Naraka
-
Posts
1035 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Articles
Patch Notes
Posts posted by Naraka
-
-
1 minute ago, Lockpick said:
The fact that you started your post off by calling people out specifically by name and demeaning their contributions negatively impacts any points you may try to make.
Is it demeaning because it's true?
1 minute ago, Lockpick said:The challenge I have is that people min/max their builds with IO sets and incarnates and then complain the game is to easy. They then advocate to the HC team to make the entire game harder for everyone, including those that do not have min/max builds, do not have incarnates, and want a more casual friendly game. These people refuse to own their own play experience to get the challenge they want for themselves.
Well I'm not one of those people. In fact, I tend to play ATs I don't have much experience with and aim to use the majority (if not all) of their primary/secondary/chosen pools specifically to gain insight on less used combos/powers. Minimal min/maxing, mostly solo and small teams, no purples/incarnate because I'm mostly playing alts and mid level locked characters.
The thing is, if I get bored, I just stop playing. It's not so much about challenge, but rather variety. . .
That all aside, I decided to come into the thread and criticise your posts. So what? It really supports my stance that you lack perspective because it's not particularly controversial to discuss about buffing a set that might not be meta... But apparently there is a problem discussing other issues in the game like the prevalence and abundance of AoE? So we have to devise extra ways ourselves to keep variation in combat ultimately but when buffs come down the line we also have to change course for that as well... But don't you dare touch other player's settings, they should be able to keep their arbitrary settings at the tippy top. Mmhm.
9 minutes ago, Lockpick said:-
1
-
-
20 minutes ago, Sovera said:
Having a 'goal' or being 'unique' is fine and dandy, but that does not mean it is useful. Some people feel 'useful' by having the -regen Interface and are ready to swear that they/it makes a difference, except the math does not back it up. There is always someone who took Stun or Touch of fear even if the crushing majority did not.
Try not to twist my words just because you like throwing stuns and being a melee Controller. It's fine that you do, hey I'm happy for you to have found your niche, but to do it or not to do it makes little difference in actual game-play. It's flavor, it's theme, it's fine. It is fine. But lots of enemies are where the danger lies even in high level content. Lots of enemies = AoE time = the time for the stuns to shine and gain a few seconds.
Even with the improvements the set still doesn't have great AoE so gaining those seconds in an AoE situation would help.
Not sure what this quoted reply even is for.
Didn't say anything about unique or useful. My main point and criticism is keeping functionality. If the functionality isn't useful to you, is that why we aren't keeping it? Or maybe the functionality is still there (no one has directly replied to me saying the set is better at stunning than before and maybe it is) but at what cost/hoops needed to jump through?
Overall, some are a bit annoyed they have to work around mechanics at all but I just don't see a reason the particular functionality I'm talking about was altered or removed since it wasn't overpowered (thus not useful, as you say) and is so simple to keep in place.
-
30 minutes ago, RageusQuitus2 said:
I cant possibly pat myself on the back with my T rex arms and fingers (another reason I dont like nerfs its hard enough for me to use a keyboard with my curled up talons for fingers). Good try though. And maybe next time dont shame people with short arms and disfigured fingers.
I didn't say pat yourself, I said pat each other.
-
21 hours ago, KaizenSoze said:
First round of testing endurance drain -resists from Acid Arrow completed.
I think it's the same situation as the -toHit resists, If a mob has endurance drain resists, they are so high, it's going to negate Acid Arrow's effect.
This is somewhat guess work as the Power Analyzer does not show endurance drain resistance.
Note, I am not talking about recovery resistance. AAs effect on recovery resistance shows nicely in the Power Analyzer.
Testing attempted:
Someone on discord was nice enough to point that Malta sappers have end drain resistance.
I used AE 1945. Not the best for sappers, but there are always a few on the first map.
I was using my TA/Elec/Mu defender with fully end slotted Power Sink and Short Circuit, end drain is at max power.
Test subject, con sapper held with Ice Arrow, so no end usage from it attacking me.
Two rounds of power sink fully slotted for end drain. Endurance stayed at 100%, ie no effect.
Acid Arrow applied. Endurance stayed at 100% with AA applied and two rounds of power sink.
Also, I waited for any -recovery to wear off.
If I cannot overcome the end drain resistance of a even con minion, then the end drain -resist is going to work on any resistant mobs.Unless there is something special about sappers. Any other mob suggestions to test on?
Of course, against non-resist mobs, the Power Sink and Short Circuit can drain a 54 boss in one round.
