Neiska

Out of curiosity, what effect would this have on say, shenanigans like 2 players on a team taking turns popping a t4 barrier? We would be right back to square one, no? "Teams too powerful"?

@RudedawgCDN Hello OP! I have never played /nature myself, but I have heard some good things. Here are a few tips that I can offer - 1. Ensure you have all pet aura IO's slotted. 2. Personally I have found that no matter what primary/seconday MM I have gone with, Juggling both Barrier and Support incarnates go a long way for beefing up you and your pets. You pop barrier, then when that wears off, swap to the other. Support Core is more damage/accuracy/defense, but the defense certainly helps. 3. For lore pets, personally I would recommend either Longbow for the super -regen debuff they have. But if its survivability, you may want to look at Knives of Vengeance Radial. None of the lore pets have any outstanding heal that will save you to any great extent, but the Knives has a 20% hit/30% damage buff, and a Regen/Recovery buff. But if you want something 100% defense, Robotic Drones radial comes with a 200 point single target heal and a 5% all defense buff. 4. I am not sure how experienced you are, but a big part of being tough as a MM is taking full advantage of Bodyguard mode. 5. Make sure you have all the restricted IOs, such as Shield Wall teleport/3%, Gladiator TP/3% protection, Steadfast Protection 3%, Unbreakable Guard +hps. Honestly the biggest one will be the juggling Barrier and Support. Though I have seen/heard people adding Rune of Protection into the mix as well for stronger personal defenses. Hope this helps!

@Bill Z Bubba - Mhm, I am aware of the tank buffs. I have a EM/Bio and a Rad/Bio tanker myself. Tanker damage isnt as bad as it used to be, which i say is a great thing. But they still arent a scrapper/stalker/blaster level of damage. And yes, they can steamroll content. But I wouldn't say thats a bad thing. I can steamroll content on my MM too. The only differences is time and attention required really. But I mean, what is the alternative? We could go back to the time when people were screaming for tanks and no one played them. Or when not many played them and most just played brutes instead. I would say what we have now is the better option. And yes, Brutes and Tanks can both do damage now. But I still think where they shine is they have taunt auras. They don't even have to really focus in order to keep things off of others, like the healers, the CC, the support. I mean, we could take a look at Wow where they have 2 hour wait times for a tank to be willing to cue. I wouldn't consider that the superior choice.

