Naraka

And that's the kind of mentality people would lable as toxic. I'm not saying you are, just making the point. It's like telling a depressed person to just stop being depressed. I feel, it'd be in your best interest to get people to log in to play, not bicker that some aspect is tied to completing some content and it's not just baseline.

Considering the surge of online discussion about depression and the much needing support people give out, you'd think it wouldn't be controversial that having goals and accomplishments can assist people with this hurdle. Imagine telling someone who is suffering a lack of motivation that they don't need a pat on the back or a bit of validation to get them up and out to get stuff done. It's not about wanting other people to give you that back pat but rather the game to give more of them which isn't holding anyone hostage for it. In this example, giving players motivation to log in and play is similar. It's understandable some may see this as forcing players to do certain content but those players likely would do the content anyway, even begrudgingly or over time. Others might see it as just the push they are looking for to keep going or take a different path when they are trying to convince themselves to log in and play.

What if it was some kind of power that sort of measured how much damage is received up to a certain amount? Maybe if it was a click with resist and some moderate +absorb every 5sec or so and if you have no absorb at the time it reapplies, it pulses AoE dmg equal to that absorb amount before reapplication.

Sweet. I don't use /soul but I use some of the other pool click self buffs in conjunction with other mitigation for something clicky... ... But I think the point of the thread is to put up MORE set options for clicky protection as there is a majority of set-and-forget armor. Having more styles for more preferences and all... Another aside is you only have access to one of those origin click self buffs so you're kind of shoehorned into presence for unrelenting if you want to get more of those clicks.

Point of personal privilege: AoE isn't needed for every set. If it is, give power pools AoEs and use those. Rather than change every set to need [this much] AoE and [this much] ST, emphasize flavor, style, customization and theme. Of course that's never going to be a logical perspective since whether a set is balanced or not depends on putting it in a vacuum or tailoring it for specific endgame and not around what you can actually do with the set.

Another idea might require some new code: how about out-of-combat suppression of fx? Like with ice Armor, I like the icy whirlwind animation that plays and I'm not overly against the body ice so when you stand by without using powers, the ice will melt off (the stat points will still be there) and the moment you use powers or an enemy attacks you, the whirlwind creates the armor with the visual representation. It's be like you instantly react to activate your power to protect yourself.

I'm glad you responded with this, but I did use this combo. It was actually the main one I used to try to compensate for not having a guaranteed stun power from Stun. While I do use and slot that power as a damage power, the duration wasn't my issue but rather needing to dance around using TF/EF to be able to use it. The needing to use TF to start isn't even that big of a deal, it's needing to hold off using focus or TF when something becomes unmezzed and starts debuffing you. In a live situation, holding off using Stun is actually more beneficial since I could get rewarded with some random stuns. Now I feel like I'm forced to monitor stun duration or power recharged even more strictly. I have no idea why you're trying to debunk people or prove them faulty. Would you rather I have replied "WRONG! Because the duration to cast time of the Mez doesn't have to account for the multiple cast times since the Mez starts at the beginning of the animation" or some such fact? No, I just agreed with the post but state how it's different and then reiterate my preferred added feedback. If PC has Stun's guaranteed stun (possibly shorter duration due to faster cast and rech), that could retain the current functionality, especially if you actually like Energy Focus and don't want to be forced to use EF just to keep doing what you do now. Maybe I'm just entitled but I don't think that's fair as I wanted to use that for ET.

That you took that sentence out of context to make it sound like I didn't play the set to smear? I should report your post for being off topic.

Do you really want to start this?

Well, if you actually enjoyed building for the Mez moreso than the damage, every guaranteed stun=a pesky target temporarily nullified with the help of OG so it's more of a cumulative effect moreso than an either or choice of Stun and TF... Or it would be if that functionality remains more similar. Having TF pushing out with a faster animation does improve that aspect of the power's purpose but if you're not rocking great rech bonuses to get TF up faster, your going to get less stun potential. I understand that. What i don't understand is random schmucks shouting me down for suggesting to ADD to the current changes since a lot of the feedback seemed aimed at the upper set ups and not much of the niche perspectives. To be brutally honest, I don't have the patience to test anything, just try stuff by doodling with it. From my time with it, I can't juggle targets as neatly and relies more on rolling dice for random stuns from the AoEs which isn't as fun. Another possible avenue is just giving the different ATs different spenders/gainers of Energy Focus. We kind of already see that with Stalkers/Scrappers but Tankers/Brutes get a less specialized version of the spenders. Maybe they could have a higher control version instead?