Maybe 2-3 players with TA could debuff end drain resistance to matter, but it's not happening with just one player.
The changes are still awesome, just wanted to see if AAs -resists would allow mobs known for particular resistance could be effected.
Perhaps try a target not resistant to END drain then? While it's a decent test set up, it doesn't give definitive results. I wouldn't be so bold to say resistant target should be made fully vulnerable by default. I'm assuming you might be able to turn an EB who is barely tickled by drains effectively drainage but probably not all targets.
-
I think it's funny that posters suggesting self nerfs are here patting each other on the backs (like @Dragon Crush, @Lockpick, @RageusQuitus2, and @Epoch Paradox) like they came up with a new original idea but fail to see the overall perspective:
We already have the ability to nerf ourselves so that's not new. If people are talking and discussing actually new ideas instead of self nerfs, it might be because they DON'T enjoy self nerfs and might want something else to add variety to the combat. If you opposed that notion, just say "I don't want new stuff" and save yourselves the effort of posting.
EDIT: the ironic part is, those that are like looking out for the overall bottom line in difficult get completely washed out when discussing changes than over buff stuff that makes the game even easier. And the decrying of needed nerfs really touches on that irony too.
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Sovera said:
I have not tested the changes myself, but reading what others have said I don't see what the point is for a ST stun. Controllers are already sad that their CC is not needed and adding a flavor that is CC leaves me cold. I don't see the benefit, that is all. We kill things that need killing, the fact that they were previously stunned makes no impact.
Maybe for a squishier AT. Doms might not mind their arsenal accrued by an extra ST stun. But for Tankers the addition is flavor at best, useless at worst. A Tanker does not mind having a boss hitting them on the face, they are a Tanker.
But that was the main goal of my dark/em tanker, to keep aggro and stun on a lot of meaty targets (and even the little ones but they are mostly ignored). It also conserves my END since I have to use dark Regen less (actually used it more for an END replenishment with IOs). Having the guaranteed ST stun meant I could focus my hard hitters on the tough targets or spread them around to neutralize more foes. I could reliably contain 3 bosses/lts if need be with only my primary and secondary and possibly more if I get lucky with WH.
If that is something not desirable for a tanker to have outside of a moderately IO'ed with good rech bonuses just say that then. Don't beat around the bush trying to justify some denial of Dom role or some such superfluous reason.
Like I said before, the same functionality could be retained by just moving the EF disorient boost on BS over to PC primary target and not needing EF for it just like current Stun. Then you can keep the power as a stun tool and you don't have to slot it for damage unless you wanted to.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Troo said:
I agree partly.
BS is effectively getting an additional 40% chance for stun when using the combo mechanic. (BS has a mag 3 stun (60% chance for)
...
I'm not sure how interested Tankers are in stunning one target. Once Power Crash and Energy Transfer are available and the primary set is flushed out, it's likely never.
And what's the duration of that stun?
The deal is, with the power Stun (not the status), and only one additional slot, I can effectively neutralize an extra boss. It only costs a power pick and one slot and that boss can be juggled for the whole recharge of the power. BS can only have 5 additional slots and trying to fit in decent attack slotting with extra Mez slotting while requiring TF is the raw deal for just a normal build hinging on the Mez.
I feel a late game tank would want to have more Mez since single target is their issue, not AoE they're usually half ignoring anything that's not a boss. Basically, you're picking Stun to juggle bosses which your going to get less of if you don't have it. Replacing it with conditional BS or fast ET is spreading your DPS to multiple hard targets.
Now if having a hard Mez melee in dark armor is just something not balanced for, why not just say that?
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Ultiz said:
I never knew people put so much thought into EM's stun component. I always viewed it as just a dmg set. Anything strong enough to me to "need" to stun it...usually can't be stunned or needs a ton of stun stacks to actually work.
I specifically built my tanker to mass stun which is why I use dark armor and why I'm rather disappointed they changed stun into something completely different from stun.
Personally, I think they should remove the 100% stun from BS and just make the new power always stun the primary target. That way I can actually slot for the effect as I don't need to waste slots enhancing BS's conditional stun.
-
3 hours ago, ABlueThingy said:
As an addendum I wanted to add that I am less ok with a set built to REQUIRE you to take all powers to function at maximum.
What is this "maximum" you speak of?
