tidge

I also list common salvage for 1 inf. The difference from the vendor for common salvage is peanuts... and there are bigger peanuts to be had by simply street sweeping at level 50. If I have to think about the cost difference, I'd just put it in terms of "the extra inf is simply the character spending inf to work towards a specific set of badges." The only drops I reliably (i.e. 100% vendor) are SO/DO/nO enhancements and level 50 common recipes. Everything else is somewhere on a spectrum of "I might be able to do something else with this." That doesn't automatically mean that I'm hording the item, or I'm putting it on the market, it just means that I pause to think about it. I go through different phases with respect to putting inspirations on the market. I will almost always do this to the point of getting specific badges, but typically I just try to use them as I get them. The SG base has storage for bigger ones for particular circumstances, email stores the resurrections.

Goldbrickers, because.... CANDY!

I'll have you know that it is part of Olympia McQuiverbottom's personal backstory that she only travels via [Walk] and she expects her teammates to do the same.

Welcome back! There is going to be a period of getting (re)acquainted with the modern lingo. Be patient; don't be afraid to ask questions (The General tab is good for this). IMO the biggest difference in play on Homecoming (and this was somewhat true at the end of Live) is that we have significantly more ways to quickly move between zones (and get directly to missions). This will come as a shock, especially to folks that remember not even getting a travel power until level 14. Don't be too embarrassed about this... again, asking questions in General, or asking TF teams about this before the TF starts will get information you can use. Now, all about me: As far as "slow play"... I don't mind a 'slow grind' to get familiar with a new AT/power set. There often comes a point when I simply don't feel like repeating certain content, or I just want to get a character to a certain level where it feels more like unique character. I'm definitely not an "end game is the only game" player... I will admit that I've "rushed" a small number of characters to higher levels when they were slight variants of other characters... in one of the two (personal) cases it was specifically because the new character was going to have a very clumsy melee attack chain without Global recharge bonuses. I still played non-farm content, but I was focused on XP with only a minor consideration for working on Accolades while leveling.

What about Mastermind henchmen?

This was the nerf. In the at-launch days, a Fire Tank could go to any zone that had DE Swarms and easily collect XP.

Alternatively, I don't imagine the F1 races are all waiting for a comic book AV (ehem, Whiplash?) to show up for an extra 'challenge', just to make it worth their while. I don't care if folks feel like it is a waste of time to play while debuffed (I'm not running Synapse at +4 every week), I simply think it is disingenuous to imply that the current game can't be made more challenging without asking players to change their builds. Rewards can be had from any content. Difficulty can be altered via different mechanisms. These are completely separate issues.

"They called it The Ice Bowl."

I think @SmalltalkJava has the best suggestion, but I have some alignment to the thinking expressed by @Vengeful Arrow. My suggestion for you if you want to be healing, is to concentrate on the T2 and T3 henchmen. The T1s may end up needing healing the most, but that is like throwing good money after bad.

Not MMOs, but sports are played in a variety of different weather conditions, on different surfaces and teams often play with rosters at less than 100%. Wins still count as Wins, Losses still count as losses.

I agree that I see this sort of response to the self gimp all the time, and I think it is silly. The biggest reward the game offers me to me is being able to play. When I read a post from someone who is clearly invested in playing, yet complains "the game is too easy, don't ask me to self-gimp(*1) because I don't get a shiny" I don't judge that person, but I recognize that they have a very different set of in-game priorities than I do. (*1) I don't think it is an more a self-gimp to play a TF with players under a debuff than it is to set difficulty at +4. MMV.

Here is my roll-back suggestion: regnarj/

Here is nothing more than an anecdote: When recruiting for TF, I don't wait for a full team. I'll take a look at the levels (and AT composition) of the teammates and make some assessment of potential difficulty *I* think we can handle and not have the arc feel like a slog. I'll ask the team how they feel about difficulty and spawn sizes if we are going to run with fewer than 8. I don't really mind if other TF team leaders want to "wait for eight", but it does begin to feel like a waste of time to recruit for ten minutes or longer when there is a core ready to go.

I have Arcane Bolt on a (mystical) Blaster at an early level; with the changes to the attack's inherent "proc" it has now become part of the regular attack chain. It does require and investment in slots to be worth using in the regular attack chain. I wouldn't fault an MM for taking it, except my usual caveats about don't try to pretend that your MM is competing with the henchmen for damage output. MMs can dip into power pools earlier and more liberally than other ATs, but slots really should be going to henchmen ASAP.

That is basically my view as well. I have NEVER gone in to make multiple Billions of INF, but I start my new characters with about 200 Kinf seed money and I as I level them up I expect them to be able to pay for their own build by level 50 (they get common pieces from the SG base of course) and to fund the next batch of seed monies. Early in HC, I definitely used the level 21 Performance Shifter market, but never more that 20 at a time. I moved away from that market when the new sets were introduced. I always wonder if the depressed prices are in any way due to the End Mod piece conning as yellow, despite being rare. There are a few other examples of this (which require rare salvage to craft) that also seem to have weirdly depressed prices... although I admit that these are also in low-priority sets for most players. It's just that the EndMod piece is such a no-brainer for improving recovery and the boost to travel speeds.

