Discussion about power sets, power pools, and "Epics."

[Blondeshell]

Now that all of the regular power sets have been standardized by format and nomenclature (no more "powerset"s), it's time to move on to the next phase. However, I think we need to clarify/update the way some power groups are documented.

Take, for example, the "Epic" power groups. The traditional names given to them have been "Ancillary Power Pools" (or "Epic Power Pools") and "Patron Power Pools." However, the current respec screen tells me to simply choose an "Epic Power Set." The list on the next screen includes all power groups regardless of source, and makes no mention of the terms "Ancillary" or "Patron." This leads me to believe that they are all considered "Epic," with the "Ancillary" and "Patron" terms being simply internal designations for their source. The official patch notes haven't been much help for figuring out what the devs consider the correct terms, either. The Issue 18 notes refer to "Ancillary/Patron" and the Issue 21 notes refer to "Epic/Patron." Regardless, the game interface still lumps them all under the term "Epic."

The second part deals with the standard Pool power groups. The traditional name given to this group is "Power Pools." However, again referencing the respec screen, I am told to choose from a "Pool Power Set" at first, with the next screen saying to choose one "Power Pool Set." The in-game help doesn't do much better because it uses the phrases "Power Pools," "Power Pool sets," and "Power Pool power sets" (Seriously? Talk about cumbersome with that one.) all on the same screen.

For reference, I have PMed Positron asking about these points, but have not yet gotten a response. No teacups, monocles, or pipes implied.

I really like the idea that every group of powers is called a "Power Set" regardless of its source or the number of powers it contains. It makes things simpler to remember and easier to understand. Considering that most players don't read the forums to see patch notes, they're likely only going to have the game interface on which to base any of their inquiries for futher information. The following suggestion is to further the idea that the wiki should match what's visible in-game as closely as possible.

I'd like us to further refine our articles as follows:

• Power Sets
• Primary Power Sets
• Secondary Power Sets
• Pool Power Sets
• Epic Power Sets
• Ancillary Power Sets (or Ancillary Epic Power Sets)
• Patron Power Sets (or Patron Epic Power Sets)

Thoughts? Comments?

[Aggelakis]

Pool Power Set +Power Pool Set

After all, you said it yourself it's listed as Power Pool Set in the interface. It's also easier transition from "Power Pools" to "Power Pool Sets" than it would be from "Power Pools" to "Pool Power Sets" (this sounds incredibly awkward, IMO).

Otherwise, no issue on anything else.

[Cannonfodder]

IIRC, when issue 3 was in beta there was consternation over the Epic designation.  Many players were disappointed by the non-epic-ness of the sets.  Jack clarified his intent for the sets and they were renamed in the late beta from Epic to Ancillary.  This is quite likely the reason that many places in the game they are referred to with varying nomenclature.

[GuyPerfect]

After all, you said it yourself it's listed as Power Pool Set in the interface.

Jack clarified his intent for the sets and they were renamed in the late beta from Epic to Ancillary.

[Sekoia]

We have Primary Power Sets, Secondary Power Sets, Epic Power Sets, Ancillary Power Sets, and Patron Power Sets... so "Pool Power Sets" best follows the established naming scheme used by all the other sets (regardless of how awkward it may sound). Since that is in fact one of the variants used in the game, I suggest that it be the official term. We can, of course, mention in the article that they're also colloquially referred to as "Power Pools".

I'd like us to further refine our articles as follows:

• Power Sets
• Primary Power Sets
• Secondary Power Sets
• Pool Power Sets
• Epic Power Sets
• Ancillary Power Sets (or Ancillary Epic Power Sets)
• Patron Power Sets (or Patron Epic Power Sets)

Barring any clarifications from the devs, this seems reasonable to me.

I don't think they're ever called "Ancillary Epic Power Sets" or "Patron Epic Power Sets" so I would avoid those specific terms.

In terms of how to portray Epic, Ancillary, and Patron Power Sets, I think the distinctions to be made are: An Ancillary Power Set is a kind of Epic Power Set that is automatically available to characters upon reaching the appropriate level. A Patron Power Set is a kind of Epic Power Set that must be unlocked by completing the requisite content.

[GuyPerfect]

A Patron Power Set is a kind of Epic Power Set that must be unlocked by completing the requisite content.

