Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined


10 Good
  1. Changing the firmware around isn't all that easy, other than straight upgrading. I've been able to confirm that the mode in question is, indeed, 120 Hz 3840*2160. More specifically, per the diagnostics screen, it is 3840x2160p @119.90 Hz YCBCR420 8bit sYCC601. This is a valid mode, but the LG C9 TV does not supports that mode. The LG CX does, but not the C9. The C9 supports 3840*2160 @120 Hz only over a HDMI 2.1 connection. That mode is not even selectable in the Nvidia control panel, or anywhere else. Not in-game either. But for some reason the game can still force the GPU into this mode, when it's set to 3840*2160 windowed on a HDMI 2.0 GPU+TV+cable combination.
  2. Some time ago, 3840x2160 Windowed Fullscreen ceased to work properly. It goes into a sort of blinking noise with a diagonal pattern, which changes somewhat according to what's meant to happen on-screen. It's similar to what you get trying to push HDMI 2.0 18 Gbps through a 1.4 cable, or setting wrong blanking intervals. I've tried different certified cables and they're not the issue. Fullscreen mode is also partially broken: it works, but any alt-tab sends the display into the same broken mode. I used to chalk it down to some weird driver combinations I may have had or whatever, but the problem persisted after a fresh, from-USB, nothing-transferred Windows install on another drive (for another reason). Relevant system configuration: Geforce 2080 Ti (has HDMI 2.0 output) LG 65C9 (HDMI 2.1, 120 Hz, 4K) Nvidia Drivers v.432 (the problem persists with many driver options, including 436, 442, 446, 451, and Studio drivers) Windows 10 v.2004 (the problem was present on v.19xx as well) No other games exhibit this behavior. Setting the color mode to 8, 10 or 12 bits, or to RGB or YCbCr 4/4/4, 4/2/2, 4/2/0, etc has no effect on the issue. The issue can be sidestepped by setting a custom resolution such as 3840x2159, which works fine (except that it's not perfect for some other things, because it activates scaling). I suspect the issue is that the game is trying to push a display mode that the display doesn't actually support. I wasn't able to diagnose the exact mode. The problem is likely to be reproducible on other 4K TVs. HDMI
  3. As experienced by myself, and analyzed here - http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=970386 - the crew skill missions reward much more Prototype (blue) and Artifact (purple) materials than Premium (green) ones. Shouldn't it be the other way around? At this point, it feels like the variables got switched somewhere, or the loot table's headers misnamed. If this is a deliberate decision, what is the reasoning behind it? I understand the intent behind the general shortage of mats, but not behind providing such quantities of blue+ materials that they never can be used up, due to the need to craft green assemblies first.
  4. It's not unfair to judge an unfinished product for being unfinished. Also, I disagree about the circumstances. The game was "dying" since day 1. It went free2play in less than a year since first release. That was 7 years ago. The problem with Onslaught is it's not finished. I knew this would happen back when they planned for a September release, then it was clear they couldn't do it, so they pushed it back to... wait for it... October 22. A month? A month is nothing in pre-existing codebase software development. Maybe it could've been ready for Xmas, if everyone worked hard (including PTS players, most of whom admittedly did). As it stands, we have what we have: a playable early beta, only without the option to choose to stay on the stable release for a while.
  5. People will still craft out of habit and sense of accomplishment if nothing else. GTN has always been flooded with crafted crap for 1/10 the price of the mats it took. As a way to gear up, though, I found crafting needless in 5.0 already - there's too much stuff you get for free to bother. Unless we're talking 258, where it was made very exclusive.
  6. Well, it did spread through the game, guilds I was in had it in the MOTD - cap all toons. Maybe it would've been fair to only grant the old rewards (obsolete as they are) on server reset time, pushing conquest time, but what's done is done. Hopefully the DBAs can retroactively grant the players the guild rewards. It would suck otherwise for players who spread their GQ across the legacy following the information.
