tidge
-
Posts
5886 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
21
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Articles
Patch Notes
Posts posted by tidge
-
-
Doing a little more testing... and now that I see the blunt reduction in base ToHit rates for teh T1 and T2... I guess I'm keeping Tactics.
-
2 hours ago, LightMaster said:
Maybe instead of completely reworking Fury, make it so when going over 50 or 70% of Fury, the debuffs a Brute can inflict with Primary power sets adds an additional stack called [(Fury) Debuff] to effectively 1.5x to double the normal debuff value of a Brute, with the debuff value inflicted by Brute slightly lowered to compensate.
42 minutes ago, Steampunkette said:I mean... yeeeah that would be a balancing act...
But I also kinda like the idea of the Brute rounding up enemies and then 7 other people basically fireballing the brute.
I freely admit my idea lives in never-never land... but the idea behind it (PBAoE debuffs from Fury) was to make Brutes a different kind of Tanker, rather than have Brutes be a different kind of Scrapper. Scrappers and Stalkers seem to coexist in a pleasant way as being similar ATs, and no one has really cared about Scrappers v. Tankers since... forever, but it seems like (super generalization follows) Brutes are either picking fights or getting picked on by both Scrappers and Tankers.... so I like to imagine a different mechanic altogether for Brutes that still makes sense to have the historical primaries/secondaries/HP/Resistance caps.
Realistically, I don't think debuffs would be powerful enough to make up for "lost damage" compared to what (existing) Brutes can do. I simply like imagining a different sort of AT where people aren't clamoring that another AT does more damage than a Brute (under whatever circumstances), and I almost snicker thinking about arguments about which AT should be the better debuffer!
-
22 minutes ago, Maelwys said:
Agreed.
And the more data we can produce that proves "pet survivability has decreased compared to Live" to the devs, the more likely they are to lessen the currently-proposed HP reductions (or buff henchmen survivability later!).I feel like I can see the difference in GM fights but hard numbers for this will be really hard to come by. There is probably a farm that is well suited for this, or perhaps Nemesis radio missions at level 50?
-
28 minutes ago, Unknown Magi said:
The irony being that because GMs are even level, that edge case seems to be one of the biggest negative impacts of this change. Feels like "Hold on, MMs are still good at something, better nerf that."
Re: "solo v. Giant Monsters". It definitely feels like HC has been moving (over the long years) to make such a thing harder (for everybody). It used to be much easier for (my) non-MMs to solo Giant Monsters (often relying on Lores) but for quite some time it's been pretty much only MMs that can still reliably solo GMs (without Lores). I've seen Illusion trying to solo GMs, but I never had enough patience to see if they could actually take down a modern zone Giant Monster solo. I'm certain many can still take out old-school holiday zone GMs with no help. In other words: I see the GM hunting as less of a niche for MMs but instead more of MMs being the last ones in that niche.
I'm not thrilled with most of the "make GMs harder" changes (e.g. "let's raise resistances!"), mostly because they driven more players to multibox against GMs (almost always with at least one MM) more frequently.... so it isn't like the task is harder for individual players (who want to multi-box, and given the rewards... why would they not?). For those of us who enjoy the challenge of solo v. GMs it definitely looks more like the bar keeps getting raised. The Health changes to T1/T2 might make it harder for a multibox of multiple MMs, but I'm more frequently seeing multiboxers where only one of the characters being used is a MM.
By now (and not because of this round of Beta changes) I'm basically living the shrug emoji when I read about many of the changes and what the possible rationales for the changes. Are we focused on x8? (sometimes yes, sometimes no). Are we focused on Level 1-49? (sometimes yes, sometimes no), Are we focused on ITF with incarnates? Farms? etc. etc. This round of MM changes appears entirely focused on new +++++ content, with some back-rationale about what to do about MMs for all the other (non-Incarnate) content. *shrug*
-
2
-
1
-
-
I've written this before (and I still believe it): More than any other AT, Masterminds benefit more by changing strategies and builds depending on their level and the content they are playing.
I suppose this could be reduced to "it's the player behind the MM", but I recognize a personal spectrum of performance for different MM primary/secondaries. Writing only for myself... it can take helluvalotta effort to find the right combination of powers and playstyle for a MM that pretty much doesn't happen with other ATs ...maybe Kheldians come close, but they have far fewer options than MMs. I mention this only because the proposed changes aren't really going to make me to want to play new MMs, because what is changing wasn't holding me back.
-
1
-
3
-
-
I won't be changing my approach: I want as many actual enhancements (and set bonuses) as possible in the T3, so the T1s get the %BuildUp by default to augment their generally smaller number of attribute enhancements. Also, 3x T1 is multiple henchmen triggering the %BuildUp.
