Naraka

It used to be Shadow Maul. Shadow Maul no longer lives up to its former stand-pummeling glory.

Ah, the way you describe BR makes me not want to play it. I suppose part of what I like about games is trying to get the best out of something so having that something made simpler just means I have to try less which is boring to me. As for cleaves, yes, having the AoE do less damage on more targets is another form of limiting AoEs. I'm not sure how feasible it is for CoX to do that but that probably would be a great change to help balance the game. For ATs like Blasters, you can actually give them less of a diminishment as a kind of feature and have Scrappers circumvent the diminishment via critical hit to give them an identity. ...but as is, CoX happens to use target caps as a balancing feature. I would agree with you that it might seem unintuitive to have a big bomb go off and some foes not be affected *IF* defense was actually balanced. It isn't and thus I feel this point is moot.

As I'm playing, I can definitely share this being a more annoying issue but not because you have to choose. I'm a passive-RPer so power choice has various meanings to me. Skipping a majority of powers in a set, to me, is like a mechanic that has a bunch of expensive power tools...but doesn't even have a simple flat-edge for measuring or a pair of scissors to cut through some annoying material you're trying to break down to remove. It's not a big deal for me to take the tier 1 and/or 2 powers but when fighting, it could get annoying keeping them both handy or available when opportunity happens. I've only ever gotten to the lower 30s on a Sent and currently working on a couple, one of which just hit 24 and I don't believe I've ever really benefitted from defensive opportunity. If they want to help scale defensive opportunity, maybe they should have a "bonus" for some of your armor powers, like adding stacking debuff resistance to slows on Focused Senses, a slight movement buff if you hit on Agile, a small stacking smashing/lethal res buff on Practiced Brawler etc. I suppose, to implement it, your defense opportunity would just give you "defense flags" and those flags would enable effects built into your armor powers. This could then be scalable by power choice as well as flavored and balanced to the armor set. I am actually not a fan of the -res portion, primarily because it's few and far between that it's every decently utilized. It's only ever on the first target and the time it takes to build up to use it again is unintuitive....if I'm understanding the mechanic to its fullest, it's only the 1st target you activate the opportunity mode that takes the largest debuff, right? A way to counteract this might be utilizing the grant powers system where you grant the power to the target that then debuffs itself but then, upon defeat, it "recharges" the debuff opportunity so you can then shift that effect to a new target while an opportunity mode is active. I don't have an intricate understanding about how the blast sets differ from the Blaster/support ATs besides the snipes. That being said, I am *NOT* a fan of the snipe changes. It screwed up the balance quite a bit. Not specifically for blast sets as a whole but rather intra-powerset balance for sets that don't have snipes. I prefer the live update to snipes because it helped emphasize ToHit buffs and also gave Defenders an edge in certain cases so they weren't so far behind. Now? I am just not a fan...and worse yet, the only way to stick to my guns is to not take a snipe since there is no way to avoid the fast snipe while in combat. That being said, I have no solution, suggestion or further thoughts on Sent equivalent of Snipes. I am not the person to speak on this. I may only moderately use the IO system with uniques, procs, frankenslotted and the occasional stacked bonuses but I don't often build for capped [insert stat], even on high-end builds. Usually, hovering around 32% def is my target or a round 25% res or just enough +rech to get me around slotted rech without actually slotting for recharge. The IO system, while cool and interesting, is a broken mess and I just don't mess with it. Also, same with the incarnate system. For the most part, my gameplay 75% hovers in the lvl 1-45 range. That all said, I do enjoy coming up with ideas but I tend to have a bias to buck the meta. The meta tends to push for bigger, faster, more powerful AoE and my suggestion was kinda 1-out-of-3 to give a benefit at a cost.

I haven't tried Beam Rifle on Sent (I haven't tried a lot of sets on Sent, to be honest). What do you mean by not being small-group focused? Or just the generalities. I know the disintegrate spread mechanic from my Beam Rifle Blasters, just not sure how it differs on Sent. As for target caps being unintuitive in current games, I find that an interesting assertion. Most MMOs I can think of today have some sort of limiting factor for their AoEs, be it having larger enemies so AoE is inconsequential, having far fewer AoEs (perhaps having 3 or less with inhibiting cooldowns), having weaker AoEs, having only specific classes with any amount of AoEs or just having fewer foes to take advantage of AoEs on. I'm sure there are other limiting factors out there but it's hard to take them out of context. Many current MMOs I can think of indeed to have target capped AoEs, most notably the "cleave" of basic melee classes. I can't remember off the top of my head if FFXIV has any sort of target caps but that game's bread and butter is big boss fights with intricate raid mechanics, not masses of foes. If the Dynasty Warriors games are considered MMOs, then yeah, they don't have target caps but it's also a pretty brain-dead beat-em-up. I think the only thing that keeps CoX in check *AT ALL* is the target caps and they are being used to balance the ATs against each other and there's no changing that. That being said, yeah, I don't see my idea being very attractive to anyone who values hitting as many targets as possible...which is why I added a slight reduction in their cap nerf to give room for my idea. But yeah, if you are all about getting those procs and splattering that fodder, then my idea would certainly be a flop in that regards.

