4th.survivor

Would it be possible to add Technician Naylor's portal in Nerva Archipelago to the Shadow Shard Travel network without breaking his quests or anything else that points there? Would be a nice touch, imo. Cheers

Minor dialogue glitch? I'm not sure if the last patch did this, but when I'm slinking around blueside zones now on my Rogue, any blueside contact I talk to informs me with some variety of dialogue that I should go see Bobcat for new jobs. I tested this alongside @General Stratos and they kept getting told to go see The Pilgrim. In both our cases we were told to go see a single specific contact. Look, if Bobcat wants my number she can have it, but I'm used to seeing "I don't trust you, maybe if you were more like me" type dialogue from these opposing contacts, so I suspect something is being misread or swapped bizarrely when it comes to reading what jobs are current for your character or who the active contact ought to be. Haven't checked if the reverse is true for a Bluesider touring through the Isles as a vigilante. cheers

with all the changes regarding drawn weapon sets and new weapon models from page 4, this issue persists. You can either be a dual pistol user with one invisible gun, or a tactical arrow user with an invisible bow.

Pretty good photos describing the other cases. I don't disagree with EI D, and I figured the placement was mainly to line up with the hand position of the draw, but nevertheless. As pictured it defies gravity rather intensely and I'd rather suffer something looking weird for .7 seconds rather than the entire time it's on my back XD Thanks in any case. Edit: Looks like it got adjusted a bit in this pass! Gracias!

Hey there, I've noticed some of the new sheathed weapons sit pretty high. Whatever the choice around this, some are more egregious than others. I wanted to point out the Broadsword sets Longsword specifically. It's very much an improved version of the legacy/vanilla "sharpened 2x4" broadsword, but compared to both the legacy broadsword, broadsword, and barbarian sword, it is sitting WAY high when sheathed. Apex appears to wear his much more naturally, so I've attached a screenshot showing this dissonance to make my point. It may be my preference, but where it sits on Apex feels much more natural.

I also encountered this bug and it appears to be specific to if I have a sheathed arachnos mace on my back. I play a Bane Spider with two builds - the first build is entirely rifle powers and the second is entirely mace powers. I was hoping to use a sheathed mace on all my costumes, however, when using the rifle with the sheathed mace, part of the gunfire effect from burst/heavy burst is displaced above and behind the character's head. Removing the sheathed mace fixes the issue, but prevents using the cool feature on my mace build. My workaround to date has been to have the bottom row of costumes with sheathed maces and the top row without, but this halves the amount of costumes I can create which is less desireable. there are a number of 'displaced muzzleflash' bugs throughout various sets and the like, including buildswapping producing a muzzleflash bug on arachnos soldiers that causes the gunfire to be about 5 feet to the right of them (usually fixed on zoning), but this one appears to be very specific to the sheathed mace and persists.

You're a peach. I knew it was something like this! tyvm

Hey gang. I can't figure out what's causing this - note the contact dialogue window is scaled down SUPER SMOLL. It's annoyingly hard to click such small interaction text and reading it when it's that tiny is manageable but feels unnecessary. I should note that whatever caused this appeared somewhat out of the blue, and only on one character! It is persistent to the character. I have tried - messing with graphic resolutions, switching to/from window mode, switching UI scaling to auto/manual, scaling the UI up/down (this works, but the contact window is always half size, so if I were to make it as big as the rest of my UI, my UI would fill the screen at mammoth size), and loading chat and window settings from defaults. None of this has solved the issue. It feels like there is a secret 'Contact UI' option and that the scale for such an option magically was set to 50%. I'd love to correct this, since this character is a 50 and I play them semi frequently. My other characters do not have this problem. Let me know if you have any ideas.