  7. This is very welcome! F2P players' 5-revive limit is a problem for everyone - it makes subscribers wait while their f2p/preferred party members revive at the medcenter and run back. This makes a ton of difference. But I have to agree with other players that you're underestimating the inflation. In 2.0, one could even buy packs off the GTN as a f2p. Today, players are charging and getting 100 million for armor sets. But that's all right, that's players. Let's look at what the developers feel as fair prices for items. Currently, the Field Legacy Cargo Droid goes for a cool 2 million for the 1st level, and 3.5 million for the 3rd. It's not a must-have, but it's not something I see as necessary to deny to f2p. if that's worth 2 mil, that should be a good number. In short, a plain 10x increase - 2 million for f2p and 3.5 for preferred - would be a good match to the game's inflation. We're not talking f2ps buying luxury items on the GTN, or even large Strongholds. It's just matching their cap to the costs of vendor items and unlocks, the developer-recognized inflation. GTN inflation is much more than 10x. And if we were to future-proof this, others' suggestions for 5-10 million cap for preferred (i.e. mostly subs on a temporary semi-sabbatical) is not unreasonable either. I don't think operations should be entirely unlocked to f2p players, as the level 70 is still behind a paywall. But they could definitely use a limitation, similar to warzones today. You can make it a really small limit, like 2/week per character (or even 1/week if expended only for the final boss), or 5/week per account, or whatever - but at least give something to let f2ps get a taste for the raiding. SM ops just aren't the elite activity they used to be. And I sincerely hope and expect that many will sub, once they try and realize that what they're missing out on (or not getting enough of) is within their ability.
  8. Not Eric, but judging by past responses to minor exploits, it shouldn't be anything to worry about - they'll probably be looking for the sellback instead, and the consequences in any case would likely amount to taking away the credits made (none in that case)
  9. With only 5 servers, it stands to reason you'd redesign the UI - as in give each server a big icon, a description blurb, a list of your characters, maybe even your legacy, you know, use the space. Now it just looks empty. (Wouldn't be a priority for me of course! Just saying, if you're making changes...)
  10. Yeah, extending it at this point would be great. CXP rewards are still broken, and mostly downward. Until you get new values in, a flat 2x for everything is a good fix that will keep players interested. This way we both want to play now because of the 2xp and have something to look forward to with the new rates. Otherwise, once it's over, time to take it easy.
  11. Yeah, I tried to make sense of it, but it just doesn't work. It doesn't even work as an incentive to do LS/DS stuff, because it takes so many points to make a difference that even a guild can't make a dent in that level. Bring the duration down to maybe 4 hours. More importantly, bring the point requirements to shift balance to what they were pre-5.5. Not 4x more, not 10% more - just to that.
  12. Nope, that would've been ridiculous. Dailies CXP gains were too high. You all know what that means, they've rendered the rewards far too common, so they'll have to be threadmilled off that much sooner.
  13. But there's no real grind for gear. Lolster removes the need for it altogether 95% of the time, the rest drops out of crates that you could get by the hundred just doing dailies. I feel that what's happening to the game is more aging than dying. There's more stuff, so it takes progressively longer to add anything - you have to watch out for compatibility with more stuff, fix more bugs, avoid more known mistakes, get more people's OK on it. The code and content have gotten older, fewer people who knew them are left, and there's been more creators overall. Combined with dwindling resources from fewer subs as the game just isn't as new and hot as it was at launch, it's only to be expected. Even WoW, which is rolling in cash, has slowed down its rate of development and expansion.
  14. The sniper survivability problem isn't lacking a 5% heal. That will buff snipers in raids, but do little for PvP. Small heals on a short timer are a raid utility. It's lacking a button to make enemies unfocus you. When a Sorc pops their magic shield, you don't touch them, it's pointless. When other classes pop their reflect, you either stop shooting, or hurt yourself. When stealthers go stealth, you have no choice. Currently, for all Sniper defensives, the correct enemy response is the same: put more bullets in them! So, Sniper defenses are great for PvE, where enemies are dumb and deal prescribed damage. They suck for PvP, where you die from focused burst. Snipers need a defensive that prompts the attacker to drop focus. A powerful but not OP option would be giving Countermeasures a very brief stealth effect, similar to Maras. Since that would be too powerful, how about limiting it to Imperial Preparation? "First Countermeasures within 15 seconds of activating Imperial preparation will grant 4 seconds of stealth". Something very modest, almost a carbon copy of Merc 4-pc set bonus, would be reducing Evasion's CD by 15 seconds and buffing it by 2 seconds (move that out of utilities). But Mercs have three lives already, that's enough for them. Evasion's real problem, aside from short duration, is only applying to melee/ranged. It's the only DCD snipers have that at least calls for some momentary change in enemy tactics, but really just some. Making Evasion work on all attacks would be better. There are already two utilities that do that, one for snipers, one for ops - so the problem is known. It should be addressed straight on, by removing the melee/ranged limitation altogether, from the start. With all the powerful defensives other classes got, snipers need that to compete in PvP.
  15. There is a compromise solution. Keep the companions as they were - then add a role override that replaces their abilities with a stock, basic set for another role. Sadly, this path wasn't taken and comps' defining abilities got gutted.
  • Create New...