Chance Jackson

you're not around to see them die

not allowed! "Preference is for me not for thee"

I don't understand how anyone could look at that, and fail to realize how bad it would be to leave that situation unaddressed. I can't understand the desire to govern how others play

Iirc alignment merits came some time after the alignment system was introduced so it wasn't taken as a noob trap by the community.

Well done, what's the name? Bad Habits I approve but would prefer the singular

Pre ED 3 slotting would get you 100% enhancement over base damage of a power. Pre ED 6 slotting for damage (something only devices blasters could get away with) would get you 200% enhancement over base damage of a power now a days it will only get you 110% enhancement a completely negligible "improvement" over 3 slots, that is a figure less than 3 SOs & 3 TOs combined pre ED! Pretending that 6 slotting an enhancement type post ED is much of a choice at all is pure sophistry. What is more optimal, an enemy being affected by a Hold longer when you can already double or triple stack the hold without any recharge redux slotting, or the enemy being defeated faster? Before ED everyone would have said "Slot hold duration". People also whined and complained about how low controller damage was. After ED people were willing to consider adding damage enhancements to their crowd control powers that accept them. Suddenly the crowd control powers didn't need to last as long because the enemies are defeated faster. Guess what, this was possible before ED, and would have been just as viable. But people ignored the option because slotting for hold/imobilize/stun duration was considered 'optimal'. Do you see the catch 22 here? Tankers 'needed' to 6 slot their defenses to survive the masses of enemies trying to pound their heads in. But this came at the expense of slotting for damage in their attacks. So of course a solo tanker takes forever to defeat foes. After ED, fewer slots were being devoted to defenses, so more damage could be slotted. Suddenly tankers were able to defeat enemies in a reasonable amount of time, so they didn't need defenses that are at the hard cap just to survive normal spawn sizes. Blasters 'needed' to 6 slot for damage to defeat enemies fast enough to not die. Then after ED, they started experimenting with other enhancement types too. Suddenly they're finding utility in abilities they ignored due to being "low damage", and not needing as much raw damage due to using tools that actively mitigate enemy damage. Defenders suddenly had more slots after ED forced them to re-examine their slotting methods, and could devote slots to increasing the damage of their attacks. Oh look, enemies are going down faster. What's that you say? That's not damage mitigation? Wrong! Defeating an enemy is the ultimate form of damage mitigation since that enemy stops trying to deal damage entirely. All of these were strategies which were perfectly viable before ED. But were ignored because the 'optimal' slotting had already been decided, and anything else was considered useless. So isn't it funny that enemy health and damage wasn't lowered, but players doing less damage or having less defenses wasn't as detrimental as it had been assumed by us players it would be? My opinion based on experiences with people over the years whining about ED long after it became fact and we got to see the end result is... They are just butt hurt over losing the 'easy mode' that 6 slotting damage or defenses could be. 6 slotted tanks were gods of survivability who could herd whole maps, those defenses weren't required for run of the mill spawn of mobs, on a team with 5 slotted dmg dealers you can't get more optimal a slotting strategy for decimating huge hordes. herd tank slotting doesn't work well solo, that said solo focused attack tanks had been able to true solo AVs as in the real deal, no temp powers. Likewise those controllers were locking down EBs, AVs, GMs with ease and the 5 slotted scrappers and blasters were killing those locked down enemies faster than all 3 of them can 3 slotted for dmg. Ill & fire Controllers with 5 slotted dmg pefs & the right secondary were true soloing AVs. Scrappers were true soloing AVs, certain defenders could too

ED didn't prove anything, everyone had the choice of slotting suboptimally, suboptimal slotting could be just fine depending on your individual performance requirements., ED just made it so everyone had to How is it not optimal to 1 acc, 5 damage Pre ED? The whole point of ED was to reduce Player Character effectiveness across the board. Pre ED 3 slotting would get you 100% enhancement over base damage of a power. Pre ED 6 slotting for damage (something only devices blasters could get away with) would get you 200% enhancement over base damage of a power now a days it will only get you 110% enhancement a completely negligible "improvement" over 3 slots, that is a figure less than 3 SOs & 3 TOs combined pre ED! Pretending that 6 slotting an enhancement type post ED is much of a choice at all is pure sophistry.

You don't have to go through the whole tip misssion system to get the alignment power of your new alignment?

I'm not talking about flesh tones on pants or chest, I'm talking about combinations that weren't available because they might clip like the winter event sandals and pants, or robes/jackets and most 3d modeled chest details.

Ditto

If i have the villain alignment power can i keep that after using null to switch to hero?

Well done, what's the name?

Thank you

For some of them I believe they have legitimate balance considerations & for others it is probably a matter of time/priorities.

Well, I remember the posts by Statesman. It wasn't about making powers better without needing to overslot them or rebalancing the game. He and the other devs explicitly said it (like the Purple Patch, Taunt and AoE target limits) was to change the way people were playing the game. That's a punishment to people who wanted to play the game that way. Then, long after the fact (and after Statesman left) the DEVs retconned the change as a necessary step, not to fix gameplay at the time, but to prepare for the Inventions system that would let hardcore players get OP in a different way. You can claim the word punishment is over the top, but it was "you guys were naughty so we are changing the rules so you can't break them in ways we don't want you to." This is completely untrue. Statesman made several comments that ED was necessary to make way for other progression systems. I remember he gave an example that they couldn't, for example, add an enhancement that enhanced for 50% because without ED it would simply be too good. the original dually HOs enhanced by 50% for schedule "A" prior to the 1st HO nerf which predates ED ...Which were nerfed because prior to ED they were too strong. they were never restored after ED either because Jack only works one way & had a very Harrison Bergeron esque approach to game balance, & character power levels. iirc he wanted us to be a equal to 3 minions smh Even after ED they would've been too strong. Look at the numbers they went with for the invention system; even two-aspect +5 purple IOs don't get nearly as high as old HOs did. they get pretty close and they are part of sets with very strong bonuses

