Killawar

Well, there's a way to 'nerf' or alter powers for PvP, why couldn't proc enhancements be given the same treatment? It sounds like a coding thing really, but I don't know what kind of resources that would take, hence the question.

Sure, but this problem could be solved if there was some sort of proc nerf implemented. For instance, you could have the proc enhancements' effects reduced/increased depending on how many other enhancements of the same set were equipped in the same power. For instance, if you have 5/6 Heca's equipped in a KO-blow, it would tone down the damage by some 16-20% of the proc. You could do the same for mez; the mag 2 holds would be reduced to about 1/6 if you were one-point-wondering them into a power. It'd certainly make going for sets more appealing as well as making powers feel more useful again instead of what they proc being more useful. Edit: Procs are already pretty bland and tasteless. Some RNG is nice, but when you've got some gross amount of PPM enhancies and two hamis just to roll the 1-shot rng machine, you might as well say you're playing slots with an avatar instead of saying you're playing CoX.

Just a simple question. I miss the days of SC fight club corners w/ no DR's/resistance bandaids for squishy ATs/PvP 'effects', etc. and am wondering what it'd take to, say, revert one of the server's issue 13 PvP changes so that PvP = PvE as far as mechanics goes.

You seem to forget in your example that build X will have mechanics that counter it. When more power choices are viable (pre-13) then the problem solves itself. This is more of a problem in, again, issue 13, where there are very few builds - especially by comparison - that someone can pull off. Once again issue 13 is the problem. Because, these days especially, you are more than likely to fail at a build you try out yourself. Why? Because PvP does not work like the other aspects of the game - at all, which is yet another example of issue 13's failure. Main game? Most - if not all - things can and do work. It used to be much closer to that way in PvP prior to issue 13. All of the problems you're stating - trial and error, diversity, a meta - were much less of a problem prior to issue 13. This would be far more useful if the game didn't have nearly as hard of a rock-solid meta as it does now. Then you must be a unicorn, because most people don't find taunt botting fun. Coming from someone supportive of issue 13, clearly you did not. This is basically all games in general. The ones that knew how to play the game also had their "off-meta" characters - which still worked. To claim that all people who were good played all meta things is flat-out incorrect. Most people who were good could play anything they wanted - make anything work - and they did, hence why they were good at the game. Rofl. Inaccurate. Majority are corrs and defs. Scraps, blasts, sents are up there. The others are unicorns. And besides, didn't you just say that most people were bad? What's to make that statistic any different now? We know melee aren't in a good spot, so what's to stop me from strawmanning and saying that the people who melee are bad? Look at kickballs. All ranged. < Says someone is looking through rose tinted goggles yet supports issue-13's horrendously inferior system. Party out in zones and you see stalkers/corrs/defs/sent occasional scrap. Ranged > Melee, and yet you seem to think there's more diversity than there was. Back in the day you'd see just about every AT in zone pvp. Even on the lower-pop servers there were far more people in one given zone than the entirety of the HC's pvp zones combined. Just about everyone - even the 'good players' - quit after i-13. I played a game where tankers didn't get the same resistances that a corruptor did. You play a game where one of the hardest hitting melee abilities is Flurry. Who's rose-tinting again?

And the list of what was good before issue 13 dwarfs this. This is just flat-out incorrect in terms of melee fight clubs. DM did insane ST. If you're talking tanks, there were people running Stone Melee for the acro-breaking mag hold back when that was a magnitude protection in PvP. The only one that was fairly sub-par was Ice Melee, and you could still make that work if you wanted. The problem with blasters back then wasn't PvP, it was that blasters weren't good in general. EM did damage, the other secondaries offered nothing. You're saying blasters being sub-par was a pvp problem when it was a general problem with blasters. It sounds like some people didn't know what Break Frees were. Drain specs were fantastic back then. You brought around an electric defender simply because Ice Armor had no drain resistance and most people didn't slot out Glacial Armor due to most damage types carrying a S/L delivery tag - which Electric did not. Same with Radiation - both primary and secondary. The flaws you mentioned: "CC". Solution: What are break frees? Clarion now too. "Only some were viable." Solution: Actually incorrect. Most things were viable in PvP, there was a ton of diversity. The fact that you even try to bring up that subject pretty much tells me you're either SJW'ing a bad issue or that you really don't know what you're talking about. Pre-13 diversity >>>>>>>>>>>> I-13 diversity. This is flat-out incorrect. Do you really think Scrappers with Ice Armor would break the game? It hasn't, and it won't. If you want to talk about something that "breaks the game" in terms of PvP then I invite you to look at the Destiny slots. Easy fix? Make them a 5min CD in PvP. Proliferation doesn't break PvP. The game is broken in terms of PVP now. You see Corruptors, Defenders, and the occasional stalker/blaster. That's it. Pre-13? These problems didn't exist. And if you're gonna say "Well, X class would run you out of BF's in under two minutes!" then it looks like there's your clock to kill them. And, again, Clarion exists now.

Pre-i13 melee weren't "just taunt bots". Not by a long shot.

Because rather than a select few builds among massive amounts of other combos, just about every build worked. If you're trying to put it off like Issue 13 is palatable then you're really on your own.

I would fund this.

If this is the goal then you have two things kind of working against each other because the problem came with a very big change, that being Issue 13. If you want things to be accessible then they have to make sense. Part of the problem with PvP is that people have to basically re-learn the game, that is, "PvP Effects", "Diminishing Returns", "Templates" (AKA inherited resistances based on AT, etc). WoW PvP was successful (well, not anymore...) back in the day for this reason, your character was the same as it was in PvE as it was in PvP. That meant things made sense, people didn't have to re-learn the game they were already playing - much less their character, which is the real crime - and so things went moderately smoothly. The first two are really the killer because those are what make the game not make sense - and that's what'll really turn off someone new. They already spent time learning their character from 1-50, and just because they went into a new zone all of the sudden their toon interacts with things very differently. It'd be easy for people to be told, "Oh yeah, these AT's are too (X,Y,Z), so they need baseline buffs to compete." (inherited resistance), but that's not currently the case, and I'm not even sure you'd need inherited resistance with Incarnates/modern IO sets/etc. Honestly with incarnates and new IO's, if the mechanics weren't completely different, you might very well have a fun game again. Though the PPM stuff is real bad. Maybe make it so only one proc will function if multiples are slotted into the same power. Can't say I see many PvE people abusing the PPM, so I don't think the change would affect much. TLDR: What Gibson99 already said. Edit: Kind of silly that the things that were good back pre-i13 (regen) were made better with the inherited resistances. Why does a regen get +res? Isn't sustained damage supposed to be the weakness?