Rylas
-
Posts
809 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Articles
Patch Notes
Posts posted by Rylas
-
-
2 hours ago, Infinitum said:
I can give you gaudy EM numbers that says the set is fine then. It's still a circus trick.
Doesnt feel fine in game because the animation makes it unreliable. Kinda like TW outside of momentum.
Then by all means, provide the numbers. I'm curious, though, do you find that numbers that don't support your arguments are "circus tricks" and ones that do as the only valid ones? Did you bother checking the ones in the thread I spoke of?
I hope you understand I haven't called for any nerfs at this point. I'm only approaching this with an open mind.
EDIT: Actually, scrolling through the thread, I see you've commented a few times and should already be well aware of how low ET's performance is. Or at least, had no qualms about the numbers presented there when they suited your desire to see EM improved.
-
On 9/10/2019 at 7:08 PM, DMW45 said:
If there was a way it didn't feel like you were punished for having too much recharge I'd be down, but as it is it doesn't seem like a good change to me.
23 hours ago, DMW45 said:Welp. Still, having to purposefully gimp yourself in some way--you can't build *too* well or you'll be punished for it--just seems wrong to me.
You'll have to explain these arguments for me. As I see it, if you stack Rage, it's going to be no different that if you stacked it now with all that recharge you're talking about. If you found all that recharge worth while now, you'll still find it worth while with these proposed changes because the only difference is the -def/-res change to the crash.
Exactly how is that punishment when it brings no change to what you're already doing?
-
52 minutes ago, Hopeling said:
It's definitely not topping any charts without Momentum. But it's actually not bottom of the barrel either. For example, the hypothetical chain SlowRend-SlowArc-FT-SlowCB actually gives slightly better DPS on a single target than Headsplitter-Disembowel-Hack, the best Broadsword chain (47 vs 42, using base numbers for a Brute and ignoring the -res in Rend). Broadsword isn't a great set for ST DPS, but it's not the very worst.
If you mean literally no Momentum so that Follow Through and Whirling Smash are disallowed, it's gonna suck.
I just meant no Momentum, but still having all its powers. Thanks for the analysis, that's definitely something to consider.
-
21 minutes ago, Infinitum said:
If you can slip 2 ETs into a build up cycle which is hard but not impossible it does more ST burst.
I built it just to do that, and it works but not as good as it did.
Are you comparing that to sets that wouldn't be using the same amount of global recharge that's required to have two BU ETs?
-
32 minutes ago, Infinitum said:
It's a very similar situation to EM, just different damage type. Its also got to be built right, and played correctly for it to work, kinda like EM used to be with utilizing recharge and correct attack chain to get two ETs in one build up cycle.
Thats why its similar to EM
And by your logic about EM its still a solid boss killer ST machine, according to the numbers anyway, how does it feel in game though?
Though not relevant to balance and performance issues, it still *feels* slower. Performance wise, it is also slower than it was. The numbers are in the thread linked in my sig, and they're nothing like you seem to be insinuating. Perhaps I'm inferring something that's not there, but it is by no means close to a top performer or even middle-road.
But until you're willing to accept the factual evidence that are numbers, I'm not sure you're coming to the discussion with any kind of objectivity.
-
4 minutes ago, Infinitum said:
Look chief, ask any former EM player how much feel matters to them and how bad nerfs to a well performing set sucks. Then get back to me.
I'm a former and current EM player. I even started a thread for getting it some tender loving care. As I pointed out already, the issues with EM are more than just "feels". And I would never try to use just "feelings" as a main argument for anything, because we all have them, they're all different, and none can be weighed more than the other.
Hence, numbers and real world results.
-
3
-
-
16 minutes ago, Infinitum said:
And feel is everything. Take EM for instance on paper it looks OP still. High st burst damage. Go play it. It IMO borderline sucks, to some/most it outright sucks.
Take psi melee and rad melee, same animation times as EM, but feel 100% better. They flow better, their mechanics work better.
Thats why TW isnt an outlier IMO, it has a mechanic that when utilized it puts it inline with the better sets with cool mechanics, both damage wise and feeling. If you mess up on it its far more unforgiving than the rest.
Hold up. EM had a completely different issue going that made its nerf so horrific. It's almost all ST damage with only one weak AoE. It wasn't just a matter of feeling slow after the nerf. It was that the nerf literally took away the only niche of the powerset - to be a fast and efficient ST damage dealer/boss killer. Before the nerf it was still pretty slow for clearing out groups and the numbers that have been shown for it didn't put it at the top of the list for performance.
The amount of AoE and range that TW has already puts it in a completely different house than EM.
