Jump to content

Mystic_Cross

Members
  • Content Count

    65
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

58 Excellent

About Mystic_Cross

  1. What a wonderful post! I have to say, I wasn't expecting you to do all of that in relation to a hypothetical tangent... but it's marvelous, so Thank You! Hopefully the City of Data... uhhh... data, is correct. I don't know that I'd be able (willing?) to convert the in-game numbers to Tank values. Even if I wanted to, my tendencies are to avoid doing math whenever possible. In light of that, I'm just gonna "borrow" a few pieces of your post if you don't mind... It does appear that Energy Drain would make things a bit too robust, given everything else. So I can see the hang-up now. Still, I can't help but wonder if there would be an "easy" fix to make it possible. What if we removed Energy Cloak and replaced it with the same power that (more or less) replaced it on Stalkers... Disrupt? It's a PBAoE foe Disorient toggle with an 8' radius that pulses a Mag 2 stun every 4s. I mean, if you think about it... Tanks don't really need a stealth toggle anyway, do they? (Dark Armor doesn't count 😛). Based on the numbers you provided, it would be a 5% (unslotted) loss in defense. So, I stole... *ahem*... "borrowed" your tables for a comparison and adjusted the base EA numbers by -5% to account for the loss of Energy Cloak: Damage Type Energy Aura Ice Armor Smashing/Lethal 17% def, 12.5% res 18% def Energy 22.5% def, 12.5% res 18% def Fire 20% def 25% res Cold 20% def 90%+ res Negative 14% def, 12.5% res 18% def Toxic 12.5% res 20% res Those numbers still look reasonable to me. EA remains best with E, still good with F/C, slightly worse for S/L (but has resists) and remains worst for N, but still not horrible. I took the same table again, and adjusted the above to add in saturated (unslotted) Energy Drain and Energy Absorbtion values into the mix, for a side-by-side view: Damage Type Energy Aura - w\ Energy Drain (saturated) Ice Armor - w\ Energy Absorbtion (saturated) Smashing/Lethal 23% def, 12.5% res 25% def Energy 28.5% def, 12.5% res 25% def Fire 26% def 25% res Cold 26% def 90%+ res Negative 20% def, 12.5% res 25% def Toxic 12.5% res 20% res With these base values and standard triple-defense SO slotting EA would be at 35.88% S/L, 44.46% Energy, 40.56% F/C and 31.2% Neg. A 3-def SO slotted Weave and the two Unique +3%def IOs would get all S/L/F/C/N values at or above softcap, meanwhile Energy defense would be approaching Incarnate softcap at that point. Keep in mind that this is all with fully-saturated Energy Drain, which needs targets. In contrast, Ice would end up at 39% S/L/E/N with triple-SO defense slotting. So with Ice, a slotted Weave OR the two Unique +3%def IOs would put you over softcap to S/L/E/N. Overall, it looks to me like EA would be pretty well balanced (vs Ice) at Tanker values, by just trading Energy Cloak for Disrupt. and just to stay the slightest amount on topic, The stun component of Disrupt would add synergy for pairing with Energy Melee. You see? We're still talking (in a very roundabout way) about EM here! Seriously though, I don't want to derail the thread much further but I would like to hear your opinion on whether this all seems accurate to you as well, @Sovera.
  2. Yes, I recall that post and conversation. I only asked in order to confirm your stance definitively, because the other details you mentioned above weren't really discussed in that thread. 🙂 Now, I don't want to derail the thread excessively, but I wanted to address this: I've only recently used EA on a Stalker myself (currently level 28), and once a very long time ago (on live) with a Brute that never got out of his teens. I've never used Ice Armor at all (simply because I don't like the FX). So, far from an expert with either. From what I can tell though, Ice Armor has more or less all of the same utility that Energy Aura does, with a more accessible +MaxHP click, Same Energy Drain with +def per target for "easy" softcap, and a T9 with healing (that is probably taken far more often than EAs T9), it also has a damage aura and vaunted DeBuffs. EA in turn gets some stealth and also has the +recharge-self/-recharge-foe aura that is a per target buff/debuff. I think they're both fairly balanced against eachother for an apples to apples comparison. The only real difference (defensively) is that Ice gets no F/C/T defense (but has capped Cold resists and decent 25% Fire resists instead, both unslotted) while EA, if on a Tank, would have probably about 15-20% max to its resists for S,L,N,T and maybe slightly better for Energy resist, But no F/C resist. At least these are the main differences I see from a very quick Passover in Mids. (Disclaimer: Tank EA resist numbers were pulled out of a hat, based loosely on differences between other tank/brute armors available to both). Obviously it's not my decision to make, but given the similarities... and the fact that SR, Ice and Shield are all available on Tanks already... I don't see any outlier reasons why EA couldn't (or shouldn't) be ported over. The only possible explanation I can come up with, is that EA can get capped defense debuff resistance on top of everything, but only while the T9 is active. I suppose the +recharge per target aura could be another consideration, but I don't think that's something that would improve by being on a Tank over a Brute.
