Rudra

The meta revolves around doing as much damage in as little time as possible, often via damage procs. It decries powers that don't let them do so as being "bad", "useless", "worthless" or in need of replacing. Like the Presence pool since it does not contribute to the player being able to maximize damage output. So no, there is no meta that involves the Presence pool. Instead, the meta wants the pool to die in oblivion and be replaced "with better powers". What do you have slotted? Is it for set bonuses or to actually improve the power? Not theoretically; practically. Accuracy, recharge, and taunt/placate duration in Pacify. As an HO if I can get it. I do not slot sets into Pacify. I was there for that debate. I even participated in that debate. And as much as I hate to say it, the ones pushing for Challenge to be replaced had it right. Yes, I loved being able to choose to draw out a single target or a group as I saw fit, but even after Challenge was removed, players like me could still draw out single targets, just with our epic snipe power or our prestige power. And we did still have Provoke. And as @Luminara said, using a loss we opposed is not a good reason to impose such a loss on others for other sets. If anything, it reeks of sheer pettiness. An "I lost something I liked so others should have to suffer the same" feeling. The difference between losing Challenge in favor of Pacify as opposed to losing Pacify and Provoke to bring back Challenge plus some enhancements that if possible will give us back Pacify and Provoke's functions? Is that when we lost Challenge, we still had our taunt available in Provoke with no other requirements and the ability to selectively draw single targets out of a room with a ranged ST attack, whereas you are asking to take away powers with no recourse for achieving the same thing we already have except by having to take a power you prefer to have back with added requirements of needing more enhancement slots than players are already using with no other recourse. Not exactly a comparable situation.

I see the misunderstanding. I am specifically referring to the placated mob, not anything else. If the placated mob is affected by something that notifies the mob of your presence, the placate is broken. Confuses are odd ducks in that even if a mob knows you are there while confused, the mob will not react to you. So it is not the taunt itself in those auras, it is that those powers notify mobs you are there and affecting them with your aura. So if a placate proc were to be slotted in say RttC, and that proc placated an enemy, that enemy would keep attacking you because the toggled aura is constantly affecting the target mob(s) every assigned increment of time. Is not a reason to take something away from players like me. Trying to make a power set fit with a specific group of players that decry anything that doesn't fit their preferred play style (the current meta) at the expense of players already using said pool is not a good reason in my book. If you were trying to make the pool more appealing to others without stepping on other players like me, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Can be done without taking powers I am personally using in the game and that others are using in the game away from them. So still not a reason for the proposal. Has been pitched by players like @Luminara without stepping on players like me already using the pool. SO that doesn't really hold up as a reason for the OP either. Has its own problems that you do not want to address because of the multiple Brute discussions elsewhere. (And which I am willing to bet will never happen because of it.) Which is still done at the expense of players like me that are already using the Presence pool by requiring us to have to devote an extra enhancement slot to get back a function we already have without that enhancement for the sole stated purpose of imposing an enhancement tax. And intentionally imposing an enhancement tax on players to get back what we already have is not exactly a solid reason to pitch things. Which can be done without stepping on players like me by taking away powers we already have and are using. You can still propose procs that don't exist in the game and propose enhancement sets without taking things away from the players happily making use of things currently available in the game. So that is still not a reason for the OP. Why should players playing the game right now be required to change how they play the game is the reason I am asking for. Why should something that already exists in the game simply be removed is my question. And saying that a desired author created enhancement tax would be available to restore that function is not an excuse to remove powers from players using it. Because you are still imposing something on the players they don't have to do right now in the game, devote an extra enhancement to a power to get a power's function they are currently using without having to slot an enhancement to get.

