Naraka

May 28, 2021

It might just be a bugged enhancement display.

May 28, 2021

1 minute ago, Wavicle said:

Do you think I would find more people to do non-AE stuff on torch?Do you think I would find more people to do non-AE stuff on torch?

Probably not the first time but there's a better chance the 2nd time.

May 28, 2021

1 hour ago, Bionic_Flea said:

Hey, you do you. I'm not selling vegetables or redside. I'm not arguing against better rewards. I like better rewards too! All I'm saying is if you want to do a certain kind of thing in game, tell other people what you want to do and you will find like minded people. It may take some work, but anything worth doing requires some effort . . . except sleep . . . maybe.

If you want to solo, obvious obviousness aside, no advertising required. Just go Kil Skuls, or Luddites, or whatever.

That's why I was saying "obvious obviousness aside". The main reason I replied to your point, though, was I'm pretty sure there's someone else out there that either understands where I'm coming from or agrees but either aren't replying to this thread or don't read the forums. I'm basically just putting my opinion out there so it is covered among the discourse.

That being said, I see no one objected to my point that swinging over to red doesn't require any sacrifice. So when any of you are possibly looking for something to do and you hear someone "advertising" on red, perhaps some due diligence is required every now and then to hop on a villain character (or just gull it) to help out so their efforts aren't all for naught.

May 28, 2021

1 hour ago, Bionic_Flea said:

Correct. More people eat crappy food than vegetables. There are many reasons: taste, ease of access, cost, but one reason is advertising.

People can be convinced to do almost anything with the right pitch. I'm not telling people to like vegetables. I'm telling people who like vegetables to advertise.

Obvious obviousness aside, "advertising" can often have an overreaching and opposite effect.

How many out there have met an obnoxious vegan? I still eat vegetables but nothing motivates me to relish in a bleeding steak more than some verbal pressure from an overly zealous grass muncher.

And you might reply "you don't have to be anti-meat" or "no one said you're pushing for ONLY vegetables" to which I can hold up a mirror to the discussion at hand. I'm not a redside "vegan" in that I only play redside or I feel redside is better. No, I'm a *player* that can do BOTH but those other that do both are often drowned out by the rhetoric of anti-red as if going redside somehow excludes you from doing anything else. I find it very bizarre, especially the many excuses put forth why people won't touch villain content.

As for the suggestion at hand: no, I don't think I'll do that. I'm content just soloing and getting my teams whereever I can find them. I'm not about to put even MORE effort when I'm already forced to do so much else just to squeeze a few extra drops of enjoyment out of this game. I'd much rather they add some more incentives so that I can gain just a little bit more for what I do do and if some extra capitalizing players want to get in on that, then at least some of us will have gained a benefit out here without being told to do backflips through flaming hoops.

May 28, 2021

10 minutes ago, arcane said:

I prefer that powersets be origin neutral as often as possible and that the conceptual work be done by the player with costume choices and with their imaginations.

You can still do that with a "themed" set. So long as it doesn't lock you into "science" or "technology", you can approximate different origins depending on what the effects actually accomplish.

May 28, 2021

11 hours ago, Menelruin said:

EDIT: I forgot, does WP give Psychic protection?

Yes, WP gives a moderate amount of both def and res to psi. WP can be a decent stand-in for a lot of concepts, possibly even this one considering the set also protects against Fear which fits very much into the concept of a robot themed character.

If we were devising a hypothetical "Robotic" defensive set, I could definitely see high def and res to psi and toxic as well as protection from Fear but rather than giving it a weakness to energy, make it weak to smashing but also very resistant to lethal. Also, maybe give it the quirk of having a hole/weakness to -END to simulate the tactic of attacking the bot's power supply. Also, anything flagged as EMP or having additional effects vs robots would also target you.

I think the difficult part of making such a set is filling all 9 powers and it not feeling like a knock-off of existing sets. Not impossible, just you really have to home in on that concept.

May 27, 2021

28 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

In a way they do have better rewards, because there are more efficient arcs, so the Merit/minute ratio is probably better (that's a guess). The villain side also offers the Patron pools which is often, though not always, a better reward than the equivalent Epic pools.

You could be right but I'd wager it starts evening out when you factor in teams (you can probably join a couple TFs to make up any differences and then some). Arc efficiency? I'm assuming you mean not having to hop between zones constantly? Or maybe repeat/superfluous fluff missions are cut back on? The implemented changes to travel and teleports probably fills in some of that disparity. I will agree, blueside will throw more non-story/story-adjacent filler missions in between interesting story steps. It probably happens redside too but I just didn't notice?

