macskull

Biggest issue I see off the bat with this one is it removes variance between the defense-based sets and especially the hybrid res/def sets like Willpower, Bio, and Ice. It'd require quite a bit of work to tweak those sets (and every enemy and player attack in the game) which seems like a bit much for a solution to a non-issue.

I used the Wayback archive to find the most recent pre-shutdown snapshot of the old forums and dug through until I found a post from myself.

This is the correct answer and in pretty much any non-DoT power a -res proc will not affect the power or other procs regardless of where they're slotted. Burn is a special case because that power is, let's just say... weird and broken.

There is that, but I am not nearly as active in general as I was back then.

Yikers, I just checked my post count on the old boards and I was at about 10.5k over a five-year span. So I guess at least I'm posting 25% as often now...

If I'm unlocking patron pools on a character my only goal is to get the arc done as quickly as possible, so I choose Black Scorpion. Auto-complete the single defeat-all mission and as long as you know what to look for in that other weird random Malta boss mission you can knock the entire thing out in like 15-20 minutes.

I dunno about other people but I like Vengeance for the damage bonus and mez resistance/protection. The defense is cool too, but I don't usually need more of it. Honestly, even if this were still "live CoH" it wouldn't happen. ED/GDN took a pretty big chunk off the playerbase back in issue 4-5 and it never recovered. A further sweeping global nerf to character survivability would do the same and it's not like the game had a particularly large playerbase near the end. I'm with you on the rest of your post though. Also, more toward the discussion that's been going on the last couple pages, specifically re: 45% defense being a "problem" on squishies... Squishies have a much smaller HP pool and generally lack any meaningful DDR. The chief issue here is how the argument of defense being overpowered compared to resistance is being presented solely on the basis of math - while math is always a good thing to bring into a discussion it does not always represent reality. For example, I can state that under certain conditions a Ninja/Storm MM does over two and a half times more DPS than any other build in the game and use math to prove it. Believe it or not, this example is actually true exactly as I've described it - but you're not seeing teams full of Ninja/Storm MMs because the math does not reflect actual gameplay conditions.

Your argument keeps coming back to a variation of this, which is based off spreadsheet math rather than the reality of how the game is played. It's been pointed out to you multiple times that dramatically reducing defense hard caps 1) kneecaps defense-based builds, 2) reduces build variety, 3) eliminates the usefulness of many support powersets, and 4) doesn't actually solve even the perceived problem because tohit debuffs still exist. For a great case study in what happens when you impose harsh limits on character survivability and the ability of support characters to actually provide support, take a look at this game's Issue 13 PvP changes.

So I'm not 100% in agreement with this - it was definitely not intended to be easy (see: Jack Emmert's "1 hero = 3 even-con minions") but it's pretty clear the initial developers had no idea what they were doing re: game balance and this game ended up being a Bob Ross-esque happy accident. When either one of them makes you functionally immortal as long as you're not standing there letting mobs bonk you on the head, the difference between the two is more or less irrelevant.

This would be the case in a vacuum, but in an actual gameplay scenario both Scrappers are going to be actively trying to defeat the enemies they're surrounded by and they only need to live long enough to stop the incoming damage. In other words, the Scrapper's primary powerset is going to be contributing to their survivability. To borrow the skydiving analogy: the resistance-based Scrapper's going to deploy the parachute immediately after jumping and fall at a relatively predictable rate. The defense-based Scrapper does the same, except the parachute might not deploy right away and even if it does there's the possibility it fails after an indeterminate amount of time.

Been saying for a long time now: the right answer here is to offer optional higher-difficulty content (and rewards commensurate with the degree of difficulty). The ASF difficulty levels are a huge step in the right direction. The baseline game being pretty damn easy is one of its main selling points, IMO.

Your defense overhaul was a bad idea when you first suggested it, and it's a bad idea now. It's also worth pointing out any character at its defense cap with no resistance has the potential to get insta-deleted by a few lucky hits, which will never happen to a character at its resistance cap.

I think your best bet is to use software like Karabiner to remap the key to a standard key at an OS level.

I'm not really sure why they were ever removed. Some tiers of the Cardiac and Resilient alphas used to boost intangibility duration but it looks like those have been replaced with absorb instead.

Apparently the reward merit system is some form of charity, at least that's how I'm understanding it.

The system you are describing in your post already exists - for the most part just playing the game will get you enough inf to kit your character out with SOs or generic IOs. Both of those are perfectly adequate for, in your own words, "capable of dealing with even-level enemies." The game's balanced around generic enhancements and the IO system is entirely optional.