While I'm not eager to see nerfs handed out to any sets, I find the numbers presented to be a bit difficult to hand wave away like you've been doing. And I'm still not sold on TW requiring one yet. But let's be honest with ourselves, numbers like that (even without Momentum) are pretty solid numbers. Whether it feels like that or not. Feelings, after all, aren't fact.
That said, I'd like to see what the average in-game performance is like for most TW players. Not sure that kind of data can be gathered. But I wonder if TW performs better alone than on teams. My 30 levels of playing it have been in teams, and I do notice a lot of out-of-Momentum time due to teams wiping enemies quickly. I'd also like to see a DPS chart for TW if it just never had Momentum. If those numbers were still at the top of performances, then *perhaps* an adjustment is needed.
-
Borrowing from the self-buffing defender suggestion thread; what about combining some armor toggles and reducing their def/res numbers? Or raising their endurance cost? Whatever is needed for balance.
-
5 hours ago, Silvanthis said:
Yellow- Yellow snow, you know you'd want to.
I believe this was specifically why they didn't allow that as an option before. Personally, I say leave it to the players to report someone making anything offensive out of their color choices and open up ice power customization. Currently the colors for ice powers are incredibly boring and drab. Yuck.
-
1
-
-
Maybe +1?
I'd probably just build quad-enhancements for the maximum amount of enhancement possible. But it would be nice to craft enhancements that could round out sets that miss an enhancement value or two.Especially for powers whose set types don't offer a lot for filling those holes. I can't foresee a balance issue since they won't have bonuses, but someone more informed might.
-
5 hours ago, biostem said:
Really digging this guy's look.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
37 minutes ago, drboston said:
Could I get a science and super huge Immortal? Results of using automatic upscaling have been... mixed. Do you have these in vector format?
What size are you looking to get them at?
-
7 hours ago, DSorrow said:
I'm slightly hesitant about this purely because of the power creep aspect, but having said that I'm not sure if this would be a huge balance concern considering existing sets such as Time and Nature. Also it would totally make sense. However, while it would make many support sets much more soloable it just might make Corrs/Defenders step into the territory of Sentinels.
That's a pretty valid concern. Maybe the self-buff aspect has slightly reduced numbers? Or maybe it requires casting it on an ally to receive it? Like how SB now hits anyone close enough to who you cast it on.
3 hours ago, Leogunner said:I was considering some of the more vulnerable sets (FF, Sonic, Cold, etc) and their buffs and some thoughts that came to mind:
- Feels kind of dated and unnecessary to have their shields divided into 2 powers. I can sort of understand but at the same time, it's doing the set no favors. So why not just combine the 2 shield system into 1 ally-only shield?
- The power to replace the 2nd shield could be a PBAoE buff that also helps the user, maybe with different numbers from the team mates.
I guess there's still the aspect of power creep so maybe not straight up defense/resistance but more on the utility side, perhaps? I'd have to spend more time rolling ideas in my head, it's too early for me right now 😞
Combining the defense buffs like that would likely require they have reduced numbers. It would be the same if they started making armor sets that combined all the shields in one power. Also, these sets have been around to long and have too many people playing them to completely change out powers.
-
1 hour ago, biostem said:
Personally, I think that, where appropriate, the game's artwork should remain original. That being said, I'd love to see some sort of unoffical power icon replacer mod added, or an official one in-game, but purely as an option...
I'm inclined to agree. There's a reason I aimed to keep the icons as close to the original as possible. My main purpose when starting this was just to have nicer, cleaner versions for people to use in the forums or elsewhere.
But if someone were to create a mod as @biostem mentioned, I'd be down for providing the artwork.
-
I'm hesitant about good performers getting nerfed. Energy Melee was a good example of how knee-jerk reactions to perceived issues can be devastating to a set and player morale.
Not that I'm denying TW might have balance issues. Something continuously hitting the top of the charts *may* be cause for concern. But that doesn't automatically mean it's over powered. What kind of gaps are we talking about in performance to other sets? We need to see number comparisons and we need to weigh in trade off's that might justify the performance.
For example, Energy Melee was all the rage for it's single-target DPS and boss killing speed. But its AoE output was always trash, and in some standards didn't perform as well as other sets for clearing maps. I don't want to turn this into a quasi-EM thread, it's just a good example of how lightly we need to tread in this area. But I'm open to hearing arguments if game balance is truly an issue.
-
3
-
-
Personally, I'm crossing my fingers for the Assault/{Armor/Control}. I know it's not the likely favorite, but it offers a broad mix that could make for some unique play; ranged, melee, armor and control.