I realize that, this feels like you've arrived backwards to my rationale of the sonic arrow. I don't want a sonic arrow, or any power which mimics the effects of another one because it is currently performing poorly and needs a buff that stretches the bounds of what similar powers do. Previously you've extended my logic well past the bounds of my intentions by suggesting my proposals in matching Trick Arrow/Entangling to Traps/Web Grenade would produce WoW-clone like effects where each powerset across the AT is functionally identical, despite Traps and TA having great thematic distinction even with their common elements. That's not what I'm proposing, but this change does bring us closer to that outcome with regards to this power specifically, and you are citing the reasons why right here, as I did earlier... Entangling is now like a 66% effective Sonic Siphon coupled with an immob. It's not a problem, but you do have a problem with it... I think? I see no contradiction in my desire that Trick Arrow should retain its mechanical kinship with other device powersets, either with respect to Entangling arrow or Acid arrow...any more than someone arguing that Fire powersets should retain DoTs across AT's or sets, or that Ice powersets should retain slow or -rech effects, or any other number of mechanical similarities which introduce interesting gameplay effects while reinforcing their thematic elements. I did not imagine those similarities or conflate them with each other - they are literally in the descriptions of powers and sets unified under a common theme. Fire. Ice. Psychic/Mental sets. Entangling arrows and web nades which hold people in place or acid arrows/mortars which sizzle through armor, Etc. The presence of those mechanics present in lesser or greater degrees is self evident. We also don't need to extend the logic I'm applying here to the point of absurdity, I'm not for homogenizing sets, and that if anything adding a nice chonky -res debuff into entangling is a move towards making it more like 'other' support sets. As you point out in your very next point, Trick Arrow and Traps are plenty distinct even with their commonalities... Correct, I don't want to go down this road and I agree with you that this is a desirable goal. This is not the position I'm taking. I just want off the ride. Bullets evidently can -resistance... but seems that effect only applies when your character does some cool twirl and then uh... forces the bullets out of the gun faster by punching forward 😛 Look, I take your points on theme being flexible, Nemesis Plots, etc and I don't think I'm as dogmatic about this as you charge me with, and I take your point that -res is more common than my initial assessment, given that I tend to play mostly device-based characters (where it is present more rarely). But within that framework, -res still is rather valuable, since as an example only one power in the pistols powerset produces it. In many of the examples you've previously cited of the presence of -res, it tends to be present within perhaps one power of the set which specifically emphasizes it (eg. Rib Cracker. eg, Piercing Bullets, eg. Rend Armor) as some kind of heavy or armor piercing attack, or else it presents more generally, as a global rider with sets that have this (sonic). Hence my opinion that it is considered to be a 'valuable' secondary effect, which I think people would agree with given its direct outcome on damage output. If Assault Rifle were to be considered for a buff, putting a comparable amount of -res into sniper rifle probably makes sense, thematically. Why this effect isn't in place already you allude to - the game has been shipped, sold, cancelled, and frankensteined back to life by hard working volunteers. To break this kick circle, and since you opened the can...is there an example of a frag grenade which doesn't cause knockback? I appreciate this offering, as someone I play with frequently has a psychic/telekinetic character that emphasizes telekinesis moreso than mental telepathy, so they play a Grav/Psionic dominator with the gravity powers flavored as manifestations of telekinetic force and recolour the effects to more closely match the general oscillating pink waves of the psi powers. But I am not quite talking about that, I think. I've attempted to demonstrate a pretty simple objection on the basis of internal consistency within the framework of similar powers, and in the process you have illustrated how power effects differ widely across sets and ATs when that's not exactly what I meant. I think that I have suggested there is room for improvement on this page 1 offering, nothing more. I certainly don't want to have my position twisted to the point that my understanding of the powers is imperfect beyond grasping, or that I've imagined the frameworks which these powers are clearly situated in, or that failing to use what's being offered is somehow a failing of my imagination. We can sidestep all that and I appreciate that you've tried to be fair along the way even as we veer into these territories. To be honest, I suspect that this entire exchange (while enlightening) has been something of a distraction for this thread and the work being done here. Moving a -res effect away from acid arrow and creating a new one in entangling is (imo) the wrong choice if consolidating powers is one of the principal goals. It's not the wrong choice if improving performance is the sole goal. There's a tension there. That the change produces an idiosyncratic effect with respect to other device-themed immobilizes can be overlooked as many have suggested, but like removing a nonfunctional -end effect in disrupting, would be pretty cool if it could be corrected (ie, that if the two net powers we have in the game end up resembling each other mechanically in some form at least, even as pale shadows beyond the AT divide). Personally, I would sincerely miss sizzling dudes with my armor-eating acid arrow (as I have already created the sort of 'personal storytelling' that this effect fits into, as you suggest), but I'll learn to live with it if that's the way the wheel is pulled, even as people tell me how much I'll love the new one. Probably they're right. ❤️

Yes, I misspoke and mentioned Defenders specifically when I meant to refer to Trick Arrow users generally. You make your points well, but I stand by my position. There are themes within sets and there are themes across sets of related powers. Commonalities between device based powers is one such theme. The beta changes run counter to those themes, and it need not be so. Thanks for your responses

