New efforts!

[Surelle]

Thanks for the information Arcana very insightful, so the emulators that are currently out there SWG, Warhammer Online have all had permission from the original owners to go ahead? And provided information required to complete said emulators?

I would bet my bottom dollar that's not even remotely so in either case.   ;)  I think SOE kinda had an unofficial "look the other way" position when it came to the SWGemu projects (I think at some point there were multiples, but only one ever stuck around, and from what I've heard over the years it's still quite the mess, no offense to them).  However, Sony Japan sold off SOE to Russian investment firm Columbus Nova about a year ago now, and SOE is now Daybreak Studios, so I don't know how they're handling it.  It seems they have all they can do to keep their older games like EQ1&2 and Planetside 1&2 afloat while trying to bring new games like H1Z1, EQNext and Landmark to fruition, though, so I doubt they're giving SWG too much thought.

In Warhammer Online's case, I know Mythic was, at the time, scrambling to pull together a F2P model when the IP owners pulled the plug (much like LucasArts pulled the plug on SWG to make room for the TORtanic to launch).  What little is left of Mythic seems to have split itself off from Bioware whom it had previously merged with, and become Broadsword Studios.  I don't think there are more than a handful of devs there, and I think their official overlords are still EA much like Bioware's are, but I don't know that they're paying any more attention to their dead IPs than Daybreak/Columbus Nova are these days.

I think it's more a case of the emus staying off the radar and trying not to gain any unwanted attention than any official approvals going on.

[Azrael]

1.  It is technically possible, but very difficult.  Lots of MMOs have different groups that start "emulator" projects (which is a misnomer: these are all actually reverse engineered servers, not emulators).  Most fail.  Some succeed on some level.  Few succeed in all respects.  Most take years.  There are very few people I'm aware of technically capable of such an undertaking for City of Heroes.  If anyone was working on such a thing, it would not be in their best interests to tell anyone about it.  The existence of this thread alone should compel them to keep absolutely quiet.

2.  Yes, there are lots of legal issues that could potentially interfere with such a project.  In the case of CoH, two separate legal challenges exist.  Actually reverse engineering the server could be construed as violating the EULA we all were supposed to agree to when we began playing the game.  This is a legal grey area, and not all countries have the same laws regarding the enforceability of the EULA in this sense.  The stronger issue is that much of the game content existed on the server side only and would have to be recreated to make any "emulator" work.  This would almost certainly run afoul of copyright laws which are much less ambiguous and much more uniformly enforced in most western countries.

3.  I'm unaware of any reverse engineering team or private server team trying or succeeding to get permission, at least official permission.  There might be some unofficial "we;ll look the other way" kind of permission going on for some efforts, but I think it is highly unlikely a reverse engineering team could actually get legally binding permission to do so.

1.  We've had Icon.  We now have Paragon Chat. 

Emulator projects are all about time.  And code.  Years.  Probably.  It's taken 'years' to get to the current Mexican Stand-off. 

However...  With Icon?  We could wander around offline.  Access to that legendary costume creator.  With Paragon Chat?  Now we can wander around Paragon City 'online' on 'a' 'server.'  We can explore and chat.  Two big parts of CoH.  We can enjoy the timeless interface.  The evocative sound fx and music.  We can enjoy 'weather' (not something I remember being in CoH...) and I do like snow....  We can have costume contests.  RPG.  ...parts of the CoH community fun.  ...and...we have a timeline to restore much of peripheral and main functionality of CoH.  eg.  Actual NPC summoning on a 'private' chat map?  Ie.  GM/RPG style powers that we didn't have on the original game.  Someone and his team have the capability to bring 'that' functionality back...or they wouldn't have posted the timeline.  I have confidence in that team given what we've had so far.  And we do have some 'fake' powers.  Travel powers!  Never thought we'd see that again.    But they 'feel' like the original powers to me...  And its clear to me, the progress on the SCoRE team runs deeper on many fronts...but that the work is not 'finished...'  It's progress and a hint of things to come.  Each brick...

The 'end' of the Paragon Chat timeline hints at Power activation and possibly targeting...

As for this thread.  People are people.  Fans are fans.  They want the game back.  It's very emotional.  It spans the spectrum of the human condition.  Nothing rational about that.  CoH was well loved by its die hard fans.

And any 'new' Coh community will be built by those fans new and old.  It won't be the 'same' but it will be 'different.' :P

2.  Legal issues.

Cat and mouse.  Sometimes the law is an ass.  Sometimes Corporations over reach.  In that instance, the consumers need to push back.  Resolve.  Patience.  And some people will fight unfair restrictions that hold things hostage to fortune.  Fair use.  ie.  You agree to pay us money if the game is online...and only while we provide the server part of the game online.  'Ok.'  *gives £1000 over 8-ish years.  But.  The game gets pulled.  Now I have nothing but a shiny CD in a game box.  What if we agree to something that we later discover isn't all that 'fair?'  Don't we get to change our minds?  (I was raised by plenty of females.  I get to change my mind. :P)  There are heated arguments to be had about those.  I think MMOs should have an 'offline' mode and local LAN provided by 'Law' to protect people's investment of time and money.  Maybe not to play it on 'their' servers in perpetuity...fair enough.  But why not on my computer and a few other buddies on a local LAN or even P2Peer?  And if they don't or can't provide that, hand over the server code to the community for a community server on the grounds that's it's a 'play' online model and that they don't own the IP.  But they can play the game.  The CoH community didn't get much say in the matter.  The game was hastily closed down.  I think they could have handled it better.  Especially as NC Soft now want to get back into the American market.  Reaaally?  See how that works, folks? ;)