Is it actually wiped-out by non-damaging notifications, though, or just suppressed/ignored? It goes away. Like a sleep effect when someone damages the target. I've never seen an enemy that I placated and then damaged by any means resume being placated for any part of the remaining 8 seconds. A placated enemy that is notified via any of your powers of your presence is no longer placated. Via the power itself. Yes, its "notifies mobs" part. And you are talking about constantly being applied toggle effects. As I said earlier in this post, I have never seen any enemy I placated that I affected with a power that notifies them, typically an attack, that stayed placated. So I would like to know what powers that notify mobs don't break placate in your experience. Edit: In order (separated by semicolons): there are benefits whether you denounce them or not, such as giving players the option for single-target taunt in a pool while maintaining the ability to make it AOE; it would entice the people who have asked for pool confuse or Intimidate/Invoke Panic without having to take a taunt or placate; reconsidering slotting depends on if you already slot Pacify and/or if you take both Pacify and Provoke as of current; I've addressed how to try working this in given what currently exists but, of course, suggesting basically anything falls into SCR territory, and for the "no reason" refer back to the "no benefit" section. Then please explain the benefits and the reason. Because what you have stated as benefits so far are not to me. They are intentional nerfs to my characters and any future characters I make (which I routinely do) that may want to use the current abilities without having to sacrifice something to get back current functionality. And I have asked you for a reason for the proposed change many times in this thread and you have yet to give one that actually says why the proposed change should be done. (Edit again: Why should players like me already using the Presence pool have to change their characters and their play style to accommodate this proposal? Why should players be forced to change how they approach the game for this proposal?)

RttC notifies mobs. So does Against All Odds and Invulnerability.

I told you, procs that change KB to KD do so by reducing the magnitude of the KB effect to 0.67, at which point the KB is still taking effect, but there is no distance because of how low the magnitude is, resulting in a KD effect. That is how KB works. Below a certain threshold, KB is KD. (Edit: KB distance is determined by the KB's magnitude after any resistances.) I'm not going state if 0 magnitude from whatever the power's magnitude is originally is possible, because I don't know. That's a dev question. Neither am I going to say if it is possible or not to reduce a power's duration by enhancement. That is a dev question as well, though it would require the devs add to the code for power duration if you insist on not going the resistance route. Otherwise you will need to have a power in the proc that grants the target sufficient status resistance to effectively negate the taunt, which will apply to any and every taunt that anyone may apply to the target in that window of application, keeping in mind that the placate effect only applies for the user. Regardless, you are still talking about taking away a power I am using, requiring me to respec to get a different power, and then dedicate an extra enhancement slot to that power to maintain the enhancements I have in it plus another to convert the taunt to a placate effect. (Edit again: Hells, it would require me to respec because the power I have no longer exists as far as the game is concerned, so my character would be rendered invalid.) So I still oppose the OP. (Edit yet again: So the OP boils down to a forced respec on players already using the Presence pool for no benefit to the game, changing a pool in a manner that as already stated will not entice more players into taking the set but may cause players using the set to abandon it or at the very least have to completely re-consider and re-make their builds to free up enhancement slots to get the same powers they already have via enhancements that their existing powers already give them, and adding more complexity to the game's mechanics/code for no reason other than to make change itself.) To the best of my understanding, they check to see if they trigger when you activate the power, and then apply their effect. Some look like they apply their proc before the power fires, but they don't. (Edit: Though making a proc delay its effect shouldn't be any different than making a power delay its effect, and that already happens.) Placates are neutralized by affecting the enemy with a power that notifies the enemy. So if they fire at the same time, assuming the game doesn't get confused, the placate dies as the taunt notifies the enemy. Just like when slotting a damage proc into Pacify, you pacify the enemy and the enemy keeps attacking you because you broke the placate effect.

No, that isn't what I am saying. A proc that applies a placate effect. Okay, I understand. Is it a ST effect or an AoE effect? You would also need to reduce the taunt's duration because the taunt will apply before the proc so I'm betting granting protection won't do anything because protection prevents you from being affected up to a certain magnitude but not how long you are affected. And since the target will be affected before the proc affects him/her/them/it, protection won't matter because the character is already being taunted for the power's duration. That means the proc would have to include a power that grants the target some ridiculously high status resistance to taunt effects, and that would then make those targets effectively immune to friends/team mates that try to taunt the target into going after them as well. Edit: And even if you reduce the taunt's magnitude, unless the target has taunt protection, the magnitude doesn't matter.

It reduces the KB magnitude of the power to 0.67. At 0.67 magnitude, the target does not get moved anywhere, just knocked down. It does not matter how much you reduce the magnitude or duration of a taunt power. It still does not pacify the target. Placate and Taunt effects are not related to each other, they are completely different statuses.

