in summary: Yes, there absolutely are abilities in the game other than the relic proc that will appear as "Power Surge" in combat logs. Discrimination by unique ID, not textual name, is an easy solution. Power surge from the Underworld SA relic should be listed as [Power Surge {3244358165856256}] in the original text file. If you work from that file, or from software other than torparse, you'll note that every discrete action/ability/buff/etc has a unique identifier. That identifier is how, for example, a parser separates a sniper's DoTs despite the text reading "Poisoned (Tech)" for two of them. Corrosive Grenade ---> Poisoned (Tech)[b] {1703989619982592}[/b] Corrosive Dart ---> Poisoned (Tech) [b]{814909914874120}[/b] Mercenaries also have an ability explicitly named Power Surge, which appears as Power Surge {2025218813984768} in log files. You didn't specify which power adrenal you use (and I didn't check your torparse links), but the Nano-Infused Attack Adrenal yields an effect of the same name: [ApplyEffect {836045448945477}: Nano-Infused Attack Adrenal {3261082768506880}]

An astute observation. I realized when voting that it may have been coincidental that oofalong was the only candidate I had ever heard of, but it's apparently a reflection of actual candidate forum habits.

Really, why is this on Facebook?

I suppose it was kind of an odd decision on my part to leave just one variable fixed . The update has been made. It's probably clear implicitly, but (for anyone learning from this) note that the corresponding HTML must be updated along with the javascript. Failing to do so would leave your code looking for a DOM element that doesnt exist.

I'm delighted that this has made it to the PTS, but I can't resist pointing out that PTS changes are not guaranteed to make it to live.

I'd speculate that some small vocal minority would complain about others having access to content first. With the vehement arguments that arise from "world firsts", this seems like a likely result.

You're not using an external tool that the other parties don't have access to. It's no more an unfair advantage than using a stun or interrupt against some poor sap who isn't smart enough to do likewise. He's got the tools; you can't force him to use them (or be blamed when he fails to use them).

No, he didn't say macros would solve the issue. He suggested that VOIP fails the test set forth by Phillip: Voice comms are a tool external to the game that enable faster responses - that's why they're used, right? If anything, I think he's written a verbose feature request (add voice comms to the game itself).

I'd have to agree with the earlier sentiment that the qualities you describe sound well suited to tanking. When it comes to DPS pulling groups, you can institute (and explicitly state, if necessary) a very simple rule: you pull it, you keep it. (To clarify, I mean specifically initiating a fight; being unable to hold aggro is a different matter.) Those who know the role they're playing won't ever come into conflict with the rule, and those who do come into conflict have no valid reason to complain to you. Paying attention, in general, is always a good thing. It might be worth noting that pulling aggro from the tank, on command, is usually the exclusive province of classes with tank trees. Pure DPS classes don't have taunts, and may have little to no healing mechanism. In those cases, no amount of attention paid to the tank's HP is actually going to contribute to keeping her (and the group) alive.

Respeccing isnt the issue; automating the process of respeccing is the issue.

I wonder: if a macro is executing your priority list, what are you doing? You might as well watch another player's stream while arbitrarily hitting spacebar to 'win'. One click respec does sound fantastic though. I don't respec often, but when I do, it's a PITA. (in truth, it's more like a minor inconvenience, but it often means 7 or more people are waiting for me to finish, and I'm clicking between the game window and a torhead skill tree bookmark).

There's no warrior (or any class I've played) ability that removes class buffs. Whether this occurrence fits the other two categories you mention (bug/hack) I can't address, and won't speculate on.

You can find it here. Your boost function seemed verbose and complex to me, so I rewrote it. In C++, my version would look like this: javascript for the link above:

Update: You did all the hard work! This should now be accessible on this Google Sites page. That should be even easier for those who don't want to copy and paste, though the performance has taken a noticeable and unpleasant hit. There's also a little tank stat tool based on KeyboardNinja's numbers in this thread.

First, thank you for your efforts! I suggest an easy to use web version; and because I had some free time, I ported your code to javascript and threw it in a bare bones html/css file. Variable input is on the left, the output is on the right. See this image as an example: imgur link (SFW, of course) I don have any server space laying around (and didn't bother looking for any) edit: This should now be accessible on this Google Sites page, but interested users can copy the code below into a text file, save as .html, and open it in a modern browser. I only tested in Chrome, so it's entirely possible other browsers may gag and die. The results update when you change an input (and the input loses focus). In other words, change a number, then hit tab or click somewhere else on the page if the results aren't immediately altered. The whole deal (javascript is minified, see below for the prettier version): Just the javascript (106 lines with whitespace) Hopefully someone finds it useful.