-
13 hours ago, Blackfeather said:
Going to ping @Naraka for their thoughts on this proposal for buffing the Controller's inherent. Hello there! I've noticed you posting your fair share of things about Dominators and Controllers in the past, so I'd definitely be interested in hearing your opinion on Overwhelming Overpower - does it overshadow how Dominators currently function, is it overpowered/underpowered/something you'd be interested in seeing? Would love to hear your thoughts!
I'm not sure why you would tag me as I'm not a huge fan of Controllers... Not a fan of the power combination (control/support) but I do have a couple, the highest a 41 ice/TA.
Personally, I think control needs a rework along with kill-time, AoE saturation and overall foe threat. A lot of things play into a lot of issues with other things and dominators are a whole other beast, perma-dom in particular.
But putting the idea in a vacuum and only concerning bringing controller closer to dominators in control, random "crits" are probably not going to work as well, IMO. Control isn't DPS where you can stand to get lucky bursts that add up or getting overkill damage doesn't feel as disheartening as locking down a target that dies at the same time.
If you want something more controlable, what about just giving controller is own version of domination that only powers up the next primary power (an over power button) that adds mag depending on who you target.
Or to make it more simple, have your AoE controls behave differently on a controller where the actual target gets additional mag depending on the target (sans the AoE immob).
I also had a thought about a "focus" button/mechanic where it'd take the next AoE control (like the AoE hold) and turn it into a single target power but all the potential control is applied to that 1 target (16 targets worth). Sounds like a lot but it still requires you to wait for that long cool down. The concept being a person turning an entire city block into an ice cube to hold one strong target.
-
1
-
-
On 10/24/2020 at 11:41 AM, RPW said:
Well, as far as Im concerned, I'm pretty happy with everything overall, but I do NOT like the change to Dark Melee's Shadow Maul. It is one of those powers we DM scarppers and Brutes must take, and its essential tbecause we have very little that's not a single target melee attack. There ar many of us who don't use Touch of Fear, and we shouldn't be encouraged to respec our builds to take an additional power to supplement Shadow Maul because its become weaker and less useful.
I have no problem seeing a modifaction to ToF, that sounds like a good idea. The SM change is a horrible idea. There was no problem with SM before. SM Is what allows us DM scrappers to perform our roles at all those low levels. If anything, you should increase the number of targets for scrappers and reduce the number for tanks. Scrappers are there to clear the mobs, but cant take the same dmg as a tank. Tankers are there to absorb damage, with the trade off as they do less dmg themselves. Tankers should never have better versions of offensive powers than scrappers using the same sets.
Anyway, this is only one person's opinion. I've been playing CoH since it was originally in Beta and never missed a week to play until it shut down, and I'm just happy its here to play again.
Oh please... If you were even playing DM before they changed shadow maul you were probably in the camp that skipped the cone all together. If anything, they over buffed some of the powers and now need to spread the effect since DM was pretty much matching the speed of moderate sets with only 1 cone power.
I'm in agreement with @TC that the trend seems to me aimed at making everything "well rounded". Homogenization is going to become a problem just like saturation of AoE will be a problem (or already is, depending on your opinion).
-
1
-
-
51 minutes ago, Troo said:
Interesting.
I think I agree that you are correct that melee and AoEs play pretty nice together as you've described. Cones though do not. There is a workaround to jump straight up before activating a cone which can effectively turn it into a AoE. Not a big deal for elite or experienced melee players but could be an issue for new or casual players.
Overcomplicating it.
Even with narrower cones like Jacob's Ladder, it's not necessary to fill the cone and if so desired, you can just outright skip the power (not sure to the cone size but more due to its activation time).
The only time I'd advocate hopping to "make it easier" is for something like Shockwave to mitigate some of the KD but you start seeing a pattern when you look at more of the cones...
58 minutes ago, Troo said:I think there is a 'behind the scenes' reason for it being a cone instead of PBAoE beyond just making all sets the same.
The reason is probably to regulate AoE. Because if we just started swapping cones for PBAoEs, there would be a while other problem even if it solves "cones are hard".
1 hour ago, Troo said:There can be synergies with multiple cones in a power set, that is not absurd. Lone cone attacks can be a bit wonky to get the right position and distance to maximize number of targets. Not a huge deal.
I didn't say multiple cones is absurd, I was making the point that it's not a standard. If anything, stacking cones is a minority feature you see for things like weapon melee set's and some blast sets like dark and AR.