Right. And that has the issues I have been mentioning. That you are taking pacify away from me and any other players that take and use it and you are removing a good AoE taunt for a ST taunt. Which is a giant middle finger to anyone using either of those powers. Just so you can have an enhancement that adds its own taunt AoE effect. Which is still taking away one of the advantages Brutes have over Scrappers to be replaced with... nothing. If you have the proc's chance to fire and its chance to hit be as high as possible? That is a whole 5% chance of failing. Oh, the horror. Unless RNG is sticking it to you, you aren't going to be missing except for rare occasions. And then you have another enhancement whose sole purpose is to take even that 5% chance of failure away. There is no enhancement that can take an effect away from a power. City of Titans face-planted into that problem on a much newer game engine. They had to design their powers to be able to change based on what special enhancements were slotted. City of Heroes was not designed to do that. So you aren't going to be able to change a taunt into a pacify just by slotting an enhancement. (Edit: Null the Gull grants players a hidden power to prevent an unwanted power effect from affecting you, but even he doesn't change how Group Fly works. Just whether it can affect you the player asking him to not let it affect you.) If you have the accuracy as high as possible as you have already stated you want, then you are facing a laughable 5% chance of not hitting. With another proposed proc that takes even that away.

That doesn't help the situation any. Because you are now stating that your intent is to remove the difference between Scrappers and Brutes for their taunt effects. And I very much oppose that intent. (Edit: So Scrappers will get to do more damage, not reliant on building up a Fury bar to be competitive, have the same starting resists as Brutes, now get to have the same taunt power in every way using just the free enhancement slot the power comes with because you don't need to slot any endurance reduction or accuracy enhancements in Confront for it to be fully effective, and only lose 15% damage resist off their cap which saves them enhancements on resists for not needing to pursue that last 15%.)

I'm of the opinion that the largest problems for Brutes are the Tanker damage buff and Fury itself not being standout enough to separate them from Scrappers in either burst or sustain which, yeah, can cause them to be watered down to Scrappers who gave up crits to have Tanker health caps - not even tanker or median values - and worse damage multipliers. But, again, I'll leave the larger discussion for that thread. Except that discussion is a large part of this discussion too. You can't just sweep something you don't want to discuss under the rug on the pretense that it is not related when the OP will very much impact how Scrappers and Brutes differ, by reducing that difference or further skewing player perception in favor of Scrappers over Brutes. Yes, it is strictly for the taunt portion of the OP and how two powers players using the meta don't even bother with, but it is still relevant. I'm willing to accept that we simply disagree on a lot and move on, but not on this. Your proposal directly impacts how Brutes and Scrappers will be viewed. Tankers will still retain the benefits of a better AoE taunt with their -100 range effect for enemy movement, but now Brutes will have worse taunts than Scrappers with just a single enhancement being slotted. Especially since you seem set on the proc having a high chance to trigger and high accuracy to make sure it hits from what I have seen in your posts so far. Yes, the taunt duration for Brutes lasts roughly twice as long as Scrappers whereas the movement portion is the same, but Scrappers have less than 1/3 the recharge wait time as Brutes so they will get more benefit from their taunt effect. And even if you apply a self slow effect to the PC for having the enhancement, unless you have the enhancement apply a -75% recharge debuff, Scrapper Confront is still going to come out as the better taunt power after the enhancement. Edit: And here is another thought: because it is a taunt enhancement set, that means it can still be slotted into Taunt as well. Which would be foolish to do since with your proposal for the enhancement to slow the slotted power it would murder Brutes' and Tankers' taunt powers, but it could still be done. So you are proposing an enhancement set whose sole purpose is to benefit Scrappers and you are willing to nerf Provoke to make the set appealing beyond Scrappers. (I know I said I would drop the nerf part, and I do apologize, but for this, it is relevant again.) Edit again: Hells, another proposed set is completely worthless to Brutes, Scrappers, and Tankers except in PvP because their taunt effects are already autohit. So it looks to me like its sole purpose is to now make the taunt proc itself autohit. (Edit yet again: Actually, you specify in the OP that the autohit is intended for the procs but aren't sure it can. So it isn't a "seems" any more.) Even Placate is an authohit power.

