biostem

Oh? I hadn't noticed. You can't take sorcery and force of will? Interesting. But you're still, in essence, arguing to be able to take 5 power pools, only 1 of them must be an origin pool...

What is the intent behind this proposal? Is it overpowering to be able to take sorcery and force of will? I can't imagine it's anywhere near as game-changing as being able to take speed & fighting, for instance. If it's just for thematic reasons, then why not just limit yourself instead of limiting everyone else? Also, I thought Force of Will was the natural-origin pool...

As is the case with powers in empathy, thermal, and any other set with a single target ally-only heal. Most importantly, however, it wouldn't have any interrupt.

Quick question: I'm currently playing a gravity control/nature affinity controller. She is quite fun, and having just hit level 35, I picked up entangling aura. The power description shows it as having an 80% chance of applying a mag 1 hold, and a 50% chance of applying a mag 2 hold. I was looking at some of the IO sets available, (the power only accepts "Hold" IO set enhancements), but wanted the input of some more experienced folks. Would the enhancement that give a chance of applying a +2 mag hold be good in this power, since it's a toggle? What about the ones that give a chance of applying psionic or lethal damage? Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!

Reduce the cooldown, reduce the heal amount, and allow it to work on any friendly target.

Kind of reminds me of Dr. Strangefate...

Here's my go at making a costume for your character: savage regen lizard.costume

OK, so here are some ideas I came up with. I've included a version of the 1st costume with and without the sunglasses & cigarette. Hope you like them! rock mutant 3.costume rock mutant 2.costume rock mutant 1.costume

Thanks! The laptops I linked to look to be about on par with the $299 one linked in the thread you provided.

I am currently using an older 11.6" i5 laptop, with intel graphics, (it's an HP EliteBook 2170p), to play CoH when I'm out. It runs ok, but I have to use the simpler rendering launch option to get a decent framerate. I already have a pretty nice full-size laptop, so what I'm looking for is an inexpensive, lighter laptop that I won't have to worry about getting dinged up. Anyone have any experience with something like this or this? Thank you for your time!

I haven't tried it yet, but what kind of animation does that short-range teleport power from the blaster secondary use?

The code is already out there. Even if Homecoming gets a C&D, CoH will continue to be playable. Do I want Homecoming to be shut down? Absolutely not! Let's not act like the lack of NCSoft's blessing means the sky is falling, though...

I'm having a bit of "character block" with this one. I'll have to give it some more thought. If you have any more specific details, that may spark some ideas, I'm all ears. Thanks!

So, then, it *would* be possible to have an inherent that applies stacks of a flat damage buff while enemies are not near you?

To take your examples, you only really hear about how good powers like "gang war" are; Other powers in that same position aren't given the same praise, (smoke flash, repair, fortify pack, etc). Maybe this means that "gang war" is actually over-performing. We'd have to break down the numbers and really dig into things. Confront is a tricky circumstance on its own; I attributed much of this to how the game has changed since launch; Scrappers were kind of able to fill in the role of "tank" in some cases, but weren't meant to completely overshadow them. It's a tool with some uses, but since scrappers are rarely called upon, (or players simply choose not to play them as), "off-tanks", said power is often passed over. The question isn't necessarily whether confront should be changed or replaced, but what are scrappers meant to do, and does confront contribute to that goal. The great thing is that no one is forced to take confront, and practically all builds take some pool power or another, so having the option to take confront or not isn't a bad thing. I think of it like this: You have this awesome screwdriver set, and there's this weird star bit in there that you seem to never use, but in that super rare case when you need it, you'll be thankful that it's there. Even though 99.9% of people will never use that "star bit", does that mean that it should be removed?

One aspect of Champions Online that I rather like is how they gave almost every melee set a "lunge" power, which allows you to quickly close the distance. I suspect that spring attack, shield charge, and lightning rod were, (at least in part), meant to fill this role...

It depends - is the goal to get an even distribution of all power picks across the relevant set(s) or AT(s), or just to create powers that follow consistent rules and fit with the theme of their respective sets?

Granted, certain outlier powers would need a bit more consideration, but even then, you can draw some baseline values for it, (those having been drawn from other calculations). Even ignoring that, I still hold that the outcome of any power change should be the result of a careful examination of the power's values/effects, and not a simple vote.

As I said, the criteria used to determine what is or is not balanced/in need of change, will ultimately be decided upon by someone's opinion, (be it the devs or otherwise). Once those criteria are chosen, objective, (i.e. independent of anyone's opinion), judgments can indeed be made.

You may be able to vote on what criteria you are going to consider, but once you do, an objective evaluation can be made based upon them; Are we using damage per second? Are we using damage per endurance? Are we using other metrics or some combination of multiple ones? Once you agree on those criteria, no further opinion need be considered...

Sorry, I don't vape. I don't even smoke. But, hey... what was that about glass houses and stones?

You seem to be making an attempt at revising history. Unless your last name is 'McFly' or you are a Timelord, I recommend against such endeavors...

Then why argue for changing things based upon a vote? Either a power or set is demonstrably underperforming, (in which case votes are irrelevant - the numbers speak for themselves), or no change is needed at all, so no number of votes in favor should be considered. Now, let me switch things up a little, to a circumstance where a vote would actually make more sense. Imagine the following hypothetical: "We can demonstrate with [insert data here] that sets or powers A and B need adjusting. We only have time to work on one of the sets/powers right now, so which do you think we should prioritize."

I never stated that giving your opinion was wrong. What I did state was that presenting your opinion, in the guise of representing some hypothetical "everyone", is giving said opinion too much weight, and that even if I did grant that premise, "everyone" voting for something doesn't mean that it should be done/changed/implemented. What you say is my being "obsessed with data and numbers", I see as wanting someone's proposal to change things be backed up by actual reasons. I also wasn't arguing that the other person's statements were false simply because they included a fallacy - rather, I stated that they were false, and pointed to the fallacies that demonstrated them to be false. In other words, not "A is false because A has a fallacy in it", but rather "A is false and here is the fallacy that demonstrates its state of being false".

You keep rephrasing the fallacy and you're just not getting it. Additionally, "common sense" told us the sun goes around the earth. "Common sense" showed us that the earth was flat. "Common sense" is not a good thing to appeal to. In fact, it has its own fallacy too: "Argument from ignorance" or "Argument from incredulity".