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, ThunderCAP said:
Energy Melee is now a combo set. It wasn't. There are no more combo-free sets in the game, peoples disliking them will uninstall, whatever you care about it or not. If a person dislikes weapons (redraw animation putting weapons out from nowhere, may defeat immersion), they now only got Electric Melee, that's all.
I already said I enjoy Titan Weapons (the old one, which a good majority of players didn't want to use even when it was the top overpowered set ever existed cause it was too complicated) therefore I was already sure I could enjoy the easy 2-attacks-combo of this new Energy Melee set... but I'm not always in the mood or in the proper archetype to like combos. Plus I know several peoples that avoid sets containing combos or cones much more then I do (and for good reasons I'd say).
There was no reason to completely transform Energy Melee into a combo-set. If you want another combo-set make a new one with it, but to destroy all the "easy-smash" sets in the game is bad thinking. There are times you just want to relax, or archetypes that need a relaxing approach cause they are more intense already (tanks and supports). I would even suggest that we need new relaxing sets in the game, instead they're getting deleted one by one, by patches or bugs or far too bad performance.
Plus the cone is another issue: you should know that putting a single cone power into a set full of single target powers with shorter range is naive and always was (for other sets too). To properly use the cone you should put yourself in a perfect position to get 2 guys instead of one and as far away as possible, to get the most of the angle.
The closer you are, the more narrow the cone area gets, therefore a combo like this "SingleTarget > Cone > SingleTarget" is disturbing as mechanic, cause the cone just creates a positional need that's not a requirement for the other 2 attacks, while the single target ones force the cone to a shorter range... diminishing its efficiency (summary: these kind of powers create problems to each other when used in combo).And "Single > Single > Cone" doesn't make sense either cause the 3rd one will be used like it's a single target with no proper positioning.
This is one of the reasons I liked Titan Weapons, cause you can make a combo like "Cone > Cone > AoE" (cause there are several cones in that set) which is far better then the previous examples.
If the devs want to put cones, they should either create a set with more cones (3, or 2+1AoE) or not at all.
Personally, I would have avoided entirely to put more AoEs in Energy Melee, I always went totally fine with Whirling Hands alone (less powerful but with faster recharge compared to the AoE of other sets, you can spam it with the proper build), and if you want energetic hands (visually) and to concentrate on AoE there is Electric Melee already, with similar animations and elements too.
But... if you really want to add another aoe in EM, then just transform Total Focus into one and call it a day, like other players said even before me that power was begging to be transformed into Thunder Strike (or a different version of it, maybe with less radius but more damage or 100% stun etc.).
While I can agree with some of this, the overall premise is absurd. You don't need 2+ cones to have it be worthwhile for a set's AoE. You talk about complicating set's with combos and then go on complicating the use of cones for some bizarre reason. Here's how you use a cone:
You see multiple targets close together that you want to hit? Use the AoE. That's it. The entitlement chain multiple AoEs of a similar range is purely on you.
-
3
-
-
6 hours ago, Indystruck said:
Sure, more badges too, I agree!
Just an idea, would be interesting for those that are interested in designing and modeling costume pieces, if they had a bit of sway if their piece(s) were locked behind some sort of achievement of their choice. Of course they could just make it available to everyone off the bat but some artists might want to put a bit of a story behind their art.
-
23 hours ago, FoulVileTerror said:
Example of a "Grindy thing" that I'd like to see:
Complete X, Y, Z content to unlock the ability to Slot Purples and Superior ATOs -before level 50.-
What about gaining currency to trade to an NPC that will allow you to change any purple/atio to a purple/atio of your choice?
-
Funny analogies aside (one of the few threads i enjoyed reading every post), I do feel the last issues that changed Stalkers really did blur the distinction between Scrappers and Stalkers. To some, it is good as it gives more people a reason to play Stalkers or to bring the AT into the spotlight (kind of antithetical to the concept tho) but only at the cost of Scrappers' niche.
I'd still want Stalkers to compete, of course, but as a huge fan of the AT, even I concede that the mainstay of the AT is made obsolete after a certain point (talking about hide+AS). I still use it because I enjoy it and I accept that as my build matures it's less useful. Still think AT distinction could have been maintained.
Not suggesting a change, just starting my opinion.
-
2 hours ago, Dragon Crush said:
It'd take some UI work, but the idea I had last time I saw this come up was slightly expand what's in the box (another 1-200 characters), but add a link you can click that'd bring up another ingame window for a fuller multi-page bio. There's tons of groups who monitor supers, no reason not to put a link to their database with your full life story, while the current box can be short and sweet version.