It isn't unprecedented to have a guaranteed Mez on a high damage power. I would like confirmation that, if PC has a 100% stun on the primary target rather than the current iteration of Energy Punch+focus, that it would be unbalanced so the damage would have to be lowered. While I can understand your rationalization, you're not describing anything I haven't already concluded. The point of my feedback is the set now has to fulfill conditions (and they are much more restrictive on a non-Scrap/Stalk) to achieve the same level of functionality. Again, the rationalization had been "it has AoE now" but that argument is particularly lacking considering the set was nearly last in that department as was ST DPS and likely isn't winning any rewards in those regards now. Overall, the perspective is coming from a player who used Stun and now gets Stun with extra steps and only sometimes. I don't think the power would have to be lowered for the sake of the effect I'm advocating, only losing the 100%stun on EP+focus.

Oppressive Gloom applies a passive mag 2 stun that can last from 8 to 10 seconds and is why I can make a control oriented melee with the help of Energy Melee. I wonder under what conditions Oppressive Gloom is skippable.

And since it is merely an inconsequential secondary effect that fits perfectly good within the set moreso than some of the replacement effects, there really shouldn't be a reason it'd be controversial. And if stacking Mez was something preserved for control ATs only, then just say that otherwise, working around EF for current baseline Mez is the objection I'm making.

My concern isn't with kill speed since I built the character to control moreso than damage. I still argue it could have been set too have the stun on the primary target of PC and kept the complexity to a minimum as that was a complaint I empathized with from the thread in the suggestion forums. You're literally telling me I'm wrong, I'm failing to read or understand and badgering me about my feedback. Did you ask yourself if that was really necessary to do that?

Only after using another power do I get a less potent effect. The potency isn't even my criticism, it's the ease of which they can retain the functionality. I'm sorry you seem to be on some kind of defensive loop that you forgot why I'm posting.

Yeah, I did. I ported my dark/em tanker over.

I'm not disproving anything. I'm just trying to get people to say what they mean rather than deflect to "it has AoE now". Rather than trying to point out people's "failed logic" why not try to see things from their perspective (I think there's an "e" word for that). I even asked if it still has the general CC capabilities it did before with a minorly slotted Stun but since no one is talking about that I'm pointing out that particular complexity. If you have a problem with that, I don't know why you bothered quoting my post directed to @Galaxy Brain.

Ahem: And good for you, I'm not suggesting the "as is" to be altered, just to keep the same purpose of the Stun replacement which is easily doable. So what you're saying is, if PC stunned it's primary target 100% rather than EP doing it using EF, that wouldn't be balanced? Dark Armor says hi.

You're bouncing back and forth between "too good" and "useless". And how is adding -regen and -special not infringing on support/debuffers? Like I said, it's one thing to say something was too effective and needs alteration and another to say "you don't need that Mez but you do need this debuff".

Then why not restore it to preserve current functionality? It's one thing to remove it if the functionality pushes the effectiveness of the set too high and it's another to presume what someone needs while not knowing what said person needs or desires.

So what you're saying is the set shouldn't have that capability anymore. EDIT: to clarify, I'm talking about the guaranteed Mez outside of your focused ST DPS rotation.

And what if there are multiple of said targets worth stunning that would require that new 1-2 punch that one could theoretically 1-shot stun and then work on another target using the live set?

I'd probably have gone the other way and altered the amount of categories down to 3, at least for defense and rech bonuses (so just small, moderate and huge and roll any tiny set bonuses up to small and any large set bonuses down to moderate). As for changes to the set, I'm not sure. The only premium effect I would really like FF to have that it doesn't is the ability to create a placable obstruction that cannot be fired or walked through by ally or foe. Only teleportation and phase shift can bypass it. That is more powerful and has far more possible applications than any numerical stat change ever could.

That's a turn of phrase. As for aspects of self-nerfing, I tend to already do that as explained above but reading through the thread (it's short enough), there is room for a little bit of everything if the overall mentality is there. Adding more notoriety settings as well as adjusting the mob capabilities upward in the high end (+3 and up). But this thread is focused on AoE and it's effect on balance. Having some kind of inherent protection on mobs if they out level you or needing some sort of strategy to overcome would make it easier to create harder content for the upper echelons of characters.

Rage? Okay. I did put the @s in the to get people to read and respond to the thread so glad that worked as planned lol You want to talk about forced, go take a look at the changes in beta lol. Blasters aside, I think the overall game is being made more and more easy and simplified which could be nice if it was an option.