  3. Haha I have two of those right now! A DA/Psi Tank that after nearly 10 hours in the creator I ended up using one of my mains spare costume files just so I could finish creation. I've made several attempts since then but nothing that quite fits. The other is an EM/Shield Stalker.... a STALKER for god's sake... that I'm almost never going to see the costume on anyway... but there's something that's just off and I can't resolve it. I'm happy with the base design... mostly, and the coloring... mostly. But up to about 40 different variations of the same costume (more or less) now, and I can spend a couple hours just cycling through them until... "oh wait! what if I do this" and end up making another variation that I'm not quite 100% happy with. lol We all are, even at the best of times. lol 🙂
  4. Hmm, I suppose that is a lot more to consider than just +defense... at the same time I'm not sure I feel it would be any more unreasonable of a buff, especially on a largely Single Target oriented set that could typically have more enemies surrounding it for longer periods than a more AoE oriented set. If anything I think it would serve to provide a unique niche for EM and "level the playing field" against other sets in regards to survivability vs kill speed. Martial Arts can get +10% to all defense positions and also has Disorient. Dark Melee has a self heal, reliable debuff potential and a great +Dam boost. Super Strength has its huge AoE and long duration +dam/+tohit with Rage. So I don't think it would be out of line with tools that other melee sets have access to. In your honest opinion, Do you think a 15s duration, 43% +special buff would push it into being too OP? I think the difference in debuff resistance somewhat balances out at least some of the extra tools EA gets over SR. It more or less requires the static resistances and self heal because otherwise it likely wouldn't survive when defense fails. It needs more layers because it can't perfectly rely on defense by design. Energy drain I see as more of a thematic staple, although it does have a small +def component per target I think. Overall I don't think it would have as easy of a time getting to softcap as SR does either. Blaster Energy Manipulation gets Power Boost, which is a (close to) 80% +special buff only (no +dam/+tohit) but is generally where I got the idea. That and it's thematically relevant. Power Build Up is in the Defender APP Power Mastery and gives the +dam/+tohit with a 98% +special buff, which was pointed out to me by @Sovera and I felt it would be a better choice since it maintains the normal Build Up function that it would be replacing.
  5. I often go through a somewhat similar process. Days of planning and modifying. Endless thoughts from waking to sleeping (and sometimes even dreaming lol)... except it also extends to my costumes and color choices. I also don't typically burn respecs unless it's a Eureka! moment... I just copy the build to test server and make changes there. Lately I've been super lazy with travel powers though, just grabbing Flight for ease. Funny because I think I only ever had one character with Flight back on live.
  6. I feel like there should be a face carved into this... a big, glowing, deviously grinning jack-o-lantern face. Also, now that I've seen it I can't believe no one has ever done it before. What a great idea!