@Brutal Justice - Alright, I propose a thought experiment here. Problem: Some builds are simply "too good" on teams that make you "personally" feel that your contributions arent impactful. Well, lets analyze and dive into that a little bit shall we? 1. Team types - You have ITFs, Radio Missions, PI missions, Farming missions, story arc missions. 1a. ITFs - I would argue this type is one where everyone has to be focused and on top of their game, at least in conception. Strong characters would be expected I should think. 1b. Radio Missions - Just an average group of random people running random missions in any given area. I would expect a strong build to be "hosting", as this is often a tool used to help random people find groups. (not always hosted by a fully slotted 50, but they often are.) For Radio/PI missions, I would think its on "you" to clarify what kind of team it is upon joining. If its a "powerlevel" team, or if its a "chill and have a good time" sort of team. 1c. Farming/Powerleveling missions - It shouldn't even bare mentioning, a 50 would be hosting this. Door sitters aren't always present but are there often. 1d. Story Missions - For this activity, I would say its up to the orginizer to decide to allow someone or not. So if thats you, you should say beforehand "Hey, were just average running." 2. Group makeup - This part could entail a full lengthy discussion in its own topic. But the TLDR here I think is that in a team of 8 with 14 different AT's, the standard expectation is going to vary, widely. Some teams will faceroll even if 5 members are fully AFK, others may struggle. Others might be completely out of left field, like a full team of 8 MMs or VEATS. But my main point here is it is stastically impossible to balance a game with so many variables with so many different possible group combinations, much less 14 different ATs with over 50 powersets, offering a dizzying amount of possible builds and combinations. And on top of that, you also have to take the "Activity/team" type into account. 3. "What am I doing to contribute?" Well, that depends entirely on the AT in question. 3a. Tankers/Brutes - You hold threat. Your job isn't to do damage, but you can kill things yourself, if given time. 3b. Stalkers/Scrappers/Blasters/Corruptors - You bring the pain. Some of you are tough in a pinch, but you are no tanker. 3c. Masterminds/Sentinels/Defenders - You bring the support. That could mean super strong buffs, or debuffs. Healing, or helping CC. All kinds of benefits could be added here. 3d. Controllers/Dominators - You bring the CC and support, but its often "unfelt" support, sleeps, holds, and so on. But some controllers/dominators are near immortal. 3e. VEATs - Your mere presence can add huge bonuses to a teams defense, accuracy, and damage. Some VEATs are AOE and debuffer specalists, others are Single target DPS. Some have quasi-pets to help, others are die hard assisins. 3f. Warshades/Peacebringers - Really a mixed bag. You can change stances and perform a different function if a team requires it. 4. Which brings me to my next question, "Who feels as if they arent contributing?" 4a. Tankers/Brutes - Bummed you arent doing damage? Well, thats not your role or function. You are there to keep pressure off everyone else as much as possible, doing what damage you can in the process. More than one threat holder in the group? Well, maybe ask to split pull, as in each of you pull your own group and wrangle them for the rest of the team. It's sort of win-win for everyone. 4b. Stalkers/Scrappers/Blasters/Corruptors - Not doing enough damage? Someone else beating you to the punch? Well, your team might be super heavy with the DPS then. Are you dieing often? Well, you may need to stick closer to the tank or support, if they are present. 4c. Masterminds/Sentinels/Defenders - No one needs heals? Well, not everyone will, and I wouldnt expect everyone to. That depends on the team makeup and everyones builds, as well as the team, the activity, as well as the enemies. If you find yourself not needing to buff/debuff/heal/support, I would kick back, relax, and enjoy trying to DPS for a change. Maybe this team just doesn't need what you bring to the table right now. It happens. So mabye enjoy being able to do something else, or if it truely botheres you so much, mabye this specific team just doesnt need you, and you can leave to find another, or even make your own. Or suggest higher/different content or activites. 4d. Controllers/Dominators - Stuff dieing too fast to bother CCing, Debuffing, and so on? Well, it happens. Mabye you can try a different angle, pre-CCing before things get aggroed, or mabye helping the team by bringing enemies to the group? Scouting? Look for the glowie? You are still a "present" body able to help, even if the team doesnt need your specality in combat right now. 4e. VEATs - Things dieing fast? Feel like the weak link? I wouldn't worry. Your team buffs are among the best buffs in the game. You just being there is making "everyone" better, and many VEATs have built in debuffs in with their attacks. So your normal attack chain is helping, when other classes such as controllers or masterminds have to "focus" on debuffing, you do it normally with each suppression, each venom grendade, each psycic wail, and so on. 4f. Warshades/Peacebringers - The team has a tank? Doesnt need your dwarf form? Or your powerups/debuffs? Well, more dps is usually a good thing, so you can always go space-squid form and pewpew away. Still not feeling important? Well, like the other support classes you are still a present body and an extra pair of eyes. You can bring spawns to the group, act as a scout, look for that glowie, or find that boss that needs bashed. 5. Combat values is not the only way to contribute to a team. 5a. This could be just my way of thinking, but when I team with someone, I don't just see them as their class. They are another person. Either they can stick with me to help in combat, or we can split up to finish even faster if we are capable of it. Or they can look for that last annoying mission clicky we missed, or even help in other ways, such as if they played this mission/story/arc/ITF before, and I have not. If its a boss I havent fought before, I may rely on their experience. Or if we are trying for a badge, I may require their knowldge for any tips or tricks on getting it. Players are more than whatever AT they happen to be logged in at the time. 5b. Along with that though, is I pay attention to how players conduct themselves. If someone is rude, unpleasant to play with, or for whatever reason I find them unlikeable to be around, then I won't want to team with them again. I don't care how massively OP their AT is, how much they spent, what their Vet level is, or what they have to say about the mission. If they are a butthead, then they are a butthead, and I will find the experience unpleasant, and wont wish to repeat it, no matter how much inf/exp I got, how many merits, and so on. (I hasten to add this is not normal in CoH, at least not for me. The vast majority, such as 99.5% of people, have been pleasent to play with. For me, it is "rare" to be teamed with someone being such a butthead I don't wish to team with them again. But it "does" happen.) 5c. But I have no objection to someone playing a weaker/new build, if they are pleasnt and fun to be around. Even if they don't even talk much, or are newer than me at the game. Both are totes fine. I would rather team with a pleasent/nice/fun/new player with a weak/sub-optiomal build, then someone unpleasant with a super strong character. But that's just me. But this is getting on longer than I intended. My point here is, @Brutal Justice, there is far greater and more group dynamics here at work, as well as personal playstyles/choices that affect how well or how bad a team performs. If you feel as if you arent contributing, I would argue that means everyone else is on top of their game. If that bothers you to such an extent, there are several actions that you yourself can do. 6. You can purporsefully make "weaker" teams, teams with no aggro-anchor, or no healer, or no DPS. 6a. You can take fewer people. Say to heck with the odds. We are gonna run that mission with only 4 people. No healer you say? Well that should make it interesting. 6b. You can leave the team if you dont feel like you are a part of it, and start your own. 6c. Problems finding teams you say? Well, perhaps you could start your own supergroup, forum guild, discord channel. Find others who are like minded and get organized. You might be pleasently suprised. 6d. You could even make a minigame out of it. The team doesnt need you? You could say in party "Look I dont feel as if my actions matter, So I will now be using brawl, apprentice charm, kick, punch, and nemeisis staff as my attacks. I am now the dreaded "escort npc" of the mission." Or whatever you can think up. Have some fun with it! In closing I can almost gurantee you that there will be situations not only in this game, but many, many others where you feel this way. And nothing the devs and programmers, will ever make it 100% kiss your elbow balanced/even/fair under every possible situation and dynamic in play. But I think I have rambled on enough. But I still stand by my previous statements that your suggestion of a 5% defense nerf to everyone but tanks and brutes would be conductive to your situation, and might likely do more harm than good, not to just players, soloists, teamers, but to multiple powersets across multiple ATs as well. They already have different hitpoints and resistances, I don't think setting a penalty to defense will be a solution to anything. All comments are respectfully given, and are in no way meant to offend. I do hope this at least provokes some thoughtful musings.