Hyperbole much? The game's combat is not balanced around the existence of IOs. This was reiterated multiple times back on live and the current devs have stated the same on several occasions. I'm curious what price point you think that needs to be, considering a character needs exactly zero IOs for the game to function as intended. The most difficult thing about the new Crey is remembering they've changed so you aren't surprised by some of the new powers. I haven't found them to be any more difficult than they were before but I'm also not trying to solo them on +4x8 or something.

Same here, but I know not everyone thinks that way or they'd just be speedrunning every TF. The wealth of +4x8 TF runs I see in LFG tells me plenty of people are doing them for XP and drops.

Anecdotal here as well but none of the speedrunners I know will touch the shard TFs unless they're the WST and sometimes even that isn't worth it if you're looking at it from a reward merit standpoint. The speedrunners definitely aren't running it when it's not the WST and on the weeks when it is they're still going to be far outnumbered by the rest of the teams running it.

No, but that's also why median time is used instead of mean/average time. I suppose it all depends on the time range they're using to determine what the median time is though. Apex and Tin Mage are both worth 40 merits which would imply a median completion time of around two hours each and you know as well as I do that isn't even close to how long those actually take. I'd bet all my inf those two TFs will see their rewards dramatically lowered and would be pretty surprised if the adjusted value is anything over 20.

I mean, regardless of what level you're at you're going to get more non-merit rewards during the run if you're fighting through each map than you would if you're stealthing to the objective on every mission.

Only cases I can think of of the "gotta go fast" crowd cratering rewards for content is KHTF and Eden (KHTF gave 7 merits when I13 launched and Eden gave only two) but those numbers were adjusted back upward around I14. There was one Kheldian-specific arc that got its merit rewards cut a bunch in the first merit rebalancing but that was more due to lack of data for assigning the initial value. Either way, the players who aren't doing "speedy anything" are ending up with more xp, inf, and drops for their time so... shrug. Just a matter of whether you want to prioritize merits over everything else.

I'm not going to respond to the rest of the post because I'm getting some pretty strong "I don't know what I'm talking about" vibes but... To your first point: the resources for even a brand new player to be rolling in inf are easily accessible to anyone who is curious. Are they going to be able to quickly afford a top-of-the-line build? No, but they have the tools to get there in a reasonable amount of time. If your response to this is "but you have to use the market to do that," see this post from Faultline. I'd argue it's even easier for a new player to get to that point than it would have been for the veteran players to do it 12 or 14 years ago. The game's already plenty playable and fair from the very beginning. To your second point: that's not how that works at all. There are two pretty distinct groups I see running task forces - the first just wants the merits and any xp/inf/drops are just a nice bonus, and the second wants the xp/inf/drops and the merits are just a nice bonus. Considering the popularity of things like +4x8 steamroll task forces I'm pretty sure we're not running the risk of alienating people if merit rewards drop a bit.

I can't speak to story arcs because those are less-commonly run, but I fully expect task force/trial rewards to go down almost across the board even for pre-level 50 stuff. Everything's easier to get on Homecoming so the average player is running around with a better build than back in the live days (incarnate powers notwithstanding, this just adds another layer of it at level 50). I can't think of any content that's so terrible it causes players to stop playing for months, but if task force A is only run 10% as often as task force B despite offering identical rewards for the time spent that tells me there's something going on with task force A, not with the reward system as a whole. The weekly strike target system does a good job of incentivizing players to "spread out" content even more than they already do by offering bonus rewards. But you do have somewhat of a point - Dr. Q might be worth 244 merits when it's the WST but even at a relatively fast run of 90 minutes it's a drag. I don't really buy the "one correct thing" argument these days. There might be a handful of task forces which are run more often than the others but it's not like LFG is full of "speed katie lfm" or "speed eden lfm" like you would've seen pre-I13. I haven't run the Barracuda SF since probably 2010 but I'd imagine one of the biggest issues was how it practically required certain ATs to complete and you wouldn't know 100% whether you were screwed or not until the final boss fight. That's not something that can be solved by increased merit payout. If there's one thing I've noticed with any consistency since Homecoming showed up nearly three years ago, it's that the powers that be put a lot of stock in design formulas and how things "should work" which tells me issues like this are more likely to be fixed by adjusting the content rather than the rewards for the content. Other examples of this include the I27P3 changes to the CoT and Eden trials and the RSF. In the case of the latter two you could teleport past/through certain objectives to complete the content much more quickly than was intended so rather than adjust merit rewards downward the ability to bypass those objectives was removed. That being said, the devs have explicitly said merit rewards are going to be looked at at some point in the near future, and I'd expect with three years of Homecoming-specific data to look at it would mean an overall reduction in rewards.