The Patron pools, while not always the best, I really do enjoy. The unique stack of powers opens up more concepts in a lot of cases, but that's really only one piece of content (well, 2 arcs) that you easily opt into when it comes available. Probably not enough, if you ask me.

May 27, 2021

Well this was an...interesting read.

Taking the less tread upon point (because that's how I roll), and narrowing back to the OP's suggestion: No, I don't think that would overall increase the population of Redside and if it does, it probably wouldn't be by as much as you'd hope. But I think that's okay.

So my reply to adding merits as a reward to most redside instances: sure. What's the worse that could happen? People would complain they're forced to play redside (does that sound familiar to any redside enthusiasts?)? Or that it's not fair (no idea why anyone would make that point)? At best, I could see them making the point that "it's not going to accomplish getting more people to redside" which I agree with.

Now maybe this particular point people don't agree with (would be nice if people actually say if they support the notion) but read the below quote:

On 5/26/2021 at 4:24 PM, Wavicle said:

I like the idea, but it has to be recognized that despite what the original devs may have intended, Red and Gold sides are in fact effectively side content/increased challenge and alternative starting areas, NOT separate but equal factions.

So if that is true and Red/Gold is bonus/increased challenge content, wouldn't that merit a better reward? Even moreso since it's more likely you're soloing it or spent more time forming a group to face the content. Beyond the notion of "villains working for self-interest" working in character, you *might* see heroes that show their true colors turning red for a while to work up that wealth by gaming the system which is just as good as being a villain (because villains don't care if you're *truly* evil, that's mostly integrity which is a heroic trait). True heroes resist the temptations of greed so you should be in support of the suggestion if you want villains to be more villainous. For every use of the word "bribe" in this thread, that would be an agreement for adding this in.

What do heroes have to lose? No one's going to swap sides for some merits bribe, right?

May 25, 2021

6 hours ago, Replacement said:

Astute!

What we decide is part of the Scrapper fiction is mutable, following the expectations of our little pocket of culture.

Consider page 4: we noticed that Tankers in comics domineer the battlefield, but here they hit like wet noodles that did little more than open enemies up to slightly improved attacks by our friends. The Homecoming team took charge of that opportunity and gave tankers an inherent identity they thought fit better.

I think "the duelist" works for a scrapper, which is why I rather like the idea of something ridiculous like a mag 10 taunt.

But considering it's been about 20 issues since Scrapper "tanks" were anything approaching reasonable (and were certainly entered status by the time of Going Rogue), I think it's a similar opportunity to update their theme.

I again emphasize my personal preference as "anything that makes them more distinctive from the other melee ATs.". And for me, "lesser version of Taunt" is the opposite of that.

For the specifics of theme inclusion, my arguments matter less but are simply:

there's a large difference in theme between combat teleport and a leap attack with a broadsword (and combat jumping would be, to me, an increase in combat mobility but I wouldn't classify it as a gap-closer).

Meanwhile, Confront and Provoke already have the exact identical fiction. So there is no loss, thematically, to the pivot.

tl;dr: My main contention above was the circular logic of "Scrappers must have an ST taunt as part of their theme, because they have an ST taunt." Since Scrapper aggro control hasn't been part of the zeitgeist since Hami 1.0, I'll stand my ground against any argument that it's definitive of the AT as a whole.

One might argue that it's not so much that Scrappers get a "lesser version of Taunt" but rather tanks get a "greater version of Confront" as part of differentiating the melee ATs is also who gets the "better" while the others remain "lesser". To extend the argument further, the blame for muddying the identity of Scrapper could also fall on buffs given to Stalkers. I'm sure you've heard me rant about buffs enough (or maybe not, I don't post that often) with some being aimed Stalkers' way. I don't dislike Stalkers, I just wish they would have made their identity uniquely Stalker rather than Scrapper.1.2 because now Scrappers could be seen as falling behind Stalkers. I'm sure Scraps still out DPS Stalkers in AoE and clear speeds but Stalkers likely have faster AV kills overall which is good...it's just they do it by becoming a better Scrapper.

So to segway back to my point, runaway buffs strikes again. Just because they (and I don't mean the HC devs) decided to take the simplest route and flubbing up identity shouldn't be the free ride to extra buffs and utility.

7 hours ago, Replacement said:

About the scrapper power level- I agree here as well that Scrappers don't really "need" anything that improves performance (just identity). See my first sentence from my first post in this thread. But remember that right now, part of that incredible performance leans into the idea of only needing (at most) 8 primary selections.