-
4 hours ago, StrykerGaming said:
Really? I suggest you re-read those posts prior to mine where this came up. I'll wait. Oh, never mind. You'll not do it because your mind is set and made up already.
BTW, if you've read anything, as stated, from me, you'll KNOW I no longer desire or want to change AD or PB to a toggle; however, that has escaped your attention because you must believe no one is capable of altering their opinions.
Actually, all I had to do was re-read the post I quoted. I mistook what you were talking talking about; a toggle AD being an endurance drain. My bad.
Now see, I was a grown up and admitted my mistake. Maybe you can try taking a different tone with people online. Seeing as how you're the one accusing this community of being terrible and not worth posting in. Yet... still posting. Because as far as I can tell, I haven't been rude to you or dismissive. Only making the mistake of misreading one post. It happens. But you had to turn around and make an accusation about how I think of people. Exactly how does that make you better than the community of people you're deriding?
-
+1. Don't know if it's feasible with the way things are built or not, but +1.
-
44 minutes ago, StrykerGaming said:
Everyone is now worried about Endurance issues making Active Defense a toggle or lowering the cool down? Pfft! You should run a Stone Armor or Electric Armor toon. I've conquered the "Endurance" issue for my toons. Specifically, on my SA/SS Tank. I run around with Mudpots on all the time. I'm Endurance Positive with my build. Mudpots and Lightning Field are the two highest endurance usage powers in the game with Mudpots the highest at .78%/sec, Lightning Field is a close second. I run with ALL toggles (Leadership (Maneuvers, Assault, and Tactics) and Energy Master's Focus) with Mudpots & Granite Armor and Rooted when required. I have no endurance issues. You believe that I'll have it if I make Active Defenses a "perma-on" power? Oh all ye of little faith. Endurance usage is minor inconvenience under level 47. Yet there are ways to overcome that still. Hint: IO Sets and Enhancement Catalysts are your friends.
I hope you realize that you're arguing against a point no one made. Endurance maintenance has nothing to do with -End attacks. If a Sapper hits you and drains you down to zero, how many +end/+recovery bonuses you have doesn't really matter. And not all sets have protection from said attacks. Your Stone Tanker gets a bit of a leg up since Rooted provides some End Drain resist. It's easy to scoff from using a specific example. But Fire Armor, for example, has none. Just the other day during a Numina TF, when the leader accidentally left it at +4 when they started it, my Rad/Fire brute didn't have much to stop a couple of Super Stunners from draining her down to zero after I'd already used Consume in a full group. Had she a clickie for mez protection, I'd have been able to at least pop a blue to run to safety and toggle back up. But she was held and flattened pretty quickly.
Nothing in what you just said really seems applicable to the argument.
44 minutes ago, StrykerGaming said:Now, after reading Point #5, who here still believes that none of these defensive sets need no improvement?
I won't speak to all sets, because the topic at hand is Active Defense being a click power, and I can say that I've seen no convincing argument that it needs to be improved. That's nice and all about people's business philosophies, but improvement/progress for the sake of improvement/progress doesn't work if good reasoning isn't provided. And the only reasoning you seem to be providing so far is "I don't like the way this mechanic works" and "other sets do it differently." Those aren't great reasons. Do you have other reasons?
-
Seen a lot of great answers in here. Personally, I'd love to see what always made this the most fun game for me. More customization! More costume pieces. More color options. More hair styles. If it doesn't come around, I can live. But my favorite mini-game in CoH is costume design.
Also, I get why they didn't allow for some colors for things like Ice Armor. But can we just move past those kinds of worries. The color selection for those sets are so.... *gags* Bland. Drab. Boring. If people really did make offensive costumes along the lines of "yellow snow" that are really that offensive, we can report them.
-
Sounds nice on paper, but I would have to wonder how good it would turn out in reality. Even if the undertaking wasn't a big deal, game AI for allies has never been... overwhelmingly great. I can only imagine 7 of my alts (since teams cap at 8 characters) running around doing things the way I wouldn't do them as those characters. I mean, it would be fun to see them, of course, but I don't think it would necessarily be great.
Also, asking for them to gain XP is a bit lofty. You're basically asking to level 8 characters at a time with only the investment of time in one. I know they've made leveling incredibly easy to do, but I don't see it getting so ridiculously easy as that.
On the bright side, you can easily make your characters in the AE and achieve at least part of what you're asking for. And if you're big on RP'ing, that's a really great way to enrich your character's story. And hey, cross over issues for your toons!
-
1
-
-
22 minutes ago, GM Sijin said:
If anything this topic has convinced me that Practiced Brawler could maybe use a little defense debuff resistance added to it as well.
Oh snap! Called it!
