SwitchFade

If you want to know how to, Earn 100 merits in 25 minutes, Convert that 100 into 300 converters, Turn those 300 converters into 80 million inf in 20 minutes... Let me know. Actually using empyrean for merits is really one of the least effective uses for them. And as @Myrmidonmentioned, I and will speculate further, that more uses for empyrean are on the way.

Everyone stops taking you seriously and knows exactly how guilty you are when you use the exact excuse an abuser uses to justify beating someone and assigning the blame to their victim. I'm in agreement with everyone you run into in all the threads you post in, the problem is you, not them. Good luck.

@jubakumbi is that you?! 🤣😂😆😅

@UltraAlt fun, yes?

And there's the proof you weren't just debating, but have ulterior motives. I will thank you not to be demeaning and use terms like nonsensical; it is quite alright that you don't follow; the counterpoints we're debate to your now clear position. Nothing you have said negates the fact that AE should never have been allowed to have such a dramatically outsized rate of reward return, and that allowing it is destabilizing. Your PERSONAL preference that it remains is immaterial to the fact that it is inherently untenable and jeopardizes the sustainability of the system (game). Now, should you deign to reply, I hope it is with a more even keel, else you'll find yourself in a hot debate of one... 😁🥧😱

Oof. I have to say, I just stopped reading at page summin' summin', due to the level of hyperbole, speculation and bias. Here's some boring facts... Current state, or null state: emps can be converted to merits Proposed change to null: emps cannot be converted Why? Simple... Emps can be converted to CURRENCY. Let's dissect that. Emps ARE currency and in any economy rapid and unchecked generation of new units of currency drives rampant inflation, bad for bonzo. We can debate all day long on who it affects, who makes them, who's getting the shaft, who's mom makes the best pie, who's dad can beat up who's aunt..... but it doesn't change reality as stated. The arguments I have read against this change include, "you just made my stockpile of wealth..." Which, unwittingly, provides clear proof that a change to null is necessary. A massive amount of stockpiled potential currency entering the economy will destabilize it. That said, this no more emp to merit change is sub-optimal. It is completely unnecessary to remove emps as a currency, the goal should be to STABILIZE the rate of currency creation vs destruction. All that needs be done is to limit the RATE at which emps can be converted, for example 1 emp per week. Now THAT rate of conversion is easy to calculate for to find the right time interval.... Yay, we just made people happy they got their "option" but retained a control to assure they don't run amok kicking bunnies. Poor bunnies.

Everything else around this was immaterial to this sentence. This sentence materially states that current AE rewards should be the Norm, regarding return on investment, and that all other content is underperforming for "a lot" of people. Understanding that this is an opinion, not observational fact, that's great. Now, being that you may just be proposing a conversational preponderance, I'll go along... Hypothetically, are you among the group that feels AE rate of return should be the Norm for all content? Entertainment of said hypothetical speculation, If you're not one of the group who desires AE rewards be the Norm, we should get more data from them. If you are, we should get more data from them. Regardless, because if that group is now the majority,there exists an argument to alter the entire game (not just AE). For the sake of argument, do you feel that a healthy system should have one dramatically skewed aspect, naturally? If you do, you are advocating a naturally imbalanced system that will always skew, the outliers will eventually purge and the system will alter so significantly that the original system is no longer cogent, thus non-existent. In either case, the original premise stands: a healthy balanced system cannot have such a dramatically imbalanced aspect at its core and survive. Any argument that purports to desire such an imbalance, while concurrently maintaining that a healthy balanced system is ALSO desired, is as a point of fact, contradictory and suspect.

Yes... But something to keep in mind... Yes in that "marketing" does have a higher rate of individual resource attainment vs time invested.... Keep in mind that marketing does not generate NEW currency, it merely redistributes existing currency. The rapid and unchecked generation of new currency to the economy causes unhealthy inflation, which is detrimental. Marketing would not generate as large a return if inflation we're not rampant, they are inherently connected by the value of a single unit of currency. Marketing, or the conversion of inferior goods to normal goods, also serves to make desired goods more available and less expensive for all participants; in a system where all goods are normal and substitutable (which this one is, via converters). (This was not necessarily arguing with you)

