Xiddo

I agree! Found that one quite confusing. I wonder if there'd be a way to do a check of "if there are more than X-number of Y-AT then it counts as [base role] and [alternative role]". e.g. 3 controllers = control [base] and support [alternative] ticked off, 3 corrs = ranged damage [base] and support [alternative], 3 defs = support [base] and ranged damage [alternative]. That wouldn't work for certain ATs I think... I don't know which other role you could tick for more than 3 blasters, for example, because you can't guarantee that any of them would have a melee power so it'd tick "Melee damage". Whereas most Controllers' secondary sets have some kind of power which supports the team (either positively by helping teammates or supporting the team via debuffing the enemy). It also doesn't account for play style: I've teamed with Robot/Storm MMs who are definitely not 'Support' but are damage, and with one memorable demon/empath MM who only used their secondary on their pets. I'll run a couple more to try and keep track. Doing these 5 and recording it changed my opinion from being "this is like a 85% good idea, get it out" to maybe nearer a 70-ish% because there are a couple of caveats. I still think the baby should not be thrown out with the bath water.

There'd been some talk earlier in the thread about 'not knowing how it would effect teams until it was live' (or stuff of that ilk) so I thought I'd try a bit of an unscientific test to see if random PuG TF groups (on current live) would tick off the bonus requirements. None of these teams had people alt, in two of them the leader joked that we'd be heavy on certain things (control and lack of support in the TinPex) but completed all. I also did this cos I wanted to test my own biases. I was pretty confident earlier in the thread (around page 10) that most players would get a bonus without teams needing to change things. It's just a theory craft, on a small sample size, to do a sort-of-test on team compositions ticking off a passive bonus. I know that this does not test the possible problem of people not inviting certain ATs if they have one of that kind. Group 1 - TinPex 1 blaster, 1 tank, 1 widow, 1 stalker, 2 scrappers, 1 defender, 1 PB. Bonus: yes Group 2 - ITF 2 controllers, 1 PB, 1 dom, 1 brute, 2 corr, 1 scrapper Bonus: no Group 3 - Post 1 1 PB, 1 def, 2 brute, 1 widow, 1 controller, 1 corr, 1 dom Bonus: yes Group 4 - Ice Mistral 1 brute, 1 dom, 1 sent, 1 PB, 1 def, 1 blaster Bonus: yes Group 5 - Yin 2 blaster, 2 controller, 1 PB, 1 tank, 1 brute, 1 corr Bonus: no So in three of the five I did, the team would get a bonus. These were all on Excel, at not peak times (I'm in the UK so there are often fewer people around when I'm on).

I really like the idea of this bonus. It feels not big enough to be an argument if we don’t have the right people, and a nice bonus if I get it. Most TF/SFs I’m in tend to be fairly balanced on this metric anyway. In fact I might do a load of TFs on Saturday and just take a little tally of which ones tick this box, completely coincidentally. Also, my main is a PB so at least I can contribute more than dazzling lights and tentacles 😉 I think perhaps some might also be over-estimating how many people actually read release notes (or the forums tbf). There are still people logging on asking where the AE in Atlas is, what Dr Aeon SF is, and when the new sonic powers were added. If this hit live tomorrow I’m not sure that many people would notice until they’ve done like 3 or 4 TFs and saw the icon.

Seems to be. I think their account now says former or retired, can’t remember the exact turn of phrase they use

Any idea on how to get Mids working on a Mac? 😉

Incan Strike. Hands (very slowly) down.

Elec/TW/Mu?

Truth be told, I’ve more struggled with which sets to give a Thor character. War Mace or Battle Axe? I wish elec armour’s taunt aura instead gave a chance to chain lightning on melee damage, like sent’s Molten Embrace, cos otherwise it feels a bit flavourless. If you go elec melee then elec/elec feels dull… so it’s invul/elec?

The new mobs introduced in the Houston arc. The PNCR or whatever. I know they’re actually [REDACTED] but there is a LOT of them to kill… Cysts in the ITF/ incarnate arcs. Call it “egg cracker” or something. We’ve got Minotaur and cyclops now, go whole hog. Id like one for doing the council leaders, like we do for the Vahz. Call it something like “Meeting Adjourned”. The Wailers!!!!!! The gladiator badge is for the exploration I think… “Wailed on the Wailers”.

That doesn’t sound right. Ive done it backwards (in a way) before and it registered 1/3 whichever you do first… I’m not sure if it works doing Khan, barracuda and the marker actually. I did Khan, the cape mission and then the exploration marker - in that order - and it worked. I just think you hadn’t done the steps. The cape mission is so rarely run it’s not likely you’ll have it registered there.

The link I posted is correct. I have it on a number of toons having followed that. Follow that for your badge, badge hunter! 🙂

You need to do all 3 or you won’t get the badge. Regardless of the marker there. https://homecoming.wiki/wiki/Tried_and_True_Badge So you haven’t met the requirements for the badge.

have you also done the one from Dr Khan?

I really don’t see the stress with these? Sure, if you want the Mini Mode thing or the shadow… GRIND. But a normal one is about 10 I think? I’ve got a lvl 40 alt and she’s on about 25ish? I’ve not done TFs with her, just missions. I can get two costumes for an alt, if I was so inclined. yes, I probably expected more by now. But that throwaway alt had enough to make my bio tank look like a Devoured.

Plant/Psi is a beast for a reason: +Regen +Rec, different damage type, nice AoEs, some skippable powers.