Appreciate your responses Luminara. I'm not gonna ask someone to make a list of every single power that diverges from like powers in minor ways, but a good faith contribution to this line of reasoning would be finding one example of a power which diverges from its cousins in such a major way as the one we're talking about (entangling). This is not a slight modification to the power. Evidently, I don't think it's irrelevant, nor do I think you speak for all players, or even all the posters in this thread, when you say that train has left the station. You seized upon my example of electrified net arrow, which is the obvious comparison, so I'll work from that... Where is it standard operating procedure to entirely change either the type or scale of the power effect when reformatting a power across AT's or into a different-yet-alike role? Furthermore, -res is not a very common secondary effect anywhere, and with the exception of sonic, is more often considered a primary effect. Electrified net arrow has a blaster scale -rech, and the damage from the electrified portion to make it "blasty." Web grenade has -rech. Toxic web grenade has -rech, and toxic DoT to again, make it "blasty." At some point, a decision was made to improve blaster secondaries so that they had a bigger impact (a decision which probably didn't go far enough, which is why they're up for another round at the same time we're discussing this, in a manner which is comprehensive and ideally, somewhat uniform). At which point 'web grenade' became 'toxic web grenade.' That's an example of a necessary change. A change of this scope to Entangling is not necessary anymore than a change to any of these other powers would be. Without cataloguing an exhaustive list, -res is achieved through corroding armor, melting armor, fiery incarnate interfaces, various corrosive acids/poisons, armor piercing bullets, and the Sentinel inherent and Bane Spider surveillance, both of which touch on 'analyzing a target for weakness' in their own way. As of this change, you can also achieve this effect with a net, but only if you're a Defender, for reasons. Sonic based powers and armor piercing bullets are one of the few examples of powers which apply -res a secondary effect, which is why I offered "sonic arrow" as an example of a power that would make more sense under the proposed change. I didn't do this because I am advocating for a change to this power to be turned into sonic arrow, I am doing so to demonstrate why this is the wrong change for entangling arrow (to be clear, I am not suggesting we create a sonic arrow power). I have attempted to offer concession to this in the sense that the secondary effect could be changed from -rech to -def under the new power description's rationale. This would even let you slot an achilles for a low chance to accomplish what the power now promises every time you fire it. Yes, yes. My equivocation to /TA secondaries was an attempt to abstract that current TA performs more at the level of a corruptor or mastermind secondary, rather than a defender primary. I gotta save word count somewhere, y'know 😛 It's miles ahead alright. That's my objection. My proposal does put entangling back where it was before, an unfortunate choice for a tier 1 that Defenders are blessed to be able to skip, and that Corruptors/Controllers/Masterminds are thankful they have primaries to lean on until they unlock the power choices they presumably selected /TA for. You do make a good point here, which is that the power has no inherent value as a t1 immobilize, justifying the improvement of its secondary effect. Yes, it's hard to argue for the inherent value of a t1 single target immobilize. Yet, people roll blasters every day, and each of them is saddled with a power very similar to the power you describe. Many of them deal (trivial) damage besides. It seems that improving the secondary effect is the natural choice for the defender version, except the choice made in this case is the wrong one. Blasters take this choice in stride in their secondary, and as a Defender, you don't even have to do that. Sometimes a stinker is a blessing in disguise, because this is the space in my build that lets me consider the following, also very useful powers: hasten, maneuvers, assault, tactics, tough, weave, or selections from the medicine pool. There is value in having skippable powers, and not every situational power needs to have a grafted secondary effect out of line with itself, or if they do... then why should Trick Arrow be the golden child among device-themed t1 immobilizes? The choice for me now is whether to nix assault or tactics in order to take advantage of the -20% res, when as a Defender I shouldn't even have to make this choice. A power being only situationally useful is still useful situationally, and so it rightly finds itself in the unenviable position of t1. Many PvPers choose to pick it up anyway, because that's an example of an environment where that situation is useful. Evidently you and I do not pvp often, and pvp balance is perhaps a laughable aside, but one which was introduced by CP in this thread when he mentioned pvp content was a consideration for the sets performance. My point is: the power should be chosen on the basis of its primary effect, with consideration to its secondary effect. It's currently a power pretending to be another power, which players will pickup because its 'secondary' effect is actually an entirely different power. This goes farther than differentiation. Call it what you want, its effects would fit better in a different set. Everyone who uses a net or a webnade has a foot in the door for asking for -res (and maybe that's fine, but I doubt there is consensus on this except perhaps among Trick Arrow players worried about being robbed of this). It would be more honest I think to say that as a TA player I am glad that this power effect is being deemed worth including in addition to the -40% resistance already on offer, but it's still correct to point out that it's been shoehorned into the wrong power. You quite rightly point this out, and it's a rule that my previous posts allude to when I concede that I'm not interested in discussing complete set redesigns. You're also right to bring it up where one of my main 'beefs' is set verisimilitude, since that's essentially one of the qualities the cottage rule is designed to preserve. You say that CP is sticking to the rule, even when he's breaking it in the case of entangling and strongly bending it in acid arrow. You can rewrite a power description and change an effect, but when every other power in the game that mimics that effect operates by a different (and coherent) set of rules, you are only paying lip service to it. That doesn't mean Trick Arrow needs to be hidebound or consigned to mediocrity because it happened to draw many of its jack-of-all-trades effects from a specific list of dev choices fifteen years ago. I have outlined a way where the exact same changes currently being tested with approval by trick archers could be reassigned in such a way that the powers not only do what they do now, but they continue to do what they always have. I've faced more resistance to this from the community than I expected, I suspect because there is a fear this is some sort of teardown I'm doing in an effort to keep them from the buffs they badly need. That's... not my intention, or even an outcome of my suggestions. you obviously do understand the mechanics of the game very well, I didn't address your breakdown of the first 60 seconds vs. an AV because it's quite thorough and I have no real rebuttals there. What you demonstrate well is that even if the changes don't do a perfect job of power consolidation, they still do a decent job of consolidating powers by virtue of trick arrow users having more time in their rotation to breath, assess, and contribute DPS, as well as accomplish more with fewer applications of powers even when new effects have been created to replace powers consolidated. Okay, although I still think that speaks more to the primary design goal of improving performance. Power consolidation to me means exactly that - where power effects are located. There is some good work done to this effect (disrupting), but it has some surprisingly lopsided elements, which I have spent a lot of words examining and which I think could be improved further still with minimal revision. Resistance to these ideas seems to be more along the lines of some other, unstated goal, which I'm going to label something like power parity. That every power should be worth taking for its own sake purely on its own basis. I understand that power verisimilitude is subordinated to the stated design goals, and I've attempted to show that this has been unnecessary as a way to reintroduce it for consideration. But I don't know how to get through your notion that powers should be worth taking for their own sake when it's being conflated with the idea of improving performance. The unspoken 'goal' of power verisimilitude has been stated by you and others variously as irrelevant to the conversation, ie subordinate to the goal of improving performance and power consolidation, even as you explain the cottage rule which is itself an effort at maintaining power verisimilitude. If improving performance were the only goal, then devs could flatly increase the performance of numbers, or dissatisfied Trick Arrow players could roll any other well performing primary. The new mechanic appears to be a creative way to sidestep the poor performance of debuffs against high level/AV targets, in a way which counteracts their inbuilt immunity to these effects. In the process of building to that goal, verisimilitude has taken a hit while room has been made for this effect, which I believe is unecessary. As you point out, TA does have a theme, a theme which has inspired devoted loyalists despite its flaws, and a theme which deserves to be consistent across power changes. Verisimilitude supports that theme. I'm not suggesting these changes demolish it, but it does erode it in two cases, and in a way which is contrary even to one of the stated goals of the rework (power consolidation), in favour of power parity. I am not suggesting we abandon the efforts put in to date. I really do think this is a situation where we can have an arrow cake and get to eat it. But we do have to chose between perfect parity between powers, and verisimilitude. Honestly I prefer the latter. Thanks for reading