Hi. AE. What a great concept and what an amazing function of gameplay. How poorly it was managed on live. What a beautiful concept, user created content! Let's dispense with the obvious: "farming," which is nothing more than a specific action (or set of actions) repeated, ad nauseam, for a specific outcome, in this case to gather resources by repeating a mission. Human nature: to increase personal benefit while reducing personal cost related to said benefit. Now that we have that out of the way... Playing a video game, where one earns varying in game resources or rewards is a function of the game. Playing in a way that maximizes rewards is normal. *Drumroll* farming is an inherently normal form of playing in the most efficient way possible. There's nothing wrong with farming, so let's never look back or bring that up again. If someone believes that farming is wrong, well... We are all entitled to our own opinions and rightly so; however, we don't have to broadcast them. For example, I don't think anyone really needs to know I detest blue cheese dressing. But now you do 😅 Now. The next part is fun. Here's where anyone who objects to the next block of word vomit needs to unplug their emotion chip and be a little less biased. Align your inner Feng Shoes, and make sure your Yin is Yanged... If there exists an aspect of a system that has an obscenely skewed rate of return for effort invested, it will eventually and invariable distort the system in a predictably unhealthy and system terminating fashion. If I work 8 hours cleaning toilets with a toothbrush for minimum wage or sell contraband for 1000 times the rate of return, neither having any risk or consequences and both being systemically acceptable, I'll sell the contraband every day and thrice on Sunday. That's the crux. In this game, which is a system, if there exists a method of resource/reward attainment that is so dramatically greater than all other activity and is not addressed, it will always, eventually, cause distortion that grows. The nearest analogy is gravity, as the field increases it draws in more which in turn magnifies the field. Let's be more specific. This system is designed with certain core concepts. Among them are the gameplay, progression of character, advancement of abilities, resource attainment, social interaction. If participating in AE grants resource attainment or rewards that are orders of magnitude greater than other content, it will become the defacto mode of gameplay for a disproportionately large subset of game participants. Statistical fact. Core concepts which are the foundation of the system, upon which all others are built, are distorted, causing said superstructures to warp, eventually leading to.... Well let's review.... On live, inflation was catastrophic, causing each unit of in game currency to have infinitesimal value. Further, normal and inferior goods were so overvalued, only the bourgeoisie could afford them. New players were immediately exposed to AE, altering their interaction and perception about what the game fundamentally WAS. The projected average line of character progression over time was shortened to hours, from weeks. Social interaction outside of AE shrank, as more were exposed. These are not opinion, they are observations and facts. Now, we can debate if it does drive away new players, or old; we can debate about how everyone should play their way, and that's great; we should all have fun interacting with the game in a fun way... So long as that individual choice doesn't have negative consequences for the collective. That's right, you're a Borg drone. The activity of participating in AE should never have been allowed to have any different rate of resource or reward attainment than any other interaction, if the system is to remain healthy. In this measure, AE was not the issue, because if running GMs or Maria Jenkins gave not just outsized rewards, but dwarfed all other rewards, it TOO would be unhealthy. All content should have equal resource/reward attainment (within an acceptable range of deviation, standardized around the median). There is absolutely NO justifiable reason that AE, or any other aspect of play, should have the current reward structure AE has. AE isn't the issue, humans are.

This. Reduce to 4 seconds.

I'm sorry, that's not how economics works, or this game's economy, specifically. What makes ios available is the fact that all goods are normal and substitutable, via converters. AE rewards being equal to all other rewards will have a net zero effect on the economy. It will, on the other hand, cease to dramatically incentive a single aspect of gameplay, and assure that all content is equal.

That's a solid idea to start with removing from low zones first. I would add, adjust AE xp/info to equal all other content, never more. This retains AE as a play choice, assures it is not a trap by moving it from low zones and makes it equal to all other content for rewards, no longer obscenely outsized. I get why people MAY want it in low zones, but anyone desiring AE to have absurdly more rewards than all other content stems from one simple reason.

My water/elec blapper is always first in soaking alpha, facetanking 54/8 MOBs, never leaves melee, unloads blaster level damage and never bothers even worrying about surviving because I know I won't get hit. In fact, his name is iBlap. If you want to see where this nerf was directly targeted, look no further. As I said before I fully realize that level of survivability and damage output is redonk OP. And I also mentioned I love my blasties, but I also understand the change. Not that I want it, but I understand it.

Someone asked why the change, I replied, you're misunderstanding in that you think I'm complaining or care either way. I was explaining and commenting that it is quite OP that I can survive as well on a blaster as a sentinel or scrap, with blaster damage, which was why this change happened, in part. I'm ok being OP or with the change and less OP, I'll still have fun. You seem to be focusing on me as someone who has a stance on this, I don't care if they leave it or change it.

You're misunderstanding, I can facetank 54/8 content and wipe 17+ foes with little danger. With blaster level damage. My nuke is up every 24 seconds and I always play in melee. Effectively, I have near scrap survivability and blaster level damage. The longer I survive the more damage I can unload

Well, to be honest, a blaster that can trivialize 54/8 content across almost all factions is a bit OP. Granted, I have several that can blap and lean into S/L to alpha everyone. I can carry teams.

