Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


PirateCrew last won the day on April 5

PirateCrew had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

71 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The notes are comprehensive and properly convey the broad scope and justification for the changes. Hope I'm not the only one to think that removing the level scaling speed/caps is the hidden gem. I love exemplaring to join PUGs, but cringed while attaching the stone of shame... I support adjustments to Nova/Dwarf forms' travel despite not using them in any builds currently - having to apply multiple in-mission movement methods, in already awkward builds, was partly to blame for my decision to avoid the forms and these ATs generally. I'd want to ensure adequate flight
  2. Solid explanation of the changes and reasoning. Based on that, Sorcery is meeting the objectives, in my judgment. I also think these were the right goals for this pool revamp, and worth re-using for any future origin adjustments. Arcane Bolt: a valuable power for those who don't have any other option, and a viable pick for those who have limited options (epics/temps) and want to chain ranged attacks. Thematic. Provides a satisfying impact when Arcane Power triggers the double damage. Spirit Ward: Thank you for applying two of the requested adjustments (EndRed and
  3. I figured the controller damage was the limiter on what traditional balance could handle, as that's exactly the use case I had in mind. I am personally ok with Arcane Power, though I would want to keep gimmicks as a sparingly used balancing tactic. Here I feel it's thematic enough to work. The other Arcane Bolt use cases I'm planning (for non-controllers) are more situational, definitely not part of an attack chain. For those, it's Arcane Bolt versus a ranged attack they can get from another source, so the competition is close, and I lean toward the free (no build impact) Blackw
  4. The recent communication and guidance on Arcane Bolt's design goals in the current build, has been excellent. Thank you, Jimmy and Faultline. It has been stated simply, connected to shared goals ('powers being strong independent picks', references to T1/2 relative power), and boundaries have been set ('Damage formulas dictate base damage, bonus damage on powers has to be tied to gimmick mechanics', 'The Arcane Power mechanic exists to allow...'). I think I've been convinced that Arcane Bolt is ready to go, balance-wise. I'd be fine with mild alterations to make Arcane Power
  5. To avoid future distraction here & elsewhere, can / will there be an update to the Beta FAQ to mention this use of Discord for testing purposes? A few hints about what types of feedback are most likely to occur there, in contrast to the forums, would be useful - e.g. rapid prototyping of a short list of options & survey on which to try in next test build, versus the forum being better for bug reporting or long-form testing commentary, etc. Those parameters for RoP would be extremely helpful to know, as soon as they get formulated. Please aim our feedback by setting the b
  6. An attempt to rebalance Sorcery has been made, worth a thank you to those involved in the effort. From the way it sounded at first, this effort was not going to happen, so I appreciate the flexibility and extra work done. I'll give the best thoughts I can spare: Spirit Ward - Seems to fit a rare use case / playstyle and feels like a rather steep end cost. I like the idea of providing something different, but think this is going to see very limited uptake and use, like before, but with a more interesting use case for small teams or special-flavor controller/MM builds. A toggle b
  7. I agree. The first half of my prior answer was worded more as general advice to any reader facing the current limitations, but like you, I'd rather see the sets be adjusted to bring them up to this standard.
  8. The soaring IO set is loaded with endurance reduction at the expense of speed, so that's about what I'd expect to happen. This is one of those cases "Common IO + 2-slot Soaring" might be the best option, if the character's end consumption is manageable and there's no desire to pursue +speed set bonuses elsewhere. If the Soaring set is being considered, then I'm guessing set bonuses *are* on the table, and might approach the cap with just 2 slots of Soaring (3, if the pure EndRed one is also desired). Making extensive use of the travel sets is rather mismatched to the higher-cap Beta designs
  9. The protection may have value, of course. Since I don't use regular Fly or variants in combat on Live (hover only), I couldn't say whether it's making a difference compared to Fly. However, I find that hover's is occasionally inadequate, in a number of cases where the enemy spawns don't seem to normally generate particularly heavy -Fly. So whenever the grounding happens, it's more of a surprise and something that doesn't clearly trace back to a tactical decision, and as already mentioned, I haven't identified a source of more protection as a build choice that I could improve. The effect al
  10. Reason 1: I'm seeing the totality of the offer, not just its speed features. For me, Flight's (the pool) Beta potential includes not being grounded, among other things. And I could be mistaken, but the -Fly protection is unavailable elsewhere, and -Fly effects are more frequently autohit than immobilization. We have at least had options for dealing with Immob. A rare use case, to be sure. I just wish this protection wasn't as separated from hover, or could be more available to mystic flight and other fly-ish tactics. I'm also not suggesting any other posters should value this aspe
  11. A portion of debate may involve EvM's presence. Sure, AB effects are partly added to Flight, with accompanying levels of (dis?)pleasure in the precise mechanics. But once again, a second power (EvM in Beta, AB is on Live) is still being offered to bring forth the Flight pool's max potential for certain uses. So that convolutes the question of whether Flight (the pool) is getting buffed appropriately or in balance with other travel pools' options for speedy travel (and combat, and buffs). It ends up as a pretty subjective answer based on what each player / character *was* dipping into thes
  12. Yes, Fly alone is getting a large % cap boost, though it can be seen as an aspect of being as low as it was in the first place. It would be strange for me to oppose a boost from running at 10 to running at 50 based on its (seemingly) astonishing 500% gain, while accepting a flight boost of a comparatively "tiny" 50% from a raw 100 to 150. The comparison is more fairly served by noting the raw increases and percentages, and the awareness that bringing things into parity may require bigger buffs to the underperforming powers. The second point of difference is that it's not Fly (Li
  13. While mine is a side note to the direct answer you requested, I'm confident it's a reference to SS deserving a somewhat higher speed and speed cap (or other benefits) as "consideration" for its still mildly inferior vertical capabilities compared to Flight and SJ, across the variety of open-zone travel scenarios that have been noted so far. To those of us whose experience/testing leads us to conclude that SS is being buffed (incorrectly) further than Flight, I think we mostly or entirely agree with the dev team that SS does need some speed advantage, and only question the amount of that advan
  14. Thanks, Zepp. The outcome once speed settings are used to highlight maneuvering difference is interesting. This testing matches my experience during regular gameplay, and some tests I did last year on Live, showing only a few similar zones / situations where flight's vertical control gained a noteworthy advantage over SS (and now gains less vs beta SS/momentum). In testing, I tried to focus on common routes involving endpoints like trams, Midnighter Club, badges, and distant mission doors (yes, Citadel, I mean you). If we knew what test cases contributed to the devs' valuing flight hig
  15. Well, unless some hard numbers are provided on these other players supposedly confused, or the misinformation supposedly spread, why would we conclude that there's any problem? Pretty sure it's also been reiterated that without data, opinions and analysis like that aren't nearly as valuable - and possibly worthless. The data is what it is, not "theirs" or "mine", assuming the methodology was correct. It forms a foundation and posters are going to interpret, extend analysis, and give feedback on the basis of it. Analysis is not limited to those who gather a piece of data. Interpretation an
  • Create New...