User talk:IN

Hi, welcome to the Dragon Age Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the Console page.

I hope that you will stick around and continue to help us improve the wiki.

Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Snfonseka (Talk) 17:55, December 5, 2009

Re:Loghain Mac Tir Info Question
Hhhm, well the wiki is soon introducing new spoilers that cover the spoiled text, if a new page is created it might get merged by an admin. I haven't heard of anyone taking on a project on an in-depth Logain/secret companion, if you like you can ask one of the admins or do a post on the Forum:Wiki_Discussion.

Admins

Also please try to sign your messages ie. ~ for talk pages/discussion pages and forums. So people can find you easier :) 09:01, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

Fixed for IN
There ya go :D 10:21, February 5, 2010 (UTC)


 * Np, anytime 10:25, February 5, 2010 (UTC)


 * Done :D 10:31, February 5, 2010 (UTC)

<3
Thanks :D I have been waiting for those icons for a while now :P 03:58, February 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * Nice, Ya more mechanics info and other info is needed on the shale talents, when I input them into individual articles they only 4 talents where documented so I have to input the info straight from the game and I didn't have the tool tip info : / so I didn't do the greatest job, LOL. 04:55, February 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * You know you can remove that stat description, it is in the item transformer as a note, FYI, if you need to remove or add quick reference mechanics notes (italic text on the talent list) to the individual talent (ie Entropy Spells all italic text is mechanics). 06:25, February 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * Hehe, don't worry it isn't something many people know or care to know, if you read the info in the transformer it says:

Is my note for my template, so really not many know but if asked, I'd let people know :D 06:33, February 7, 2010 (UTC)

Re:+X% Healing Received Bug Article
Hmm, ask an admin about what should be done with the article. I am not sure about that one. 21:48, February 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * For you, anytime :D 21:57, February 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Why have you included Maric's Blade and changed that article when that item doesn't have +X% to healing effects received modifier ? PhilV 11:47, February 14, 2010 (UTC)

You are absolutely right :) That was a reason: http://www.gamebanshee.com/cgi-bin/search/banshee_search.pl?_layout=DAO_Items_Page&_cgifunction=search&DAO_Items.id=537

I'll remove both the link to Maric's Blade and the note in the article dedicated to that weapon. Thanks for pointing it out! :)

IN 12:57, February 14, 2010 (UTC)

Re:Two Things
One, do you edit with Rich text editor... thats why Forum:Rich Text Editor - Kills Tables

Two, regardless, the admins will call for it too. Because it is opinionated it won't have it's own article unless it is integrated in the Tank article or put on the talk page (reason why I don't have an article for my AW guide). Trust me there is a very slim chance the admins will let this be a stand alone article (or else there would be multiple how to guides on how to play one class/spec/role), I put the merge tag so it can be put to their attention, sooner, rather than later. So you can do 2 things, ask the admins (I think Loleil would be the most appropriate for this one, might need Tierrie's ok too), if it is fine as is, which I have a feeling they will have some idea of change on it. Or leave the tag and see what they do with it along the road. 23:08, February 15, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, the respective page Tank is not any better because some articles have to be opinions cause there is no hard facts but to minimize them, keep them (similar topics) in the same article. I heard Loleil say something like that to some one once. Thats why I took notice. 23:26, February 15, 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi IN, I would support a merge in this case. Essentially it reads as though your article was written as a response to the Tank article to point out the flaws that exist there. This means it ends up reading as even more of an opinion piece than other guides. I was slightly hesitant about allowing guides in the wiki because of personal opinion, but I relented because I feel that there is still good reliable information that people can benefit from reading.