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, StrykerGaming said:
How about this then. There are 11 defensive sets. Of those, 2 do not have knockback protection (Dark and Fire). Of the other nine, 2 have manual activation (Super Reflexes and Shield Defense). The remaining 7, excluding Electric Armor, have toggled protection against mezz/knockback. Only Electric Armor has "Auto protection with 'Grounded.' My assertion is, "... that this important defensive power has to manually activated either before or after you've been mezzed." When 6 of the 11 do not as they are toggled on, Electric Armor doesn't count in that since it is an automatic power. We have 2 defensive sets that offer no knockback protection whatsoever (Fire and Dark Armor). Ice Armor has it and mezz/knockback protection with 'Wet Ice.'
This isn't about "I personally don't like active mitigation abilities," it's about a vitally important ability on two defensive sets that require manual activation while 7(9) of them do not. The 3:30 cooldown is painful, especially at low levels where you have to invest 2 or more slots into it just to make it manageable. That still leaves a window open for being vulnerable. For a tank player that is painful and can cause a party to wipe at the most inopportune time if they are mezzed or knockback or controlled in some form or fashion and not able to break it for whatever reason.
Changing it from manual click to a toggle does not change the play style, it would enhance play allowing the player(s) to concentrate more on the role and doing their bit. 7(9) powers have this ability (really 6(8) if you don't count Electric Armor). Again, 2 have NO knockback protection at all. That means 63.63% of the defensive power sets are toggled mezz/knockback, 18.18% are manually activated, and 18.18% have no knockback protection yet they have the toggled mezz protection. That means 81.81% of the defensive abilities all have toggled mezz protection while 2 do not.
Something to bear in mind, is that all sets have their "weaknesses" and varied developments during level progression. Not that I would call click mez protection a weakness. So far in this thread, I've seen more strengths listed for it, and no weaknesses that seem unique to SD or SR. If spending slots in recharge is a weakness, then so is slotting for KB protection in Fire Armor and Dark Armor. But that's not really a huge issue. If the problem is that you won't have perma-AD until SOs, well, most powers don't reach their full usefulness until SOs. Especially armor powers. But the strengths listed in the thread so far are good strengths to have. I've been end-drained out of mez protection plenty of times. And with end-game content like Malta, it's all too easy to fall victim to it. Especially if you're the one jumping into the action first. You don't seem to be addressing these strengths when making your argument that AD has a bad mechanic.
Another thing to remember is that armor powers come in 3 forms. Auto, toggle, and click. And they follow respectively in strength: good, better, and best. Electric only has partial KD protection with its auto power. Toggles are click and forget. Clickies get stronger protection and can stack (useful in higher difficulty content). Though, SR doesn't get as many protections as SD and it's arguable that maybe it should receive more, but it's still stackable. Sure, you have to invest a slot or two for recharge, but again, that doesn't really set it apart in any meaningful way.
Also, SD and SR get the highest defense-based powers in the game and reach soft-cap numbers very easily. And they require minimal investment to make the Incarnate soft-cap. On top of that, they receive the strongest numbers for DDR. If their biggest drawback is that you have to pay attention to your mez protection, that doesn't really sound like an awful trade off.
Do you have any other arguments to change it? So far, I'm not convinced by "more sets use toggles than clicks". That's just confusing frequency as a standard.
-
2
-
-
8 hours ago, Falsey said:
Here's my take at it.
Hmm, I think I'm going to need to do some Justin testing on all these builds. Glad I hadn't started reworking the build yet. Thanks for taking a stab at it!
Feedback: Testing Melee Set Performance
in Suggestions & Feedback
Posted
And so I shall reiterate, yet again, that I have not called for any nerfs. And my first post in this thread clearly stated my hesitance to do any nerfing because of how knee-jerk reactions to *perceived* performance issues has done real damage in the past (i.e. Energy Melee). I hope this isn't falling on deaf ears when I say this. Try to look past what you're afraid of happening to actually give people a fair shake when they present their arguments or themselves.
That said, if EM had actually been performing insanely too well, and had the nerf for such insanely good performance brought it down reasonably so, then I wouldn't making a case for its need to be buffed. And I would base all of these decisions off of numbers and well researched data, as well as adequate testing before implementation. I would not base them on my feelings or my wishes to have the most uberest strong set to play despite the issues it might create by being so uber. Why? Because that's how being open-minded and fair works.
I'll say it one more time, none of that means I am, or necessarily will, agree with any nerfs that aren't justified through the aforementioned requirements. So please, for the sake of civil discourse, try not to accuse people of hypocrisy or jealousy nerfing. Just make a strong case presented by facts, and if you're in the right, you have nothing to fear.