@Brutal Justice - strong words from the person who posted "nerf defenses" and then said "soloists be fine". When my fears are not for myself, its for people who want to solo but are stuggling, because I assure you, they are out there. I have friends among them. Just saying, trying to force players to do things they dont want to do, wont suddenly find yourself knee deep in teams, but more occassional teamers such as myself or 100% pure soloists leave the game, leaving you with less people to play with.

@golstat2003 Honestly? Some of the stuff being thrown around here in this thread makes me want to team even less. Not a huge fan of the "you will team and like it" or "i want teams to do anything but what they are already doing" points. At this point I am wondering how much of this is really about trying to get more people to team, and not about making someone who likes teaming to feel like the MVP anytime they feel like it, because I don't really see how any of this is "fostering community" and so on.

Still feel people are missing context or seem to forget that different players enjoy different ways of spending their time on the game. It's an MMO. Its not a "team focused" game. Its a game that has teaming content and features. And personally the moment I am penalized for playing solo on my own schedule doing for what I want to do, for playing how I want to play, is the day I uninstall. Because spoiler alert, some people play the game for their own enjoyment, which does not always include teaming with other people. If I "want" to, then I will. But I won't be bribed/cocered/browbeaten into doing it if I don't want to. And I would like to point out from where I sit, those people who are on the "we need to fix the teaming game" side of things, well why not just take 1 or 2 less people? Poof. Problem solved. And not all builds who can solo 4/8 are absurdly OP over 9000 damage type of builds either. Personally my favorite character is my robot/ea MM. She solos the hardest content just fine, and I don't think anyone in their right mind would accuse her of having too much dps or being too powerful. And teams have always felt all too happy to have endless END, +absorb, and status protection when I am around. If people were serious about balance, personally I would take a long hard look at buffs/debuffs/dps/cc values. And personally I would love an indepth explination of how the solo people are a problem/difficulty for the team game. Just how precisely is my Robot/EA MM "dangerous" to your team interactions? My damage is only so-so, I have little CC to speak of (only bonfire), and sure, I "could" run off and probially solo an entire spawn if I wanted to, but it would take forever, and wouldn't be helpful to the team at all. Honestly, this entire thread is turning into a "I want people to play MY way" discussion. We have everything from "soloists are too good" to "lets try to encourage people to team more" to "nerf defense" to "higher difficulty shouldnt give more money." How is any of this game balance? Since when "did only teams" matter?