The one change I'm considering, but need to test: I may swap the Leadership pool's Tactics with Assault. Tactics was chosen specifically to help address level differences in Accuracy/ToHit (of henchmen, pseudopets), otherwise it doesn't make that much of a perceived difference for the content I favor. The one (barely) tangible benefit of it is that while the henchmen are in aggressive mode, Tactics seems to help them pick up viable targets a little sooner than otherwise.
-
10 minutes ago, boss said:
I'm pretty sure more creative people out here could come up with something amazing. To me the two staples of teams in this game are the Brute and the Tanker. We should have those two classes set and in a good place before we do anything else. I don't know, these are just thoughts that came across my head.
Fundamentally there is the issue that changes to either AT will run afoul of pre-conceived notions about the AT as well as pre-existing characters.
Personally: I'd violate pre-conceived notions about Brutes (they do more damage the madder they get) to implement something with a similar effect but different mechanics that make them better for team play (the madder they get the more they debuff nearby enemies). Of course debuffs are a huge balancing act, so it's not like I think my idea is easily workable for folks with expectations on things like farm times, etc.
-
3 hours ago, Maelwys said:
I'm more concerned with Henchmen survivability.
The -HP debuffs on the T1 and T2 henchmen are almost exactly cancelling out the fact they're taking less damage and being hit less often as a result of becoming even-level.
So if MMs were only ever fighting regular foes and taking damage that way, then there'd be no problem.
However; that's not the entire picture.
@tidge noted earlier in this thread that some of the GMs they were fighting on Test took about the same amount of time as they did on Live... but others took much longer; mainly because their pets died more often (more resummonings required).
Whilst the fact that some of these GM fights took the same time to defeat is good news (alongside the pylon testing it helps prove that pet damage output hasn't been lowered too much), the fact that pets were dying more often here is a bit concerning... even if it's not exactly unexpected. GMs are effectively "levelless" - they treat everything that they're fighting as even-level. This means that on both Live and Test, a GM should be hitting all of your henchmen for exactly the same amount of damage; however T1/T2 henchmen on Test have lower HP so it will take less damage to kill them.
"Levelless" GM encounters should be the only time this happens (a non-levelless foe on Live would have had its damage multiplied by 1.22 against T1 henchmen and by 1.11 against T2 henchmen - which is offset by the HP differences!) but they're quite tough fights and a favourite pastime of many players.
And then there's Bodyguard mode. A lot of soloing MMs place themselves in Bodyguard mode for survivability... however if the share of bodyguard damage absorbed by T1/T2 pets remains the same as before but those pets have lower HP pools (on Test) then the MM's survivability becomes lower.^this^ is actually my primary concern.
TL;DR: I valued Masterminds' ability to survive in Bodyguard mode more than I valued "raw DPS" from the henchmen. This is especially true (for me) in "hard content" Put another way.... I never tried to play my MMs in "hard content" as sources of DPS, I always treated them more like team buff/debuff with a side of grab aggro and survive.
My approach isn't how everybody wanted their MMs to play... and I kinda get it... but I also think that expectations for ATs need to be different. The level shift is a PITA for some content, but bodyguard mode/HP pool is a factor in ALL content.
-
4
-
-
1 hour ago, Captain Powerhouse said:
There has also been resistance from multiple dev team members that keeping your henchmen alive should be one of the responsibilities of the MM. If they simply get summoned with all the upgrades, the cost of resummoning them becomes too trivial. This is not any one person's opinion, but unless multiple people in the dev team can be sold on a concession/middle ground, it's not likely to change anytime soon. Even if a pitch was agreed upon today, it would not be part of this page. I am middle of the road on this stance, personally.
I'm not intending to be nasty (especially not to the messenger) but I will state: The first henchmen boost power comes at level 6, and the T2 and T3 summons come at 12 and 22... so it isn't as if most (any?) Masterminds will delay taking the first upgrade until after the T2 (or T3, for T3-only MMs) is taken.
With the reduction in HP for the T1 and T2... also (still) requiring the first upgrade feels a lot like punching down. I accept the code is a mess, but I feel like the actual buffs from the first upgrade could just be included in the summoning power.
-
11 minutes ago, Gobbledigook said:
When a minion leaves supremacy range a countdown should start and they will be teleported back to the MM if not called back. May need to increase supremacy range.
I don't think the countdown idea is practical, because of server-client lag/ping/malarkey.
The range increase might be something that makes sense: Even when a MM isn't "outrunning" henchmen, it isn't hard to see examples where the two are "just far enough" out of range (of each other) for things like full damage to MM (i.e. no Bodyguard mode in play) or hits against henchmen doing "too much damage".
