Naraka

You say IO tax, I say near-equivalent exchange. As is, the KB>KD IO already breaks certain powers (looking at you, Bonfire) because some powers just aren't meant to do KD. Getting that functionality using an IO seems somewhat fair but getting that for free is likely a problem you haven't thought through or simply don't care about. At best, I think getting some kind of enhancement value added to Sudden Acceleration's KB>KD should be the best compromise here because no one wants to go picking through powers to balance them just because some players just want everything for free.

I see you have an issue reading context. As for your poll, unless you actually outline what it was asking and its context, liking and not liking KB has nothing to do with attempting to abolish it either wholesale or through coercion. We all know @PeregrineFalcon's statistics were balked. That was the point. You can just make up statistics all day when you don't show the numbers and the context. Like, out of 236 responses to a poll, only 29 liking KB likely excludes the 41 that like *some* KB but don't like uncontrolled AoE KB or chance of KB as well as the 24 who don't like to inconvenience other players who complain loudly and avoids using KB or the 63 that don't like having to use the tools to position for KB but don't want to negatively impact the players that *DO* tactically utilize KB to their team's advantage or the 18 that literally don't care either way because the game is easy.

Well I just can't take this rationality seriously. Is it wasting a slot if it's giving you an effect that you want the power to have? Also, if the IO is giving additional damage slotting (in the case of Overwhelming Force's KB>KD also enhancing damage), how it is a wasted slot? It's no different than putting procs or uniques in other powers so you get those bonuses too. This is how IOs work. You're not meant to just get stuff for free (on top of all the free stuff we already have) all the time. Now maybe they could add accuracy enhancement to Sudden Acceleration so you have a choice of +dmg/KB>KD (Overwhelming Force) and +acc/KB>KD, but slotting these enhancements power by power *IS* the optimal solution for *EVERYONE*, to include the players that like to have some focused KB but altering the scatter on AoE KB as well as players that want all their KB turned off. To push for a change that adds a global switch, you'd have to prove the current situation is detrimental to builds. And by detrimental, that would mean worse with it than without and I think that would be difficult to prove overall.

The simple solution is just add damage enhancement to the IO.

Notoriety comes with zero visual differences. It'd be more akin to an MMA fighter going into two fights with overall normal looking fighters and one fight being far easier than the other. On the point of challenge, this is exactly what most suggest when adding difficulty settings: just mess around with the stats as an option with no mechanical difference. That's what increasing the level does, it's what nerfing yourself does and what this particular suggestion does.

And I'd argue that the amount of risk when fully kitted out in IOs and incarnates is so small, people find rez powers useless let alone support or control in general. How much risk does a full team ever face when not split up? It can sometimes vary but it's rare the situation calls for team wipes or pull tactics or LoS controlling. [EDIT] There aren't as many circumstances in game where failure is even possible. If ever there is risk, that is likely where you'd look. Even taking a team wipe really isn't risk.

I'd also postulate, why not give players max rewards on the lower difficulty too? If farming is so accepted, why not let practically everyone have farming characters. Some might ask what would be the point of running at higher difficulty and the answer is very simply "so you can say that you can". It's basically the inverse of the argument people have for players that ask for more challenge. If players like to trick out their characters to feel powerful, setting the difficulty low also accomplishes that so give those players the same reward as players running cruising builds with soft-capped def and oversaturated AoE.

It should be simple to calculate how much a slot's-worth of damage gets you from an individual power on a specific AT then compare it to whatever proc you're thinking of slotting it in. Damage-slottable powers that do very minor damage would definitely math out to a much bigger gain, of course, but just like the various other disparities like slottable power effects or proc chance by power's recharge, there will be some set-ups that don't benefit directly from damage procs. I would say try the same powers but with a Brute instead.