Agreed. If I see something being weakened, then to me, it is a nerf. That a bandaid is also being provided to undo that means nothing to me. Especially when I have high confidence that said bandaid can't even exist. So I'll drop this. Coercive Persuasion's proc adds its own AoE confuse effect that has a chance to trigger. It does not change the slotted confusion power from ST to AoE, it adds its own AoE effect to the power. While adding an AoE taunt effect as a proc can actually happen in the game as opposed to changing a ST attack to AoE, you still run into the Scrappers now do everything a Brute can do just with slightly lower damage resist caps if powers that are intended to be ST can now be AoE even if only via added chance for AoE taunt effect on top of standard taunt effect. Especially if the ToHit/Accuracy is cranked as high as possible.

No, it is a nerf in that you are specifically asking to take away a function a power currently has. That you are also proposing an enhancement that most likely can't work in the game that will give that function back has nothing to do with the fact you are requesting a power be nerfed. And you still are not giving a reason why it even needs to be nerfed. Scrappers get a ST taunt effect because they need to be able to draw aggro to them as a melee AT and they also need to not be competing with Brutes and Tankers for that. We already have threads talking about how Brutes don't have a role and need to find one that doesn't have them stepping on either Scrapper or Tanker toes. And now you want to add an enhancement that lets Scrappers taunt groups of enemies like they are Brutes and Tankers, except with a much better recharge time on their taunt. You know what the difference between Brute Taunt and Scrapper Confront is if there is an enhancement to make Scrapper Confront AoE? Scrapper Confront will still have a base 3 second recharge to the Brute's 10 second recharge. That's it. Why bother playing a Brute any more since Scrappers can now even taunt like Brutes. And that is on the assumption that somehow your proposed enhancement can be made to turn a ST attack into an AoE since not even KB to KD procs actually change how the power works but instead reduce the effect of a function of that power low enough to act like another effect. And then the inevitable: we can turn one attack power, even if it does 0 damage on its own, into an AoE, so why can't we do the same to the other ST attack powers?

Exactly. Challenge and Provoke both used to be in the Presence pool. Challenge was a weaker version of Provoke. So effectively turning Provoke into Challenge makes it weaker. And that is a nerf. And you already know this because in your post you also say: And players complain about the Sudden Acceleration proc as is, decrying it as an enhancement tax. Which it isn't if players bother to slot more of the set. And here you are specifically proposing an enhancement tax to get back a power's current functionality in the name of applying a nerf you have already admitted you understand is one without giving any reason why the power should be nerfed in the first place. Oof. Fair point. Tell that to Challenge, which Pacify very specifically did that exact thing to. When Challenge was removed, players still had Provoke, which was a better version of the same power for all intents and purposes. Removing Pacify gives players like me what to have that power's function? (Edit: And please don't say a theoretical enhancement from a set that does not exist to change a taunt to a pacify that we both know given how the game works most likely can't even be made with that function anyway.)

I'm not sure what you mean. I don't necessarily see AOE taunt as objectively superior to single-target. What makes the ST Confront superior to Provoke is that when you use it against an enemy that enemy will then move towards your character for the next 12 seconds unless rooted by attack animations, you can use it every 3 seconds before any recharge considerations, and it is guaranteed to hit the target unless the target is a PC. Provoke gets target mobs' attention for 8.24 seconds so it has a shorter duration than Confront (let alone Taunt with its 20 second duration), does not get them to move towards you, and can miss the target even if you have a 1x1078% chance to hit because of the hit chance cap. The current advantage of Invoke Panic is that when you use it, for the next 8.344 seconds, every enemy within 20 feet (up to 10 targets) is too busy spending their time cowering in your presence to kill you. Handy for those times when you find yourself inside a building with no room to hover out of reach and the mobs are swarming you. So you are still talking about nerfing a power and not giving a reason why it needs to be nerfed. Edit again: I'm willing to bet you will never see these sets as presented because of how the final enhancements in them work. Even Contagious Confusion does not change a power from ST to AoE. It adds an AoE effect, but the power itself is not changed. How is an enhancement supposed to change how a power itself works? Procs add effects, they don't change the power itself. That added effect can be a global buff, an added damage effect, or other added effect, but it cannot change how the power itself works. That doesn't seem to be something the game engine can do.

Of course, number tweaking would be involved. I did also recognize that Challenge used to be part of this pool, so if the changes are so substantial that it should be renamed/replaced back to that power, by all means. Definitely don't just remove the AOE component, nerfing it. I'll edit that into the OP. Why though? Why do you want to nerf a power that is already not as good as the Primary/Secondary AT equivalents? Intimidate already is a ST power.