This is the kind of issue I basically just shrug off, but I understand why "one more thing" can de-interest folks in playing MMs.
-
Some more testing (on Beta), solo MM v. GMs:
Kraken (Perez Park) - no noticeable changes, but I did lose henches (not uncommon, but rare)
(3x) Paladin (Kings Row) - I split them up first to get a better feel - Significantly longer times (usually a Paladin only gets one pulse off against me... so increases of more than 90 seconds on top of times that are more like 3m30s to 4 min). Based on fighting three of them (one after the other), I say this was due to both losing T1/T2 more frequently and less damage sticking (when I didn't lose them). The MM also took significantly more damage than I expected in each of these three fights.
28 minutes ago, Maelwys said:IIRC you tend to not slot damage procs into Single Target abilities... but since Reactive (or Degenerative) Radial Flawless Interface plus Assault Radial Embodiment Hybrid typically add a very decent chunk of damage versus a single target for the duration of the Hybrid buff window; I figured a "GM Hunter" build might be making use of them... My bad! 😉
I run with Degenerative (radial), but that's something of an afterthought. For Hybrid, I run support. Lining up the conditions to get the Assault to work was something I played with long ago, but it didn't make my round-the-world sweeps of GMs any faster.
The one possible change I've been kicking around... I currently run Tactics but I might swap to Assault. My GM hunter does rely on pseudopets, and I hate ToHit/Accuracy debuffs, which was my original reason to run Tactics... but it has been easy to toggle off and not see much change, so perhaps this page might convince me to experiment again.
-
1
-
-
I'd describe my level of care about Incarnates to be pretty close to zero, so I'm sure I skipped over that.
-
7 minutes ago, Maelwys said:
FWIW the next minor patch should hopefully be fixing the T3's proc damage issue;Can you describe the issue? I don't include any %proc in my T3, just a each of the MM ATO Aura pieces.
IIRC @Maelwys and I take a different approach to slotting T3s (in general, we may have closer agreement on specific primaries).
FWIW: Slotting (only) T7s with MM ATO seems like one the most "who asked for THAT?" changes. May as well allow such powers to also include Recharge Intensive Pet/Pet damage sets too. [I don't intend to be too critical, but unless I'm going to do something weird like Detonating Maintenance Drones (with their terrible pathing AI), I really don't see why I'd put MM ATO in such a power.
-
Quick (on Beta) test (solo) against:
Arachnos Flier (Grandville): Slightly longer time... almost but not quite to PITA level (because of flier's unhittable status + travel time). No noticeable changes in henchmen surviving, I did lose some T1... while rare on Live, it is not unknown. For the flier, there would be a significant change if the Flier had two travel cycles... my typical experience with the flier is that it gets only one travel period, unless I am really late to getting to it. I can generally get it down to 75%-95% of its health in one cycle, with the variability mostly coming from my henches in Bodyguard mode and what they are targeting.
Adamastor (Echo: Dark Astoria) No noticeable change, either in defeat time or survivabilty.
-
2
-
-
I'll try copying a level 50 GM hunter to Beta and see what I can estimate about performance.
The reliably available ones will probably be Adamastor and Scrapyard, but if I find other ones in the wild I certainly have enough experience that I can report back. There is always a little variability in GM defeat times, but I could definitely tell the differences in the (multiple) HP/Resist boosts as well as the GM ToHit Buff.
(*1) For me (specifically) there is a sequence of "random numbers" I encounter with a handful of GMs (those that have multiple, consecutive AoE) that break up my typical, smooth GM defeat... because of a streakbreaker and/or "high rolls" on the part of the GM that smack the MM+henchmen and/or apply status effects... it's weird, but especially since the GM ToHit buff I can noticeably tell against specific GMs (for me, Jack in Irons, Paladin... very rarely Adamastor) that things are going pear-shaped (with my typical approach to them).
-
1
-
-
20 hours ago, Videra said:
We now live in a world where Masterminds have been, broadly speaking, 'adjusted' in such an over-complicated manner that something as simple as removing the -level debuff pets have? Has somehow transformed into a nerf.
I can easily see Giant Monster(*1) fights taking a LOT longer for MMs (on test) because of reduced damage from the T3 and T2 henchmen. Thanks to @Bionic_Flea for going up against a pylon.
Presumably, the lower HP of the henchmen will also make them less survivable against Giant Monsters (with the "new improved levels" of the henchmen)
-
1
-
1
-
-
I'm seeing Hold Resistance, not Hold Protection.
Resistance never gets the status effect duration to "0 seconds".
-
45 minutes ago, biostem said:
If the macro had 2 powexec commands, with hasten as the first to execute, then it'll trigger the second power while hasten is still recharging, IIRC...