Okay, let's reset. I agree, the powerset is better off with the changes, in case that was in doubt. I am not proposing power redesigns. New mechanics are being introduced to a 20 year old game. Powers are being reworked in an effort to boost their performance. In the process, icons have changed and the function of specific powers have changed entirely (perhaps in ways we are still coming to understand). It strikes me as ironic that proposals which incorporate these benefits while adhering to the original vision of a game rebranding itself Homecoming are considered to be too far afield for discussion. To address your criticism of my rationale, I didn't feel it was necessary to state my full repertoire when breaking down my power rotation against an AV because I believe most TA's probably do the same thing on the current live build - ensure that acid arrow and disrupting arrow are up immediately for full -res and that these conditions are refreshed and constant, and then work through their ancillary powers to provide additional, less impactful, heavily resisted benefits throughout the duration of the fight while contributing DPS as best as they're able. In the same way that a scrapper would make sure they are hitting with their two highest damage or highest DPA single target attacks as soon as they recycle, and then working their utility and lesser damaging attacks inbetween as needed. On the test build, my approach is much the same. You can point out that I'm choosing to reintroduce complexity into my rotation by adding in entangling, but you are just as conveniently sidestepping that the secondary effect added to the power is entirely out of line with others of the same sort and that any Defender or /TA user remotely concerned with being effective let alone optimal will be picking up this power and spamming it in their rotation against bosses+, even as power consolidation is a stated design goal of the revamp. I get that trick arrow is tricky to get right. Essentially it's a MM or Corr secondary support set being billed as a primary support, and rather than incorporating a theme across its powers it sort of forms a grab bag of effects from other sets like ice, earth, sonic, poison, rad/elec, etc. You can't just slap crazy magnitudes, durations etc on the set because it pIays with less synergy than something like Sonic for example, which is heavily devoted to one sort of debuff - these are all taken as givens by most players I think. That's one of the reasons making irresistable effects on the debuffs is quite clever, because while we may get a smattering of several different sorts of debuffs, those we do get are more likely to stick (which fits thematically while not smashing the math with the values ascribed to each one). To that end, I still think we should try to get it just right. Should we expect -20% res in Traps/web grenade, since it's also a t1 immob in a support set? Or -13% res in Blaster/Tac Arrow/electrified net arrow, the same secondary effect at blaster scale in virtually the same power/set at blaster schedule? The answer to both those questions is and probably should remain 'No,' but the dissonance this causes with Trick Arrow/entangling arrow is undeniable. The proposed change as it stands actually makes better sense as a different power entirely, despite this not being the place to propose complete redesigns (which I am not). It would fit better as something like Sonic Arrow, a 20% res debuff arrow patterned after Sonic/sonic siphon, which it more closely resembles. If that was done I doubt anyone would bat an eye at this power, except inevitably I'm sure someone would crawl out of the work wailing that they had their t1 single target immob taken away. And the reason it's annoying is because the effort was expended to do this while there is a perfectly good home for this effect elsewhere in the set, in a power that describes this effect exactly. Granted. But as with my exchange with Monos, I find myself being pinned to defend positions I am not interested in defending. I like the changes, but there are a lot. I am focusing my efforts on the ones I see as problematic, and that focus has since narrowed. Please don't take that as me being somehow ungrateful for the full scope of changes presented, or dismissive of the work being done by the team to get to this point, or the struggle of TA/ players who lived with their idiosyncratic bag of tools all this time and are on the cusp of standing in the light of recognition. I like what we have, I think it can be done better without scrapping what we have, I hope those ideas are given consideration. At some point a conversation moves from broad ideas where there is consensus to areas of specific complexity where there is disagreement. I reject the notion that 'we get what we get,' and am hopeful that if enough fans echo the sentiment, and are able to competently make their case, then they will be heard. I will take the temperature in the room though that I am perhaps past the point of beating a dead horse here, if indeed this is a distraction from uncovering the nuts and bolts of the revamp, and let you have the last word should you wish. Ultimately, the devs will decide what version of trick arrow sees play. Thanks for reading

It seems I'm unable to offer feedback without attacking the entire idea or reverting back to the existing model, as you say. That's not what my posts have been in reference to, so if that's how you take it than sure, lambast me. I think there should be room to consider something that incorporates the changes being made while retaining consistency and familiarity, and it seems there is some consensus on this.

no worries, it's gonna take a few back and forths to get there I understand that and appreciate the insights you've presented in the thread and keeping in course. But then why have feedback threads? Especially when I can demonstrate that these changes are actually going to make me work just as hard keeping all these debuffs on an AV since Acid Arrow and Entangling and Disrupting are now a 3 power rotation for maximal effect, whereas before I would never bother with an immobilize against anything higher than a lieutenant. This defeats the goal of power consolidation. I am being saved from having to fire acid arrow in a mob situation only, except I might still want to against +4's (so it's a wash), while entangling now enters play in my single target rotation (inflating it).