As someone who takes powers from the Presence pool and uses Pacify (mostly on Blasters), I oppose the request to take away a power I am using. Provoke lacks the move to power user effect that Confront and Taunt have, has less range than Confront or Taunt, requires a ToHit check even for mobs rather than just players like Confront and Taunt, and takes 3 times longer to recharge than the ST Confront (being equal to the Tanker's Taunt for recharge). If Provoke is made into a ST power, absolutely no one will take it. (And I would respec out of it for it now being worthless to me.) (Edit: I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the reason why Challenge was replaced with Pacify was because given the choice of a ST taunt effect and an AoE taunt effect, no one took the ST version.)

Because MMs were never the red side tanks. Just like Brutes were not the red side Scrappers. And your own comment shows that MMs were never meant as a tanking class. However, that is still a tangential discussion to the thread.

This is the only part I care about. I'm fine with after the event going in and deleting temp powers, but the keep adding icons to more trays part is very annoying.

Enhancements not slotted in powers or held in the enhancement trays at the end of a respec are not sold. They are deleted.

In that case, the player is best served by backing out of the respec, it won't consume the respec token if (s)he/they do, and selling off the enhancements in their trays they don't need before doing the respec. Otherwise, that player is likely going lose enhancements via deletion. I appreciate you trying to cover worst case scenarios, but that one just needs to be resolved differently than by simply doing a respec as is. Edit: For clarification, please note that I am not opposing the OP or the other suggestions provided in this thread.

True, it does reach a point where the scroll bar is removed. (Edit: Though at the point at which the scroll bar went away, I didn't need it any more.) However, if it is removed for certain resolutions, then that is a bug that needs to be reported and fixed. I just went into the game and respec'ed a level 50 (which I then backed out of when I was done checking), and on my screen, there was a scroll bar and it did scroll the enhancement storage window so I could peruse and select any enhancements I wanted. Edit again: Huh, you edited in the time it took me to log back in to respond, so I have your edited post as my quote rather than the post I was responding to.... (Edit yet again: Sorry, I'm delusional and failed to read that part of your post that I was responding to when I re-read it. The part I was responding to is still there.) However, again, if the game is erroneously detecting it no longer needs the scroll bar when it still does, that is a bug that should be reported and fixed.

You can see 48 enhancements in the window during a respec. And there is a scroll bar on the right side.

Which is unfortunate. I liked Kitsulot a great deal, but that's one more lost from this Great Community. Author was asked to give it a rest for a while, not go away. Author agreed to give it a rest for a while, didn't say was going away. I think you are misreading the situation.

You can just download the game code and run it. There have been multiple threads that included instructions on how to do so.

There was a comment about the time when CoV was released about MMs being intended as villain side tanks because it was expected the enemies would spend all their time fighting the pets rather than going after the MM, but that comment never made sense and it never came from a dev as best I can remember. I heard it from players trying to explain the (at the time) new ATs. I have never heard of MMs being considered Scrapper equivalents, because that was held for Stalkers. (And was a large complaint at the time about Stalkers for their planned crits rather than just getting crits.) The only official comment I ever saw about MMs was that MMs were the villain pet class. Not the Tanker equivalent or the Scrapper equivalent, but a whole new concept that focused exclusively on pets. And the way the AT worked, that comment made sense. MMs never worked as off-tanks or pseudo-Scrappers, at least not until after Bodyguard Mode was added, and I only ever heard players claim that was their purpose, never the devs. And yes, Bodyguard Mode was added after, but that was in response to players complaining that mobs would consistently ignore their pets and just rapidly kill them, making them feel like the AT wasn't really playable except with a team to protect them. (Edit: So Bodyguard Mode wasn't added to fix MMs failing to be tanks as designed, but to fix that for too many players MMs struggled with basic survival because mobs preferred to ignore the pets.) Edit again: Oh, and as far as MMs originally being designed to be Tankers or their equivalent? That runs face first into the fact that not a single MM pet has any means of taunting enemies. And without the ability to taunt, until Bodyguard Mode was added, the pets had zero ability to actually protect the MM, let alone anyone else with the MM. And that should have been evident even in beta testing. (Especially when you see just how much squishier MM pets are compared to Controllers and Dominators.)