3.  Paragon Chat.

Clearly testing the waters.  Having a server connecting the clients is the big one.  And we'll see as more functionality gets restored.  Will NC Soft serve an injunction..?  For people using their clients to 'chat' and 'explore' said clients?  *'Serving' your ex-player base with a court notice, who are nominal in number and no competitive threat...and who are not making any profit out of it...probably not the best publicity for them.

But people came to CoH for the combat and missions.  Those are the reasons people really turned up.  That's going to take a lot longer.  There is the 'hint' of something else coming after Paragon Chat around the end of the timeline.  *Would NC Soft 'bite' then?  It will be unlikely for us to have the original missions...(no...but 'so'?  We played 'em all.)

...but maybe some tools to make our own?  'Someday?'

I look forward to see events unfold.  I'm very patient. :)

Azrael.

but I don't know that they're paying any more attention to their dead IPs than Daybreak/Columbus Nova are these days.

I think it's more a case of the emus staying off the radar and trying not to gain any unwanted attention than any official approvals going on.

...and that takes time.  And while we may want 'CoH' to live in some form of another.  The more 'drawn out' its eventual resurrection is...the better from SCoRE's point of view.  Better to do it right and watch NC Soft's reaction to each stage of that resuscitation.  So far.  No legal SWAT team.

[Tubbius]

Now I have nothing but a shiny CD in a game box. 

But I like my shiny CD in a game box.  :(

[darkgob]

... I dreamed that the negotiations had succeeded, and as a test, they were putting up a partial version of the game with the character creator and the various tutorials (yes, even the old ones).  I remember being so happy.

The removal of Breakout from the game is one of the things I hated about CoH Freedom.  Nothing of value was lost by removing Outbreak but Breakout was a unique mission and served as a good atmospheric introduction to a villain character (and no, flashing back to break back into the Zig is not a suitable replacement).

[Arcana]

Thanks for the information Arcana very insightful, so the emulators that are currently out there SWG, Warhammer Online have all had permission from the original owners to go ahead? And provided information required to complete said emulators?

Reread #3.

[Arcana]

Fair use.

People keep mentioning this, but only the most radical "information wants to be free" maniac would argue that straight up ripping off the City of Heroes IP by copying it into another unauthorized game without permission is "fair use."  It doesn't matter at all that NCSoft decided to no longer provide that content to you.  It is not in the game client so you can't claim to have "purchased it" in any way.  Content owners have the right to not sell it to you.  You don't have the right to steal it just because it makes you happy.

We can argue the grey area of reverse engineering all day: you're not *copying* someone else's work when you reverse engineer something.  You're making something else that happens to perform the same function.  But you can't say you have a fundamental right to the Magisterium trial just because you used to play it and you miss it, and if NCSoft won't provide a game server with that content on it you have a fundamental right to simply duplicate it.

If you aren't actually talking about that content, then fair use is irrelevant.  There's no such thing as the concept of fair use in the context of reverse engineering.  Fair use is a specific legal concept describing the rights individuals have to use copyright work for distinct protected purposes without compensating the copyright holder.

Also, "we" can encourage "us" to start an intellectual property rights revolution and bring down the Man, but at the end of the day the people we are all cheering on to violate the law will be the ones to bear the full consequences of those actions.  Unless you actually have skin in the game and intend to suffer the same financial and penal consequences I think the level of your encouragement should be carefully considered.  I would never encourage someone to do something like that when I know I'd be putting them in harm's way, not myself.

[Brigadine]

So, it sounds like the negotiations failed?

[MM3squints]

So, it sounds like the negotiations failed?

If it eases your mine, you can think that to give it closure and move on. When the game magically comes back, it is just an unexpected bonus because you weren't paying attention to the news.

[Angel Phoenix77]

So, it sounds like the negotiations failed?

?

[Soul Resonance]

So, it sounds like the negotiations failed?

I don't see a post by downix  ;D

[psquared007]

Arcana, et. al,

I've addressed this to Arcana because she demonstrates a deep working knowledge of the game mechanics, but I'm also looking for input from anyone that feels they have a good source.

I've been playing around with Mids and want to double check some of the numbers I'm seeing.

I'm looking for an on-line primer/resource on the to-hit, acc, def and def debuff relationships as implemented in I23. 

Is   "http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Attack_Mechanics"      a good source? 

Thanks in advance!

[Arcana]

I'm looking for an on-line primer/resource on the to-hit, acc, def and def debuff relationships as implemented in I23. 

Is   "http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Attack_Mechanics"      a good source? 

