DrInfernus
-
Posts
109 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Articles
Patch Notes
Posts posted by DrInfernus
-
-
33 minutes ago, Naraka said:
Does War Mace, Archery, Fire Blast or Martial Arts have Rage or an equivalent damage buff?
No, but you’re missing the point. Super Strength IS the power, just like Fire Blast IS the power or Martial Arts IS the power. You’re literally supposed to be able to hit harder than everyone else all the time, otherwise it’d just be strength, not super strength.
So why shouldn’t you be able to use the set’s power all of the time? Why should we be happy with 90%? Could understand if you just lost the buff for 10% of the time, but make you literally unable to bruise a peach for 10% of the time? When you’re meant to have super strength? Come on…
-
2 hours ago, Vanden said:
It's incredible how people can fixate on the negative. With Rage you have Build Up 90% of the time. It's literally Build Up! There's nothing more Super Strength than having a massive damage buff all the time. If that means a trivial amount of time spent doing no damage for game balance reasons, that's something I'm absolutely fine with.
So would you call it a positive of War Mace if you could only use it 90% of the time? Or if an archer couldn’t use archery for 10% of the time, would that be a positive for the set? An empath who could heal 90% of the time… ‘positive’?
A damage buff is literally the entirety of super strength. That’s what the ‘super’ part is. That’s the ability. Fire blasts are available to fire blasters 100% of the time. Martial Arts are available to martial artists 100% of the time. Archery is available to archers 100% of the time. Why the hell should super strength being available to super strength characters 90% of the time be seen as anything other than a negative?
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Snarky said:
4 of those SS 50s are mine. You can deduct mine out I will delete them if it gets the Devs to change SS>
Mine too. Played to 50, game got quicker with incarnates and everyone rolling out their IO builds, and I couldn’t stand my lvl 50 SS tank anymore.
But this is the problem, though, isn’t it? People who currently have what they want dismissing those who don’t with a ‘pull the ladder up Jack and stuff the rest’ attitude.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Snarky said:
This thread. Maddening. The fact that the Dev Team had a mostly complete fix to this (heavily edited adjectives here) problem and killed the idea due to nerd rage is your clue. Any hope we had for a fix to an iconic Super Hero powerset died that day. Get out a coffin, dig a deep hole, drop it in. Cover. Walk away.
It’s the entrenchment I find frustrating. Take my favourite powerset in the game and if some players were saying ‘this is unplayable for us’ and I’d be more than happy to make concessions to make it more inclusive. Sadly, that’s not the case with Rage and it’s quite sad.
-
3
-
-
7 hours ago, America's Angel said:
Shows people make SS tanks, not that they play them. 🤷🏼♂️
I’m not expecting anything to change. I’m not demanding. I don’t even want Rage completely changed to meet my hopes. I’d just absolutely love to be given something though to open up a powerset to me that is currently very much closed because of one mechanic. I don’t think that’s even remotely unreasonable.
I’m just giving my honest opinion on the question that was asked, and I’m far from a lone voice on this thread.
-
1
-
2
-
-
4 minutes ago, siolfir said:
You've said this a couple of times, but history doesn't back you up on it. You can stack Rage with SOs and Hasten and prior to ED - before I started, but when the powerset was designed - could 6-slot recharge and have it up permanently then. If they really wanted it to not stack, they could have set it to not do so as they did with many other powers. So as much as you want to blame IOs (and as many things as you can blame them for) you're totally off base here.
I'll give you Foot Stomp - it should have a 10' radius for its damage and recharge - but Knockout Blow is an underperforming power based on their own design formulas and using it as an example of why SS isn't nerfed because of Rage is disingenuous at best. It has the damage and endurance cost of a 20 second recharge power, but recharges in 25 seconds for no reason beyond "we felt like it." The only thing it has going for it is DPA, but because the recharge is longer than it should be you can't use it as often to boost the rest of the set. Speaking of DPA, that "pathetic" Haymaker would be the second or third best DPA in most of the other melee sets - it's tied with Pulverize in War Mace, both of which are just above Shockwave in Claws for Brutes and Tankers (which is ahead of the Scrapper version in damage scale/second by a decent amount); it at least follows the formula. Since they actually follow the formulas, the DPA for the rest of the set is on the low end because it's saddled with longish animations to look like you're hitting hard with recharges that mean you're not actually hitting hard.
