Cheli

Devs of this game have known for a loooong tiiiime that this issue of CC sets being of limited use in an ultra-optimized group would be a thing. There's a reason Hami has the 'pls bring controller we beg you' mitos.

Oh no, a strategy that isn't 'roll over it with proc-bombed nukes' was actually sometimes useful in 4* content!! Call the balance police. Changing plant to be as useless as the rest of the sets in high-end content isn't going to suddenly change the meta, is just means the one slot that might be allotted to a confuse chump will go to another proc-bomber instead. If your idea of balance is just sour grapes that one set might actually be useful and you want them all the be useless, I guess that makes sense. Your actual issue seems to be a lot more with the confuse mechanic itself, and tbf the devs seem to agree, but aren't willing to just gut confuse as a mechanic (if that'd even be feasible given spaghetticode). Easier to gut the set that can leverage it I guess.

"Every set we change significantly should have a branching path that lets you pick the old one" is probably a slope the devs aren't really wanting to slip down. If we're doing that, when are we getting a branching path that adds old Rage back to the game?

It's not really any different than arsenal, or dual pistols, or traps. From a theme perspective it's actually probably way more versatile than those because there's not really anything requiring the 'pyrotechnic' to be mechanical or manufactured. Jubilee from X-Men shot mutant fireworks at people, Zatanna Zatarra makes flashy fireworks with magic spells. You're also not required to RP the powers as fireworks just because it's named 'pyrotechnic control'. A friend of mine RPs dark armor as Moon Magic, I RP spines as glass/obsidian shards, I know someone who recolored their Water Blast to look like blood and RPs a vampire blood-mage. I actually like the set's theming as it is tbh.

Yes, it's for a first-hit bonus, and Stalker versions of defense sets generally don't get the 'taunt aura' powers other versions do for this specific reason (there've been some exceptions in recent years though so it's probably fixable.)

I can see a psi defense set being thematically defensive (precognition, forcefields, etc) or resistance-based (I'm reminded of D&D psionics, where characters could train a skill called autohypnosis that basically allowed them to ignore pain and the negative effects of poison, disease, etc through sheer psychic conditioning and willpower). Mind Over Body is resistance, after all (though humorously it provides adequate lethal resistance). The 'using your brain to enhance your body' thing also kinda works thematically with the focus on regen, since you're empowering your metabolic processes through the psychic energy devoured from others' minds. I don't personally have a problem with it being a res set, I think the biggest bone to be picked at this point is the ineffectiveness of the defense layering. I appreciate the idea of layering mez as a defense since it's thematically appropriate, but I strongly feel like the devs are (perhaps rightly) scared of just adding a flat 'cloak of fear, but with confuse' power to the set, which would be way more useful than the current cloak of fear wannabe. Like procs, the confuse mechanic itself seems to be problematic at its core and this set suffers both thematically and mechanically for it. Thus with the mez being of questionable usefulness, you need to really knock it out of the park with the active mitigation layer. The comparisons to 'dark armor at home' are apt cos in an optimized build I just see dark regen wiping the floor with this set all day.

Is your problem with plant, or with procs? Because nerfing plant does nothing to stop people from proc-bombing. Plant isn't even the best at it. Honestly, no control set/AT is. Procs are a completely separate problem and one that the devs clearly do not like but because the entire meta of the game's top-end now revolve around it, to the point that they balance content with it in mind, there's not really anything that can be done about it. Changing plant ain't gonna change that.

Funny thing is, I play on Everlasting, the RP nerd server, and am an RP nerd. The thing is that RP nerds are creative and if we like a powerset, or want a character that is both thematic and mechanically effective, we can make it work for theme. I know people who've recolored Water Blast to be poison, blood, paint, recolored Time and Dark Armor to be sand, one of my fave characters of mine is Spines/FA and I RP the spines as shards of volcanic obsidian cos the character is the priestess of the Hawaiian volcano goddess. I even have a character who specifically would benefit from a psychic-themed armor set cos she's a melee psychic, but I'm just gonna keep her EnA if this set remains as mediocre as it is currently. Even funnier, if there's a new set (or even an old set I haven't given a try to yet) that's mechanically effective and I don't have an RP concept for it, I'll usually be inspired to come up with one to fit that set just so I can give it a try. Theme is never a good reason to make a mediocre set.

Honestly it feels like "I would never play this outside of theme" is the balancing point they're going for with new sets. A lethal hole might be mechanically 'different' or 'interesting' but it's the most common damage type in the game and you're going to be struggling from level 1 if your toggles don't cover lethal adequately. Very silly decision.

OP fell into the same quagmire every post on this particular subforum does, which is posting an idea that's a bit out there, getting the usual inflammatory responses to it, and then taking the bait until it devolves into a meaningless bickering match about nothing really related to the original topic. I don't honestly even know why the suggestions forum exists at this point, lol.