Literally I am suggesting keeping everything the test version has, in some more logical format. Now, vs an AV: Acid Arrow, Disrupting Arrow (for maximal -res), EMP arrow (for -regen) and crash, other effects as necessary and heavily resisted while chewing blues On beta, vs an AV: Acid Arrow (for -debuff res), Disrupting arrow (for -res), EMP arrow (for -regen and ally +res), no crash, spam other effects as necessary to take advantage of less debuff resistance, including a magical 20% -res from a net My proposal, vs an AV: Acid Arrow, Disrupting Arrow (for maximal -res and -debuff res), spam other effects as necessary to take advantage of less debuff resistance. Keep EMP stocked for when the AV hits 50% in case it spawns an ambush your group isn't ready for and they need some sleeptime, instead of burning it for the -regen effect, or burn it on the AV to generate the ally +res (depending on if this part stays or goes). No net. it's the same rotation any way you shake it, so what has been consolidated? Where in my actual proposal am I suggesting to keep it as the current, underperforming version, given that it will have the same debuff values as are currently being tested? Thanks for reading

ahhh I forgot about that part, good catch.

Your argument boils down to "sure, it may not make any sense but it's categorically better and so I'm for it." While at the same time admiring the changes as "simple, not sloppy." and promoting synergy in a game where this is already readily abundant. I don't buy much of that reasoning. I never suggested restoring -res to acid arrow would be an improvement. I am suggesting that it is appropriate. We agree that "technically" disruption arrow is a better home for the new -debuff res mechanic that you feel is indispensable, so let's build toward that consensus rather than get bogged down debating the existence of the new mechanic since people aren't going to give up a new toy. Entangling Arrow is a tier 1 immobilize. There should be only one reason I fire this at anything higher than a lieutenant, and that would be to stack immobs on a boss or higher that I for some reason would like to see immobilized. On test however, this does not bear out. I fire it at bosses+ purely because the secondary effect is akin to the primary effect of powers like acid mortar, venom grenade, envenom or (yes) the present-day live version of acid arrow. Imagine a blaster and a corruptor each lining up their bows to fire off their respective nets and trying the mental gymnastics necessary to justify the difference in power effects as they've been presented. "My net electrifies, albeit with a lessened secondary effect!" says the blaster. "My net amplifies our damage on target by 15%, give or take" Says the corruptor, as they each activate their tier 1 secondary immob. Should Blaster/Tac Arrow/Electrified Net Arrow be similarly amended with a (highly) marginal blaster scale -res effect to match? If I'm firing this power at Bosses and up, let's be real and say the -res effect is actually the primary effect and the reason I've chosen the power. And if it's the primary effect, it ought to be in a power that is primarily the tool for that job. That is why it is appropriate for acid arrow to remain primarily a -res tool, since that's literally what it says on the tin - "corrodes the targets armor." Acid Arrow should be patterned after Poison/envenom, plain and simple. It is congruent with all similar power effects. This is not giving the set MORE -res as you assert in point 1, since I've already positioned it within the suggestion of removing the -res from entangling. 1 - 1 + 1 = 1 (not 2). That would make Acid Arrow primarily a single target -res (literally like its power description), and the AoE portion could remain -def. It would be _really_ cool if the single target effect could also incorporate envenoms -regen (take it from EMP to stay on budget) and -heal (it has already been given this), which it seems like the team almost went for but couldn't quite commit to. I would vastly prefer that over the new mechanic, but since people cannot give up their new toy... move the new toy into disrupting, where we agree it fits. That takes us to disrupting. Is 40% AoE -res PLUS the new -debuff res mechanic too much for one power, even a lynchpin like this one? I could see that argument. Yet all these options were presented to us an presumably justified on-budget, and I still think this is the best way to lay out everything presented to us. If the concern is my proposed swaps would make disrupting arrow too lopsided/overloaded, dial the -res on this power back to 30% (the same value as a Longbow Nullifier's sonic grenade, practically the the same power I might point out), and stick 10% of the AoE -res back into acid arrow, tweaking AA into a power which greatly inconveniences the hard target it hits, and slightly inconveniences those within splash range, all while remaining a comfortable and familiar power (and employed in the exact same fashion you are advocating for on test, so soften up a hard target). The argument can't be made that these proposed changes go too far since they're merely shuffling existing effects between powers, something being seen as NBD in light of criticism to the enshrined idea, but which is the main thing I'm concerned with. Here's my proposal, then, with changes from the test build highlighted Entangling arrow: single target immob, -def (go ahead and change blaster/tac arrow/electrified net to a marginal blaster scale -def as well, and differentiate "net" type immobs from others this way) Flash arrow: AoE -tohit (50% irresistable), single target chance for mag 2 stun (the guy hit by the arrow sure feels it, but chance for stun prevents easy stacking w beanbag/KO arrow) Glue arrow: AoE slow, AoE -rech Ice arrow: single target mag 3 hold, -rech, -special Poison Gas arrow: AoE -dam, sleep Acid arrow: single target -20% res, AoE -def, -heal, -regen?, (OR single target -20% res, AoE -10% res, AoE -def, -heal) Disrupting arrow: AoE -40% res, -debuff res (or AoE -30% res, -debuff res) Oil slick arrow: no changes EMP arrow: improve dmg vs robots, improve -end, improve -rec, move -regen to acid arrow? keep ally +res or trade for a better debuff effect? Notice we can stack two effects from almost any source, meaning any type of debuff can be skipped to consider a pool power instead if that's not the direction the player wants to take. We are left with in-set synergy between Entangling/Acid (-def), Acid/Disrupting (-res), Glue/Ice (-rech), soft controls (ST hold, AoE sleep, AoE hold), and incidentals useful vs AV's (-regen, -debuff res) Homecoming - a return to the comfortable/familiar. Even if we bypass the fact that this new -debuff res mechanic does not justify its own existence in a 20 year old game, I would prefer a beloved set merely be tuned into a more useful version of itself rather than something else in pursuit of 'new mechanics' Thanks for reading