 * With rewording I think the two articles can come together to make one good article and it is a wiki, so if there is anything that is wildly off target in the original article feel free to take an axe to it. On an initial glance I would loose the first two paragraphs from your article and put everything else from your article at the top of the existing page. However there is no rush, and if you would like to be in charge of combining the two articles I would encourage you to do so. Also, if you want to keep your article untouched, you could copy it into a blog. 00:34, February 16, 2010 (UTC)


 * Sure, no problem. Thank you for a clarification. I'll see what I can do about merging Tanking: An Alternative Approach and Tank into one innerly consistent article. IN 04:28, February 16, 2010 (UTC)

Yep
I can't make him respond to the thread, so maybe someone else will notice it and respond. Mictlantecuhtli 05:19, February 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * Uh, no, I don't imply I prefer him over any other dev team member. As far as I recall, however, you mentioned his existing post on the topic, so I was actually just asking for a link to that post. That way, we won't have to trouble him again regarding the same subject. If you cannot find it, though, fine by me -- there is no rush, hopefully someone will answer. IN 05:42, February 19, 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism
Hi there IN. I just picked up your message from yesterday. You're right in thinking that the first message when someone makes their initial contribution is automatically generated (with a random admin's name, I think). I'll keep my eye on the user's contrubutions for the next few days to see whether this was a one-off or the start of a pattern. Thanks for the heads-up! 12:51, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

Threat items...
Hello IN, thanks for that update on Cleansing Aura. You seem to know alot about the game's mechanics, so I thought I would ask you. Do you know whether the reduce/increase hostility items stack? Is there a formula that shows what effects these items have on threat? Thanks,

Lufos 00:04, February 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * My judgment is based on my empirical experience only, whatever it is worth, but I think they do stack. However, hostility modifying items do not seem to draw/reduce threat by much. On Nightmare, the difference is barely noticeable. Let's put it this way: if you equip your party tank with both Ageless and Cadash Stompers, the enemies will probably target him first. Maintaining threat via items is, however, impossible. Probably the modifiers are something like +10 threat per gear piece, so the very first crit from your archer or the very first direct damage spell from your mage, and... I believe you get my drift. IN 00:27, February 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * P. S.: It is possible hostility modifiers are not fixed bonuses/penalties, but factors. Say, 'Increases hostility' mod = all threat generated x1.1, while 'Reduces hostility' mod = all threat generated x0.9. The figures above are totally arbitrary, of course, but you should get the idea by now: both the increment and the reduction are largely insignificant. IN 00:33, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I was wondering if they were indeed modifiers. That's what I mean't by a formula, but I guess it isn't something that can be easily tested (without extensive modifcation of the original program.....). Ahh, well thanks. Lufos 00:45, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

script
I have never enabled or used script X /, I am not familiar with it. Is it easy to do, I'll try for ya. 02:22, February 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah, ok, maybe I'll get the bf to do it for me some time for the future, he is the computer tech. Sorry about that. 02:34, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

 * Still a wiki-noob. I learn when I have time though. Lufos 19:09, February 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm new to this whole wiki-editing business, too. IN 19:11, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Vulnerability Hex
75% is what you need to be able to strip away in order to use nature spells/staves/poisons against Beasts without any penalty. While undead possess a 75% resistance to cold I believe. Mictlantecuhtli 17:36, March 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * That was my reasoning as well. Some people might not want to bother with using windows calculator, or doing the calculations in their head. Mictlantecuhtli 18:33, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

Abilities
I may be going for a while or for good but I am sooo happy I have you taking care of my abilities and doing such a good job! Most I couldn't do better myself, I hope you project duncan is a success, its everything I want our abilities to be :) hug 18:05, March 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you! :) Best of luck, and please consider coming back. At least after DAA release, when this wiki will begin to grow steadily once again -- don't let personal feelings stop you from doing great job (even when this 'job' is a hobby) forever. We all know this wiki will be worse without your input. IN 18:15, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

Coup De Grace
I don't think there is any info on the Wiki that describes that the critical hit/backstab damage bonus only applies to the weapon base damage + attribute bonus and NOT weapon bonus damage properties, runes, spells like Flaming Weapons, Talents like Berserk.