The attitude some people have towards this game is eerily reminiscent of WoW players who analyze the game exclusively in the context of the meta; that is, because some people spend most of their time steamrolling, theoretically everyone could do it, which means we must assume everyone is always doing it and that's the only way anyone is playing and therefore it's not just a problem but the problem all conversation has to revolve around. In WoW, if a raid tier was finished by world-first professional video gamers 'too fast', or some meta comp developed that let people blast through high-level keystone dungeons, everyone from the top-to-bottom of the playerbase would say the game was 'too easy' even though literally 90% of players had never seen any mythic bosses or done a key above a +15. People see that some teams are full of procced out IO'd invincible heroes nuking half the map in 30 seconds, and even though most gameplay doesn't take place in that atmosphere, we must always assume everyone is playing like that all the time, and all balance discussion has to take place in that context. I think even in the context of teams it can be overgeneralizing to assume every team is mowing maps down. I'm sure many are, but even in that context, how many of even those teams mowing maps down are complaining about things being too easy? I feel like it's a percentage, but one small enough that they're probably satisfied by things like hardmode TFs and other optionally applicable changes. That's sorta why I feel like any sweeping changes to difficulty, even in a team setting, should be either very subtle, or strictly opt-in. I definitely agree, though; if we're going to have these kinds of changes, they should be tightly tailored to the actual problem. I don't think the Council changes really were.

Because it effects other people, Like I said, in the post you didn't read, it impacts the exact opposite of the people you and others are insisting this change is meant to impact. For folks with tweaked builds it turns Council into slightly-more-annoying Freakshow clones and evinces - as others have pointed out - a design tendency to equate "slog full of HP punching-bag" with "difficulty". For the old-fashioned types who run around with SOs and don't engage in forum feedback threads and already weren't soloing Council at +4/x8 and complaining about the game being "too easy" - many of which do still exist - these changes probably are very noticeable. I'm not terribly committed on these changes either way - but when I feel like they're evidence in a broader picture of the direction the HC team is taking on balance, I certainly think it's worth talking about it. And I have no problem pointing out that extremely compelling counterarguments like "well you complained the game was too easy, get good noob!!!!" aren't all they're cracked up to be. Your signature suggests to me you probably have a history of saying silly things to people, being called on it, and then claiming victory by publicly announcing you've ignored them. There's a common denominator there... and it isn't me. Such is life.

The change has 0 impact on how I play the game; I don't do PI radios except occasionally to stress-test a freshly IO'd 50, and I mentioned multiple times in my post I've had no problems with them, even on characters using fairly meh powersets. The projection here about "insults" is strong; from your first post and this followup it seems you're really jonesing to throw out snide and condescending replies to people fairly innocently discussing the state of the game, even if it requires you to build strawmen. Like you did in this very post, by shifting from "well some people somewhere complained but I'm not going to dig their threads up" to accusing me of being one of them, even after I explicitly said it didn't effect me (going so far as to cut out the part of the post where I said I wasn't even opposed to the change if it's done for logically sound reasons), so you can get your digs in. Reading is your friend.

I don't know about OP but I never complained about the game not being challenging enough. I don't think all that many people did, and most who did are probably satisfied with hardmode TFs and stuff like that. Is there anyone on here with a history of complaining about the game not being challenging enough, now complaining about it being too challenging? Okay but this game has been one where you can fight 6 zillion guys one-on-one for the better part of two decades. Why exactly does that need to change now? Because you want it to? I'm not even against buffing some of the weaker enemy groups (I've soloed +4/x8 nu-Council on a /nin stalker, I don't honestly think they're that much tougher with the right build), but it's always the same weak, lame arguments trotted out to be nasty to people making fairly innocent comments about changes. Edit: now that I think about it, honestly the change feels a bit counterintuitive if the objective was to give people who complain about the game not being "challenging enough" a challenge, since those people are probably not feeling that big a difference (I'm a fairly average builder at best and can deal with nu-Council on several melee characters fairly decently), but casual players and people with no build experience or who just want to run no-incarnate SOs at 50 and probably already weren't eating Council maps for breakfast are definitely going to feel it. I don't feel strongly either way about it, but that's certainly something worth noting.

You're taking game mechanic discussions very weirdly personal, which is.. the exact thing I was pointing out in my post. ROP was among the least-picked powers in the game pre-nerf back when it was essentially free, permanent mez protection for any character that took it. Popularity is not an indication of power strength, especially for a set that flavor-wise is the only one that represents an extremely common and extremely popular character archetype. There's a reason AR/dev has always been one of the most common types of blasters in the game, and it's not because those sets are mechanically strong.