I take your points but can’t shake the impressions I have of these changes. Acid arrow is enhancing the debuff effects of other debuff powers. It’s a developers way of saying, “well, these powers are as good as I can justify or am comfortable making them, but the whole set isn’t as good as I want it to be, so one of these powers will do the remaining heavy lifting when used in tandem (a point well illustrated with painstaking statistics comparisons above, bravo) whether I fire it first, last, or in the middle, acid arrow is still a nothing power that is taking up space in rotation for a counterintuitive effect. It seems sloppy. There is a reason acid powers lower -res and players are familiar with that - verisimilitude should be a design goal. Now I didn’t need to loose two arrows for my -res needs, but I do need to soak’em in vinegar to get the most out of flash, EMP and others. the same verisimilitude rationale can be applied to the entangling changes- there are no other web or net based powers which -res. Even -def would be more logical (suggested above), since a constricted target cannot defend itself as well. Ah! Kryptonite-indestructible supermans only weakness! Well, that and nets, apparently. I understand TA players want the buff but I’m not interested in a bunch of shoehorned effects, when a stated goal by the people making the change was consolidating effects. A certain amount of overlap is desirable- an aoe -def (acid), a single target -def (net), an aoe slow (glue), a single target slow (ice), an aoe -res (disrupting), a single target -res (acid) IS possible and incorporates all the performance tweaks being considered here. The -debuff res can be placed into disrupting if it is becoming a sacred cow to the testing archers. My counterpoint for -debuff res’ inclusion made for the sake of argument would be that IF these already stronger debuffs need to be stronger vs AVs and uneven cons (debatable considering analysis above puts TA quite ahead of the pack in this regard with its inclusion) then make a greater portion of debuffs irresistable to avoid brute forcing the math with high magnitudes making even con engagements trivial. The design goals for the revamp were stated - to improve performance and consolidate power effects. The test build succeeds at the former introduces awkward attempts at the latter. My feedback is geared towards the latter aspect, as I feel forced to take net arrow in order to be even close to optimal, while acid arrow has been sacrificed as a tax power for an effect which you rightly point out has never existed before in a 20 year old game and which can arguably be safely omitted omitted. But, IF -debuff res is a less hamfisted way to situationally improve debuff performance versus targets which are notoriously hard to debuff (AVs etc), then I still argue the power effect assignments be reallocated according to the more intuitive framework I’ve advocated for and the -debuff res effect find its home in disrupting arrow. for the sake of illustration, imagine a different ‘new’ mechanic tied more broadly to the theme of arrows in general and which used the built in nature of some arrows being targeted vs others emplaced. Rather than lowering debuff resistance, arrows which target a mob would have a greater portion of their effect apply against it, or have a greater portion of that effect be irresistible vs the single target. The guy you stick is gonna feel it, the flash/splash/spray will hamper the crowd. This would be an alternative approach that could be taken to addressing the problem of hard targets, while ground targeting arrows (glue, disrupting, etc), are relegated solely to crowd pleaser effects. Much of this is already present and would require minimal rework thanks for reading and the responses. As Replacement wrote, we are threading a needle!