Of course, for Tankers Foot Stomp - while having the same 15' radius - doesn't get the benefit of the increased AoE sizes that Tankers now get and because of that actually ends up accidentally following the design formulas, so I guess it's only Brutes - who get the least benefit from persistent +damage bonuses - who get the benefit from it being larger than it should be. So one power on one of the ATs is better than it should be, one power on both ATs is worse, and people will somehow point to both and say, "See! You have those!"
If I’m off base with that then fair enough, but it doesn’t really change my opinion on it. If we just left things with the flaws they had from design, we’d have a very different game today.
And in my opinion - and that’s all it is - double stacked rage is a flaw if clinging onto it means clinging onto the crash which many players feel renders a set unplayable. There needs to be some middle ground found somewhere.
-
1
-
1
-
-
44 minutes ago, Haijinx said:
Keep in mind that Rage is UP ~92% of the time, so that is actually a HUGE -damage cost ~8% of the time. This is what I meant about detachment. You state the downside without also acknowledging the very high uptime.
The Downsides are significant, yes. There is also the Defense cost, that hurts defense sets, particularly on Brutes. Potentially a survival issue on them. But for a limited time. There is an Endurance cost also. But this is mitigated by the fact that you probably have enough recovery to handle this, especially since you have enforced rest breaks.
You seem to be okay with a cost to Rage, but not okay with the current cost of Rage. Where do you stand on Double Rage? It seems like Capt PHs solution would have been good for you. Its unfortunate that one got killed by the Double Ragers.
Another point of Detachment is that I am not talking about you. There have been Rage arguments in COH for YEARS going back to before I even owned a cell phone. So I am sort of simplifying impressions I have gotten form dozens of flamefests. Not this one, nor this set of posters per se.
I personally think double rage is a bit of an abuse of the IO system. We were never supposed to have double rage.
My solution would be to make rage unstackable and remove the -damage from the crash. Think there probably should be some kind of crash. Or make it unstackable on Tanks without crash but leave it as it is on Brutes. That way there is a path for both sides of the debate.
I get that rage is up 92% of the time, but excessive strength is the whole point of the set, so I don’t understand why we can’t expect it to be up 100% of the time. We don’t tell War Mace they can only use their mace 92% of the time, or fire blasters they can only use fire 92% of the time.
So you’re right in that I don’t acknowledge the upside, but that’s because I don’t personally see Rage as having an upside for 92% of the time, I see it as doing what it should do for only 92% of the time, while other sets get 100% uptime.
Either way, it’s nice to have a rational debate about it, and I thank you for that.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Haijinx said:
SS flame threads seem to me to be these amazing contests of filtered arguments.
Like a critical mass of (hopefully unintentional) disingenuouity.
You have the people who cant seem to see past the crash. The crash that is all that matters. They can't seem to see past the crash. They don't care that removing the crash would make give SS the highest sustained, stackable build up effect in the game with no downside.
You have the people who say that Getting Mad, then getting tired ruins their Kryptonian or whatever inspired concept. Like somehow this is the only power in the game that doesn't follow their pet comic book lore exactly. Its a game. They had to call it something. They wanted SS to have a long duration build up instead of a bursty one. This is what they came up with. They were not trying to come up with a power or even Powerset to describe all Super Strong characters in Comic Books.
You have the people who say that SS needs Rage "just to be as good as" other sets, when this is only true for HALF the set. Their argument is fine if you are looking at the pathetic Jab, Punch, and Haymaker. Maybe include the ridiculous throwing power whatever. But they conveniently ignore a very effective Knockout Blow and the stellar Foot Stomp, neither of which seem to be "balanced around" rage at all. With the Irony being that those are the powers you get closer to actually having Rage.