It's not perfect, but I do take some solace in the idea that if Confront was cottage burnt, it would require a power selection (and thus giving up something else that likely gives better sustained performance) to get the new toy. It would, in most instances, trade power for utility. For the builds that don't envision their Scrappers as "zippy," they change nothing (statistically speaking). For the very very few people who use Confront for pulling - they can get better results for free from the p2w. For the people who like actually like a taunt on a scrapper - maybe we can finally start breaking the taboo on pool powers by making Provoke auto-hit, or including a range debuff when used my a melee AT.

Complete tangent: I'd be all for improving Scrapper identity and altering certain powers like Confront and even Build Ups and their equivalents, but I'd also want rebalancing. For example (and I'm not saying it should/would happen), but if they put def caps/diminishing returns on all ATs besides tanks that simulate 40% def instead of 45% and added to Scrapper's confront a "negative crit" debuff on the target for any hits to themselves, that gives them a "squaring off" power for their targeted foe that surpasses their current mitigation FOR THAT TARGET (negative crit explained as the target doing half damage normally but if they get that 5% crit, they do a normal damage hit). While it is a huge hit to lower their overall ability to stack def to cap by such an amount, you'd actually likely end up with Scrappers being the better option for fighting off big hard targets but less effective at surviving many targets.

Tangent off: I don't see your suggestion as more radical than mine (very possible and less meta-breaking), but at the same time, I see it as completely unnecessary. Same with the changes to Dark Melee. I know there were people really hating DM before the changes and I'm sure you're pleased with the outcome, but it's basically just another reflavored melee set now with few differing qualities and flubbed the main power I play the set for (Shadow Maul) and I don't like playing the set anymore. At some point, you have to see, pushing people out and telling them to just go play somewhere else is forcing disenfranchisement and apathy.

May 25, 2021

4 minutes ago, Zeraphia said:

Respectfully, I'm going to respond to you as kindly as I can, but it is one thing to attack a person's ideas, it is a very different thing to attack them as people, which your posts frequently cross over into doing. I did not provoke anyone by name, or intentionally call anyone out, I said why I disagreed with what some people are doing (and not by name), I also did not use those words. Further, I did not use nearly as pointed language as this. This topic routinely comes up in threads, and there is a reason for it. By a large amount of people, Regeneration is seen as underperforming, these threads do not appear in anywhere near the same frequency as Radiation Armor, Invulnerability, Dark Armor, or even Fiery Aura for a reason.

Telling you you're provoking a response is hardly attacking anyone. If you aren't stating posters in this thread are "gatekeeping" or assume people defending the set are "emotionally attached" to it, you probably didn't need to bring it up. It's fine, provoking responses isn't inherently bad. I do it all the time. But you seem to be defensive about it.

If you're attempting to be respectful and non-confrontational, I was giving you advice.

And I realize people assume it's an underperforming set. I'm aware of that and even advocate for giving the set unique utility. But I don't think it needs higher baseline performance because IOs already cover it. And with such a heightened control over the things you solo, it's not hard to manage with a non-IO'ed build....I've done it. But me soloing normal +2/x4 and above isn't an argument to keep a set underperforming. It's an argument to keep the game from being constantly thrust to higher and higher heights needlessly because it doesn't do quite as well as set x/y/z under m/n situations. It's unnecessary and purely fluff.

14 minutes ago, Zeraphia said:

There is indeed a damage mitigation calculator to test the effective rate at which a set or character "mitigates" or heals the damage per second, and can survive. Without team party buffs, Regeneration is typically in most scenarios at the bottom of this calculator for its mitigation, and this was found a long time ago (I can't remember the exact link to the calculator, but it exists and I'm sure someone will link it). There is a lot of variance in how you IO a character, so some can be attributed to that but not all, and honestly as much as you can IO a character, you may find yourself sacrificing so much recharge and damage that it's not even potentially worth it to roll Regen instead of a set that provides a lot more bang-for-your-buck in many cases.

I didn't expound on this before but I feel that different buffs have different potential factors. If I were to coin a term for the variable, I'd call it "boon potential". Boon potential being a variety of factors that take into account the abundance of, stacking potency, caps and usability of different effects. Things like defense buffs have good stacking potency and its easy of use help make it a stickler for nearly all avenues of mitigation....but it's over-abundance makes each point of defense have less "boon potential" along with it's capped effect of only flooring an enemy's chance to hit to 5% before levels. Resistance fairs quite a bit higher since its abundance is still spread among 8 difference damage types (defense has more but they do not stack). Boon potential of heals changes by level (being very useful in the early/mid-game, lessening toward the end-game) but there is always a use if you ever take damage and moreso if you, the player, have control over WHEN you receive that heal. Basically, a powerful heal at your finger tips has more potential than a heal at the control of a teammate.