Alright, I got some time on the test server to bear out my assumptions this afternoon since it didn't seem fair to spill ink without getting dirty. power descriptions during character creation Entangling Arrow - the power description text misspells the words 'grounds' as groudns. Acid Arrow - "This acid eats through armor, causing damage over time, reducing target's Defense as well as their resistance to debuffs..." Should probably read "the target's Defense" EMP Arrow - "Allies in range of the pulse will also their resistances to all damage except toxic" should be reworked, I know what it's trying to say, that allies will have improved resistance, but it doesn't quite get there Next I loaded up a version of my TA/archery defender, slotting him out etc. I did not get into incarnates as I thought a hyper build was already enough of a skew without opening up that can of worms. I did Grandville paper missions solo. One vs. Arachnos in a bank, and an office mission against Malta, +0/x4. Build was a bit overtuned so I didn't have much trouble, but Arachnos were harder since my builds defense and resistance are lopsided to S/L and that served me well against Malta, whereas Arachnos was throwing out more of a variety with Mistresses, Mu, toxic, energy beams, etc. Right off the bat, some visual things- Since Entangling arrow now debuffs resistance, it puts little red shields on the target. Poison Gas arrow similarly creates little red swirls on your target like Assault, presumably from a 'negative value' damage buff. You guessed it, Flash arrow causes targets to have the beige crosshairs we associate with tactics orbit around their heads as well. These aren't major things, but they're noticeable. Gameplay feel: Compared to my rotation on Everlasting, I felt acid arrow more or less dropping out of use, which makes me a bit sad. The set overall does feel beefier, but without a team to debuff things for it was hard to fully stress test it as I can run harder content but to a point. Several people have piped up about their intrigue for Acid Arrows "debuffs debuff resistance" effect, but in practice the use for this power is not clear except to lead with it and hope that everything else is doing better for it. In practice, I barely noticed the times I forgot to, which makes me strongly consider Acid Arrow skippable under the current test build. EMP arrow not having a crash is great, and the boosted values across the board are nice. It felt like I got a damage buff, because in a backwards way I did by applying more -res. Here are my thoughts on the powers as they stand @Captain Powerhouse Entangling Arrow - I do not like this change. Remove the single target -res and put back the -rech (tweak values, let it be the baby brother -rech solution to ice arrow or glue arrow). CP mentions balance including pvp balance is a concern but this power seems to exist solely for the pvp crowd as it stands, so I don't understand this choice. We could easily skip this unless we desire an immobilize, now it's a must have, which defeats the design goal of consolidating power effects and furthermore has me tossing out my "weaken net" on anything higher than an LT, inflating my rotation. Flash Arrow - good job, -tohit values actually seem to matter a bit and are probably worth enhancing somewhat, but to a level 1 defender the choice of this vs. entangling is not gamblers vs. sting or jab vs punch, it's swipe vs. follow up. Glue arrow - good job, but giving it a ton of -rech from entangling and then giving entangling a new effect that we still want doesn't save us from having to make choices, we still need them all, so this will probably still end up getting skipped half of the time or more Ice Arrow - good job, I like that it actually does something other than be a proc beast vs. something it can't hold now. Fine with the -rech or -special being tweaked, powerset has plenty to go around. It's still the biggest damage dealer on my rotation with 5 procs loaded, but I understand procs are a separate conversation. Poison Gas arrow - good job, maybe make it a hold a la Poison (in which case make EMP arrow a stun, hold vs. robots, like the tac arrow version) "this isn't a control set" I hear, we're talking about tweaking the set, it's a good tweak with precedent in a similar set (poison), and furthermore this is a debuff set with a secret ally buff now as well, so that line of reasoning is taking on water fast. Tweak the uptime of the hold if need be to be compareable with the hold uptime EMP currently offers, I'm talking about shifting things around, y'know? Either way I'm fine with it. Acid Arrow - I don't like this change. Give it the single target -res (instead of entangling arrow), or 50/50 split single target -res (10%) and aoe -res (10%) so that the initial target gets both (-20%), and cut disrupting back to 30% (aoe 40% total). Move EMP's regen debuff into this power (tweak the duration for Acid Arrow's higher uptime). Lose the -debuff resistance effect and put into disrupting arrow instead, if at all. Lose the heal resistance, it does nothing, unless you like the 50% version as a pvp spike mechanic, in which case let's be clear that's why it's being included. This power needs more work, it's not doing what its power description describes and it's ingame effect is counterintuitive and entirely opaque - players do not see debuff values, they see the outcome of their debuff. How would I know if my larger numbers or the enemy bars slower/faster crawl were an effect of my debuff, or of my debuff which debuffs debuff resistance that I later applied a debuff to? What is the point of consolidating powers if I have to fire this one first to get the full effect out of my subsequent debuff? It's irksome to have the -res moved into disrupting to save me from firing off a power and then create a power that I'm obliged to fire off to get a better effect from my debuffs. Would make more sense to replace entirely with power boost in that case. Trying to be fair, but that's how I see it. Disrupting Arrow - lose the -end, focus any & all -end efforts on EMP arrow. Add back the -debuff resistance axed from the new acid arrow here if you are intent on this mechanic. This power should either be -40% res, or -30% like the longbow grenades and work 10% of that aoe -res back into the acid arrow splash. I'd also note that loading almost all the AoE -res into this, an emplaced power, makes it pretty useless in pvp and sensible for why their should be a single target or targeted AoE source of -res. Acid Arrow is the place for this effect IMO, not entangling. Oil Slick Arrow - no news is good news, still lovely, I checked and added pet damage to the combat window to make sure it was still proccing, happy to report that's the case. EMP arrow - love it without the crash! And yet... move the -regen to acid arrow (and tweak the duration), if you make poison gas arrow a hold, make this a stun with hold vs. robots like the tac arrow version so that the holds can't be stacked since (wait for it...) this isn't a control set. Improve its sapping ability and damage vs robots, both are a bit laughable even on the test version. Remove the ally +res, it makes no sense. If allies need to be made more durable, hit the mob with a beefed up poison gas arrow, that's the Trick Arrow way (happy to report it's possible now, too!) Thanks for the attention to this set, I'm not trying to be ungrateful, but some "design" choices were made here and a fan-server should rightly be open to fan criticism/feedback I think. Hopeful for the version we might see. Thanks for reading

Thanks, there is a subtlety to discussing these tweaks that is sometimes lost in forum conversation. The more I think about it, the more I like acid arrow getting the single target -res. Arrows are unidirectional, so even if they have a payload, they are usually designed to stick into something (with a few exceptions: explosive arrow and emp arrow airburst near/above the target, and glue/poison gas are fired into the ground to release their payload, etc). Whereas mortars and grenades shower an area. So having acid mortar and venom grenade apply their -20% resistance broadly in an AoE while acid arrow applies its specifically to a target makes sense, with some sort of lessened splash effect to accompany the graphic of acid spraying all over (the -def, etc). But the more I think about it, the more I think the -debuff resistance should be moved from acid arrow to disrupting arrow. I don't expect there will be much agreement here, but if 'sonic waves' or whatever can disrupt a target's molecular structure enough to weaken its ability to withstand damage (-res), I think it's just as believable that it can disrupt the target to make it more susceptible to debuffs and the like (moreso than acid anyway!). As long as we're moving the -debuff res to disrupting then I'd suggest moving the -end and recovery effects to EMP arrow, and tuning up this aspect of it. Have it be like a true sapper arrow, combining aspects of rad emission's EM pulse and Elec's sapping qualities, rather than providing some kind of targeted aoe buff. Where does this leave entangling and glue arrow? I don't know, but obviously I think they ought to stay in their wheelhouse, offering a single target immob/-rech, and an aoe slow/-rech, with one or the other giving you a tool for single targets/groups, corruptors/mm's being forced into either the single target or dual role while defenders have the option of either with their primary pick, and players taking both having options to stack an effect with an opportunity cost for their other powers.