And at lvls 10-40 where there's no barrier and exotic damage is quite common?

AE removed from starting zones is a much needed change, in my opinion

Disclaimer: I detest AE. That said, this here, Characters at Level 50 can no longer earn experience towards the Veteran Level rewards (Veteran Badges, Incarnate Threads, and Empyrean Merits) from Architect Entertainment content; this does not apply to Incarnate Slot Experience which can still be earned in AE. Maybe not the best? I firmly believe AE should NEVER give more rewards than regular content, but a categorical exclusion may just drive away people who don't abuse AE but love to solo run weird maps. It's no secret I detest AE and think it should be removed from starting zones under level 20, but I'm not so sure excluding things at the top is the answer either. Lock it so it can never reward more than running a story arc and that gives equal choice and equal reward.

I don't AE farm so the effect there is nil for me. For PVE regular content, Solid change. People will have to have situational awareness a bit more now and controls and defenders will contribute much more. On most maps this won't really mean much as group spacing is enough that it's easy not to pull a second group. Should be fun!

Unyielding (all ATs) - This power now adds 5% psionic resistance (Tanker values) Resist Energies (Tanker/Brute/Scrapper) - This power now adds psionic resistance. In think you should rethink this one where invuln thanks are concerned, just think is all, not saying change... I mean, I'm all for buffs, but does my invuln tank that has 71.5% psionic resist standing still need 5-7% more? I get the tuning is centered around SO builds, so if this is truly necessary to make that hole on an SO build a bit more manageable, I'll survive with more awesomeness 😁😁😁😁🥧🥧🥧 Free cookies! 🍪🍪🍪🍪🍪🍪🍪🍪🍪🍪🍪🍪🍪🍪🍪🍪

I also have to add Devs, I get why you're doing this and appreciate the goodness of toggle suppression, but this huge delay, along with the other small things like the defense changes (which I get and don't mind in a VACUUM) become additive and disheartening. Causing a pause before I log in. You feel me?

Real life actual situational math inside, open at your own risk of economic recession... 50 fire/kin controller Warrior map in PI 54/8 Hot feet turns off when an LT or boss stuns New beta: I no longer have to retoggle, but the power will not reactivate/retoggle for 8 seconds, which starts AFTER I recover. The fun stuffs on beta - When I am stunned I notice it within 1-2 seconds as I stumble about like I'm three sheets to the wind and my key presses are futile. I hit an insp or clarion, another 1-2 seconds. Now, my hotfooties get the 8 second holeshot. Live: Recharge on this power is 6 seconds on this toon with her level of recharge and the Retoggle is a 1.7 second animation. The fun stuffs on live - When I am stunned I notice it within 1-2 seconds as I stumble about life a kung Fu master and my key presses do nothing. I hit an insp or clarion, another 1-2 seconds. That's 2-4 seconds time the power has been recharging and off Math average....ish: On live, 3.5 seconds of the 6 second recharge on hot feet have elapsed since I was stunned and I am released and ready to hit alt+4 to fire hot feet, leaving only 2.5 seconds left on the recharge timer until I CAN actually fire it, plus the 1.7 second animation. And that's if I'm fast, clarion is not recharging and I'm not out of Bf's, and need to combine to make one on the quick. Some of the time I may be stunned, combining and breaking free for 4-5 seconds. So, mafs of the fastest normal time elapsed from stun to run: 3.5 seconds of no hot feet whilst punch drunk, 2.5 more recharge and 1.7 seconds whilst GRRAnimation. 3.5+2.5+1.7 = 7.7s. New beta: 3.5 seconds of no hotshoes while blitzed and... 8 SECONDS while I detox (again, this is fastest possible comparing vodka to vodka, if I'm in the above scenario of no clarion or combining insps.... Sad panda...) More mafs on fastest time on beta, stun to run 3.5+8 =11.5s I'm gonna make this next part pop ***** 11.5 seconds with no stinkfoot on beta vs 7.7 seconds of no stinkfoot on live, common core teaches me... Jack stuffings! But mafs teaches me this is a 4 second difference, in the wrong direction of train A leaving station B at holy crap C ***** In this case this is not a QoL change, because I know I have been stunned and I can quickly alt+4 to retoggle quicker than leaving it alone. That's 4 seconds of 27+27 less damage per tick, 4 seconds where the -res proc cannot fire resulting in foes that take less damage if it did, 4 seconds of mobs that can run quickly so their AI is not confused resulting in 4 seconds of increased damage I take due to that. Same lvl 50 controller alt build with the dreaded kinetics repel on, slotted with +recharge. 4 seconds of lower recharge as well. QoL, to me, would be not having to retoggle in this case and not having slimetoes for 4 seconds AFTER I'm free. That's a QoL change: no retoggle needed and only 4.2 seconds of no hot feet. Beta is an active nerf, in this case, NEH?! New system will cause me to suffer to compensate for some hooligan with 3 offensive toggles, so they don't all pop up at once, vs if they had to retoggle 3 at 1.7s each. Cut that 8 seconds down to 4 and be happy that you gave that hooligan a 3.4 second buff, or figure out how to have the toggles delay in series as they come back up with a 1 second delay between each. Else it's a nerf for most edit: after much reaction time testing, all 3.5s here are actually 2.5s in my gameplay. Not going to edit all formulae; note all 3.5 are 2.5, and end 11.5s is actually 10.5s.