Not sure if its against forum policy/rules to refer to another game, but I would like to refer to D3 if I may, for context. The gap between its solo play, and team play, is massive. It's not even in the same country the amount of drops/exp teams get, vs what a solo player gets. And I really do not think that is what we should want here. (note: I don't think anyone has pushed for this sort of dynamic, I only bring it up for argument's sake.) There is such a thing as "artificially" rewarding teaming "too much", to the extent that solo play is a joke and such players can feel ignored, and it quickly turns into a game of the "have's" and the "have not's", when someone is 1000+ paragon levels ahead of you, just for being on a team, when they played less time.

@Brutal Justice - So on the same hand, you are saying you want to slow down the powerful people, when your proposed change would hurt the weakest people the most? If most the player base is casual as you said, I would argue they would be most affected by the -5% defenses, particularly if they don't plan for things like -hit powers. What about the "casual solo player"? They wouldn't feel any -5% defense on their baby blaster with training wheels? I would argue they would need the most help, not the most penalty. And I agree with @Bill Z Bubba, putting a 5% handicap penalty on all non-tankers/brutes just but the hurt on several powersets, like Shield Defense, whose only source of survivability/durability are positional defenses. You are right, power builds likely wouldn't feel much from the 5% change. Those who would are the casuals, the soloists, and the defense focused builds. So you say you want to feel "meaningful" on a team, but you want to make everyone on the team, weaker? From what viewpoint do you state this? As a tanker? As a healer? As a buffer? Who is this change supposed to help? The people you want to affect (the strong builds) wouldn't be, and the people who want to contribute and matter (weaker builds) would be? As I mentioned, tanks/brutes already have higher resistance caps than most, generally speaking. You have oddballs like SoA's who resistance caps are 85%, but generally speaking tanks/brutes have more. So... yea. Am confused here as to the point of the change, aside from making the weak builds, weaker, and to make things harder on solo players, as Teams likely wouldn't even notice.

@Brutal Justice - Alright, I would like to do a thought experiment then. For arguments sake, lets say your proposed change came to pass. Now, personally if I wanted to solo on any particular AT that had a penalty to defense (when tankers and brutes already have higher res caps), I would look into other options such as juggling Rune of Protection and Barrier, instead of focusing on defenses, because that would likely be a moot point. And you already said, solo-players would already feel the brunt of the change, but large teams wouldn't likely notice, as there is also a good chance of excessive +def buffs such as maneuvers already running to make up any shortfalls, and there is likely to be a tanker on the team. So the only real difference it would make, would be the solo players, when I would say there are already more AT's that cant solo on hardest difficulty than can, at least efficiently. So in this example, I am wondering what the overall goal is, to nerf solo players or to try and artificially encourage/coerce people to team more, and solo less? Neither of which is a good thing in my book. A game shouldn't "punish" a player for playing X way, particularly when its not written anywhere this is a team focused game. This isn't Everquest. (and thank god for that.)

It really varies on what difficulty you imagine I solo at. Some builds can solo at 40% certainly. Others? Not so much. While even more others solo just fine with even less than 40%. Mere defense is not the end-all-be-all. And, actually, yes. I do think solo players can sustain an online game. There are many examples of this already. And no, I don't think that LFG or teams is the only thing that matters. Please don't think I am at odds with you, I just think your suggestion would do more harm than good. To what benefit would everyone who isn't a tank or brute get from having a lower defense, when many of those builds already have a rough time as it is in the solo game? And I would argue that on teams, if you had a brute or tanker, everyone else having lower defenses wouldn't matter, since they are taking most of the attention anyway. So I don't see how lowering everyone else's defenses would encourage party play, and would only make some weak builds overall weaker.

I play more solo than I do on teams. If I team, then I do so on my own terms and desire. If I want to run public PI missions to help people, then I will. If I want to run ITFs then I will. If I want to run Story Arcs, then I shall. But I also spend most of my playtime playing alone, in any particular activity that I feel the urge to do. People do play solo in MMO's. If you don't feel like you are contributing to the team, then that's a personal question or possibly a question of team makeup. I don't think that's really a valid reason to nerf an entire section of the community/game, just to artificially prop up some other ATs or playstyles, when those shine in their own way already. And regardless, I think you might forget that some ATs/Builds that perform wonderfully on teams, don't perform so well when solo, and vice-versa.