Well now I'm curious what you perceive the AT's problem is then. From what I could gather, it's mostly a mix of lack of identity and clunky/weak mechanics in their inherent. Defensive-wise, they seem pretty solid, possibly functioning better than Stalkers in a lot of respects. Offense-wise, they're squarely behind most of their competition. And appreciate the critique.

I'm not 100% sure I know what you mean by "hacky" but I assume you either mean "slapdash" or maybe "cheaty". One thing I didn't elaborate on when I made the OP was some of the conceptual ideas behind it which might make a difference in your perception of it. I touched on it with the names but didn't talk about it. The power name that doubles the power of your AoEs but cuts the amount of targets I was going to call "High Caliber" or "Focused Fire" and the concept brings in the concepts of the other blasting ATs. To make an analogy, Blasters are like a flood or tsunami, capable of sweeping away most anything in a semi-chaotic fashion. The Corruptor is like a waterfall, the higher the drop, the stronger the downpour. The Defender is just your standards river, you can use them as a vehicle to attain other things but they are going to have limits depending where they cut into the earth. This idea would make Sentinels into structured flows like a hydroelectric dam or a fire hose, able to control their flow for specific purposes. You have the opportunity feature to weaken single targets, a wide spray to whittle down lots of targets and a mid-control setting to better handle the stuff between single target and mass swarms of enemies. The other name, "Roulette", was kind of touching on the randomness that might occur if you have 8-10 enemies really close together but your AoE will only hit 4 of them. It's be like a lottery but with bullets. Instead of everyone taking a couple of pecks of birdshot, a lucky few will be taking a proper high caliber shot to the face. Who will win the prize? Lol

Been reading through more threads and curious if anyone has suggested just rolling offense and defense opportunity together as a means to improve the function of the AT? So then you wouldn't have to choose between the offense or defense opportunity nor the tier 1 or 2 attacks.

That's just a disingenuous strawman. I didn't say no one should use Assault sets because they'd be second rate or less than. I said only Doms should use them because they are built FOR the Dominator AT. It's not a simple building-blocks type of set like Control sets, Armor sets or Blast sets but rather a hybrid of 2 building block sets and the conceptual dynamic of using range when foes are not locked down and then using melee when they are is how the set was meant to complement the Dom AT. Things are not always 100% locked down. Not everyone has perma-domination to one-shot hold all bosses and not every set is tricked out with low-cooldown AoE confuse powers. Further still, Doms can be pretty hectic swapping targets to apply their various controls on so having ranged attacks can fill in the time you're swapping targets or closing the gap. And I disagree. On a standard (i.e. not IO'ed to the gills build), you're not going to be able to melee everything to death without huge risk. It's too late for that and outside of the scope of this suggestion thread.

I'm not sure why I end up playing ATs or combos I have less of an understanding of rather than focusing on characters or concepts I like.... Not saying I don't like Sentinels, it's moreso not having a specific concept for the AT then hearing in the forums about people complain about the AT so I have to try it for myself then I just get ideas....it happened with Masterminds too and now I've got an extra 4 MMs between lvl 25 and 45 to get a feel for some of their sets. Anyways, I've started up a couple of Sents. I first tried recreating a Blaster from live (DP/Fire/Ice) into a Sent but didn't like it for mechanical reasons. Since then, I tried again with a DP/Ice up to like lvl 28 and haven't touched it in a long while then made an DP/SR and an AR/Fire that's I've been concurrently leveling. Anyways anyways, reposting my suggestion from the Suggestions forum here to see what people in the AT feel about it: Sentinel Inherent Addition - Suggestions & Feedback - Homecoming (homecomingservers.com) Snipped the main "addition", it would be: New Addition Unsure of name but some I thought could fit were [High Caliber], [Focused Fire] or [Roulette]. Type: Inherent Toggle Enhancements: None Cast: None Recharge: 25 sec Specifics: Unaffected by recharge reduction Effects: you no longer build opportunity while toggled on. Any AoEs from your primary set deals double damage (excluding non-nuke rain powers) but affect fewer targets (12 target AoEs >> 8 target AoEs; 8 target AoEs >> 4 target AoEs; 3 target piercing attacks still affect 3 targets). What do you think?