I don't think the proc thing affects encounters much beyond adding power to less powerful aspects of the game. One of the main reasons I made the thread is to get down some of my ideas, specifically the 2nd one, because if done right, you'd have fewer procs to "proc-bomb", so to speak, and have a bit of an avenue to "buzzsaw build" or even create new kinds of "procs" rather than them all being PPM and bound to high usability on certain powers with certain recharge times. It got bogged down because people just don't want to lose their current power proc-bombs or just purely dislike procs or some varying degree of the two. But overall, I agree with your sentiment. Perhaps me not wanting to pay attention to the specifics like "Are procs OP?" or "What specifically is wrong with procs?" might be my blind spot but to my defense, even if presenting numbers to outline a point, it would inevitably get dismissed because it is numbers looking for a problem which, in this context, would likely be easy to find such. I've also put up some share of ideas to diversify play and not merely bolster HP. I put forward a blanket change to give all mobs toggle armor and transfer some of those player detoggle changes to the NPCs, making it some there is only a minor chance of the toggles dropping with a hold or stun and a much higher chance with Sleep mez (as well as a scaling chance to knock off toggles with knockback depending on the magnitude of the KB/KU). Spread more "toggle drop" utility around other useful powers and maybe even a certain kind of mez that nullifies toggles for a short time (even on players). That last one would be a doozy and might make click buffs from support and tier 9s a bit more interesting. I also suggested a kind of upgraded-minion that has HP between Lt and minion and also has the inherent ability to count as more than one target (I suggested 3) that would randomly replace a single minion. The result would be, if 3-4 of these get sprinkled in a spawn and you throw your volley of AoEs, it would cut a 16 target AoE in half and the other 8 targets you could have hit would have "Guarded!" float over their heads. Couple that with the idea of them having certain abilities to make you really have to pull out all your tricks at the right time. I want to say some missions do mix around the mobs a bit but not often times intelligently. I want to say there might be some limitations on mob spawning from the perspective of AE but no idea if any of the rest of your suggestions is currently possible. Although, making an enemy group that just have 25 different minions from different factions, 18 Lts from various factions and every boss in the game and putting them on a map would certainly make for an interesting map.

Another easy solution that I don't recall hearing: what if procs just had recharge enhancing properties, maybe even along with other stats. Example: Blasters Wrath has Rech/fire damage proc; just give every proc get an attuned Rech/damage proc. If all you're trying to do is balance the proc chance in proc bombs, that could be another option that also comes with a benefit. And I'm for looking at some of the weaker procs to just make them uniques. They don't have a proc chance, they just go off 100% in the attack you slot it in but you can only slot it once. Beef up the effect a bit too. Putting these in fast rech powers would be better.

I guess I'm just crazy but, why would DPS matter on a controller? Wouldn't a controller be using more support and control powers? This wouldn't DPA be the point of using this type of slotting? Not to use it off rech but rather to delete targets?

It was mostly just a fun jab since the considerations you're talking about aren't all that difficult to overcome at all. Also, I already have a means of dealing with incarnates: I don't level past the upper 40s on teams just like all the incarnate wanking players tell everyone to do. I'd say, if we're comparing the level of broken-ness of the two, procs are probably close to even with incarnates if only because they affect the entire game even as early as level 1. On a completely other tangent, what is the earliest "proc bomb" one can make in the game? I'm not asking to prove a point, I'm just curious. I'd assume it has to be some Trick Arrow character paired with some set that has another hold or maybe Infrigidate? And how much damage could it do at that level?

To be frank, I do not care how simple it is to obtain or how convenient they are, you don't compare ATs to other ATs with ATOs in the equation. Because, what if it was deemed a certain AT's ATO was overperforming and needs to be changed? It's much easier to balance if an AT's ATO is underperforming and needs to be change vs an AT's ATO was overperforming and you balanced every other damage AT on that metric and now need to revisit them all. Comparisons aside, I am for the approach of giving Sent some kind of "crit" or "damage proc" mechanic because they are A.) somewhat behind on damage compared to Scraps and B.) because you can accentuate that using the ATOs as well as C.) damage being so prominent, it is the most visible change you could make to the AT that I can think of. If we are bringing up the mechanics of the various DPS ATs, you're probably going to have to delve into their intent and actual performance there to then highlight possibilities for Sent (not compare then directly but rather to gauge what potentially they could do).