The main reason I even go over that train of thought is partially to do with the whole cost-benefit argument of using IOs to build up a character. To say it's not potentially worth it to roll out an IO'ed regen is ignoring how easy it is to achieve effective mitigation with them while exaggerating the sacrifice required. It's mostly a meta decision to roll a Regen or not. You will get an effective character either way and to assume you can't or to a lesser extent sounds like we need to rebalance IOs then.

25 minutes ago, macskull said:

I think they were saying "players want to get rid of the T9s with crashes and replace them with something better," but they were simultaneously bashing players' desires to have powers that aren't auto-skips.

Yup, there it is.

It was also an intentionally exaggerated provocative statement. Not specifically calling out people who want to "fix" armor Tier 9s, but if we did remove their crash or reduce their effects to increase their uptime or exchange the over-buff to instead fill in holes of their respective sets, then the sets that perform "better" than Regen now will be even MORE better.

May 25, 2021

2 minutes ago, Zeraphia said:

The question "does regen need a buff/no change?" (as it relates to the topic at hand) is something that is by default an opinion. An opinion is a belief that you hold, and in this case, an evaluation of a set's performance is always by default an opinion unless you are not recommending changes but instead simply stating numbers without analysis.

Considering you were using your conclusions to state statistically the set needs a buff, walking back your argument to just an opinion is acceptable.

4 minutes ago, Zeraphia said:

Provocation was not used in the post, it was stating the fallacy that if you minmax a character to the highest degrees, the character will perform decently and thus not need any buffs (which I find to be bad examples), and that is from the high-end meta perspective not the other parts of the game which was what I was actually talking about, the players who are not going to use incarnates like T4 barrier, and lots of defense inspirations to "force" it to be serviceable.

If you don't want your points to be labeled as provocation, I'd be weary on using terms like "gatekeeping" or allude to nostalgia or reduce others' opinions and conclusions to merely being emotional.

7 minutes ago, Zeraphia said:

I just find this a bit ironic that in the same post you've said that I'm arguing "from a meta game high-end min/max perspective" as you say within the next sentence "in the higher echelons of content, where buffs and IOs exists, Regen is going to come out on top." And I'm going to say, sure, if you're talking about teams that have buffed you, that are not always a reliable source of mitigation, where you probably don't even need the mitigation to begin with that Regen would provide, sure it absolutely does! But this a circlejerk conversation because that's what a team provides you, not what the set does by itself, and it goes in circles getting us nowhere.

Also, quite frankly, this is pretty exaggerated, currently there are no T9's that are crashless, and there is still difficult content if you seek it. Has the powerscale moved a bit since the "good old days" sure. Has it gone off the rails? No not really outside of judgements. If you truly feel like this, don't play at level 50? Or don't play content with incarnates on?

I'm glad you see my intentional point as ironic which was why I pointed to the overall game balance (teamed content and exaggerated min/max soloing) is out of whack. But sure, that set over there gets an statistical effective-HP advantage of y% more therefore...no. If you can provocatively dismiss someone's argument as being emotional, trying to balance by statistics and spreadsheets specifically could be seen as vain and dismissed just as readily if people still play and enjoy their Regen characters.

Would it be interesting if Regen got a buff or some extra utility? Sure. Does it need it? No. No it doesn't. And this is coming from someone who posted a 6+ paragraph post near the top of THIS page about ways to add/improve the set.

And I said tier 9s WITH crashes, not crashless. And I already don't play lvl 45+ because the game becomes a bore (I only have a select few that build up their incarnate powers because its within their character concept). I already do bring myself down to make the game more interesting but appreciate the advice. Now what suggestion are you going to make to make my game even easier?

May 25, 2021

18 minutes ago, Zeraphia said:

Please give regeneration a serious no-nonsense buff. Also, just because you are attached/emotionally tied to a powerset that you love the theme of, and are willing to IO it to the gills, and claim it's "fine and no buffs needed!" is not helping the discussion.

This is not an objective argument. It's mostly provocation.

You're mostly arguing from a meta-game high-end min/max perspective as I'd argue a SR Scrapper/Brute/Stalker without outside sources to cap your defense has fewer options to mitigate damage. In the higher echelons of content, where buffs and IOs exists, Regen is going to come out on top sans the DPS loss from clicking its powers.

