"Soon" - perhaps next week, or at least within the next millennium. Probably.

Ooops! I sit corrected! I must be developing an allergy to apostrophes in general...

Edit: or maybe it was the apostrophe in the "its" (stupid autocorrect tried to put it back in!) that I removed from the quote. ^_^

At the risk of stating the obvious...

CoH = City Of Heroes, the spiritual predecessor of this game

CoT = City Of Titans, this game

CoV = City Of Villains, an addon to CoH that was later bundled with the game

CoX = Typically a reference to CoH and CoV after they were bundled together

MWM = Missing Worlds Media, the folks making this game, City Of Titans

SP = Signature Power, an idea currently being discussed in http://cityoftitans.com/forum/alternative-epic-power-pools.

"THE TITANS ARE COMING! THE TITANS ARE COMING!"

I find that, in general, too many folks ignore the (to them) obvious abbreviations and acronyms that a new player may well have no idea what the meaning is.

Regarding the definition of [b]Theme[/b], from 2013:

Tannim222 wrote:

There may be animation suites (themes) or visual fx suites (themes) so you don't have to choose the same animation type or visual effect for each power individually, but that's up to UI. I also want to stress that depending on how we design certain things, there MAY not be able to plug any theme or suit to every single power set. I empasize may due to the fact that we are still in design phase and there's a lot that is in flux. Some may read this and think we will unfairly limit choices, this is not the case, there may be a reason there are a limited amount of options in certain cases which will offer additional options in other cases. Or it could very well work out to where anything can apply, but that may come at the cost of certain other game play aspects. We will see. I know this may cause more questions but I hope it also clarifies others.

I see in the Glossary definition above, you mention quick fast versus slow and powerful, but I think that would be more applicable to the base powerset. I believe Tannim was trying to say that the animation theme would be more like do I want to have a martial arts theme to my powers (ranged powers, melee powers and support powers can all have martial arts animations to them) or a plant-based theme, such that plants, roots, seeds and pollen would be the modes of deivery.
Or maybe a beastial theme, such that my powers are delivered from a more unrefined and visceral animations, or maybe from a technological theme where powers are coming from tools like guns or melee attacks using powerfists, or a magical theme with glowing arcane runes and maybe a staff or a wand.

Then the visual FX theme would be fire, or ice, or dark magic, or celestial magic or blood, or electricity, or faerie sparkles, or 20th century tech(ballistics and wearables) or future tech (energy weapons).

I think that's what I understand as far as themes go. You can choose from a slate of powers which will give all your powers animations and/or effects from a cohesive theme, or you can pick and choose different themes for each power such that one power may come from a colt .45 revolver but the next come from your mind. I would expect that each power will probably have a default theme for animation and fx so that if a theme does't fit it well, the default is used. That last part is pure speculation; hell, this whole post is pure speculation.

Tannim222 wrote:

StellarAgent wrote:
hhmm . .
so Theme = Thematic Functionality?
Base Layer = Type (Melee, Ranged, Defense)
Thematic Layer = Power Effects? (Fire, Cold, DoT, . . . )
Aesthetics Layer = Visual Effects (colour, emanation points, . . . )
Themic layer is termed Thematic Mechanics, that is damage ovet time, target vector displacement, etca d may include a damage type. Fire is not a damage type, it is an aesthetic.
Aesthetic Theme is the range of possible visual partical effects afforded to a power. Burning sets have stuff that looks like it "burns" such as fire, stinging winds, boiling liquid, or acid.
Emanation points, colors, and animations are also part of the aesthic options but may be more widely applicable or limited depending on certain factors. You can make a ranged attack using a boxing animation throwing a gust of wind, and there could be a melee attack using same animation and melee-ranged particle effects for a melee wind attack.

Can I just say, on behalf of all the people that have been waiting patiently or impatiently for CoT, that you are a [b]big effin' TEASE![/b]
>mumble grumble ...can't wait... grumble mumble<

StellarAgent wrote:

Tannim222 wrote:
StellarAgent wrote:
hhmm . .
so Theme = Thematic Functionality?
Base Layer = Type (Melee, Ranged, Defense)
Thematic Layer = Power Effects? (Fire, Cold, DoT, . . . )
Aesthetics Layer = Visual Effects (colour, emanation points, . . . )
Themic layer is termed Thematic Mechanics, that is damage ovet time, target vector displacement, etca d may include a damage type. Fire is not a damage type, it is an aesthetic.
Aesthetic Theme is the range of possible visual partical effects afforded to a power. Burning sets have stuff that looks like it "burns" such as fire, stinging winds, boiling liquid, or acid.
Emanation points, colors, and animations are also part of the aesthic options but may be more widely applicable or limited depending on certain factors. You can make a ranged attack using a boxing animation throwing a gust of wind, and there could be a melee attack using same animation and melee-ranged particle effects for a melee wind attack.
So instead of using the stereotypical phrases Fire, Cold, etc; we should instead be saying: Burning, Freezing, . So in the Base Layer where we have the Types we should refer to the Damage Effects, not what it typically looks like?

No, your Basr Layer id fine. It was the mechanics that you have to watch out in avoiding specific visuals, ie replace fire with burning.

Tannim222 wrote:

Sorry, target vector displacement is the long-winded waynof describing knock back and up, or shortened up as vector attacks - but the longer phrase is what is used to describe the mechanic in our power set templates. We had this internal issue of avoiding common terms which may conflict with engine-specific terminology which cause confusion between teams or issues if we changed engines (we were being cautious). Player facing youll see the common terminology in your power descriptions.

Just out of curiosity; is KB going to be more prevalent than KU and/or KD? I was under the impression that KB wasn't exactly universally loved in CoH/V and the preference was for KU/KD since it kept the target(s) grouped, which is just easier for damage, agro management, and debuffs. My namesake was a Nrg/Nrg blapper, so I certainly raised the ire of some players, particularly tanks and support, until I learned through positive feedback and experience to not be as disruptive.

Tannim222 wrote:

Cobalt Azurean wrote:
Tannim222 wrote:
Sorry, target vector displacement is the long-winded waynof describing knock back and up, or shortened up as vector attacks - but the longer phrase is what is used to describe the mechanic in our power set templates. We had this internal issue of avoiding common terms which may conflict with engine-specific terminology which cause confusion between teams or issues if we changed engines (we were being cautious). Player facing youll see the common terminology in your power descriptions.
Just out of curiosity; is KB going to be more prevalent than KU and/or KD? I was under the impression that KB wasn't exactly universally loved in CoH/V and the preference was for KU/KD since it kept the target(s) grouped, which is just easier for damage, agro management, and debuffs. My namesake was a Nrg/Nrg blapper, so I certainly raised the ire of some players, particularly tanks and support, until I learned through positive feedback and experience to not be as disruptive.
The knock back issue has long been discussed (to death, rezzed, and killed again, rinse, repeated). We have a rather simple solution allowing players to actively be able to switch a knock down effect to a knaock back effect. Realize, these are not results of magnitude like coh, where kd occurred at a low threshold of kb mag.
We want these changes of play style to be done in an active play on the player's part without impacting the UI. Neither effect is purely binary either.
Knock up is also yet another effect being separate from knock back and knock down.

Thank you for the reply and insight. Much obliged.

Are we totally ruling out "pull towards self" and "knock sideways"? By "knock sideways" I mean, let;s say I'm shooting due north at a foe and when I hit the foe, they get knocked east or west, that would be "knock sideways". Oooh, what if me hitting the foe caused him to spin around in place? Possibly getting dizzy and falling down, or getting a debuff. That'd be cool.