Specifically, these are unlocked by running the corresponding arcs from the Arachnos Patrons. If in the future there are other epic sets unlockable by other means, I doubt anyone would consider them "patron" sets.

[taosin]

Apologies to come late to this. Another source of naming are the KB articles.

For example, when I was revising some of the player guides, I was in frequent contact with the support staff, and at last one I can name 'gets it' and is incredibly responsive to updates and clarifications.
I'd like to quiz the KB and get back with a few typical links to add to potential 'naming-clature'? It'd take a coupla days, life's insane atm. And yeah, there seems to be a set of 'good' KB, ignored KB, and so on.

At the very least, be pointing relevant KB back to devs when asking about stuff?

Just a thought.

[Blondeshell]

KB = "Knowledgebase"?

Taking a quick scan through there makes me think they've revised some of their answers to match our articles.

[Thirty-Seven]

KB = "Knowledgebase"?

Yes.

Taosin and I had a nice chat one morning (well... my morning anyway) about how he has filed a ton of /bugs etc. regarding irregularities re: the Knowledge Base articles and how many have been updated in his wake. 

[Blondeshell]

Any idea how many of the Knowledge Base articles have been updated with their own content as opposed to borrowing what was on the wiki? If they've been using what we're planning on changing, Taosin's work might have been for naught.

[taosin]

Blondeshell: "Any idea how many of the Knowledge Base articles have been updated with their own content as opposed to borrowing what was on the wiki? "

Not sure what you mean? I from a previous post somewhere that sometimes we end up providing the name things get known by for new things, but from my point of view, the wiki reflects what NCsoft use in the game, site and answerbase.

For example Missing Power Pool powers Answer ID 2567, About the Power Pool System Answer ID 784 uses 'power pools', and these are sets of powers, and "Ice Bolt" is a power in the Ice Blast power pool. And bring in 'power pool sets' as well. Epic Power Pools Answer ID 8166 says "Epic power pools, also known as Ancillary power pools ... These are special power sets" and also uses 'epic power set' and 'patron power pool'.

So yeah, no usage that is extremely clear and consistent. Power sets... power pools... and so on. (And wow, they have City of Heroes Power Info Glossary Answer ID 9002 - - had not seen that)

Going back to the OP here... there's nothing wrong with the schema posted by , with Agge's Power Pool Set. I'd think:

* Power sets the main term
* Power Pool remains accepted usage, and handled via redirect or whatever... (or definition and link to 'new correct term'
* Anything seen in the game remains accepted usage
* I can say "I have Patron Powers" and that's correct and normal
* New types of power sets ... grrr, what was the term that poked in... oh this " NOTE: This is a Specialized Power Pool. You can only have one Specialized Power Pool in your build" -- so we prepare for that?

On Patron Powers, Patron Powers Answer ID 8167 gives us "Patron powers are special abilities villains can earn after reaching the appropriate levels and completing new tasks. ... Patron powers are essentially the Villain equivalent of Epic power pools for Hero characters, but with a different level of commitment ... Once you decide which power set you would like, return to Arbiter Rein to select your Patron" .... so even there, Patron Power Set gets a look in.

I've no issue, once this gets started (and is the OP is up somewhere on the wiki.) in doing a significant find/ask/document loop with the NCsoft answer base, if there's answerbase articles that contradict the majority of usage we see in the game, site and answerbase.

[Sekoia]

* Power Pool remains accepted usage, and handled via redirect or whatever... (or definition and link to 'new correct term'

Having thought about all this some more... I think some of us care more about unifying to a single unified naming scheme than the devs do. However, if the devs are consistently using multiple terms for a single thing, then we probably shouldn't go out of our way to update all instances of such things to a single term.

So for example, "Pool Power Sets" seems like the best term for the article itself. However, that article should also introduce "Power Pools" as another term used for the same thing (and Power Pools should redirect there -- no point in having a separate definition article). Elsewhere on the wiki, we should feel free to use "Power Pools" interchangeably with "Pool Power Sets". And the same thing would go for "Power Pool Sets".

If and when the devs actually decide to bless one of the terms as official, then we can go about forcing everything to line up with that. In the mean time, I don't see value in us artificially blessing one of the terms on our own. In fact, that could very well be counter-productive.

Which is to say, I agree with Taosin's point quoted above.

[Thirty-Seven]

I very much agree with that take, Sekoia.  Looks like a bunch of fun redirect pages!