Alright, and I have to disagree strongly then. If you only play for the challenge, as you claim, then what do you care how much you or anyone else makes on any particular difficulty? If you would get the same amount, either way, why does it matter to you if others get more for their efforts? I certainly do seek to challenge myself. But I also expect fair rewards for my efforts, for effort, time involved, and the investment required to get to that point in difficulty. And no, I also disagree its "hairsplitting" unless you only apply this specifically to solo play. For group play, its a much different matter. What if I want to farm? What if I want to help a friend with money and exp? What if I want to design my own adventure in AE? Context matters here. From my perspective, what you call a win-win I consider a loose-loose. I strongly suspect more people would dislike your suggestion than like it, moreover once they get to 50, it would be tantamount to "well now what?". So congrats, you just killed endgame replay-ability for a good section of the community. For many players, endgame farming "is" our game. Playing the market "is" our game. Making, leveling, fully gearing up, and meticulously planning alts "is" our game. Your suggestion would pretty much invalidate the entire market as far as making/leveling/gearing alts are concerned. If it wasn't for the systems in place that support making alts, I would likely have moved onto another game by now. What I find disturbing however, is this idea that rewarding players more for harder challenges, is somehow "bad." And I respectfully, but strongly disagree the idea that higher efforts do not deserve higher rewards.

A fair point, I did not consider that. So how about a compromise, say an enable option? That way it would be up to inviduals choice if they desired to play in such a manner or not? I do concede your point, looking at (achem) other gaming communities. But for solo play only? I see why it couldnt be an option for those that wish to experience such.

Honest question, Why increase rewards only by "number" and not "level" of enemies? I mean, lets have a thought experement. For arguements sake, lets say all enemies gave the same amount of inf/exp, regardless if it was -1, +0, 1, 2, 3, or 4, and that only increasing the how many modifer would grant additonal rewards. If that was the case, why would anyone want or even desire to run +4? Personally, I probially wouldn't care to. The difference here, is that "you" can lower your encounter level and spawn amount, and get those rewards. Lowering the rewards for higher difficulty only "punishes" others who do so. So why try to inject and "force" an artifical standard that people already have access to if they wish? Why "browbeat" them into sub-standardization? And why not lift the aggro cap? I mean, if a tanker wants to aggro an entire map playing solo and have that epic 1 man army moment, why shouldn't he? Again, I have no desire to offend or argue, I am genuinely curious as to the logic or context of your statement.

@Sarion Hello OP! I have run both Robots/EA and Demons/EA. Both are capable of max difficulty - +4/8 with solo bosses turned on. Here are what I consider the highlights - Defenses/Resistances - Demons are argueably more durable with the double resist staking, with moderate defense rating. However, I consider this a moot point with /EA due to the fact you can have infinate Endurance on demand, which frees up Barrier for your Destiny Incarnate slot. So if you take Barrier and Support and "juggle" them, I think you will find both Demons and Robots to be very close in terms of survivability, but thats Top Endgame content you are talking about, without taking things like exemplaring down into account. Pet IO muling - Demons have the clear advantage here, with Hell on Earth, allowing more freedom to slot pets as you like. Robots have no such option, and are even further restricted by having to slot KB->KD in certain areas as well, or else you will find enemies getting knocked out of your Assualt robots fire patches which is your main source of AoE. Ranged pets vs Melee pets - This is completely up to personal preferance. However I would like to point out a recent discovery I made. With the change in Pet AI a few patches ago, ranged pets will stay at ranged, they wont "run in". This means if you take Robots (an entirely ranged pet set) and take group fly, you can have your entire team flying overhead. If your enemies don't have any substanacial ranged or -fly powers, you take very little damage. The robots even get little rocket boots and fly around with you. Demons do not have this gameplay option as they will run in and claw. Damage wise - Demons have a definate edge here for single target, but robots have the AoE out of all the MM sets. So thats really a question as to what you perfer. Though Robots do have built in -regen, which is even better if you use a Longbow lore pet as well. Top end - My Demons/EA at top end, was tough enough to farm the moon map AE. Everything (even my hell on earth cinders) were resistance capped. I would more or less run in, pop cage, and get to spamming. The demons aggroed half the map at once, and it would be a long 5 minute fight. More often than not, I would survive, and so would my pets. That's something not even a tanker can boast of, being able to survive fighting 7+ spawns of enemies at a time, as each pet has its own threat table. But its high risk/high reward gameplay, and you couldnt pause even for a moment or it would all come crashing down on you. But just the fact I "could" was pretty awesome. It is possible to solo quite well with Demons/EA, as well as contribute to a team. My Robots/EA at top end, is my new favorite MM setup, namely with group fly. I can Farm on AEs with the highest difficulty, even being able to go AFK while doing so, due to the mentioned Group Fly interaction with the new Pet AI. I simply fly to a group with my robots, throw up cage for chain stacks, status protection, and resistances, and then put +absorb on autocast and the robots do all the work. Against some enemies, I don't even need to heal. I also like interactions with CC powers like Web Grenade, Electric Fences, or even better Bonfire with the Assualt robots fire patches. In the end I perfer my Robots/EA for a few reasons. 1. Varied play styles and power interactions - You can footslog it, you can Tankermind, you can lock things down with CC and outrange them, and lastly you can use group fly for an aireal combat sort of feel. 2. Robot/EA I feel has more interesting combations in combat, such as Bonfire + Assualt robots flame patch. 3. My Robot/EA can afk farm even on the hardest content. So far she is the only one I have made who is able to do so. And I think only a Robot/EA could pull it off, though /ff might be able to as well. 4. I just like Robots better, theme/flavor and all. I hope this helps. Really its up to you, either one is fully capable either solo or for a team on the hardest content. Personally I vote Robotics, but thats just my personal taste. Why not level both of them to 50, to get a good "feel" for them, and pick a "main" one from there? Surely you should lean one direction or another after that? Happy Masterminding!