Running missions with exotic type damage being dominant (demons, pantheon, carnies, Arachnos, Crey) at +3-4/8 on a blaster that has 45 ranged, 36 melee, with varying exotics between live and beta shows a marked change in damage taken, pace of play and overall survivability. If 3 of 17 MOBs in a group could not hit before and now can, at +4, this is quite a significant increase in damage taken. To look at it another way, if I am said blaster and alpha, 3 of 17 MOBs will hit me BEFORE the change. This effectively doubles incoming damage where those exotic types are present. L This is a lesser issue if one chooses to avoid factions that have a greater number of exotic damage MOBs, maybe 1-2 of a 17 count spawn, but will still be an increase in damage. Fighting the much avoided exotic heavy factions like Malta, Carnies, Arachnos, pantheon, Vahz, CoT and so on, that spawn 3-7 exotic per 17 is a marked increase in damage. This will cause people to avoid them even more. Now, am I against the change? No, not really, it makes sense and seems reasonable. Let's be clear though, in some cases the change is quite large. That said, I'm ok with it. However, guaranteed this will need, and receive, tweaking on the fringes.

The bottom line is, any exotic attack from any MOB in any faction, at any level, where the exotic damage is the majority share of the damage, will now check only that defense or positional on a PC. This, most assuredly, is not insignificant; it is a significant change to Squishies. Any toon that achieved solid blanket defense coverage from Alpha strikes by hitting 45%ish on S/L/E/N will now take more damage, and more swiftly. Even council have MOBs that prioritize exotic damage, as do Crey, outcast, CoT, Arachnos, Malta, Carnies,Pantheon, Vahz, Rikti, Lost, family... Now, I don't like ignoring exotic defense as a rule, on any toon and have always tried to build all defense types. I also play a wide variety of toons and do not solo, I mainly team. I also don't kite, I play primarily in melee on most toons. This is how this change will affect me, - Tanks - no real change - Scraps - no real change - Dom's - I build for all defense types to be 38-45 and ranged 45, so this means an increase in incoming damage due to S/L not being preferred, however I tend to alpha with stuns/KD, which mitigates, but there will be an increase in incoming damage - Controllers - mixed to large, a few cannot build a significant value in all types, this will mean more incoming damage, but I tend to alpha with stuns - Defenders - the several have all types above 38-40, and less mitigation as they are not controllers, so medium change here, alpha striking will be tougher and incoming damage will cause a much more pronounced swing from ok to dangerface, as my 50 S/L is not a blanket - Stalkers - all defense types and positional are well above 45, no change Blasters - large change. I melee, and it's impractical to attempt exotic defense, as the sacrifices are too great. S/L/E and maybe N we're basically it; incoming damage on alpha and beyond will now be much greater. I play in melee, I alpha and this will now mean less survivability and will necessitate a change in gameplay. When I run in and queue my alpha strike, I always take theirs, now any exotic MOB will be more likely to hit. Added to that, those exotic types tend to hold, stun, DoT etc Add to this the new adjustments to aggro and this will mean that survivability for certain toons is significantly changed for certain play styles and pace. For example, the first mission of maria Jenkins, the pantheon outdoor pit map, where all that exotic damage is packed in to MOBs in groups standing in close proximity. Same with most indoor Arachnos maps, they bunch. If we inspect the intended focus of this change, it is clear that the goal was to reign in the efficacy of high damage, less resilient (on paper) toons that tended to trivialize content and other ATs in a way that was unintended. It's also clear that the Devs have among them a few (at minimum) very highly skilled/profressional game designers and coders, as this type of change is not one that would be easily deciphered or implemented. I spend a significant amount of time doing system architecture and the changes I make seem inconsequential to users, but have a very significant ripple effect and impact that is not readily perceivable to most, up front. I become more curious now, are there OG devs involved? This will not be a small change, it will vary, but some will definitely feel it greatly. It does, however, swing the paradigm back to center in 35+ content. This will likely need adjustment, on the fringes.