1) Yes, but I don't want to fire acid at a guy to lower his debuff resistance. This is like an inverse power boost that only applies to the targets being hit. If this is the cool effect the set needs or wants, then fine, put it on acid arrow, but don't change how acid arrow works relative to similar powers. 2) Yes, that is a problem. Introducing new effects to powers where it makes no sense does not make this problem go away, as now we are obliged to pick up entangling where we might have skipped it before. I understand there's a budget. I'm not suggesting the budget be broken, but I am suggesting the powers do what they ought to. I would prefer that acid arrow keeps its -res in addition to this new effect, and that disrupting arrow keeps its existing (or slightly higher) -res in addition to its new effect, and that entangling arrow remain a -rech immobilize, and that the values of these debuffs merely be adjusted to stay on budget in a way that lets the whole set perform more towards the goal. An alternative compromise that still accomplishes your desire to have a mass -res in one power and a single target -res for hard targets would be to move the aoe -res into disruption as has been done, and have Acid Arrow apply its -res only to the initial target and not the AoE, while keeping the -debuff res for the AoE portion.

I think it is relevant. We are not traps. We do not drop effects at our feet to hamper foes or aid allies. We are trick arrows, we fire things over there exclusively to make problems for the enemy. If the arrow is affecting us, we are doing our job wrong. It's why we don't have the healing arrow (and why that is a CoH meme). So what makes this power a bit weird now is that it does all that while also assisting our friends. It's already sort of accepted that our fire doesn't burn our friends since there is no friendly fire in this game (thankfully), but it's a bit weird to have an arrow that both holds our enemies and shields our friends, don't you think? Like either the power description ought to address this nonintuitive inconsistency, or the designers shoehorning this effect ought to rethink their rethink. Each of Trick Arrow's powers are more or less duplicating a power from another set, in the form of an arrow. Disruption arrow should match thematically with sonic. Acid and Poison gas arrows more or less retroactively fits with poison. Others, like oil slick, are more unique. Entangling and Glue arrow ought to be similar to other web powers. Here's what I expect when I fire an EMP arrow: It's the exact same t9 as rad emission, but targeted AoE instead of PbAoE (The arrow goes over 'THERE' while the radiations comes from 'ME'). It should be useable mainly in one of two ways, to contribute to cutting an AV/GM's regen (and hopefully better than envenomed dagger temps for this), or it should let me hit the reset button on a mistake my group made biting off more than it can chew by shutting down the second front or the whole pack while getting started stacking holds on bosses/EB's, shifting the fight back in my group's favour. Therefore, changes to EMP ought to focus around getting the -regen just right such that it's useful for this purpose (they did this, cool) and being useful enough to accomplish the control aspect (thanks for removing the crash, for real). Adding the resistance buff to allies is a bit weird and quite rightly pointed out, should radiation emission expect the same for EM Pulse? No? Is this being done because the middle powers of trick arrow are underperforming? I suspect the answer that is yes, so let's focus on those ones. What the rework is doing is creating a framework where powers are ALSO other powers. Entangling arrow is also a 2/3's sonic siphon, better not skip that. EMP arrow is rad emission's EM Pulse PLUS a sort of lite-version of increase density from kinetics, better not skip that. It would be more thematic to add in more -damage debuff to EMP arrow if the goal is to have things hit by the arrow deal less damage to your team - but this is already what poison gas arrow does, so if the set as a whole needs more -damage debuff than concentrate that in the power that already does that so people can take it and get that benefit without having to take it across two powers and pickup the entire set for all the hidden benefits. Thanks for skimming.

Daaamn what? I just don't understand the changes to acid and entangling. Trick arrow should get some love, and it's nice to see - but this makes no sense to me. Applying acid to a target makes them more likely to be slowed by your glue? and blinded by your flash? This is not what acid arrow should be doing. Acid burns things and corrodes. Keep the -res, it makes more sense here than entangling arrow of all things. This is an iffy change, if magical debuff effects need to be thrown in, put them on disruption arrow - at least that one is using weird vibrations to cause some sort of change to the target's resist capacity. 100%, except there is already a power that does this with no need to change it - acid arrow, and it has a radius as well.

You're right, which is why I preface my entangling arrow proposal with IF it needs some love. They could keep the -rech instead to make it equivalent to web grenade from Traps, though. Gale gets some minor damage in a support t1 and has better mitigation besides.

I'm excited about these changes, especially as it means the higher debuff values might provide a bit more incentive for say a /trick arrow corruptor. I'm assuming these changes already have some consensus among the Homecoming Team, so I'd propose reshuffling a bit given -PvE enemies very rarely heal each other -'acid' type powers (see acid mortar, venom grenade, etc) are commonly associated with -res effects -single target immobs have most often been enhanced with a DoT, rather than some other effect (eg web grenade-> 'toxic' web grenade, entangling arrow -> electrified net arrow) to that end -I think acid arrow should keep it's -res and treat the heal res as purely a buff, rather than a rework -move over whatever -res is being considered on entangling arrow to disruptive arrow, since that's its thing -if entangling arrow needs some love, give it an electrified DoT. People who want to take it over flash arrow do so because they value having an immob, but throwing -res on there makes it a must have for the debuff crowd as well who would have been the most likely to skip it (and ironically will probably now skip acid arrow given it's limited utility other than as a proc attack and holder for -res procs, the thing it will no longer natively offer) Thanks for reading