As far as I'm aware, the Paragonwiki pages on game mechanics are by in large correct.  I should point out that Mids sometimes did calculations that were not strictly speaking correct or involved unstated assumptions (for example, Mids' calculated tohit chances presumed the target did not have any defense and the attacker did not have any tohit debuffs).

[Thunder Glove]

So, it sounds like the negotiations failed?

Nobody has said anything about the negotiations ending, failure or otherwise.

[Risha]

Well, just checking in after a long stretch away.  Man, I miss this game.

[psquared007]

Thanks Arcana. 

I've already found that Mids does some wonky things with dmg calcs on certain powers. 

Could you outline for me how I should be calculating dmg with buffs, bu, aim, et. al. from a base dmg standpoint. 

In other words, if I start with a base dmg of 100 and I have two different buffs, one at 60% and one at 20%. 

Is the total dmg:

      100 + (100*.6)+ (100*.2) = 180
or                       100*1.6*1.2 = 192
or    something completely different? 

Do the dmg bonuses that IO sets award work differently?

Thanks for your time and patience, psquared

[Arcana]

Thanks Arcana. 

I've already found that Mids does some wonky things with dmg calcs on certain powers. 

Could you outline for me how I should be calculating dmg with buffs, bu, aim, et. al. from a base dmg standpoint. 

In other words, if I start with a base dmg of 100 and I have two different buffs, one at 60% and one at 20%. 

Is the total dmg:

      100 + (100*.6)+ (100*.2) = 180
or                       100*1.6*1.2 = 192
or    something completely different? 

Do the dmg bonuses that IO sets award work differently?

Thanks for your time and patience, psquared

Everyone starts with a base "strength" of 100% or 1.0 for all damage types.  So when an attack claims to do "100 points" of damage (it is actually more complicated than that, but that's not important here) you should assume that by default you do 100% of that damage, or 100 points.  When you have damage buffs running, those buffs improve your damage dealing strength.  So if you have a 60% damage buff what that means is your damage strength increases from 100% to 160%.  You would then do 160% of that attack's base 100 points of damage, or 160.  If you had a 60% damage buff and a 20% damage buff, you should treat that as your strength increasing from 100% to 100% + 60% + 20% = 180%.  You would then do 180% of the damage of that attack or 180.  Damage debuffs would work the same way.  If you had a 60% damage buff and were also currently being debuffed with a -30% damage strength debuff then your total strength would be 100% + 60% - 30% = 130%.  You would then do 130 points of damage.

All damage strength buffs and debuffs are additive, meaning you should add up all of your strength buffs applied to your character, and then all of the enhancement modifiers for the specific power in question.  So if you have a 60% damage buff and an NPC is hitting you with a -25% damage debuff and the attack you are using is slotted with +95% damage, then your total strength when using that attack specifically would be 100% + 60% -25% + 95% = 230%.  You would then do 230 points of damage with that attack.

Also note that "damage strength" is actually typed.  Meaning you can have different strengths for different damage types.  Most damage buffs and damage debuffs buff or debuff all types equally, so we normally talk about Build Up buffing "damage strength" by +100%.  In fact (for the appropriate archetype) BU buffs smashing strength by 100% and lethal strength by 100% and fire strength by 100% and so on.  I mention this because there are rare cases when this is not true.  The one that comes to mind specifically is Fiery Embrace.  For scrappers that power buffs Fire strength by +125% and every other type by only +100%.  Also, the fire buff lasts longer, so after ten seconds you'll have +125% fire strength and +0% everything else. 

[Brigadine]

If it eases your mine, you can think that to give it closure and move on. When the game magically comes back, it is just an unexpected bonus because you weren't paying attention to the news.

But when dead things come back it is usually zombies :(

[MM3squints]

But when dead things come back it is usually zombies :(

That's essentially what CoX when it comes back is going to be (a zombie.) More than likely i23 in maintenance mode with little to no development. Unlike a zombie, it dose have a soul and the beating heart of CoX community.

[Joshex]

As far as I'm aware, the Paragonwiki pages on game mechanics are by in large correct.  I should point out that Mids sometimes did calculations that were not strictly speaking correct or involved unstated assumptions (for example, Mids' calculated tohit chances presumed the target did not have any defense and the attacker did not have any tohit debuffs).

I always assumed mids was made to specifically not calculate full battle statistics but only to give the player notice about what their build would be like without interference or with general interference when it comes to grouping and only for the sake of powers that are affected by mob numbers.

I always wanted a mids that could allow us to calculate the outcomes of real battle situations in the game, such as picking a horde or picking an AV and seeing how your build fares. but that would have been a lot more work, plus it's funner to test it out in game (when we had the game)

That's essentially what CoX when it comes back is going to be (a zombie.) More than likely i23 in maintenance mode with little to no development. Unlike a zombie, it dose have a soul and the beating heart of CoX community.

zombies have souls. just not the soul of the person that was there. Actually, technically they do but that's a whole lesson in zombie mythology right there. I've never seen it done right in the movies, I've only seen it partially done right in a TV show based on a story/novella series by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.

leave it to the oldies to do mythology right.

[brothermutant]

So...that would mean CoH, when it returns, would be in a Life Supported coma?