I'd also point out, you're pretty bias when it comes to power creep. How about I argue that melee armor needs a nerf because it's becoming more and more obvious that the curve has shot upwards out of control. Melees hardly even expect to go down (maybe once per door at most) while wading through the highest of threat content which is pretty ridiculous, moreso when it's constantly advocated that such ATs need even MORE. They want more power while spending less. They want every power to be top notch with multiple utility. They want more choices while having those choices be more flexible. Tier 9 armors with crashes?! Remove them. Replace them with MORE!

It's hard to gatekeep when the gate is shattered on the ground in pieces lol

May 24, 2021

17 hours ago, Replacement said:

Scrappers aren't "relying on" Confront for anything - and its usage statistics back this up. And it's not like "screaming at just one guy with no one else noticing" is part of the Scrapper brand.

If taunting is so important to YOUR fiction, there's a pool for that, and that meets your arbitrary criteria that pools are fluff.

If ST pulling is your aim, then you don't care about fluff and you can grab blackwand for free (and an extra 10' of reach).

I'm not going to convince you, I just want you to know why I cannot accept your argument.

Tbh though, I'll root for any change that makes them more unique from Brutes.

Edit: apologies on misunderstanding the aoe taunt part. Right, you said if anything do pbaoe, not targeted. Still not my vote but at least it's different from Brute.

Your argument could be used to argue against your point as well.

If a gap closer is so important to YOUR fiction, there's a pool (multiple, in fact) for that.

I'd further profess that Scrappers don't need buffs to make them anymore reliant on Confront than they already are.

Frankly, I hate having to argue against buff changes all the time but no one's going to ever suggest putting a purpose for such buffs by, you know, making the game more challenging to require all these new bells and whistles. You are perfectly capable without adding on more arbitrary effects onto an already popular and strong AT(s) purely because you don't like a purely utility effect. Or what effect do you already have that you'd be willing to lose to add it onto this new power? Nothing? I thought so...

May 24, 2021

1 hour ago, Jarrakul said:

Again, I ask, if everyone is just supposed to chug Break Frees, why do we have personal mez protection at all? Or, to turn the question around, what's the merit of making some melee ATs chug Break Frees on some missions when soloing or in some groups?

Well, break frees aren't meant to be chugged, they're reactionary most of the time. You can use them when something gets through your tools to protect yourself. If you use them pre-emptively, just make sure you have enough left over.

Why do we have mez protection at all? It's typically given to melee ATs as a fallback to needing to get close to their targets to engage. Not having comprehensive protection to all mez all the time isn't congruent with having NO mez protection.

As for some armor sets having protections that others don't, you have to consider that those armor sets also have powers that can make them practically unkillable. Having some holes likely were the only means of defending against such odds.

But I tell you what, how about we change the armor Tier 9s to add some Fear protection. How about that?

May 24, 2021

6 minutes ago, Jarrakul said:

I don't understand the distinction you're trying to make here.

Theme is the game's structured building blocks that you utilize to create characters. Examples:

Fire burns. Fire only does DoT. It has no other secondary effect.
Stalkers are sneaky and not tanky. They inherently have less staying-power than other melee ATs.
Weapons are physical. They do smashing or lethal damage. Bludgeoning often causes KB or stun. Slashing often causes -def and bleeding.
Super Reflexes act and react faster. This is portrayed by +speed, +rech and a protection to Confuse but doesn't make you fearless or privy to fear tactics.

RP is your particular thematic considerations. Some examples:

That isn't fire my blaster is using, it's soul-flare, a spiritual energy that harms wicked foes.
My Stalker is indominable and unkillable, he can be reduced to ash and pull his particles back together by sheer willpower. The only thing that can truly vanquish him is his own ability to disintegrate matter at a touch.
My weapon is made of high tech energy. It splits things on an atomic level.
My Scrapper sees the future and reacts by seeing ahead 8 seconds at a time.

The theme of the Electric Armor set says you only are protected from KB while on the ground. Your melee storm god being able to fly and be immune to KB is something you can fulfill with IOs or power selection.

19 minutes ago, Jarrakul said:

To my mind, there's a very obvious thematic connection between lightning, storm, wind, and flight, and it feels very strange to have this set in particular be the one that punishes you for flying. While I do understand the thematic argument in favor of the ground-only restriction (it's a nod to electrical grounding, though that makes more sense for the energy resist portion of the power than the knock/immob protection portion, which is the part you actually lose while airborne), I think there's a similarly-powerful thematic argument against it (lightning comes from the sky, so lightning characters should be able to do the same).

Like I said before, armor sets tend to be limited in scope. They are meant to build up a character's ability to take punishment to such a degree they reach a benchmark in performance rather than fill a thematic niche. They always have to provide a certain level of sustain and/or mitigation and everything outside of that is theme. That is the ONLY way we can differentiate them (outside of costume FX) otherwise all of them would provide the same benefits at the same level in the same circumstances.