  7. I think it would possibly be equal to something like a 15s duration Medium defense inspiration at most for defense powers. I think the only "click" defense powers Melee ATs have are their T9s, and a few have Anti-Mez clickies... but if it were made to be a static 15s duration regardless, as suggested, I doubt it would have that large of an impact on defense. Especially with only half of the original +special% buff. It's something like +98% originally. I can't really see why Energy Aura would be more OP on Tanks than Super Reflexes is. I wasn't aware of that decision, but it seems like an odd one to me *shrug*
  8. I think the overall balance of an MMO is important. Whether it's a Triple-A juggernaut, an obscure Indy or a niche fantasy game that was resurrected on a private server. There are different levels of balance, and it's ok that sometimes things get too far off kilter. But when they do, adjustments eventually need to be made. Obviously I'm not the only one who thinks we're currently in such a place. I think the devs have a good idea on where they want their balance to be, and have set goals to eventually get there. It's probably going to take some time, but it seems to me that they're trying to hit most of the right notes along the way. IMO Tweaks and changes are what keep things fresh and interesting. Buffs, Nerfs... in the end they both open possibilities and end results that may otherwise never come to pass if no action were taken. IOs likely never would have happened without ED, the game may not have even lasted that long. Did ED upset a bunch of people? Undeniably. Did it completely ruin the game? Well, it's still here... and with dedicated and passionate players so... No. The people who didn't throw a hissy and quit, they adapted and the game eventually became better for the change. Changes in any game I'm invested in come with a certain level of fear or apprehension. Some things may be worse, certainly, and some things may be better. My favorite powerset may become unplayable to me after spending hundreds, if not thousands of hours perfecting it. All that time and effort wasted. Of course I'd be pissed off, but that's just where the dice land. Unless you're completely new to gaming or MMOs in general, it should be expected at some point or another. You don't have to like it, but you still have to accept it or move on. Some people can't accept change, but without it everything would become stagnant and unbearably boring. I prefer to try to adapt, and sometimes that makes for pleasant surprises. Personally I have no illusions that I'll agree with everything that may change, but the fact that we're getting updates with new and interesting things at all, let alone with some frequency, speaks volumes to the devs interest and dedication. That it's all being done on a volunteer basis only makes it that much more impressive to me. As does the tolerance for criticism, the willingness to entertain player ideas, and the consideration to implement some of those ideas. All of this has earned at least a percentage of my trust and support for their current and future endeavors. I think the plans, such as they are in the OP look promising. While nothing may be set in stone, it provides a good outline of what direction is intended. I'll save the final verdicts until things are actually available for testing.
  9. The way I see it, Tanks and Brutes are currently opposite in-game from what you describe here... in an AoE vs ST comparison at least. The reason they are slow is simply because they do less damage. Their description in-game is misleading because nearly every other AT hits harder in practice. Tanks plainly get better AoE now in any set that has 10’ or less PBAoE radius or sub-90 degree (I think?) cones due to their inherent. Brutes have far better damage due to their inherent which in turn gives them better ST output while still maintaining decent AoE range, and still better damage in that regard as well. So long as the targets are closer. Brutes are akin to the Bull charging after the red and directing all their rage at it. Tanks are more like the Matador, controlling the arena and directing their opponent’s’ fury. This isn’t Tank vs Brute discussion though, so pardon my off topic rant. What I’d personally like to see from EM In a nutshell: - reduced activation/animation times for Barrage, Whirling Hands, Energy Transfer and Total Focus. I think these four powers make the entire set unnecessarily slow-feeling. It’s possible that simply reverting ET would be enough, but I wouldn’t stake the future on it so... - IF ET wasn’t fully reverted for whatever reason, then either removing the self damage, adding an energy return or slightly increasing it’s damage further (yes I know it already gets bonus damage etc) or some combination there of might be acceptable recompense. - Increase Whirling Hands damage reasonably and/or give it 50% stun chance (mag 2) with a 2nd %chance (20-30%?) for additional +1 mag. - Replace Build Up with Power Build Up, 80% damage, 20% tohit, 43% special enhancement (est.) with 15s duration and 120s recharge. (the %special and recharge are reduced approx. 50% from the APP version). Duration of special buff should be made finite regardless of power type (i.e. click, toggle, etc.) - Make Stun a 10’-15’ PBAoE stun (mag 3) with minor damage (so it could still be proc’d if desired) or a 10’ PBAoE damaging power with a stun component (50% mag 2, 20% chance for +1 mag or similar). Making it a proper AoE would give that benefit to Stalkers as well. That’s my Christmas wish list anyway. Fairly certain is doesn’t matter either way because as I understand it, EM is already on closed beta, and has been since possibly even before the “weekly discussion” on EM took place. At the very least, changes were likely already in progress prior to the discussion. I can’t imagine it would’ve been available for CB so soon otherwise. I suppose that doesn’t mean changes can’t be made, however I doubt it will change drastically from whatever has been decided already. Guess time will tell.