I think they did a decent job with Sent as it is undertuned. That's good. That means they can alter the sets or AT upward to smooth out it's gameplay. The range reduction for the AT, to me, was partly to balance it but in the long run, no one uses strictly uses extreme range as a defense (moderate range with either flight or using some kind of obstacle is enough to keep you safe). The range limit was to restrict Sent's offense and require the Sent to need to close gaps enough to stay in range. I doubt Sents are trying to push range to stay safe, in fact, it's probably the opposite in that they try to utilize their defenses and maximize their offences. At best, it's purely an offensive change to give them more range, specifically for things like cones. As for blasters being the go-to for bigger caps, they still would be. Blasters have 16 target caps while this proposition limits Sent to 12 for equivalent AoEs or 8 targets (half the targets!) If they used the inherent toggle I'm suggesting. I don't think anyone but Dom should use assault sets. Giving Sent an attack set that incentivizes close melee neutralizes having ranged attacks at all. Assault was made for Doms only because they benefit from keeping things at range but also can capitalize on the inert enemies they lockdown. I think the go-to risk v. reward balancing point is range v. melee and that's fine until you take into consideration a lot of blast sets have PBAoE aspects so balancing that on an AT might be a bit tricky. My suggestion is aiming to add another reward balancing point into the mix via trading some kind of potency for another, in this case, hitting fewer foes to hit those fewer foes harder. It's kind of the balanced version of how Tankers got changed...i.e. they shouldn't have gotten their offense bumped up and just stuck with increasing their AoE (range and target cap). You can kinda consider my idea as a "Tanker attack" mode and a "Brute attack" mode in that one is meant to hit more foes normally while the other is less effective AoE but more potent damage. That was also a concern. As is, I tend to just take what I can get with the opportunity attacks and adding something else on top might get dicey. I feel Stalkers start to get in a similar ballpark though with it's assassin's focus, team crit rate, assassin's strike (slow and fast), demoralize, hide, ect. But for them, most of it is passive. If another variable power were added to Sent, it might require turning one of their current opportunities to a passive effect... Or maybe roll them together so you just get both offense and defense at once and only require tying it to the 2nd blast power with perhaps a shorter duration. The funny thing is, I like the opportunity mechanic-wise, it's just a slight bit muted on the offence if you're not built to maximize -res (IOs, powers, etc). If they combined them so you get them together, it might feel pretty strong and might be the actual change Sent needs. Outside of my suggested toggle inherent, if they just rolled Offense and Defense opportunity together, would that be enough to give the AT the right bump up? Overall, I think it'd be an interesting dynamic giving the player an equivalent choice of hitting their normal amount of targets for regular damage or hitting half the normal targets for twice the damage. In some cases, it might net you the same damage, but in other cases (fewer targets or only some targets being debuffer or in range) it could be pure gain.

I just would like to put an idea down so I can stop thinking about it so much but would enjoy getting feedback on it. Weak? Overpowered? Clunky? Unnecessary? Preface For this suggestion, some overall AT changes are required: Rescind the decrease in range, partially for QoL but primarily to help cones. Slightly reduce the target cap reduction. Instead of 10 targets for true AoEs, it would be 12 and instead of 6 targets for cones, it would be 8. Opportunity The bar and the various effects for offense and defense are unchanged. New Addition Unsure of name but some I thought could fit were [High Caliber], [Focused Fire] or [Roulette]. Type: Inherent Toggle Enhancements: None Cast: None Recharge: 25 sec Specifics: Unaffected by recharge reduction Effects: you no longer build opportunity while toggled on. Any AoEs from your primary set deals double damage (excluding non-nuke rain powers) but affect fewer targets (12 target AoEs >> 8 target AoEs; 8 target AoEs >> 4 target AoEs; 3 target piercing attacks still affect 3 targets). Now I didn't scour all the sets for exceptions to the target caps of all blast set AoEs or to compare how it would affect some sets vs others. Most blast sets seem pretty standard in how much AoE they have so at first glance, it doesn't seem to favor any sets in particular. That all being said, I'm not as experienced in Sent, only just made a new DP/Inv to brush up on them so take this idea as just a fun thought. A lot of players seem to love their AoEs and I don't blame them but when on a team, all vying to splatter their AoEs on as many things as possible, I've tended to care less about hitting as many as everyone else as much as I care about taking out the ones that I do hit. I see the same value in hitting 8 enemies with Empty Clips and weakening them for a follow up AoE as I do hitting 4 with Empty Clips and actually taking at least 3 of them down right then and there. And with it being a toggle, it creates the dynamic of weighing the amount of damage you could do with how many targets are present.