Then you have the die hard double ragers. Who will eventually show up. If they haven't already. They tend to make 3 arguments. That even with Double Rage SS is underpowered, That the crash kills all fun, BUT when faced with actually seeing something happen to Double Rage will sabotage any compromises on the power at all.
Thus nothing will ever change. How could it? Many of the people most interested in the changes refuse to look at the Power with any sort of academic detachment.
What about those of us saying:
We are happy for there to BE a cost for Rage. You could even argue that ‘the pathetic jab, punch, and haymaker’ are already part of that cost. But the HUGE -damage cost is too high.
Where do we fall on the “filtered disingenuouity” scale?
Like I’ve said before, there are no solutions on Rage, just surrenders. Apparently, we’ve surrendered to the people demanding it stays the same. That’s fine. It’s not my decision. Doesn’t make it a solution though, and neither is just hoping people stop moaning about it.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Lazarillo said:
The whole "perma" thing for me comes from a different direction. Having a non-perma buff means, effectively, that I don't need the buff. A power that won't be on all the time is one that I might as well not take, because I'll have to be able to approach any content in the game without it anyway.
Indeed. If Rage isn’t perma then you don’t have a super strength character. It’s literally set-defining.
I mean, if we are honest it’s not a great set anyway. Knockout blow and footstomp are good, but the rest are very meh. Rage is the reason to play super strength, and then you’re punished for using it 🤷🏼♂️
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Hew said:
This thread is an example of why it will likely never be changed: Two sides, refusing to meet in the middle. When the opportunity to meet in the middle was coded, tested, and presented, the vitriol this type of thread presents sunk that opportunity faster than the Titanic.
EVERYONE in this thread that is complaining will _have to give up something_ if any change is to be had.0
If you yourself find you are posting here about the travails of SS, ask yourself, how do you meet the other side in the middle? What will you give up? What will you accept? If you can't do this, then there is little to no point in you posting.
Don’t think that’s fair at all tbh. How can we give something up when many of us are saying SS is unusable to us in its current form?
From my perspective, at the moment there is nothing about SS to give up because I’m not using it specifically because of Rage. So what position would you like me to take?
-
1
-
1
-
-
If stacking Rage is the problem, then why not just make it unstackable like hasten is? I mean, it was never supposed to be stackable. IOs made that happen.
I know a lot of people kicked off about that but there’s plenty of us who have been left with a pretty much unplayable powerset for us because others want a bit more damage. That’s not a solution, it’s a surrender.
You could even make it so Rage is stackable with crash on Brutes yet unstackable and crash less on tanks. That way those who need the damage fix are served, and those who can’t abide the crash are served. Everyone has an option, everyone has a solution.
Feels like there’s so much middle ground to explore yet we are stuck in an ‘all or nothing’ mentality.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Arnabas said:
I don't know... I agree with the first part here, but I don't think it's theme-destroying. I mean, the idea is to replicate Hulk-like characters who will Rage, do bonus damage, and then calm down and recuperate after everything has been smashed. Or like a berserker who kills everything in sight then passes out exhausted. So I don't see it as theme-destroying, but theme-enforcing (a theme that many may not want to play).
It's kind of interesting to me, though. Rage (along with certain other powers in other powersets, some of which have been drastically changed since inception) was built as a concept power suitable for people who like a little RP in their MMORPG. My first character was an Inv/ SS tanker who had Rage, but almost never used it. She only activated it when it seemed thematically appropriate, such as when she was injured and close to being overwhelmed, or facing a major villain. I still tend to play her that way much of the time.
Over the years, we moved away from things that added "flavour" to the game in an effort to pursue pure utility. I personally like to have some concept powers, but it seems few others feel the same.
I think the theme one is definitely quite subjective, although I’d argue that the Hulk style theme has been completely catered for by the Brute AT and the fury. That’s literally a case of the madder you get, the harder you hit, and once you calm down you return to normal. So that theme is definitely catered for.