  10. For this threads purpose, yes the goal was to have ET returned to its original design. For EM fans (and other interested parties) I’d say the above statement was not the only desire for the set. There have been many suggestions in various threads, but I don’t recall any of them being to disperse ETs damage across the set.
  11. I see. As I said, I was using Mids numbers... but I was looking under Tanker AT. It seems there is something wonky going on with the tanker damage calculations in Mids. Set to "Damage per activation at 50" it says Whirling Hands would deal 94.25 damage and Spin would deal 126.5, meanwhile Whirling Axe is only at 50.19 and Whirling Sword is at 74.28. I should have realized that those numbers didn't look right to begin with. In any case, that was the basis for me saying the 18% increase would put WH closest to Spin, but it was obviously dead wrong. Completely my fault for not validating those numbers in-game before speaking. Thanks for the clarity @Bopper
  12. Poor phrasing I suppose. What I meant was that it's been mentioned multiple times that the formula should have Whirling Hands doing about 18% more damage than it does currently, and that +18% damage would put it "similar" but also "lower" than spin. Not being a numbers guru myself, I referenced Mids to compare sets and damage numbers of similar powers. Of all the melee PBAoEs with the same radius, end cost and recharge, that damage increase would put it most closely to Spin. I didn't mean to imply that it would be the "same" as Spin. If that's incorrect then I'll take your word for it, as I've seen your previous work with damage formulas and it seems you know what you're talking about 🙂
  13. Speaking for myself, additional mechanics, even with “hidden” ones like Psi Melee Insight, often prompts a reaction from me to do everything in my power to make the most I possibly can out of it. In other words, It fundamentally changes how I would play the set if that mechanic were not present. Someone may say that is a psychological thing, and I’d be hard pressed to disagree... but by the same token, someone who finds those mechanics fun “all the time” is just in a different boat traveling the same river. When I want to play those sets with mechanics that I feel obligated to make use of, I play them. When I just want to relax and do “whatever” with no obligations, I play Energy Melee. My Invuln/EM tank is the epitome of “idgaf cuz I’m chillin” gameplay. I feel like putting in a mechanic like EF would fundamentally change how I’ve always played my “main” and threaten to destroy any sense of enjoyment I get from playing her. If the devs are truly considering going that route, then I’d also ask them to consider this: Rather than adding a damage increase mechanic like EF, why not simply increase the damage of all the powers as a flat bonus to achieve the same goal? Example: If this mechanic would increase damage by say 10% over a pre-determined course of time, then instead of using the mechanic, simply increase the sets base damage to a point that will achieve the same end result without said mechanic. Everyone benefits. No convoluted new mechanics and the set still gets a performance increase and remains inline with what it is at its “core”. A no-gimmick, hard-hitting Melee set. This post is only addressing an alternative to using EF, of course, and in no way reflects a summary of what myself or others would like as an end result.
  14. Something that may help you folks that are new to IOs, or just enhancements in general, is Mids Reborn. It's technically a program that you can use to plan out your characters build, but it could also be used to learn about all forms of enhancements, enhancement sets, set bonuses and how they interact with both your character and your powers. You can use it to view what the difference is between enhancing a power with a level 25 set instead of a level 50 set, or what sets are available at different level ranges, what sets a given power can take and really a whole lot more. This post from Felis Noctu has a link to download the program and a link to the Mids forum section, in case you have any trouble getting it up and running, or to ask questions about using it.
  15. I'm pretty sure that EleMs powers mainly apply Sleep, not Disorient, and those have a %chance to apply that's very similar to EM. Only Thunderstrike actually provides Disorient in the attack, and it's only half the duration of EMs Total Focus disorient. Of course EleM gets Thunder Clap (Lightning Clap?) as an AoE mag 2 disorient with a decent radius and a chance for +1 mag. I'm pretty sure it doesn't necessarily do disorient better, so much as you have more control over when it happens... which in turn makes it "feel" like it's better. If EM got say, Stun turned into an AoE disorient, even with a smaller radius than Lightning Clap I'd bet you would see a pretty big change in that performance ratio. Currenty I also skip Stun, and Energy Punch. Edit to add: I'm glad you don't skip Whirling Hands. Nobody should skip WH lol. 😉
×
×
  • Create New...