Archetype Enhancements

Aggelakis · January 01, 2012, 04:29:53 AM

I put up a quickie overview of the special bonus enhancement for each archetype here:
http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Archetype_Enhancements

Then I fiddled around with the blaster version of what the set page would look like (nothing is templated so that it's easier to change until layout/formatting are finalized). I used the IO set page as a launching pad, and tweaked wording as necessary. Could use a little wordsmithing, I think; I am having a really hard time being concise on the set page so it ended up REALLY terse. (The more indepth explanation should be on the Archetype Enhancements page, which I will be fleshing out as well.)
standard
superior

Somewhat but not totally related:
http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Super_Pack

Also not totally related (stubby mcstubberson!):
http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Enhancement_Catalyst

Thirty-Seven · January 01, 2012, 06:05:43 AM

Will these be considered "special" in terms of drop pool? Or should a seperate icon be crafted to represent these?

Thirty-Seven · January 01, 2012, 06:08:21 AM

Additionally... is the official wording for the Super Pack REALLY SuperPack? As one word like that? Grrrr if it is. I hate CamelCase. :(

Derek Icelord · January 01, 2012, 06:59:36 AM

In the Beta Server store they are listed as Super Pack : Heroes and Villains under the Super Pack category.

And I was under the impression that AT enhancements weren't drops and only available from the store?

GuyPerfect · January 01, 2012, 07:29:31 AM

AOs will be available from Merit Vendors, at least. I haven't heard of them dropping at all.

Codewalker · January 01, 2012, 08:25:56 AM

Last I heard AOs from Super Packs and merit vendors, with the Catalysts being available from Super Packs and as a rare drop from Incarnate-level enemies (trials and DA).

Aggelakis · January 01, 2012, 03:15:31 PM

Re: Drop pools:
ATEs do not drop. Catalysts do. This information is already in the relevant articles.

I don't plan on using the Invention templates, since these are not inventions and I didn't want us to have to put a bunch of wacky code in the Invention templates to deal with these. I was planning on creating a template (such as {{ArchetypeSetOverview}}) to layout the details more easily -- I think we can use the set bonus template though, the ATEs don't have special set bonuses (yet). There will probably need to be another template created for the actual enhancement pages.

Re: CamelCase:
I honestly THOUGHT it was "Super Pack" but I based the spacing off of the Archetype Enhancements article that Rajani Isa created, which linked to "SuperPack". I should have double-checked on Beta but that's easy to fix.

I'm off to work, hurray hurray (can you sense the sarcasm?)...I'll be back later :p

Aggelakis · January 01, 2012, 07:49:58 PM

A quick note to drop before I head back to work from lunch:

How are the superior versions called? Is it:

a) Blaster's Wrath: Accuracy/Damage (Superior) ---- similar to purples?
b) Superior Blaster's Wrath: Accuracy/Damage ---- this is what's in the dump that Codewalker gave me

back later!

GuyPerfect · January 01, 2012, 10:39:47 PM

What, you don't believe me? )-:<

https://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y255/bgng/SuperiorOrNotSuperior.png

Aggelakis · January 01, 2012, 11:59:38 PM

My question: 19:49
Your wiki updates: 20:36

I didn't have time to log in to beta while on lunch to verify the naming convention of them, hence why I threw down the question here. Half an hour after I was back at work, you updated the wiki and comment here about me somehow manipulating the timeline to not believe you before your updates. :p

GuyPerfect · January 02, 2012, 12:06:17 AM

Now don't be bringing the facts into this!

Also, that was from the live build.

AlishaShatogi · March 29, 2012, 06:56:57 AM

(Yes, forum, I can see that "this topic has not been posted in for at least 10 days" I'd rather not start a new thread with the same title!)

So uh, dem ATO set pages! Looking good.

They seem to have broken the "Sets that improve X" set categories - the tables have gone goofy, and in the set summaries, there's the error "There is no such invention origin set listed in Paragon Wiki. Maybe the spelling is wrong?" next to a set bonus summary for a given ATO set in its alphabetical position - the bonuses for Brute's Fury showing up between Analyze Weakness and Call to Arms on http://wiki.cohtitan.com/wiki/Category:Sets_that_improve_Smashing_Resistance for example. I haz a sad because I have no idea how to fix this!

I am using Safari on OSX 10.6.8, since I believe that will probably make a difference. The problem doesn't appear to be on my end, as it shows up in both Firefox and Safari.

And uh, apologies for slight necro? :D

Sekoia · March 29, 2012, 07:33:08 AM

I fixed this by excluding the ATO sets from the output temporarily. Including them will be non-trivial, since they aren't part of the invention system. But for now, at least they're not breaking anything.

AlishaShatogi · March 29, 2012, 07:50:28 AM

Thank you for looking at it at least! I had a feeling it'd be non-trivial just from the way all those templates seem to interact. Good luck on fixing it more permanently. :)

CmdrAdeon · June 29, 2012, 05:05:30 PM

Is anyone going to get annoyed if I add them to the Invention Origin Enhancement Sets page:
http://wiki.cohtitan.com/wiki/IO_Sets

I realize that they aren't technically IO sets but it would be useful to have them on that page and in my opinion they are close enough.

Aggelakis · June 29, 2012, 06:51:16 PM

Yes, I would be very annoyed, because they are not inventions. Unless the scope of the article changes, they don't belong there.

Sekoia · June 29, 2012, 06:55:15 PM

Why don't we just move "Invention Origin Enhancement Sets" to "Enhancement Sets"? That seems like a pretty easy fix to me.

CmdrAdeon · June 29, 2012, 07:56:36 PM

Quote from: Sekoia on June 29, 2012, 06:55:15 PM
Why don't we just move "Invention Origin Enhancement Sets" to "Enhancement Sets"? That seems like a pretty easy fix to me.

That sounds like a reasonable compromise to me. The utility of that page has always been that it's a good way to scan through sets to find the bonuses you want. Leaving out sets just because of a naming convention pretty much kills the utility.

Personally I'd be fine with out a name change but I figured it might bug some people which is why I bought it up. As far as I'm concerned they are IOs since they are enhancements that provide set bonuses that are subject to exactly the same rules and restrictions as regular IO sets (i.e. the Rule of Fives). The only difference is that they are attuned rather than having a fixed level.

GuyPerfect · June 29, 2012, 08:04:01 PM

Quote from: CmdrAdeon on June 29, 2012, 07:56:36 PMAs far as I'm concerned they are IOs since they are enhancements that provide set bonuses that are subject to exactly the same rules and restrictions as regular IO sets (i.e. the Rule of Fives). The only difference is that they are attuned rather than having a fixed level.

Attuned Enhancements come as-is; they are not crafted. There is no Recipe to use, and no Salvage involved. Attuned Enhancements are strictly not Invention.

At this point, our only real option is to call the article Enhancement Sets, since its function is to show what Enhancements are available and what Set Bonuses they provide.

Aggelakis · June 29, 2012, 08:09:38 PM

Quote from: CmdrAdeon on June 29, 2012, 07:56:36 PM
As far as I'm concerned they are IOs since they are enhancements that provide set bonuses that are subject to exactly the same rules and restrictions as regular IO sets (i.e. the Rule of Fives). The only difference is that they are attuned rather than having a fixed level.

Free players (and preemies without temp/perma license) cannot utilize inventions. Free players can utilize attuned enhancements, which means they cannot be inventions.