up any kind of limited resource, and in fact escalation strength used to grow naturally over time, taking down escalations wasn't just a matter of taking the strength down. Instead, it also required taking the escalation's strength down as fast as it was going up just to keep things even. Any time you took a break, it felt like your progress got taken away. You could potentially battle the same escalation forever if you never managed to do damage fast enough. That made escalations an interesting simulation of having an enemy settlement nearby (which can basically grow in power anytime you're not damaging it sufficiently), but it just didn't feel right for PvE content. Our long-term plans involve treating the ability to spread as a limited resource that gets depleted each time it spreads, or each time you block it from spreading. That way you always feel like you're making progress against the overall, lifetime strength of the escalation.
Bob
Nihimon
Bob
Neighboring infectable hexes used to transfer a percentage of their escalation strength to each other every hour.

Bob, is your use of the word "transfer" intentional? It makes it sound like some of the Escalation Strength is subtracted from one hex and added to another. I thought it worked by each hex simply adding Escalation Strength to neighboring infectable hexes, proportional to its own Escalation Strength, without reducing its own Escalation Strength.

Nope, that was not my best choice of words there. You are correct that this process didn't reduce the strength of the original hex. A better phrasing would be "neighboring hexes used to boost each other's strength by a percentage of their own every hour."
Bob
Paddy Fitzpatrick
Also can someone answer me on what exactly is involved in escalation spreading? This must have been before my time but are you guys saying that these things used to branch out into other hexes or something?

Neighboring infectable hexes used to transfer a percentage of their escalation strength to each other every hour. If an uninfected hex rose up to its infection threshold, then it would become infected, resulting in the escalation spreading. If the hex was already infected with the same escalation as its neighbors, this could result in reinforcing that hex, making the infection strength go up, which often felt like any progress made lowering the strength in that hex got reversed. We took it out partially because there were some bugs allowing escalations to spread much farther than they were intended to, and partially because we felt it needed changes to keep the reinforcement mechanic from causing so much frustration. We have a long-term plan for bringing it back, and we've had some thoughts on simple ways to reintroduce it in stages, but nothing definite enough for us to throw on the schedule yet. It does need to come back eventually because a lot of the world balance was designed around it, but we need to be very careful about reintroducing it.
Bob
Nihimon
When you say "this kind of logging", do you mean the LogCharacter logging in general, or the specific request for XP Spent? The reason I ask is because I expected LogCharacter to be complex, and made the OP suggestion as a workaround. If the XP Spent by itself is fairly easy, that (in combination with the OP suggestion) would let the community produce a complete Feat Logger without y'all having to address the complexity of LogCharacter.

While I suspect that just logging out XP Spent wouldn't be a daunting task, it would still be a bit involved because the information isn't all neatly stored in one place, and we don't already have a function that outputs a similar list. For some of the other requests, we were already logging most of the information in a semi-legible way for internal use, so all we needed to do was clean it up a bit and include it on the personal logs.

I mostly added this request to the LogCharacter feature because it could either be done as part of that request or as an incremental step toward that request. As you say, I suspect a list of feats and the XP spent on them probably covers a huge percentage of the details for a character that you'd want to list out, so it would probably be a good first step in that it would provide the most bang for the buck.
Bob
We'll certainly make adjustments to the roadmap as circumstances change, particularly to which polish items we choose to prioritize, but the overall scope is based on a reasonably conservative estimate of what Cole and I can achieve through March 2018. As we get closer to that date, we can talk more about what work we might be able to do post-roadmap, but for now we have to stay pretty focused on the items listed in the roadmap and leave additional possibilities for later consideration.
Bob
Wolf of Rathglen
Trading/Vaults

More than a perk it strongly mitigates a lot of the clunkieness and frustration involved in trading now, whether its for crafting, profits, or helping new players get started.

In the first iteration it can be just character names, and companys or settlements appoint specific trade envoys that each other know. It can be fleshed out later from that framework. You just open the bank/ah in some town and there is a button to create a trade contract from items you can access in that town, when appropriate a button next to it to view/collect contracts left for you in that town.

We considered some limited trading contract ideas when working up the roadmap, but couldn't fit them in. They're still on the list to be reconsidered if we find more time or as work we could do post-roadmap.

Wolf of Rathglen
Rebalance Ranged Combat

Since this is happening in EE14 also, is there any chance of getting knockback to work on NPCs at all? Distance control is kind of a thing for ranged combat.

Last I tested it worked oddly on PCs also, they only went one cardinal direction no matter how I adjusted variables of the attack. Getting it to work as a forced Evade from the knockback caster would be great. But any knockback on NPCs.

The rebalancing we're looking at is really just in changing the spreadsheet numbers to take into account the addition of ammo, not a deep dive into the combat code. That said, the issues with knockback are listed in our bug database and are among the things we hope to look at when we're at the polish stage, but we'll still have to do a lot of brutal prioritizing at that point.
Bob
Some of the trainers do teach quite a few feats and it can be difficult to find just the ones you want to look at, particularly if you just want to compare the available longbow attacks or some other small group of feats. Another possibility that could be done without code changes would be for us to split some of the trainers up so that there are specific trainers for things like longbow and for shortbow, with each trainer having a shorter list. There are some advantages and disadvantages to either solution, but it's certainly an issue we'd like to work on at some point. I'll add a feature request to our database to look into some solutions when we can.
Bob
Tyncale
I think one of the things players will encounter very early on is that pretty much every skill or Feat that you train is behind some lock(i.e. needs pre-req).

This is a good point, and I'm trying to work some general advice about pre-requisites into the quests. Unfortunately, we can't do any complicated branching at this point, so I can't provide specific advice on exactly what's missing and what you'd do to get it. That's definitely the kind of advice we'd like to add to the UI over time, but that's going to be a major undertaking.
Bob
Nihimon
It would also be useful if we could get a log of "Total XP Spent" for a character, so we could combine that with the feats we detect have been trained to verify whether we've identified all trained feats.

I've added a comment on that to the LogCharacter feature request. I suspect this kind of logging would be a bit involved to implement and wouldn't take as much advantage of existing functionality as some of the previous logging requests we were able to get in, unfortunately.
Bob
Nihimon
TL;DR - List every rank for a trainer, even if that trainer can't train that rank.

There's a lot of great logging now, and I really appreciate it. Thanks again to Bob & Cole! And to Lisa, always!

Reading something Tyncale wrote in another thread, it occurred to me that there might be a (hopefully) simple way to make it clearer to new players what they need to do to get the next Rank of something they want to train, and that is to list *all* ranks of every trainable Feat at every trainer that trains that Feat, even if the Settlement level doesn't support training that rank.

For example, if I look at the Weaver trainer in Keeper's Pass (Settlement level 19), I can't see Weaver 20 in the "Unavailable" tab. If I could see Weaver 20 there, the tool tip could tell me "Settlement Level too low" along with the other reasons I can't train that rank right now.

Another benefit would be that my log parser could get an accurate picture of what feat ranks have been trained as soon as the player visits *any* trainer that trains that feat smile

I'd definitely like to include feats that can't be trained because the settlement level isn't high enough on the list of unavailable feats, and there's a feature request in our database to do so. Not sure when we'll be able to get to it.