But then there’s the Superman style theme, where they just have super strength. And yet, with Rage how it is now, you make a super strength character and you somehow end somehow end up with (as far as my memory serves) the only powerset in the whole game which leaves you unable to do any damage at all for a spell, i.e. no strength at all.
Definitely think super strength should come with a cost. You shouldn’t get it for nothing. Just don’t think the damage crash is remotely reasonable.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, MTeague said:
Definitely times i wonder if I'm even playing the same game as other people.
I pop Rage on cooldown on my Invuln/SS and have never had a problem with the crashes.
I don't find myself running out of end. I don't find myself freaked when my damage bonuses numbers drop to deep negatives for a very short window of time.
I haven't suddenly felt extremely squishy on him when it fades.
I'm also not doing non-stop farming. Perhaps that matters? I tend to do just regular story arcs at like +2/x5 on him.
The farming suggestion isn’t right, as my SS tank has literally never done it.
I never run out of end and I never feel squishy on rage crash, and the damage crash doesn’t freak me out. It does annoy me though. A lot. Sufficiently to make me just not want to play my SS tank. Wind up a knockout blow, connect, and zero damage - like a wet fart.
It completely undermines the theme.
-
1
-
2
-
-
My own opinion is that Rage makes super strength unplayable in its current form.
If you don’t use it, there’s nothing special or ‘super’ about super strength at all. If you do use it, the crash means you don’t even have strength for a while, never mind super strength. It’s literally theme-destroying.
What’s the answer? Personally I’d say remove the +tohit and remove the crash. Maybe add a hasten-style mini-end crash if you must. A simple, yet set-defining large damage buff. I mean, why are we over-complicating this?
-
2
-
-
Love any archer, but my favourite matched build has to be Elec/Elec/Elec Sentinel.
Can hover blast, can take alpha, can sap, can AoE, can survive just avoid anything. It’s a delight.
-
Absolutely no reason why it’s not viable. I had a similar idea with my Fire/Pain corruptor: Good active blast set for when things are going well, valuable team resource for when things aren’t.
And don’t let anyone tell you that heals are no longer needed either. They are. They’re not as important as they used to be, but I find I’m healing at least as often as I’m blasting. And if you find yourself on a great team that needs no heals, that’s great too. Just blast 💥 😎🙂
-
1
-
2
-
-
I do wonder how much ego is involved in the whole ‘heals aren’t needed anymore’ rhetoric. Over the last couple nights I have specifically played my healer exclusively and find she’s been needed on teams more often than not, including high level content.
To me, it honestly just feels like declaring healers as obsolete is just another way to show off their superbuild. Admittedly, some people on some ATs have incredibly survivable builds. I’m one of them. But there’s always someone somewhere on the team who needs some help to get out of trouble. We should value and appreciate our empaths more.
-
1
-
-
Empathy certainly isn’t dead, no. Empaths, well, heals in general, are certain not as important as they used to before IOs, but they are far from obsolete. Back then they played a vital part, where as now they are more like lifeboats: You hope you’re not going to need them, but you’re pleased to see them there.
Last night I did two task forces with one of my healers (fire/pain corruptor - not empathy but close enough) and had two very different experiences. On the first I was actually told off by a tank for healing him because he ‘didn’t need it’. On the second there was a lot of heeling needed and a lot of gratitude sent my way.
One thing I do love about playing my empaths or pain doms is they put you in a position to influence the outcome, and last night was the perfect microcosm of that. You might not always be needed, but you’re able to make a massive difference when you are.
-
I’d suggest Ice/Plant/ice. Three holds, two doing high damage, so bosses are no problem at all. Lots of AoE control, ranged nuke, and a tonne of survivability in the epic power pool. It’s a powerhouse of a solo blaster (and great in teams too).