The way it's worded right now, implies that the critical hit/backstab damage bonus applies to everything.--69.163.243.32 21:25, March 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * The most logical solution would be to add the corresponding sub-section to the Combat Mechanics article. I'm sure you are competent enough to do it on your own :) Inserting notes into different crit-generating talent descriptions could prove quite time-consuming, and, ultimately, counter-productive. IN 21:32, March 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually, the damage section of Combat Mechanics does have something. Didn't see that before... --69.163.243.32 21:48, March 6, 2010 (UTC)

still a wiki-noob
Yeah, I undid one part of what that user did to the effort page, but I wasn't sure about the other so I left it. I see you removed that change too. Heh, oh well. Guess I missed the fact that he made that link unusable. Lufos 22:15, March 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Uh? I didn't remove anything aside from restoring the link's validity... IN 22:18, March 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Err, sorry I am partially delirious from sleep deprevation. I meant that you basically undid (hence removed) the other change I debated on undoing because I missed the fact that it was a link. nevermind. Lufos 22:35, March 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * That's okay :) IN 22:42, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

Attack Timing
http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:69.163.243.32#Attack_Timing --69.163.243.32 17:25, March 12, 2010 (UTC)

Flanking angle
Hi! I'm hardly a designer either, but I made an attempt at new illustrations. I'm not very happy with them, but at least the angles should be correct :-)

I write this here since I seem to have managed to sabotage the Talk page for Flanking :-O I had problems getting the new images to refresh and cleared the browsers cache without realizing that this was not a good thing to do while in editing mode. Yup - really stupid of me. Boise66 12:13, March 14, 2010 (UTC)

Cone of Cold, Patch 1.03
Are you sure, it's not spell resistance (did you get cold damage)? Resistance checks heavily favor the attacker. Typical resistance check, Lvl 14 Morrigan against Lvl 12 Wolf: final_res = -111. Attack attribute (spellpower): 64, Defense Attribute (mental resistance): 8. final_res < 0 means, the check is always lost. Even with 100 mental resistance, final_res would still be -11.

Unfortunately, it's only possible to log the checks by modifying core scripts. Patch 1.03 script sources are not available.--69.163.243.32 07:16, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

BTW, those mages likely have spell shields up - 75% spell resistance.--69.163.243.32 07:19, March 15, 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't know what to say... That's really embarrassing... Look, I wasn't dreaming and I wasn't imagining things: they resisted CoC (not only mages, Qunari Mercenaries too) more than 50% of the time in the morning. I tested shattering, so I was both shocked and annoyed to load the same scenario over and over again... Now, when I run the same test under the same conditions, none of the enemies in the first room is able to resist CoC. Not once. I've tried it about 20 times. I'm removing the note. IN 08:00, March 15, 2010 (UTC)


 * Gave it some more thought. I think it's another Rock Mastery bug. I'm serious. My party was Shale, Morrigan and Warden archer. I'll try to test it again in the evening: maybe the attacker and the target must both stay within aura's limits for the resistance bug to occur, or maybe the attacker must stay outside the aura with the target inside, and so forth. I'll try different combinations. There's no other explanation I can think of - no other factors were involved. IN 08:39, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not (just) Rock Mastery. The funny thing is, the resistance check code is correct. There must be some weird bug in the engine that causes it to return the wrong resistance value under some condition(s). But, I have only seen the -1 with CoC and that's consistent with all CoC checks in my logs. --69.163.243.32 08:55, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * No, no. I mean, the ability to resist CoC was a bug as opposed to normal state, when no target ever resists it :) My point was: I'm quite positive this bug inside bug was caused by Rock Mastery. IN 09:00, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