We don't have the ability for Macro buttons to show timers (or any sort of indicator), so I'm having trouble imagining a circumstance where this approach would be valuable... I guess if there is some emote or say the player wants done to indicate that Hasten didn't fire....
-
21 hours ago, CoeruleumBlue said:
It's really just that Spirit Ward is bad now, while all the other powers on the other pools are viable, so you can take Experimentation or Force of Will solely for the non-offensive powers if you'd like, but you can also take them for the attacks if you prefer those thematically.
This argument feels extremely thin to me. I don't doubt that personal preference doesn't exist... it's more that personal preference =/= non-viable power(*1). If nothing else, it is literally a 1-slot wonder power for slotting the %Absorb piece. If a player opts to slot a different %proc (one that requires a trigger) in it, I believe that Spirit Ward can be cast on the sorts of summonable pets available to all players.... but I rarely slot anything but the %Absorb in it.
As much as a b**** about the first three power choices in the Presence pool being at odds with each other, making that pool somewhat "clunky"... i don't think any of those three powers isn't viable (for characters that don't have access to such powers via primary/secondary).
(*1) My own personal ranking of the powers in the Sorcery pool would put Enflame at the bottom.... but not because I think it isn't viable, I find it to be one of those powers that looks good on paper but needs rather specific circumstances to really sing. My perception is also colored because it becomes available at level 14, but for most ATs it is rarely the best choice of a power between levels 14 and 30.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Rando comments:
I definitely consider Invulnerability to be a "hybrid" set. One of the things I like best about Invulnerability (on Tankers, Brutes, with bigger Health pools) is that it isn't necessary to run all of the toggles (all of the time, or ever)
Scrappers... because of smaller caps (on Resistance and HP) I think perform better with a secondary that contributes to debuffing/damaging enemies in melee while also providing healing/absorb to the Scrapper. I'm not really thinking of "damage auras" for Scrappers as much as PBAoE powers that can have %procs added. Off teh top of my head, Radiation and Bio.
Defense based Scrappers IMO perform very well... but they need something else when things go pear-shaped. Incarnates can fill the gap, but I don't like relying on Incarnates to make a character awesome... so for Defense based ones I'm usually looking at a T3/T4/T5 power in a power pool to provide that little extra something.
-
11 hours ago, The Trouble said:
Step 1: Log in to the character you want to be "Super Respec-ed". Save their costume.
Step 2: Log out and rename them.
Step 3: Create a new character. Load the saved costume. Give them the old name.
Step 4: As you level this character, go ahead and reacquire the badges you left behind.
Congrats, you just saved 2 billion 🙂
"I saved 2 BInf with one stupid trick!"
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, Rudra said:
Primsatic Aethers are getting farmed by some players so they can get the costumes and costume effects. Those premium costume effects cost 250 Prismatic Aethers each.
I think it is better to say that the Prismatics are farmed because of the market (so indirectly to "people wanting them"). I've been watching the market and I am surprised that we are seeing near daily getting influxes of 1K+ prismatics with the total amount above 5K. Somebody is really dedicated to farming Prismatics; I suppose someone could be playing the "I want to set the market price for them" game, but like everything else that drops freely that would be silly and I can't even imagine it is fun as an intellectual exercise.
-
1
-
-
KB protection is literally one of the easiest things to build for using enhancements.... especially for Tankers/Brutes because of the +3KB three-set bonuses from useful sets like Gladiator's Armor and Fury of the Gladiator (IIRC both Dark and Fire armor have commonly chosen powers that can take each. Those are on top of the multiple choices of +4KB pieces that can go into travel, resistance, and defense powers. SG bases offer 90 minutes of +10 KB protection. How much easier does the game have to be made for some people?
This is a request that sounds like someone wasn't expecting actual variety in the game.
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Scarlet Shocker said:
I'm trying to make this into a Macro rather than bind, so there's a power (in my case I'm calling it "HST") in my tray. How do I get that to work. I'm keying to my S (backwards) key.
I may be missing something: This approach might be defeating the purpose of having multiple powers queued for auto-execute, Macros act like power icons you have to click, the concept of keybinding is that the player is queue a power along with some key they would be pressing anyway. I suppose you could set up a macro to trigger a rolling set of bindfiles, but for (alternating) powers this seems like the wrong approach for the more common circumstances (e.g. Domination and Hasten).
[FOCUSED FEEDBACK] Mastermind Archetype Adjustments
in [Open Beta] Focused Feedback
Posted
This "kicks in" at levels 12/22-> Incarnate, so forgive me if I think the argument "but better at levels 1-21"! is the among the most disingenuous arguments I've heard about game balance. For crying out loud, "beginner's luck" is in play for those levels, so it's not like there wasn't already something in play at low levels.