-
1
-
-
Good question! For me it’s a bit of a chicken/egg situation. Dr Infernus, my fire/NRG/fire blaster is my favourite. He’s veteran level 82 without ever setting foot in a farm. Poor my many people’s standards but remarkable by mine.
However, whether I’ve played him so much because he’s my favourite or he’s my favourite because I’ve played him so much... well that’s anyone’s guess!
I do love fire blast. It’s fast, it’s frantic, it does great damage, the animations are satisfying, and the AoE is great. Dr Infernus has a great build too. And NRG manipulation is highly versatile I find. So there’s all that. That said, I have about half a dozen fire blast characters with a great build and don’t love them like I do the Doc.
I do think that practice with a character makes perfect, and that makes you enjoy it much more as a player. I’m faster with Doc than I am any other character I have. I need no time to respond to a situation in-game and know exactly how to get the best out of him.
But of course, if a character is not great to play in the first place you’re not going to get to the well-practice stage with them, are you?
So, just to summarise... I have absolutely no idea.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Haijinx said:
You can only use so many attacks though. Blasters tend to have too many available. That's where scrappers builds tend to be designed around.
If you have scrapper level survival, you are going to end up with Scrapper level damage, adjusted for range. Not that Range matters a lot as far as doing damage usually. Some opportunity based stuff.
But I don't think Sentinels are there yet, are they?
This is just my rough feel on where you could take it though. I don't see Capt PH saying Sents can do equal damage to a Ranged (primary attacks) only Blaster both ST and AOE.
But looking at the power balance, it’s all off.
IF we accept the idea that Sentinels were designed (badly) to be a damage dealing AT or that they should be, I don’t understand the obsession with penalising them so much.
Blaster - Bigger base damage, range, extra damage in secondary, build up and... survivability penalty
Scrapper - Bigger base damage, extra damage from crits, build up, strong survivability and... range penalty
Sentinel - strong survivability and... damage penalty, range penalty, AoE penalty, no build up
So all I’m really asking is what does a Sentinel have that justifies more penalties that strengths?
-
9 minutes ago, Haijinx said:
I don't think Sentinels do enough damage now, I agree with that.
May comment was with just making Blasters and Sents the same except for secondaries. Same Blast Sets, Same AOE target caps and so forth.
I mean. You could do that. But you would probably need to nerf the Sent's secondaries down some.
Why though?
I mean Sentinels would be trading something compared to blasters (extra damage, melee attacks) for the buff to their primaries.
I genuinely don’t know what people think that Sentinels have that is SO unbelievably amazing that they have to have massive penalties for anything good. Scrappers get top level damage AND survivability and no one thinks their secondary should be nerfed. Why Sentinels? What am I missing?
-
5 minutes ago, underfyre said:
How about we aim more for a
"Want ranged damage with the option to do a little more at a higher risk? Blaster"
"Want similar ranged damage at little risk? Sentinel"
Yeah, think that’s the sweet spot personally.
-
2 hours ago, drbuzzard said:
Honestly, even if they come up closer in damage numbers, the lower AOE target numbers give blasters an edge.
In my exploration of various other COH servers, I happened upon one (which is no longer running) which had sentinels which had scrapper secondaries (duplicate numbers) and blaster primaries. They just had no inherent. It actually didn't really work badly at all, and was not over the top. Mind you, I like most of the sentinel secondary versions here, but just saying that some more damage wouldn't break everything.
Agree with this. As has been mentioned elsewhere on the thread, a blaster will always have a damage edge over Sentinels because of the secondary.
Absolutely nothing wrong with making Blaster and Sentinel primary damage the same and then giving the player the choice:
Want more damage? Blaster
Want more survivability? Sentinel
Rebuilding rage.
in Suggestions & Feedback
Posted
I’d say a trade off was how pretty atrocious punch, jab, and haymaker are. Or the long animation in Hurl. Or the -defence in the Rage crash. No one is saying there shouldn’t be a trade off. Just there are plenty of trade-offs already without inflicting a punishment that basically renders you weaker than a chocolate fireguard for 10% of the time.