Full disclosure, when I quickly referenced my 'favorite' Widow build, I have LotG Def/Global Recharge in Combat Training: Defensive (lvl 1), Tactical Training: Maneuvers (lvl 4), Foresight (lvl22), Mind Link (lvl 24) and Combat Jumping (lvl 49). That particular build doesn't even include Hasten, and That build happens to have Mask Presence 6-slotted (with Reactive Defenses)... I agree that this looks like an inferior choice (because once engaged with an enemy or glowie it provides less defense than Foresight (3 slots on my build, including Steadfast Protection Global... which could go somewhere else), but I stuck with with this slotting since Foresight is an Auto power and Mask Presence is a toggle and I wanted to cut the endurance usage on Mask Presence by half. I won't pretend that there are a lot different options for Widows with all of their available different Defensive powers. I checked my notes and I have a proposed respec (to test) that shifts 6-slots in Mind Link (Reactive Defenses) and 4-slots to Mask Presence (1xLotG, 3xShield Wall) which should improve both positional defenses and recharge time on Mind Link. (with no other changes to the rest of the build). I'm a big fan of the 5 and 6-piece bonuses from Reactive Defenses!

Inefficient is accurate. I am a fan of Reactive Defenses (I actually try to 6-slot it somewhere) so using the 3rd slot from Hasten to bring it to six so may help... but... With Mind Link, I think the 'optimal' slotting (for a large swath of content) is 3 slots with: Adjusted Targeting (Recharge), Luck of the Gambler (Def/Global Recharge) and a 50+5 Shield Wall (Def/Recharge). This assumes that you don't already have 5 LotG. You can eek out slightly more Defense and Recharge, and more ToHit (base it +5% IIRC) but the real value is in the Team Defense and Psi Resist boost IMO. IIRC, any more investment in Recharge (which must come from a Defense or ToHit set, no HO, no IO) is in the enhancement diversification limit. Widows are typically on the limit of getting perma-Mind Link, so YMMV on this advice. You could put six slots in Combat Jumping or Mask Presence (for Reactive Defenses, which would help endurance costs as well) and have four slots in Mind Link (put the Global Shield Wall piece in there as well). I can sort of see what you are trying to do with the two Red Fortune pieces, but the little extra S/L you get is probably not as important as what you give up. There may be a slot or two where they are.

It reduces your annual subscription cost by $1.

Prêt-à-porter fails are the worst.

I look forward to it. The additional EndMod sets added on HC certainly made the market here harder, but there are times when this niche looks downright weird. Anecdotally: I still stick with one of these in Stamina for everyone of my characters, although I have done some experimenting with a few characters (that don't have extra slots invested in Stamina) to see if I noticed any difference between the %proc and simply slotting an IO EndMod (boosted, natch because of Inf). I had a couple of characters with large +MaxEnd boosts (accolades, sets, buffs) and I ran them across a lot of different content at many different levels... it felt to me like keeping the Performance Shifter proc was the right call for most cases. This was not a rigorous study by any means.

I have no disagreement with the above, but I am reminded of other threads with many posts on the topic of "make the game harder for me, but don't make me play with debuffs". The game offers challenges, it's just that the game may not offer the challenge that a particular player wants.

I totally agree, but my union boss requires that I point out there is a difference between henchmen and pets. Of the mentioned classes, I think the VEATs hit the best balance between having enough pets and making enough well-scaled attacks to benefit from the Gaussian %BuildUp in a toggle. MM Damage scales are too low with too high an Endurance cost for the Build Up to make much of a difference for them. Better to slot Tactics to boost the Henchmen.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ What else are you doing with your time? (Costume designs? SG Base building? Revealing maps via travel?) (this is written in jest) The SSA1 (blue/Skyway or red/Cap Au Diable) takes my lowest DPS characters (at that level, MMs) about 10 minutes to run, high DPS characters (including well-kitted Controllers) take about 6 minutes. Even counting glowies and doors, I think there is less clicking (including necessary combat) in that first arc then there would be to play market with common salvage. There is a cut scene of course. The Heather Townshend DA arc can take about 10 minutes to finish with minimal enemy engagement, and 30-40 minutes to clear all maps at 0x8. Either way you end up with convertable/marketable/saleable items at the end of the arc, and if you run at 0x8 it's the near equivalent of farm in terms of things you can sell (e.g. common IOs for ~100Kinf each)

I'm not surprised (and not unbiased, see below) to read that (modern) MIDS is misbehaving and causing issues. I'm not knocking the hard effort that is in it, but the times when I've tried to install and use it (on my 64-bit system) if always felt like it was using too many diverse resources (video, memory, etc.) for what it ought to have needed (my casual assessment, but if I can watch local video and edit audio while running CoX I feel like MIDS should work without issue). My bias against it became deeply ingrained when it was literally the program I (reinstalled) on an older HDD before the PCB of the HDD smoked. The HDD was older, but it actually smoked at the point of the install/launch of MIDS. This is absolutely anecdote, but I'm not a luddite when it comes to software design. Is there an architecture document for MIDS that details the interfaces of the software with system (and network) resources?