The money/experience thing I would consider a different matter entirely from game balance, and has been debated, discussed, and argued by much wiser heads than mine. Personally if it was my call, I would - 1. Equalize both money/inf/drops across all activities - farming, story arcs, radio missions, even oro things. 2. Increase rates of rewards with increased difficulty, but with dimishing returns, much like our enhancement system. Sure, you get more money from higher difficulties, but "farming" on the highest difficulty might not be the most expedient or effecient way to gain Inf. That way, its sort of a win-win for everyone. Those that like to push difficult content would see at least "some" bump in rewards, while the farmers would still have their methods that they do now. But regardless, I don't think balancing game difficulty around money/exp rewards is a right call to make either.

Here are my thoughts on it, I think "balance" really depends on where the "finish line" is, in this case, that means game difficulty, as well as what activity you are doing. Personally I consider +2/8 difficulty to be my personal standard. Anything over that I try to view as a sort of hardmode, becuase not all builds/ats/powers can play on the highest difficulty. But also keep in mind activity matters too, such as Radio missions vs story arcs vs AEs, or Single target vs AoE, DPS vs CC, and so on. Balance can change depending on all of these variables. Its this bad? No, I don't believe so. Different levels of activity for different kinds of builds and players is good for everyone. Should we balance the game around IO's? No. I don't think we should assume everyone is building the best of everything down to the decimal point, but nor do I think should we balance things for theme/story/rp builds either. I think we are sitting well for different levels of activity for different kinds of characters and players. There is also what I like to think of as "investment" to consider. This can be investment in time to become a better skilled or knowledgeable player, as well as time invested in such as time spent farming for money, or farming incarnates and buying enchancements. For context, I have several level 50s. Not all of them even have all of their incarnate slots unlocked, and only two of them have their full T4's. The funny thing is that my fully upgraded t4 characters, aren't even my strongest characters, but they are the one's that I enjoy playing the most, and spend the most time on. So for context, some examples - 1. The game is rebalanced for the lower end of builds/skill/IOs. Well, that would make for terribly boring content for anyone who makes a stronger, better, or more expensive build. 2. The game is rebalanced for the higher end of builds/skill/IOs. Well, that would prove to be an unfair obstale for people who enjoy doing things for theme, fun, roleplay, or who are still learning (like myself) or who dont have the free time to invest in becomming better, or the free time to farm 600m inf for each character they want to play at endgame. I would consider both extremes bad for the community. The answer? For me it is the varied difficulty setting, which we already have. I would personally push for even making harder content, but 100% optional content, for those that enjoy it. Just my musings on game balance.

@Hyperstrike As requested, here's my build. I built differently than most, I tend to favor defense over offense in games. But yea, she's quite tough! https://www.midsreborn.com/builds/download.php?uc=1564&c=718&a=1436&f=HEX&dc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

I cant right this moment, but I can when I get home.