It's a blessing and a curse. In the case of Invulnerability, they actually combine 2 passives into one to make room for Hide as a freebie; in Dark Armor, the defense and mez protection from Cloak of Darkness is split between Hide and Shadow Dweller and you don't get unsuppressed stealth in combat; for Regen, you just straight up lose a large chunk of +recovery for Hide but gain a little bit of defense instead...and any taunt/damage/buff aura disappears.

If GW2 was any more current indication to me, it's easier to balance across multiple forms of PvP, PvE and specific content if you create more iterations of powers rather than relying on a global data source. So you can balance a power for a certain mode or for a certain AT much easier. Because if a power underperforms for a certain AT, there would be no way to fix it outside of buffing that power for every AT or buffing the specific AT across all powers. I don't think so. I do think it would make powersets more bland and samey. Having unique aspects to powersets is a good thing. Is it good for balance? Probably not, but if people actually believe the mantra "diversity is our strength", you have to accept not everything is equal and THAT'S OKAY! Same for differences between AT. Because inherents aren't actual powers most of the time but rather flags/additions to powers themselves, having differences in powers actually incentivizes players to try different ATs because Dual Blades will play differently on different ATs, Ice Control will have a different feel on a Controller vs a Dominator, a Tanker will have a different experience with Dark Melee than a Brute, etc etc you will feel a mechanical difference and thus more game to play. As for issues with Stalker's inclusion of Hide in it's secondary, any effect you might need to add to its secondaries, I see no reason why it couldn't just be added to that set's Hide.

It's also good to get a relative standing when talking about balance so knowing the differences between Stalker and Scrapper is also important. I'm still curious if my suggestion would be outlandish or useless. The most important aspect to me isn't just being balanced, it's mechanically playing differently. The OPs suggestion to just increase damage seems to me to make the AT a scrapper but using ranged blast sets instead of melee.

We aren't talking about caps, we're talking about base numbers. They both get the same resistance from Dark Embrace, for example. That said, I don't really know how sentinels compare to stalkers and scrappers. I never bothered to dig into it

Stalkers and Scrappers have the same value armor. Stalkers just have less HP than Scrapper. As for the Sentinel, I only dipped my toes in just a bit with a low 30s DP/Ice and it seemed pretty cool. The inherent is interesting but might require taking both tier 1 and 2 which isn't an issue for me. To buck the trend on suggestions, what if their inherent stayed the same but they added a toggle to the mix (unaffected by rech) that greatly increased the damage of your AoE powers... But further decreased their target cap? Flipping in and out of that mode too best utilize your attacks would be the name of the game and give a different dynamic to it's kind of blasting.

I think the funny thing is, I'm sure I've heard plenty of players criticize the patron pools, saying they're weak and the pets are underpowered, but there still needs to be equality. Most have boiled the patron pools as either niche, mediocre or a failed effort outside of certain powers like Gloom/Ball Lightning on Brute/Tanker but I guess any possibility of "unfairness" should be rectified, even if the unfairness is having a pile of meh, everyone should have a pile of meh....but I have a sneaking suspicion that any suggestion for a Hero Patron pool will be "adjusted" to fix some of the meh-ness of the Patron Pools.

The problem is, there's already a bunch of overlap. For example, Back Alley Brawler uses Invulnerability, SS and Energy Melee, all of which are available in normal epic pools. Same for Statesman. Hmm, what about Citad- yep, same. I guess you could make a "trick arrow" epic for Manticore or put empathy powers in Numia but you're hardcore pushing against blurring AT niches. People are so caught up in "make things equal" and they lose all sense of creativity. Lvl 35+ pools could be an opportunity to add pools that shine rather than being regular pools that have to be watered down and you could do that by creating new, more condensed powersets. Throwing 5 powers that follow an AT-set's parameters while just being nudges to some NPC by filling it with a bunch of existing powers...is wasted potential and, IMO, effort, especially if a content arc would be tied to them.