You might already know me.
I posted on the social.bioware DA:O forums for a while under the name 'tetracycloide' and, as far as I know, was one of the first to point out the mechanics of aim there and here (the wiki, i kid you not, used to say Aim was bugged and didn't add any crit at all). I think it's awesome that you didn't just presume you were correct and rererevert. It's refreshing to run into someone technically minded that's willing to question everything, even things they think they already have down. Getting more to the point, I wanted to make a 100% critical chance archer after I discovered the mechanics of Aim for myself hoping that I could then use them to test the roll mechanics in the game. I never got around to it, however, since I got side tracked playing ME2 when it released. I was wondering if you had done a 100% critical chance archer and if you recall them missing with a 100% critical chance on an auto attack hit. My instinct is that auto-attacks are a two-roll system in this game (hit then crit) but if it were a one role system that would be a neat revelation. Tetracycloide 01:03, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * There are two rolls. An attack roll that determines if you hit. If you hit and a second roll says it's a critical, the attack result is set to be a critical (if the second roll says no critical, it's a normal hit). http://social.bioware.com/wiki/datoolset/index.php/Combat_Rules --69.163.243.32 07:46, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, I'm not sure that's what Tetracycloide was asking... I mean, anyone even remotely familiar with this game knows you have to hit first in order to deal any damage (not just critical hit), right? :) That's the reason I decided to refrain from explaining such intuitively understood basics in my reply on his talk page. Let's hope he will come back and clarify things a bit. IN 08:22, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * No, that's what I meant. It might seem counterintuitive but there are systems where the crit and hit rolls are combined into one roll such that, once crit rate = hit rate, each % of crit added adds both 1% crit and 1% hit by converting 1% of misses directly from misses to criticals. Like I said, my instinct with dragon age was that auto-attacks where a two-roll system but it's important to confirm these things with tests and data mining. Since I hadn't been keeping up with developments on the DA forums or wiki after ME2 released I assumed you could point me to tests or data that answered what was an outstanding question when I stopped playing a few months ago.Tetracycloide 13:12, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, DA:Ology had progressed far since then, it seems :) Personally, being a D&D (both pen-and-paper and CRPG variants) veteran, I wasn't even thinking about the possibility critical hit chance and chance to hit might be interrelated somehow. That's definitely an unusual idea for me, so I hope you didn't find my comments about how elementary and immediately intuitive it is snobby or condescending :) IN 16:27, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

DAA Question
hey IN,

I noticed you already got DAA, I'm wondering if you could help answer my question here, coz right now I'm really stuck in at Wade The Origins. All I wanna know is:

Is there any new Fatigue Reduction Armor in The Awakening? I'm about to go see Wade about my Dragon Scale Armor, and I'd like to know whether I should get the Massive Armor or just Medium Armor for my Arcane Warrior.

Thankyou

Fy can  [ fahy - kan ] @ 05:22, March 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think Wade's Superior Dragonskin Armor Set is still your best bet as far as fatigue reduction is concerned. Unfortunately, I don't play AW, and I haven't advanced much through DAA, either, so I have no idea whether there is an equivalent (or a better) set in terms of fatigue reduction in DAA. I know I haven't seen one yet. Stick with Superior Dragonskin, if you ask me. IN 05:55, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

Have you noticed Accuracy?
I found your efficient approach to archery to be very useful for Leliana in DA:O (made her actually relevant), but man, have you noticed Accuracy in DA:A? This skill is pure ridiculousness, especially with lethality and song of courage (and actually, I'm not even sure if those two skills are even necessary anymore given accuracy). At level 24 with tier 7 gear (that is, just starting off on DA:A), with 70+16 dex and 52+7 cunning I'm doing 140-160 normal auto attacks and 220ish crits. This is without using Aim. 49.5% crit chance without Aim, 97.4% with. It's just plain crazy!

Although, I must say, I just got DA:A the other day, so actually this might not be all that big a deal within the scope of the expansion (I'm really not sure as to what the top range for damage is yet with all the new skills introduced to the game), but good lord, I thought my dual wield rogue was cleaning up before... I put this same build on Nathaniel--two rogues doing 140-200+ ranged damage per hit. Insane! - Basileia 10:17 UTC 03/20/2010


 * Yes. In fact, I'm in process of making a major DAA update to my guide. Stay tuned! :) IN 08:13, March 21, 2010 (UTC)


