Excraft

Nothing wrong with disagreement. I can read about a heart attack or being bitten by a great white shark. I'd rather not actually experience either. I can read about my salary being reduced by 10%. I'd rather not experience that. I've read in the local newspaper my property taxes are going up next year. I already know I won't like it, I don't need to experience it. I don't necessarily disagree that changes on BETA should be tested in their totality to see how they work overall. I merely suggested that dismissing an opinion outright over changes that are relatively straightforward in the patch notes without actually testing is dismissive, and many times used as a crutch to discount what can be valid criticism. Some things really can be gleaned just by reading. Again, I don't agree with the OP that these changes are the end of the world. As I've said, there is a lot of good stuff in this patch.

It sounds like you didn't read my post at all. I understand what the changes are and what the point of them is. I wasn't making a commentary on any individual changes or the patch in general beyond it's not the world ending update some are making it out to be. My comment was regarding dismissive replies.

Or they've tried anchovies before and know they don't like to eat them regardless if they're in a salad or on a pizza. I can't stand cilantro, doesn't matter what it's in or mixed with. If something has cilantro, I won't eat it. I can come up with many more examples too. Spot on. Couldn't agree more. I wish it were different too, but it is what it is.

I know most people mean well when they post this standard dismissive "did you try it?" response, but it's a pointless retort and over abused to dismiss/discount the feedback/opinion of someone else. Simply put, one doesn't need to taste food that's prepared from ingredients they already know they don't like. They can tell that just by reading ingredients. If one reads Dev notes that discuss "reduced damage" and such, there isn't much need to test things out to know it's a nerf. With that said, I don't think all of these changes being put forth in this update are world ending. There is quite a lot of good stuff in there. There isn't much anyone can do. HC will change what they feel is necessary as its their server and they can do whatever they like. I'm not at all saying that's a bad thing.

I made no mention whatsoever one way or the other about solo play and whether or not it has any worth in consideration. That's you attempting to inject that into my post. Why I don't know. For the record, it's poor form to inject things into other people's posts that isn't there. Seems clear that you're just interested in arguing, so good day to you.

I never said it wasn't or even suggested it wasn't. You've completely missed what I was saying. Thanks for the response and your understanding. It's appreciated. Don't get me wrong, I understand why these are used as test scenarios and that they provide data based on how individual characters with individual sets will perform. I just don't know that I really think that these results are what should be used to determine adjustments. Soloing one mission over and over or standing in one place punching a pylon isn't really standard activity in a game where people are teaming up for missions, TFs/SFs, iTrials, raids etc. Again, using my TW scrapper as example, it performs much better with much higher DPS when solo. That goes for any of my characters regardless of AT/set choices. If I go by those solo results, the TW set is way overpowered and vastly outperforms other sets, like my Kinetic Melee scrapper. With that said, put either one of them in a team setting and both aren't doing anywhere near the same DPS and performing poorly compared to soloing. How much DPS you're generating is highly dependent on what enemies are being fought as well. I guess the best way to describe is that tests like this seem to want to make adjustments/nerfs to "correct" spreadsheet numbers at the expense of team play and how the game actually flows. I personally do not care if Tankers do 2% better DPS than a brute in a solo mission or standing idle punching a pylon. I understand why you all want to use these as test cases. No need to change that. You all make whatever changes you like based on whatever spreadsheet criteria you like. Nothing I or anyone else here will say can change that. I just thought I'd offer my 2 inf on it. Thanks for all the work you all put into the game. It's appreciated, even if I disagree with some of the changes you all make.

Not only that, it doesn't represent actual team play where a tank isn't doing the highest DPS. In a team setting, Tank DPS is minimal, if any at all due to the overwhelming DPS coming from the damage dealers on a team. There are Hami raids running all the time on Excel where melee are discouraged in favor of bringing blasters or corruptors. Those kinds of things are an indication to me that tanks aren't doing too much DPS. My TW brutes and scrappers can do great DPS soloing. Those same toons on a team can struggle to keep Momentum going due to lack of targets unless I hotdog it and split off from the rest of the group to solo. I understand that Trapdoor and Pylons are used as a test. I just don't think that their results are all that meaningful.

For me, both. No point in shouting at the wind.

What would be the point? It's not like it would make any difference.

No one said anything even remotely like this.

If the damage nerf numbers aren't significant and the change is meaningless, then why make it at all?

Sounds like an across the board damage nerf to me.