I actually agree here, when leveling my brutes, I usually focus on END redux, Acc, rech and get those ToHit/recovery IOs and use inspirations for +res/def/healing ontop of whatever my armor provides. In the case of procs, they also get a nice boon having a low melee mod so slotting for damage isn't quite the premium except for certain high-damage attacks. So make the attack cheap to use and proc it out...although proc rate sometimes affects if slotting for rech is even a goal at all...but then I also don't mind having a squishy character (again: inspirations) and tend to play in the mid levels anyway. Partially agreed. I personally feel people fixating on solving certain problems and not making precise calculations to determine if you are doing blah blah blah feels pretty elitist. I'm not here trying to get the devs to do overtime, I'm just asking for civil exchange and input on suggestions. The devs can decide to read and interpret that how they will. I'm also not trying to change others way of playing...at least not anymore than others have pushed to change the way I now play. It basically limits me from playing anything above lvl 45, half-and-half solo, limited build focus (so no soft-cap, limits on perma-stuff, budget limits on builds, etc) or sometimes only uniques and generic IOs. I'm perfectly content with all the limitations I work with and still like discussing stuff (even if it's more a bias on anti-power creep). I find it's moreso the elitists that want to keep their power so much so they feel obligated to stifle expression and free thought on a public message board. I've even repeatedly said I don't want to remove proc bombs but I'll be put in the camp that is anti-proc bomb regardless. Why is it so hard for you to set aside your bias and just stop and think "what if"?

Scrapper or Stalker without ATO IS NOT UNDERPERFORMING! Just accept that your point of perspective to compare has shifted up. And it has nothing to do with the game being easy, it has mostly to do with the game not changing. YOU are the one who has changed, specifically your expectations. And this isn't about Sent ATOs vs other's ATOs, this is you comparing base Sent to Scrapper with ATOs. You shouldn't be doing that. Regarding the aggro auras, it's mostly a coin flip. Most sets that have damage auras don't have taunt, if I recall correctly. It's the buff auras that have taunt, so your Invicibility, Against All Odds and Rise to the Challenge have taunt but I don't believe things like Death Shroud, Oppressive Gloom, Blazing Aura, etc etc have taunt. In which case, I wouldn't even grant "aggro management" as a plus to lone Scrapper unless they take some kind of pool taunt....you can do the same on Sent. As far as aggro, there is more to it than merely taunting. Debuffs, damage and threat all play a role as well as retaliation (the foe being able to hit you back for the effects you cast on it). If you want some kind of role in that regards, why not just suggest increasing Sent's threat level? As is, Sent can be pretty slippery since they can just hang out in the air or at range meaning retaliation is going to be minimized. That all being said, I don't think "aggro management" would be a reason not to compare Scrappers to Sents. Sents are Scraps that get to use ranged attacks and upgraded armor sets.

A benefit should not be seen as mandatory and Scrappers and Stalkers can function competently without ATOs. There's already a huge debate about balancing around IOs, and ATOs are like IOs on speed. As for Sents needing to be comparable to Blasters, why? Why not Scrappers? To give them comparable damage to Blasters, you'd first have to take most if not all their mez protection away...

Just another outlier idea that I was thinking, since considering add-on damage such as from procs is more rare to get across the board... ...what if they actually did decide to nerf procs quite a bit (exactly how, I'm not focusing on in this particular post) and while they did so, they looked at other means of adding "proc damage" buffs throughout powersets? Shock Therapy has a kinda-proc debuff/control power it casts on enemies and Plant Manipulation has Toxins that add toxic damage to all your attacks, what if they changed more powers (ally buffs and self buffs) either to assist balancing powersets (FF and Sonic buff giving some damage procs or giving Martial Arts mechanics to add proc damage and/or debuffs to its attacks) or to just diversify buffs that feel stagnant in the upper-levels. So reduce proc-bomb builds but enable proc-bomb teams, so to speak.

I enjoy procs as well and having some proc-bombs is fun but it can favor some powers and sets over others. Like, imagine if they went in and made every proc "generic", still apart of a set but that one enhancement could simply be slotted into any power you wish (I bet no one else considered that idea). At least that would be *fair* and it might put +ToHit team buffs on even more of a premium, but even then, the way some powers propagate (i.e. things like pseudo-pets or special mechanics) would still cause an uneven playing field. As is, procs are closer to a coin-flip: hopefully the set's powers have slottable effects with recharges and AoE that can best take advantage of some procs or they're just unlucky and barely have beneficial procs or procs that are unwieldly. It also has the side-effect of trying to future-proof powers to have specific propagation methods to best take advantage of IOs/procs rather than being something experimental/unique.