As for the theme of grounded, I tend to feel it has to do with direction. Electricity can be pretty unpredictable but grounding it makes it more predictable which is why you have a better chance to protect yourself when you manage your ground. Not every character using Elec Armor is an electric manipulator/god. Some just expel it and have no control, others just suck it up or are just made of it. I believe it is a common trope in electric-type characters that, for the underdog to overcome the sheer power and speed of lightning, they'll devise a trap or direct the discharge in some way to gain an upperhand for a split second.

28 minutes ago, Jarrakul said:

Again, my point is not that we should all bow to one thematic argument over the other, but that the existence of thematic arguments in both directions undermines the thematic case in either direction.

I'm not really defending the argument of theme, though, I've been mainly just explaining it. I'm moreso defending the argument of structure. On the power creep front, this suggestion isn't really all that far from asking for Psi resist in Invul or trying to fill up the Neg Energy hole in Elec Armor purely because it adheres to a theme you don't agree with. Now if the benchmark for survivability was particularly negatively impacted (and moreso than Fire or DA's complete lack of KB protection), that could be a starting point but so is Trick Arrow not having a heal arrow or any other plethora of thematic structure built in the game for the player to work out themselves.

If they removed the ground-limitation of Grounded, it wouldn't be any skin off my back. Like I said, we've already started the downward spiral. It's not that changing Elec Armor would speed up that spiral or that keeping things as is would stop the spiral. I'm just presenting the contrary point. Take that as you will.

May 23, 2021

9 minutes ago, Jarrakul said:

As for other holes, I'll admit I haven't gone through every set and checked, but I'm not aware of any defensive set with a Hold or Disorient hole.

Oh, let's talk about that!

May 23, 2021

5 hours ago, Jarrakul said:

Fear is a surprisingly-nasty status effect when used on player characters. Your ability to take actions while feared is extremely limited, even while being attacked. It's not quite as bad as hold or disorient, but it's pretty close to disorient in practice. Plus it has the added problem of being a bit... RP-breaking, for a lot of characters. It's one thing to get stunned by a heavy hit or restrained by telekinetic force, but it's quite another for a supposedly-brave hero to cower in terror of their enemies.

I think it's perfectly within reason that a brave hero be brought down to his knees in fear if a strong enough influence or an influence isolated from that brave hero's strength (Superman is pretty damn strong and invulnerable but even he can be put in such a state in a variety of ways).

If anything, a better example would be if your character isn't organic at all. How do you cause fear in a computer?

5 hours ago, Jarrakul said:

In fact, only four melee defense sets in the game provide fear protection: dark, shield, willpower, and ninjitsu. If it were just dark and willpower, I could kind of understand the choice thematically, but surely we don't think ninjas and people with shields are inherently braver than everyone else?

I think the way this works, in theme, is Ninjas typically use deception and trickery. It's not that they are brave or fearless but rather trying to play with their minds or use illusions on them is less effective (you can't con a conman, so to speak). As for the Shield, I think yes, their theme is supposed to embody strength of character and bravery (a la Captain America).

Not saying the theme has to be adhered to by all characters, just saying that might be why it exists on those sets.

5 hours ago, Jarrakul said:

Add Fear protection to the mez protection abilities from most/all defensive sets. If only most, probably also implement one of the other suggestions.

Add Fear protection to Tactics, in the same vein as its existing Confuse protection.

Add a new pool power (possibly to the Presence pool, it could use some love) that provides Fear protection. Probably should do more than just that. Maybe a weak +resist all toggle with Fear protection and a low stamina cost as a fear/res counterpart to Combat Jumping?

Add Fear protection IOs or set bonuses in the same vein as the current knock protection IOs and set bonuses.

I don't agree with your premise, mainly because I don't like that melee's are practically immune to most mez completely. It really creates a have-and-have-not situation among the ATs. Maybe a +mag but a -duration as the level goes up.

Abandoning the above suggestion and coming to a compromise: what about some kind of IO that reduces one of your mez protections to increase another? Like a "-1 Stun, +2 Fear" IO to make this a give-and-take addition that requires choice.

The other would be improving the Presence pool to have one of its later powers provide some Fear resistance and maybe a low mag protection but you'd still be vulnerable to a lot of stacking fear.

May 23, 2021

14 minutes ago, Jarrakul said:

My point is less that RP is a reason to buff the set and more that RP is a bad reason to keep it as it is. If you think the set would be uniquely imbalanced with the ability to fly, well, fair enough. But "concept" doesn't really work to defend how a power works when it hurts as many concepts as it supports.