On topic: I run my Jugg in a mostly vigilance spec. Unfortunately my level of skill and experience the last time I played rage was so vastly different that I couldn't offer a meaningful direct comparison from personal experience. A little off topic: I'd argue this is the most important part of your post. If you're running with a team rather than a pug, the best spec is the one that provides the greatest benefit to that team. In my opinion, it's almost irrelevant to argue about pvp specs outside the context of your specific team.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that surge soft cap is pre-2.0 (or for level 50s, since they haven't changed). Copying keyboardninja's excellent 2.0 work in this thread:

What I've read and experienced: Alacrity is still of little use to anyone. You have better options as a Sin. The importance of accuracy has not diminished. Missed attacks have a very consistent damage output: 0. In PvP, expertise is not to be missed. It's the only reason you would ever prefer PvP gear over PvE gear. The bonuses it provides cannot be acquired by any other means (please note that the bolster system may make this less accurate in practice than it is in principle). If you're setting up your gear with pvp mods/enhancements/armor, you'll get the expertise you need. The only time you'd need to put thought towards this issue is if you're replacing pvp items with pve alternatives. You may not have the time to 'experiment' with stats in game (I assume you mean the time to grind out comms for every permutation of gearing that you deem as having potential), but searching the forums you'll find a lot of this work has already been done by others. Reading their results, opinions, and ideally math requires far less time investment.

Then tell us what you think changed in this case. Anyone who reads the patch notes regularly should be aware that they aren't entirely comprehensive - though specific class mechanics are not the typical type of omission. I hope your 100% certainty accompanies 100% accuracy, but that remains to be seen. (on a comedic note, tabloid talk show guests consistently know that they are 110% not that baby's daddy - tragically, not all of them are right) Again, if we didn't have to play 20 questions to determine if we've noticed the same thing, perhaps you'd have vocal support. edt: in regard to this thread being directed at Bioware, it may be worth noting that responses in the forums are typically from community managers, not developers. Chances are they don't know what you're on about.

Haven't read beyond this post (came in straight from the dev tracker), so apologies if this is already covered: the vast majority of my guildmates don't venture into the forums. As such, they have a high likelihood of 'spend[ing] their weekend on a futile hunt'. Has anyone considered some form of in-game notification system for bugs like this? You may be surprised at the how frequently in game mentions of the Known Issue List are met with 'the what? ' and 'where is that'?

Would be nice. You can gather all the rotation info you need by reading the parses. It requires more effort, but the result is equivalent.

It may be a matter of loot settings, but opening the box for me showed me the contents, but did not force me to remove them (ie accept the comms). Clicking the x to close that window retains both the container and the comms therein. I was however rather unpleasantly surprised to learn that these boxes count toward my weekly limit. Given the current cap, I could exceed the limit for a month+ (I'm not logged in, or I'd offer more precise numbers:o) without running any content. That really isn't a positive thing from my perspective (especially during the gap between 2.0 and regular access RotHC) - and it certainly doesn't make me optimistic about the other comm types and their weekly limits.

If you check the pve forums, you'll find threads complaining about this very thing; calling this hypocrisy is a stretch. Unless I missed a post, no one here is talking about PvE, so why even bring it up? In cases like failing to wear recruit gear, the message is fine - but the delivery is often counter productive.

Basically my thoughts, though I'm not a healer. It often seems our ragey brethren haven't heard that classic saying about crying over spilled milk. I would think that if the thought of losing is what bothers you, then spending your time raging (with constructive activities being the opportunity cost) would be an obvious poor choice. This line of thought always surprises me. Shockingly enough, not all of the people currently playing the game signed up on release day or during the beta. Similarly with the '...in a 50 WZ' complaint that appears in this thread, and in many others. I won't speculate on the frequency, but there are people who don't even try a warzone until they're at or near 50 (perhaps because the repetition of PVE has finally gotten to them or something). It's a weak link for those experienced players who just want to win, I understand that - but if you're that competitive, why aren't you running a premade (assuming you're fortunate enough to have that option)? You'd benefit more from calmly instructing (or leaving) than from raging about accurately identified ignorance, which shouldn't be confused or conflated with stupidity.

I've seen occasions where the 'whiners' appear to be skilled, but I don't think that's the issue. The problem, imo, is that berating your teammates does nothing to improve the current situation, and it does nothing to help that terrible player (in cases where they really are terrible) improve. Providing useful guidance to an under-performing team will produce better results in every case, short term and long term. And I have to emphasize the already mentioned point that this behavior turns away new players with alarming efficiency. That's not just being a jerk to one unfortunate; that's robbing your faction of a potential pvp player-base (perhaps not an issue on pvp servers).