I think it was more a statement of consensus of what people think the problem stems from (context: the statement that "Nobody thinks that 1-2 procs in a given power is bad."). And you're not going to isolate procs as the specific problem because it's not procs but rather the culmination of stats you can garner (context: the statement "That whole thread dives more into it than just procs...") I think it can be obvious that a traditionally slotted power will start to outperform a proc-bomb power over time, but "over time" is only one relativistic parameter here as battles vary from moderately long to extremely short. Performance, thus, can't be only determined in one over all else AND in a vacuum of stats that will quickly favor the more valuable (i.e. rare) effects like add-on damage compared to the less valuable (i.e. not-as-rare) effects like +ToHit, +dmg and +rech. I'm just glad there is some kind of cap to proc damage being you can only, at max, have 6 extra over-damage-cap damage effects per applicable power...but then the imbalance creep of IO set favoritism would then have a foundation in the discussion of effectiveness of procs and them needing to be looked at.

Speaking on that, it would be an interesting niche if more factions used stealth and -perception more often. It's such a powerful effect and has multiple counters, I can see making this an enemy option if faced at +3 and +4 difficulty...if it is at all possible to swap in the proper mobs dependent on your relative level, that is. Haven't really only recently started rolling up various Sents, I have a fresh view of how I perceived the inherent after mostly forgetting that Sents exist over the course of nearly a year. 1. I actually noticed defensive opportunity more than offense. Working on a DP/Fire at the time, I had the toggle for fire damage on my attacks as well as Incendiary rounds so the extra damage procs I got from offensive opportunity were drowned out. The main res debuff seems pretty obvious to me but I've played other games with a similar mechanic that gave a similar visual cue. 2. This, I'd agree, is the most annoying part in that, I built up opportunity and end up wasting the debuff on something I'm finishing off. I too suggested a rework to that particular mechanic to refresh the target once the target is taken out. 3. I think rolling the opportunities together so there's only "Opportunity" instead of offense vs defense would also mean you can take either the tier 1 or tier 2 instead of both. You have to take 1 anyway. But as for needing to take and use them, I tend to do that anyway purely so I can experience the whole set. 4. & 5. I would say are limitations many ATs experience in some fashion or another. Collapse compared to what? I've played plenty of Stalkers who do and don't use the ATO. As for the conceptual role of Sentinel, I always perceived it as providing an overwatch which you can kinda do if you're at a distance, you can see the whole battlefield while you engage and take action from that perspective. Your mechanical suggestion might assist in that concept but I think the AT's actual role will always be merely damage.

Lol, you're counting? You are the authority on the subject, apparently. You should be expecting more interactions here.

Also, this is pure strawman. Just saying...

I would argue that, just because you and a couple of people that decided to post in the thread have decided to label people's opinions as wrong doesn't suddenly create the contention to throw out their position part and parcel. It'd be like me saying "If there was no problem then you wouldn't be posting in the thread so much". I'm sure there is a logical fallacy in that type of reasoning but I'm not versed in philosophy and orational discourse. That's not appealing to authority. That's appealing to consensus. If anyone has been appealing to authority, it's you. You decided what the problem was by appealing to the authority of a dev's statements. I'm of the opinion that the devs are human too and can be swayed if you provide them enough reason to diverge from their personal opinion. You've also appealed to the authority of studies that no one can see unless they join your discord. I'm not saying you're wrong for doing any of that, but maybe explaining it to you will help you understand the perspective of others here. Like I said in my OP, I'm not here to debate *IF* there is a problem because that can happen elsewhere. I'd much rather pontificate on what would happen *IF* you changed it so you can only slot 1 proc in a power or if the damage scaled with the chance of proc'ing. You said you did all that testing but you didn't bother telling anyone what the results were. You just say it's less effective or unbalanced and you don't show or state why.