 * Awesome. Looking forward to that. Put together a very basic build myself if you're interested. I'm almost bored with the game now, what with accuracy being so ridiculously overpowered. It's hard for me to believe that the designers would not have anticipated a build that dumps 100+ points into dexterity--the defense, attack rating, base damage and crit chance with accuracy at that point is just so out of whack that it pretty much breaks the game, especially if you bring over some of the end game items from DAO. And vitality and clarity just makes it that much easier. - Basileia 08:48 UTC 03/21/2010
 * It's hard to disagree on this. A very weird re-balancing done. I'd prefer 4 solid useful archery abilities to 1 uber-ability and 3 crappy ones. Anyway, update done. It's not finished, I'm going to add more items and tidbits of info (I'm currently mid-game, there is a lot of stuff I've yet to discover in DAA). P.S.: Nice little guide. You aim for a less academic, more personal approach, and that's a welcome change from my guru-like tone for some people! :) IN 14:08, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, thanks man. I like that your coverage is so exhaustive. I think its a better discussion method for seeding experimentation. On a separate note, I think though, the other branch 4 archery talents aren't so bad. Obviously, not as useful as accuracy, but Rain of Arrows definitely has its uses. An extreme example: 3 high dex archers launching 3 Rain of Arrows on the same spot at the same time should kill everything inside within two, at most three, ticks. And if Rain of Arrows is like a carpet bomb, burst shot is like a tactical nuke. Its just that you need some sort of crowd control while the skills cast, or to use the skills outside of engagement range. - Basileia 00:27 UTC 03/22/2010
 * My point was that immobilizing AoE preparation is absolutely mandatory to make this talent work. AI on Nightmare always flees stationary AoE effects. Say, you have a group of 12 enemies (all neatly arranged within 10m radius) assailing you. Time for triple Rain of Arrows, you say to yourself! Uh, wait a second... We need a preparation AoE. Hmmm... Let's see. We have three viable options here: Mass Paralysis, Blood Wound, Paralysis Explosion. The latter is somewhat slow to trigger. The former is pointless, since Blood Wound combines paralysis effect with some solid spirit damage. But if you have 3 Dex archers able to eliminate a crowd with triple Rain of Arrows, your mage is no slouch, either... So I can guarantee there won't be much left of that crowd after Blood Wound. I trust you get my drift. Too much preparation required, to the point the preparation itself can be a viable alternative to Rain of Arrows. A theoretically godly skill it is, no doubt. But I prefer practically solid to theoretically godly. That said, if there are Broodmother/Flemeth-like stationary opponents in DAA, I'll use it gladly. IN 01:05, March 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I would say that immobilizing AoE is actually not necessary in that there's a much easier (no prep) crowd control method that can be used in tandem with Rain of Arrows: a shield tank with Air of Insolence+Threaten and Carapace (or Force Field, as in the link in my last comment "has its uses"). Air pulls all the mobs to a single point, and Carapace lets the player use Rain without danger of friendly fire (oh, I should mention that the threat generation here [in Nightmare mode] is high enough that mobs will ignore AoE and still go after the tank, even after multiple ticks). I only mentioned the example with the 3 rain of arrows, though, in that I'm looking at your preference to play with three archers. With high dex, rain does at least 60 damage per tick, so 60x3x2 (that is, two ticks of rain) = 360, which should be just enough, or just under enough, damage to kill most unranked mobs. As long as you cast it outside of engagement range (that is, they don't start moving until after the first tick), they should be dead before they can move out of it. But 3 rain of arrows is totally overkill--just one is good enough to clear out most mobs with good cc.
 * It's definitely a circumstantial skill, agree with you there. But I think there are enough circumstances, or you can create the conditions with a good tank frequently and easily enough, that it's a good skill to have. At this point though, I think I'm just discussing a play preference more than anything else. - Basileia 01:35 UTC 03/22/2010
 * Heh. (1) You won't believe. I actually missed a link in your post. Didn't click on it :) (2) I'm totally ignorant as far as DAA tank skills go. (3) Yup, that's option number 4, right after Paralysis Explosion. I'm not so sure it's easier to execute (= worth the hassle), however. I'll try it, of course, seems interesting enough! :) IN 05:35, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

A favor...
I usually check out your archery approach page and leave messages for you there. I find the page informative about the game mechanics that the game doesn't tell us about. I have a question however that's not archeyr related. I'm wondering if you could check out the exact numbers for shadow striking? Alot of awakening skills/talents lack numerical descriptions really and this is one I'm really curious about.


 * There is a note on Combat Mechanics page, claiming Shadow Striking is total backstab damage *1.5. I'll check it out though, no problem. At least, the parameters that are checkable. IN 08:48, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

Cool. While you're at it could you check what part of dmg (or if it's the total) mark of death, weak points and shattering blows modifies?