On one of my Crabber alt builds, I went the exact opposite. I capped defenses, and went for as much resistances as I could. Resilient Alpha, the whole 9. I ended up with 45% defenses and 85% res to most damage types. She has pets, but they arent perma (but are close). She still has the suppression/venom grenade/toxic grenade cycle. But she also can do things that some other crabbers cant. She has frenzy. So I can park her in a 4/8 farm with that on autocast, and actually "afk" farm on a crabber, which as far as I know not many other crabbers do. Sure, others will do damage. But I still have my alt crabbermind permapet build I can swap to if I want that. Another one of my builds forgoes pets entirely, because I just wanted to see what was possible. So, I wouldnt say required. But theres nothing wrong with building for durability if you want to go that route. Its really a question of personal taste and what you like and enjoy, which is a question only you can answer. Personally, I love being a supertanky crabber.

Great feedback! As I said it is still a work in progress. I am really loving Bonfire as an Epic pool pick, because it really is fantastic with Assualt Robots fire patches. Plus, its fire and forget which works wonderfully with /EA's active playstyle. The problem with that is, that leaves me with a power left over. Between that and Bonfire, that leaves me 6 slots to play with. (not including the free single slot, 8 in total if you count those.) I already have all the leadership toggles, I don't feel defiblerate or the T9 from /EA is worth getting. So that left me with whats left over from Robotics. I saw pulse rifle and more or less wanted to just check it out. It seem "okay", but nothing worth writing home about. I havent tried Photon Grenade yet, but thats a thought too. If it was possible, id take another buff for my pets, but I don't see anything, and I would rather stick with Blaze Mastery. It's just odd, having a power pick left over, with the 6 slots to play with. Like I said, its a work in progress. Still fiddling with things. And I didn't mean to derail the topic either, was just making mentions to the OP about other things that can be done, particularly with Robotics.

@TheSpiritFox - Well, I put KB->KD's in my pets and dont have an issue, also I dont think bonfire is really sub optimal, at least in practice. On paper it may look so, but I have used mace, mu, and now blaze on my EA, and its still a toss up between mace and blaze for me. Mace mostly for another LotG mule (not that I need one), but the main grab is Web grenade. It ties things up nicely and is pretty good at doing that, but the redraw sucks. Blaze for Bonfire, I like it because its fire and forget. You can drop it and not have to worry about it for 45 seconds, and can keep with your EA rotation without much issue. Plus taking only 1 epic power frees up another power slot, which I took pulse rifle. Mostly to help with single target DPS which is sort of the weak area of Robots/EA. Its still a work in progress, still experimenting with Blaze Mastery currently. Mu is strong, but I dont like how close you have to be, and it also seems to fail quite a lot on bosses or above, which is what I really care about locking down. While I can drop a single Bonfire and see an entire spawn of things bounce like ragdolls, and just melt, including bosses. Each to their own though! But so far I've had best results with Blaze. Not just for the help in tieing things up in the fire patches, but a bit of added DPS as well.

Some other sets, such as Robots, don't have a "mule power" to stick all the Aura IOs into. By putting them all in a power like Hell on Earth, this lets you largely slot your actual pet powers as you like. Far as the pet slotting themselves, thats largely subject to personal preferance. Another example of having a power like Hell on Earth being an advantage versus a set like Robots without one, they have several Knockback powers. So you need to spend more slots with KB -> KD IOs as well, costing even more slots. So Robots have to spend both slots on the Aura IOs as well as KB - > KD, which adds up to quite a few slots Robots are obligated to spend, where a set like Demons does not. Personally, I like slotting for Accuracy (because pets are lower level and tend to miss), as well as damage procs where I can. (It does make a noticeable difference), as well as Soulbound Build Up proc. Additionally, remember that by putting Aura IO's in Hell on Earth, that opens up other things such as putting a Resistance or Defense IO onto a pet, if you are lacking powers that can accept those. So there's a few reasons why many consider having such a "mule power" is a boon. Hope this helps!

Depending on the secondary, I tend to go for more accuracy on pets, due to them being lower level. It really makes a difference once you get into level shifts later on, and not all secondaries need many LotG mules. I think I only have 2, mabye 3 on my demons/thermal, and I definately run all 3 leadership toggles.