If procs are the problem, why not limit procs to one per power? Most META builds I see posted around here and on Discord forego set bonuses in favor of slotting every possible damage proc into an attack. I've even seen some that are 6 slotting brawl with procs. Limiting how procs can be slotted would be better than nerfing damage across the board in my opinion.

Quite a few people have already covered what I would've posted here. I'll summarize by saying I don't like this change and think it heavy handed.

Most, if not all reviews are subjective and based on opinion.

To actually interact with the game? From my experience, most players aren't looking to go nuts with proc builds to instavape mobs. They actually want to enjoy interacting with the game and feeling super. Think of it like going to a restaurant and ordering an expensive meal. Most people want to enjoy savoring the meal, not swallowing the entire thing in one bite. Personally, I do speed runs mostly, but will hop on the KM team every so often when the mood strikes. You can do both here and that's a good thing. I think it's a problem if that's the expected behavior. I've been on quite a few non-speed TFs advertised as such, only to have a couple of players wanting to speed objectives. There is also the problem this creates in that DPS and DPS only is king, so every other AT besides Blasters becomes irrelevant. Join a Hamikaze run sometime. There's like 1 tank, a couple of buffers and the other 99% of the league is all blasters. I'm not saying the author of the article is right. Far from it. Just that I can understand where they are coming from in one regard.

Wait, so Riri Williams isn't the "right kind of person" to be a hero? That doesn't sound right. Again, if people are desperate for heroes to protect them, why doesn't anyone want to help her out if she's willing to step up and help? She's got the motivation, brains and the talent to dot it. Absolutely Tony Stark recognized talent. He can't be the one and only person in all the MCU to do so.

It's not exactly a set of fancy pajamas. It's vibranium that is bulletproof and grants the user near invulnerability to physical attacks. Sounds like armor to me. It also grants the wearer the option of storing and releasing kinetic energy, kind of like how Iron Man was able to absorb and redirect thunder blasts from Thor. They're not exact matches, but it is an armored suit. Killmonger also had a vibranium armor suit as well. That is certainly true. But why does Riri Williams build an Iron Man suit then if there's better tech out there? Especially since she'd already be familiar with it having worked in Wakanda and had access to their science and tech.

Very true and even more reason for her not having a sponsor a stretch. Exceptional students are offered all kinds of scholarship deals, internships and such. If she's this brilliant, she'd have some very interested parties wanting to work with her. How can you miss T'Challa running around in an indestructible nanotech vibranium suit that can harness and refocus kinetic energy or their robes that can project force fields? Stark didn't have any of that until Infinity War.

The story we're being presented with here is very odd and doesn't seem to make much sense. There are several things that contradict what we've already seen in the MCU. Riri Williams, super genius who designed and built a vibranium detector and suit of armor that rivals the best that Iron Man produced is somehow struggling to find a sponsor to fund her work. Didn't we see all sorts of people and/or governments trying to reproduce the Iron Man armor in Iron Man 2? Surely there is more than Justin Hammer who would be interested in funding her. I find it very hard to believe someone of her intellect and talent would be having problems finding investors. The Wakandans gave Sam Wilson brand new armor and wings gratis in FaTWS, but Riri Williams gets no help at all from Wakanda? The wrap-around armor has been done before in Avengers and Iron Man 3. This isn't anything new or innovative or "iconic". The Solo movie stunk.

I really very very much hope this is not the direction this series takes. I'd like to see a space based sci-fi series, not some police procedural set in rural small town America.

Wow. Is that really the direction they're going with the Lanterns series? I don't know that intergalactic cops hanging about in rural America solving a mystery as a setting appeals to me. I mean, they're the Lantern Corps. They're history and setting is the universe itself. There has to be plenty of stories for them to do in that setting. Wait and see I guess. I was just hoping for something more space/sci-fi.

I'm looking forward to these. Lanterns especially I think is a great setting for a sci-fi series.

You've misunderstood. This isn't what I was suggesting. The comment was regarding video titles and such of these YouTubers immediately being negative and "poisoning the well". This was just one example from another source including immediately negative words or sentences from a full review. That's all. There are plenty of others there for modern films as well. It was not meant to say modern internet critics are right and everything they say is true or to validate their cultural beliefs and other nonsense they promote. That's all.

I forgot to mention in my earlier post, the link to the Battlefield Earth review was just an example to show that even these "legitimate/major" outlets are doing the same thing as these "hacks" to get clicks. They could promote are more subtle and nuanced bad review right on the listing page, instead they went with a 1 word tagline from a "top critic". They're all doing the same thing.