To double-reverse UNO your argument: so one of the things people complain about redside, being a lowly lackey to a big boss that follows orders, yeah, let's proliferate that to blueside and then hypocritically herald it as the greatest form of story telling and inclusion. That being said, I wouldn't be against adding more lvl 36+ pools and unlock them through various content but you'd need to be more creative than just copying villain patron pools. Also, don't just plop then in a neutral piece of content, make it require being a villain or hero or rogue or vigilante.

I have a certain expectation of what dark powers are/look like/function. But the game defines dark powers differently. That's how game rules/limitations work. It's called Homecoming, not Homebrew. You can't just make your own pet power set, you have to work with the tools available. If you don't like how the powers are defined, that's just something you're going to have to live with and pushing forward the argument that "words have meanings" ignores that groups create those meanings and the group that created the meanings here define those terms different from comics. It's not wholly different but it's apparently different enough for someone to have to explain the difference to you.

Then I have no idea why you cling to the moniker "Super" in the name Super Strength. It's literally just words that then have to fit in a game where a person without "super" strength but rather "trained and abnormal" strength (see any other physical set) has to be balanced to function *at least* similarly. That said, I think the suggestion @Vanden pointed to seem like a good idea. A damage proc type effect would, at least, be unique with the only other power that does something like that coming from Plant Manipulation and Fiery Aura. Only thing that miffs me about that is the extra damage isn't affected by damage buffs.

And what is the average buff and uptime of said buff (Soul Drain + Aim)? I tend to not try to be disingenuous when making comparisons but taking into account outside powers will get you a lot of shady areas since having access to AoE powers not balanced around the presence of Rage (or double stacked) has always felt unfair in Rage's favor and Soul Drain requiring many targets to get a high bonus was its balancing factor. As for War Mace and Martial Arts not sucking without damage boosters, that's kind of the fucking point. If those sets did suck without Rage, that would make SS unfairly more powerful. If they made Rage non-perma and just a regular BU, then SS would be unfairly weak. I KNOW you understand this simple logic but you're trying to twist things to make people arguing against you wrong while completely ignoring the fact you're twisting words, definitions, logic and arguments harder than a pro-wrestling league rival plot. Falling back on Rage not working with your concept of SS....I DO NOT CARE! I don't fucking care. Storm Summoning doesn't conform to my concept of summoning storms and THAT'S FUCKING FINE! Learn to separate your dream concepts and *conform* to the tools a game gives you. Then get a 2nd monitor. This game isn't twitch reflex competitive play. It's slow and deliberate. But I believe the point of the argument about turning Rage into a BU clone and rebalancing the whole set is that doing so makes the set just a clone of other powersets. If you want that, go play Martial Arts or Street Justice. Personally speaking, I think missing a TW attack should make you lose momentum as a balancing point for the set but the set has already received some lickings and it's still a high performer. Your contention seems to be tied up in envy that SS isn't above TW? If not, being balanced should be the goal, not being the best....which is the arguing point you don't seem to understand. And no, having a penalty to help make you balanced doesn't give you a free ticket to be the best. Jeeze. So you are the type of RPers that like to godmode and be ultra powerful? I also bet you're the type that would want to skip all the ikky RP talking/conversations and get to rolling the combat die. As for naturally being strong, YOU ARE!! You can hurl boulders, uppercut foes into the sky, clap your hands and break the sound barrier or stomp your foot and upheave a room to the ceiling....you just don't get all the D33ps you're looking for. The fact you can't even see that makes me chuckle. Come on, guys...

To clarify going 3 quotes in: -Someone mentioned the *benefits* of Rage and rebutted with how people fixate on the negatives -You then state, if several other sets had the negatives of Rage, would the benefits still be benefits. -I asked do those sets you mentioned have a damage buff equivalent of Rage. -You say I'm missing the point. The interesting point is, I'm actually in the camp that would consider reworking SS because of how wonky it is built but then I do not play the set. But I'm also in the camp that would consider putting in more drawbacks to work around in various powers OR pullback some effects to make room for improvements across the board. I view a lot of the arguments as requests to get rid of the negatives partly because they're inconvenient and partly because of RP. Said arguments could be compelling to some, but I'm not buying it. Super Strength is merely a powerset name. I've been making characters for years that takes a powerset and ignore the name and name it something else. Just because the set is called Super Strength doesn't give it a pass to be better than every other set lol

There were some at some point. Inferno, Black Star, Blizzard, Thunderous Blast, etc. There are still others like Power Surge, Unstoppable, Elude, Overload, etc.

Does War Mace, Archery, Fire Blast or Martial Arts have Rage or an equivalent damage buff?