Adding -
Also, it'd be cool if you had the option to have the short form bio say something different for each costume, while the long form you could write out the changes that brought about the costume changes in more detail.
Maybe they can use some features from this forum to offer a somewhat discreet pop-up window linked to your account that is easily navigatable and won't minimize the game window. Then you wouldn't have to worry about limitations. Might even be able to put in screen capture or art.
-
Yup, as predicted...
-
36 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:
Code as a service was absolutely the worst direction the industry could have gone from the customer side. But screwing over customers has always and will always be the correct path for the stockholders.
Why, yes, I do miss the days when I owned a game/application when I purchased it and could continue playing/using it even if the maker ceased to exist.
To be fair, customer can and do screw over the industry too that them ruins the things for everyone else.
-
3 hours ago, oedipus_tex said:
In fairness to the folks who are fine with where the currently difficulty level lies, running at +4/x8 produces superior rewards to running at lower difficulties. They may feel that the rate of XP and influence generated at +4/x8 is the reasonable rate toons should get in normal play. So, I can understand some anxiety when the discussion turns to making things harder.
I know someone had mentioned the proposition before in this thread but I don't remember if anyone ever answered:
What if all the rewards were just maximized? Basically, and green to barely grey mob in the game has the same exp/drops as +4 boss mobs?
Is basically the other extreme of the mentality of wanting to push for a more difficult game by de-emphasizes difficulty itself. If you think about it, it'd mean that the current standard difficulty for maxed out characters would be another form of nerfing yourself, so to speak.
-
53 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:
And yet I consider +4/x8 to be the standard difficulty level for maxed out characters while being one of the people calling for a more balanced game.
It's almost as if blanket statements about other players are often false.
Purely depends on your perspective. +4/x8 is the standard difficulty level for maxed out characters NOW... But in the past it was more for specifically meta min/max builds as well as moderately good teams /teams with some buffing.
All in all, I can perceive the perspective of most opinions here, it's just entertaining to see the mental gymnastics when you put forgot certain points that have to be logikt away.
-
1
-
-
You can use Spines or thorns to also be crystal projectiles since it had the customization option although there is a green mist that is not colorable that is the set's toxic damage.
Shield defense has a gem shield option.
Earth control has custom similar custom options for molten rock as well as crystal.
Beam rifle has a crystal powered rifle option. There's also ice blast out ice melee.
If you already have your eye on ice control, theirs also cold Domination as a support set.
There's also just the various costume options. It can blend with a lot of power effects too. Invulnerability has some nice sparkle effects and makes some sense with its effects.
-
2
-
-
6 hours ago, golstat2003 said:
I . . . don't give a rats ass about it's effectiveness. If feels terrible to play. That was enough for me to shelve mine indefinitely. And I actually played it from 1-50. Painfully. I was waiting for when it would get fun to play.
I am happy they are reworking the mechanic.
So? Do you play Mercs MM? Or MA Stalker? I don't think the game will end just because there's a set you don't like to play lol
-
1
-
-
All this talk about blasters and no talk about ninja training. It had nice utility but said utility is highly accessible to most others, namely the stealth. Beyond that, it's pretty mediocre. Please don't forget that set.
The melee attacks are quite weak, the PBAoE is wonky (it either does too little damage or recharges too slow), the damage buff is just broken. I hear a lot of complaints about /dark's sustain requiring a target but it also does have a use to stack (the extra mez) while kuji-en toh really gets no benefit from using it more once it's recharged since none of its effects stack.
There's a lot you can shift around to help the set. A recommendation from me: add some kind of mechanic to bring Shinobi's damage buff back after you attack. Like using a ninja training power brings up the +DMG for the next hit. So using kuji-en toh during a fight charges up the next hit. Using a katana skill also charges the next power.
NeRF AoE !!
in Suggestions & Feedback
Posted
You disagree that the idea of adding self nerfs isn't new? That means you think it's a new ideas not yet implemented?
Are you sure about that? I just had to check but this thread is a few weeks old so maybe you don't remember the post you made in this thread over a month ago...
That's more a commentary for the general dissenters but I included you since you wanted to comment about how those discussing possible additions seem to be trying to "tear everybody down" for "equity". But again, you weren't the only one shouted out there.
Considering the devs are actively putting even more AoE on my toons as we speak, I think it's a worthwhile thing to discuss possible options to quell AoE, not by specifically nerfing powers (or at least not just) but other avenues on top of options we already have.