Rudra

Yes. I would call it a worthless buff, but it would still be a buff. MM pets became enhanceable for their defense or damage resist depending on set. That is something that could not be done previously. So yes, that is a buff. Except that MM pets did pick up more survivability. Bots for instance, can now have their damage resists enhanced. My bots MMs for instance, have their bots' damage resists improved by 60.96% from slotted enhancements. Something that could not be done before. My ninja MM has the ninjas' defense boosted by 71.85% from slotted enhancements, something that could not be done before. That is an improvement. And yet, my pets die just as fast in incarnate content as they do outside of incarnate content. So by your definition, that is not a buff. And we both agree it is a buff. Check the damage your bots take without damage resist enhancements slotted and with damage resist enhancements slotted. Your bots can take more damage if you slot their upgrade with damage resist enhancements. It's just like how if you run around with your MM not in Bodyguard Mode you won't notice any major change in the damage you take just because you took Tough. You're still going to get mauled by most enemies doing Smashing or Lethal damage regardless of whether you have Tough or not unless you use Bodyguard Mode. Except your pets don't have a Bodyguard Mode to protect them. More crippling for them is that if you are in Bodyguard Mode, your pets will take both their damage and a portion of your damage, and that double hit is going to hurt even through their improved damage resists even with enhancements even for bots. Agreed, just like how the pet upgrade powers becoming an apply to all pets instead of just one pet per use was a massive buff/improvement for MMs. Not arguing that either. Regardless of whether you think it is a buff or not, it is a buff. If you had instead argued that you thought it was an insufficient buff rather than it not being a buff at all, we wouldn't be having this debate. Because then you would be arguing your opinion and I can't impose my opinion on you. However, you instead chose to say that the obvious buff, regardless of whether you think it is sufficient or not, is not a buff, and the whole point of its implementation was to buff MM pet survivability.

The problem with that is the skin palette does not differentiate between body locations. (Edit: Character costumes have 2 palettes: the costume palette and the skin palette. What palette is pulled up is dependent upon whether you have selected the Skin tab or not.)

The reason for the explore badge reward change is provided in this thread. As for the rest? It can pretty much be summed up as whatever the dev team decides is their direction for game development drives the game changes.

We only have access to the tailor NPCs. What you want are the surgeons the tailors have.

You've lost me. First, there is an improvement. My bots for instance can take more hits before they die. (My ninjas on the other hand still like to block enemy attacks with their faces instead of make use of their improved defenses. However, they do still more or less survive better with their enhancement improved defenses.) There is a bug where the enhancements don't always apply to the pets, but that is a bug the devs need to fix and is something they were aware of when they made the change. Edit (for missed second half of thought): And second, how and where did I contradict myself?

Nah, I'd more argue that is a pointless buff or completely ignorable one. (Edit: Or a giant middle finger to the players buff.)

A buff is an improvement. A manifest change can be a buff but can also be a redesign. Your definition is irrelevant because it does not match up with what a buff is generally understood to be or is defined as. MMs have gotten 2 buffs so far. The pets get combat level shifts up to the MM's incarnate level while within Supremacy's radius in incarnate content, and their defense and damage resist can be enhanced which previously they could not. Those are buffs. No matter how much you close your eyes and cover your ears screaming la la la you can't hear me. That MM pets need further buffing is not in contention. With me at least. Your declaration that MMs have not gotten any buffs however, is.

To buff something in the game is to make stronger, better, or more effective. (Edit: In other words, to improve it in some fashion. And the improvement in this case is that having moved the defense and resists to the T1 power, now it can be enhanced. It now being enhanceable is a buff.) Whether you like the buff or not does not change that it is a buff. If you choose not to take advantage of that buff, that is on you. However, you cannot simply choose to say something is not a buff because it does not meet your preferred levels of achievement. So no, I am not going to let this go because you were arguing against @PeregrineFalcon that the buff the devs implemented is not a buff whereas it very clearly is. That you are not satisfied with it does not change what it is. And if you insist on arguing from a false standpoint, expect to have others argue back on that standpoint.

MM pets use lower scalars than other pets. And the fact that other pets have better resists does not change the fact that moving MM pet defenses and damage resists into their T1 upgrade is a buff implemented to improve their survivability. Now, do you have anything that proves the provided buff was not in fact a buff or are you just going to keep crying that their buff does not count as one to you because MM pets are still intentionally lower than Controller/Dominator pets? (Edit: Oh, and using bots as the example? You can enhance their damage resist past 30% by slotting damage resist enhancements in their T1 upgrade, something Controller/Dominator pets can't.) (Edit again: And Controller/Dominator pets have a base 240 second recharge. The slowest pet recharge for MMs is 15 seconds at base. So if those Controllers and Dominators lose their pets? They're SoL unlike the MMs that just re-summon their lost pets.) Yes, MM pets still need help. However, your insistence that the MM pet buff they already got is not a buff is undercutting your credibility.

The procs are not affected by enhancements, inspirations, or power effects. So they should not be affected by Rage's crash. WAI.