It's not RP that is the reason that mez protection is in Grounded, that's theme.

I think, overall, protection in Armors is often sprinkled in by theme. It's why some sets don't have confuse protection but other sets will put it in a power like Focused Fighting and not just shove it all in the "catch all" Practiced Brawler, for example. Because armor sets are pretty bland and limited in scope/function, often times theme is used to flavor them which is why Electric Armor caps Energy resist but not Negative Energy resist or that Invul has low Psi resist.

I'm not arguing to keep the power as is (mainly because the power creep train has no brakes), moreso that requiring the players to work with/around the overall themes of the sets can have its ups and downs but downs are not grounds to advocate for more ups.

May 23, 2021

3 hours ago, aethereal said:

Maybe my biggest power customizataion request is a version of Neutron Bomb that doesn't involve the radioactive basketball. I feel like it's very out-of-place and goofy looking in a set that's otherwise pretty straightforward blasts. I'd like a variation describes a straight line towards its target and emits from the hands (or eyes), instead of like being formed up and lobbed.

Not arguing against adding more customization options but Rad blast is a straight forward blast set? Nearly have the set are some kind of "orb" you're projecting. In fact, it was the reason I paired it with Force Field to get even more orb-slinging in there with Force Bolt and Repulsion Bomb. I suppose PFF is also an honorable mention there to put yourself in a ball.

May 23, 2021

4 hours ago, Jarrakul said:

To the argument about Grounded only working while on the ground... it's thematic, sure, but it's also thematically-restrictive. Want to make a melee storm god (hardly unlikely in the current cultural zeitgeist) who flies around on the wind and strikes like a bolt of thunder from the heavens? Too bad, one of your main mez protection powers basically doesn't work while flying.

Both of those mez holes are easily circumvented without heavy investment. I personally wouldn't use RP as a reason to buff a set as RP is its own counter. Just because you're a melee storm god doesn't mean someone can't send you flying on your ass (i.e. see Mortal Kombat's Raiden).

May 23, 2021

On 5/21/2021 at 7:57 AM, Ukase said:

For me, the thing against dark is the sound and look of the attacks. It's why, even though I've tried them, I just don't like dark. The powers seem to come out more slowly, and aren't in a fast, "crisp" fashion like ice blast. The animations are ...not to my liking. The sounds are not to my liking. The look of the blasts heading toward the npc are not to my liking. I want a concentrated tight, focused beam, not a diffuse, foggy looking beam.

I'd argue darkness isn't "focused". There's always a gradient. Darkness is only sharp like that in the presence of light otherwise, it's merely the absence of light.

Feel-type, I'd say if you want "crisp", there are set for that. While I can understand your perspective, I feel variety in feel is more important than trying to adhere a specific AT to only a specific style. That was what was in place before proliferation but has since faded. While I'm not a big fan of Dark Blast in general, I do like Darkness Armor, Dark Miasma and Dark melee and Dark Blast is an extension of those themes.

May 22, 2021

Is being immobilized for a couple seconds that detrimental?

Yeah, I know it's annoying, but I mean on survival...

May 22, 2021

Just going to say, as a Spines/DA Stalker, I ADORE Impale. Not it's damage but its animation. It's an old animation that used to be shared with Claws' Slash (I think) that was changed as well as EM's Stun (which was also changed). I think it's the only power left with that animation.

For it's long wind-up, I would wholeheartedly accept giving it full range (70-90ft) instead of shortening it's animation to make it a "better" DPS attack. Making it a snipe? I dunno...I am weary of how snipes were changed. It's only a short side-step to eventually just giving it a short animation (the only part of the power I really like, wind-up and all). Slightly improving it's secondary effect wouldn't be a bad change either in place of a shorter animation (give it some more slow, some more immob and increase it's DoT).

That all said, the only power I have an issue with is Spine Burst. It's the only "slow" animation I'm not a fan of but rather than replacing it, why not give it a cool mechanic like a +res buff during its animation (you're in place covered in spines armor) so at least you're just coasting while it's doing its thing.

As for redraw, I desperately want a "no body spines" customization. Having a no-redraw option is probably not an option (mainly because it should be the default). Just remove the redraw from it and add a "no FX" option for the customization.

Also, what if Spine's Build Up was similar to Fiery Embrace where it has an extended +Toxic Damage buff instead of increasing the DoT itself?

Hah, I'm contradicting myself on the power creep argument on that last one. The rest seems like utility (+range impale, protect user during Spine Burst animation, no FX option) than power though.

5 hours ago, Haijinx said:

I hadnt intended to be sarcastic.