No, ED didn't make sub-optimal slotting strategies more viable, it just made the most efficient slotting strategy unviable. I'll repeat it another way, ED did not make any slotting strategy more effective than it had been Pre ED, it just made the best strategy Pre ED slotting strategy ineffective/unworthwhile. There was only more slotting variety because the best strategy became worthless, net effectiveness plummeted. We can engage in infinite sophistry to make it sound like ED made 1 acc, 3dmg, 1 end reduc, 1 rech worthwhile but the truth remains that you don't need the greater recharge if you have greater dmg and they are not equal, because of ED you now need the end reduc because you have to use your powers more to get the same result as Pre ED again an unequal trade.

most of those points are nothing to do with the AT (aside from aggro) but more to do with the powersets that AT has, for example an electric melee scrapper will be great for AOE. Brutes inherently do not have better survival, they just have higher res caps, which generally require outside buffs to reach Exactly what i wanted to say in regards to dealing dmg but Brutes have more health so that will by definition improve survivability over a Scrapper

Stuff like the workshop and extra origin pack buff powers.

I'd assume standard toggle rules would apply. A chance when you first activate the power and then every 10 seconds thereafter that the toggle is running. as a Bubbler I'd stick it in Repulsion Bomb. With a base recharge of 30 seconds it's going to proc very often when using that. That being said, this IO has always seems of dubious use to me. If a power isn't "recharged" within its 5 second window it seems to reset back to where it was before the proc, minus 5 seconds. Making the whole thing mostly futile unless you're using it for shorter recharge powers like attacks, or luck out on your long-recharge powers timing wise. So I'd imagine its great in Super Strength etc, not so great for recharging multi-minute powers though. the price use to be great when it could be used in aoes & stack with itself but now it just seems useless

It's also useful if you want to tank with your mastermind. While both provoke and debuffs can help get aggro, adding in some damage will help more. Aggro formulas are complicated but damage acts as a multiplier so it's worth doing a little bit. better to get a pool power AOE attack instead unless you're a demon MM

Well, I remember the posts by Statesman. It wasn't about making powers better without needing to overslot them or rebalancing the game. He and the other devs explicitly said it (like the Purple Patch, Taunt and AoE target limits) was to change the way people were playing the game. That's a punishment to people who wanted to play the game that way. Then, long after the fact (and after Statesman left) the DEVs retconned the change as a necessary step, not to fix gameplay at the time, but to prepare for the Inventions system that would let hardcore players get OP in a different way. You can claim the word punishment is over the top, but it was "you guys were naughty so we are changing the rules so you can't break them in ways we don't want you to." This is completely untrue. Statesman made several comments that ED was necessary to make way for other progression systems. I remember he gave an example that they couldn't, for example, add an enhancement that enhanced for 50% because without ED it would simply be too good. the original dually HOs enhanced by 50% for schedule "A" prior to the 1st HO nerf which predates ED ...Which were nerfed because prior to ED they were too strong. they were never restored after ED either because Jack only works one way & had a very Harrison Bergeron esque approach to game balance, & character power levels. iirc he wanted us to be a equal to 3 minions smh

Thank you so much

Well, I remember the posts by Statesman. It wasn't about making powers better without needing to overslot them or rebalancing the game. He and the other devs explicitly said it (like the Purple Patch, Taunt and AoE target limits) was to change the way people were playing the game. That's a punishment to people who wanted to play the game that way. Then, long after the fact (and after Statesman left) the DEVs retconned the change as a necessary step, not to fix gameplay at the time, but to prepare for the Inventions system that would let hardcore players get OP in a different way. You can claim the word punishment is over the top, but it was "you guys were naughty so we are changing the rules so you can't break them in ways we don't want you to." This is completely untrue. Statesman made several comments that ED was necessary to make way for other progression systems. I remember he gave an example that they couldn't, for example, add an enhancement that enhanced for 50% because without ED it would simply be too good. the original dually HOs enhanced by 50% for schedule "A" prior to the 1st HO nerf which predates ED

Calling it a "punishment" is dishonest and, frankly, unnecessarily hostile. It absolutely was about the cookie cutter 6-slotting being too powerful. The old way left no room for customization. One accuracy, 5 damage or you were crap. Yes, there were actual player complaints about that. Enhancement types made totally useless because there was literally no point to using them when it removed a slot for damage. So, yes, it was about balance. It was not, however, a personal attack against you. Or anyone else. by depriving the best slotting strategy of its effectiveness ED FORCED you to be "crap" (or at least forced you to choose suboptimal slotting) by depriving the best slotting strategy of its effectiveness

Why? I have a 17 MA/Shield Brute that I'm enjoying. Starting to have endurance issues if I run 3 defensive toggles at the moment. I'm curious why a scrapper might have been a better choice. Thanks Due to scrapper's higher dmg mods, & diminishing returns on dmg buffs that brutes feel more than most, Scrappers get more out of the "against all odds" dmg buff & "shield charge" attack iirc On the other hand Brute/Tank MA - Storm kick gives 7.5 unstackable +def so maybe that justifies the combo? I had an Ma/shield brute but rerolled to StJ/Shield Scrapper