Except the reason why defense and damage resist was moved from the pets themselves to their T1 upgrades was specifically to buff their survival by letting us finally enhance the pets' defense and damage resist. So it is a buff.

When it comes to MMs and inspirations, if you want to affect your pets with inspirations, your best option is to use the team inspirations. The personal inspirations can be used on pets, but they can also be a pain to use as pets run off or queue up an attack.

After the previous thread asking to be able to slot MM ATOs into all MM primary powers, I'm fine with that. However, the other sets are Pet Damage sets and Recharge Intensive Pet sets. So it makes no sense to be able to slot those into non-pet powers. So for those sets, I oppose your "not optional" proposition. First, even in incarnate content, MM pets still get their negative level shifts. It is just that in incarnate content, they get added combat levels to bring them back up to the MM's incarnate level. Second, I'm fairly certain that this will never see the light of day outside of incarnate content to keep MMs from getting too powerful. To an extent, this has been looked at. At least as far as some GMs go to keep all player character pets from simply disintegrating in combat against said GMs. Something to bear in mind is that if the MM is in Bodyguard Mode and the MM and the MM's pets take a hit from the enemy, that's two hits on each pet from that one attack. One hit from the attack on the pets and another hit from the damage the pets absorb for the MM. While I would be glad to see MM pets not suffer as much damage from enemy attacks, I'm not sure how much mileage you will see on this.

Fair... even if you are wrong. If I'm wrong, then oppose my comment. If I'm right, then agree. Agreeing and disagreeing in this manner is a cop-out.

It's not his pathing. It is that friendly mobs are showing as hostile to him. Which is why they can't be killed.

It's not a bug. Experienced Marksman is a PvP set. PvP sets and purple sets do not show up on vendor lists for selling to prevent you from accidentally selling them. However, they do show up for placing on the AH.

That needs to be its own Judgement power. What damage type does it deal? I don't know... what damage type(s) are missing from the existing Judgement attacks? Make it untyped damage. Because who can resist the power of kittens?

Instance maps exit you where you accessed them from. So if the Mission Transporter simply placed you into the mission, then when you exit the mission, you would leave the mission and be placed at the same location as you used to enter the mission. So that would be the "regular place".

Power sets are not designed for and so are not likely going to be changed for speedrunning teams.

To the best of my knowledge, magitech was a Final Fantasy thing. Technomancy predates magitech and I've seen it in use much more often than magitech, which again I have only seen in the Final Fantasy series of games. In the end, it doesn't really matter because both reference the same thing. For all I know, there are other names/labels for the fusion of technology and magic beyond even just those.

Technomancy. Techno being shorthand prefix for technology and mancy meaning magic. So technological magic. Though yes, while practitioners of technomancy would be technomancers, they are also called technomages.

As @PoptartsNinja said, there is a distinct difference. When most players play heroes or vigilantes, even if they play brutal, murderous, psychopathic characters, they are out to save the day and all blue side missions/arcs move towards this goal. When players play villains or rogues, they do so with a different mind set. Some may be out to cause as much mayhem and damage as they can, and most of the red side missions/arcs lend themselves to it. Others prefer to play a more honorable villain, one that commits great evil but does so within strict boundaries set by the villain's code of honor. Others yet may prefer to simply play the selfish character, doing whatever best benefits the character which makes the character a villain because (s)he/they/it is taking from others for their own benefit, but selfishness doesn't extend to casual murder, intentionally causing medical disasters, rounding up random innocents to be experimented on or harvested for the sake of someone else's plans, and so forth. So villainy comes in a great many forms, but the red side missions/arcs too often lock you into the more extreme takes of it. Whereas heroism boils down to the same thing regardless of personal motivations or methods, because the end result is still to save lives. So yes, blue side and red side both lack agency, but that agency is much, much, much more important to red side story telling. Edit: That said, there are some work arounds. For instance, on the Vahzilok mission where you deliver those 3 people to them, I intentionally leave almost the entire map of Longbow standing so that they can see and trace my path, and so rescue the 3 citizens. For the plague distribution, I have my characters draw attention to the canisters and the plague already had a cure made for it. (The cure was mentioned in the Outbreak tutorial.) And for the mission where you steal the only sample of a cure for a disease, I have the character emote leaving half the sample with the defeated hero so they can still have the doctors and scientists work on replicating it. (It helps to come prepared with additional tubes just in case.) So there is a way to build some agency into some of the stories just by player action.

It reads more as opposition. "You want this? Then become a dev and make it." is the overall feel of your responses in this thread.

A bit extreme, but I at least understand the sentiment.

Do you always ask if someone making a suggestion is going to be a dev? If making a suggestion, especially if said suggestion is prefaced as a thought experiment instead of a full request, should result in the requester becoming a dev, then all of us better be signing up to be devs. Your question is odd to say the least. This is an even weirder response than your initial dev question. If you can't be bothered with reading the posts you are going to comment on, then how can you expect to have any reasonable idea what is actually going on in the thread?