Slow animations, no balance changes, a fairly weak secondary effect, redraw and the rest. It seems like a relic, lagging behind the times.

I'm of the opinion that, rather than racing to the future (which the game really isn't....I mean, what challenging content is on the table here?) we should be seeking to preserve the core.

Despite not being a premiere set, Spines still performs quite admirably in AoE (and adequately in ST on Stalkers). It's a rather moderate/slow set which I don't want replaced. It should be like the "Knockout Blow" of AoE sets for melees. Yeah, TW and all that but I said "like" so it's fine.

As for balance changes, has anyone looked at Battle Axe? Kinetic Melee could also use a bit of help. I'm all for helping lagging sets a bit but Spines is pretty decent.

May 22, 2021

To expand and more quantify my previous idea to give Regen some resistances, I think improving the cast/effect periods of the clicks so it's a bit more responsive would help a lot but also adding a new mechanic to the set built around stacking your clicks. Sent would retain it's advantage of +Absorb, incentivizing playing that AT for the difference in Regen for those that want to try all flavors of the set. My intent is to make you want to play more different ATs to get the full spectrum of a set OR pick the AT that has the flavor of a set you prefer. Equity across the AT, in this case, is purely homogeny and only benefits those obsessive with the exact numbers, clear speeds, etc.

Fast Healing (Brute/Scrapper): Added onto its base effect, Regeneration activation powers activates Fast Healing's stacking effect that adds -regen res (12%) and -rech res (8%) for 90sec and stacks up to 5 times.

Fast Healing (Stalkers): Same as Brute/Scrapper (12% -regen res and 8% -rech res per stack) but also grants the user 5 Max END (passive) and every Regeneration activation powers grant back 8 END and adds -END res and -recovery res (15%) for 60sec and stacks up to 5 times. [In this case, Regen for Stalkers doesn't have +recovery options outside of MoG. It only has this power that increases max END and an END rebate for every click you activate...also, it'll be the only AT for this set that gets -END res as well]. This power is slottable for END mod.

Quick Recovery (Brute/Scrapper): Every Regeneration activation power grants -recovery res (18%) for 60sec and stacks up to 5 times.

Integration (Brute/Scrapper/Stalker): Add to this the stacking mechanism. Every Regeneration activation power grants the user -movement res (12%) for 30sec and stacks up to 5 times. Nothing major, mostly fluff. Gives a slight boon in dire situations to escape when you're forced to activate a lot of your click regen powers. Activating DP, Recon and IH puts you around 36% to give you the chance to reposition or flee.

Resilience (Brute/Scrapper/Stalker): I could see them increasing the Toxic res up to around 15-18% but it's not necessary. Add to this the stacking mechanism. Every Regeneration activation power grants the user Psi dmg resistance (!!! some complain that MoG doesn't have Psi res. I think having holes in a set isn't a bad thing but conditional holes are a decent alternative too. This auto will add 6% psi res every stack), -ToHit res (10%) and -def res (12%) for 60sec. This would make the resilience power a pretty big deal for the set, specifically for the -def res. This power would be the only "stack mechanism" power that stacks up to 8 times but due to normal recharge times, it's unlikely to really stack that high for very long without outside sources of recharge.

Revive (Brute/Scrapper/Stalker): Taking the idea of @Leo_G, giving this power a kind of "Burn out" mechanic is almost like a different flavor "tier 9" but not. Having it used while alive recharging all your Regen cooldowns works in sync with the "stack mechanism" idea so if need be, a Regen character has the means of further escalating their sustain OR keep going when things have hit the fan and are still spinning. If used while dead, having it recharge all your cooldowns means you get back up at max rather than considering to wait for Integration/DP or some other reactive power to recharge. At worse, it could be skipped if you don't want a "Burn out" click but it still benefits someone who doesn't want just a self-rez.

Furthermore, this has a bit of synergy with the actual Burn Out as you could, effectively have your 4 main sustain clicks 4x available since your Revive click would be available 2x.

May 22, 2021

Trying to quantify Regen's mitigation will get you a rough approximation but having controllable bursts, whether it's damage, control or buffs, can be gamed to exceed rough approximations...or fall below them. Just like it's possible to completely waste your MoG if used at the wrong time, you can use it to mitigate a show-stopping burst or save it for another time by utilizing a plethora of other tools to allow your weaker tools to combine into sustain through tough situations.

It's one of the main fun things about the set: you're looking for your own synergies as situations change to maintain performance while leaving something in the tank to rotate while your other tools are coming off cooldown.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Events

Store

Articles

Patch Notes

Posts posted by Naraka