tidge

Don't be like that. People having a different perspective on the game and game balance does not mean that those people who disagree with you are ignorant or cognitively deficient.

I find the forum moderation to be better-than-not. I do have a couple of suggestions: #1 I think the forum members deserve more than a "be excellent to each other" or "we are watching" comment; there should be some specificity regarding the behavior that prompts such a post. My thinking is: Some members, some fraction of the time, don't recognize what is drawing the attention of a forum moderator. #2 When posts are hidden, I similarly think a note acknowledging the moderator action, with a brief explanation that can offer clues to forum members about behavior that was considered inappropriate. I'm not looking for a novel-length replies to content. My own "forum moderation grievance list" is shallow: #1 I believe that the forum moderation is too slow to recognize and/or call out certain negative/bad-faith behavior, with a corollary that sometimes the hammer falls on folks who call out the negative/bad-faith behavior. This makes it difficult to know if the mods simply don't recognize the behavior as bad, or if they actually tolerate it. I'm specifically thinking of a semi-recent case of sea-lioning, but I also occasionally see both direct and oblique insults that stand out. Not real example, but things like "I can't tell if you are genetically fat, or you just eat everything in sight." There isn't any way IMO to see those types of comments, even in drive-by as anything but insulting. Suggestion: See above about being more transparent. #2 One common behavior that spirals is what I refer to as self-brigading. A user makes a post (often in the suggestion forum) that receives analysis, criticism, or clarification that doesn't agree that the proposal is 100% correct and brilliant. The original user then begins a meticulous process of responding to every other post, often in minute ways... so instead of receiving a dopamine hit from direct validation, the dopamine is flowing from "energized" back-and-forth. Suggestion: Prepare a stock message to indicate that forum discussion is a back-and-forth, and to be aware that forum ideas are neither a good place to seek validation nor should every idea be considered to be "perfect"... and to make users aware that full-throated defenses of minutae often result in antagonistic postings that serve no purpose here.

@Maelwys hit the most relevant points about T1/T2 primary/secondary powers and why (not) to choose to add %damage pieces to them. The only other point adjacent to what was added is IMO this: The T1/T2 powers are often single-target attacks. It might not be entirely noticeable if only facing default (Nx1) spawn sizes, but my experience has been that it is generally better to have %damage in AoE, because ultimately defeating an entire spawn ends up requiring fewer attacks if the AoE is applying %damage to several of the critters. Put another way: an unreliable %damage in a single target may not be reducing the number of attack clicks necessary to clear an entire spawn. TL;DR: for me, it comes down to a balance opportunity cost of using those slots somewhere else, sacrificing set bonuses, spamming low-level attacks without Endurance Reduction, blah blah blah fishcakes. There are times when I will add %damage to T1/T2 powers: Below level 10, I'll drop in the P2W/START %damage pieces, as there aren't really any better options at those levels. The character is an AT that both/either doesn't have a good damage scale and/or doesn't really have enough low-level damaging attacks without using %damage. The only exception I make to the second point is Masterminds: they have a poor damage scale but their damage should be coming from the henchmen, so T1/T2 powers either get set bonuses or franken-slotted to improve henchmen performance.

The main issue that my Bots/Traps has is that I skipped Web Grenade and I have no means of applying Immobilize to AVs. Once an AV decides to skedaddle, those fights can become either tedious or impossible (because Traps is somewhat location based for debuffs). The only place skedaddling matters for GMs is for the monsters in the level 50 zones that tend to run towards other monsters. Multiple level 50 Giant Monsters can be problematic, lower level GMs not so much (I'll include "Tentacles" in the not-so-much-if-I-am-on-my-game category). ^ This ^ is without the use of Lore pets. Lores speed things up for Bots/Traps, but I don't find them necessary (except in limited cases) when solo. I do think it is somewhat important to consider performance without Lores (for things like AVs and GMs) because "waiting around for 5 minutes of +DPS" can be a time-killer. As noted by @Maelwys, flooring Regeneration on big sacks of HP is a big deal. One of the corner cases my Bots/Traps finds tedious solo is the Goliath War Walker, because it has a self-heal. When it begins self-healing is when I will bring out the Lores for the extra damage push. I learned the hard way that bringing the Lore out too soon can end up being a waste of DPS. The one Giant Monster I think might give problems to a Merc/Marine MM would be (new) Eochai, because of Pumpkin Patch... and possibly Lusca's Tentacles (because AoE) but I suppose with some very timely application of certain secondary powers and some fine control of the henches I suspect Eochai could be overcome regularly. Otherwise I believe @Maelwys that a Mercenary zerg with all the +offense and +survival from /Marine should be able to dispatch some big things relatively quickly.

*Some* of what is described here is a combination of (summoning) animation (mostly the henchmen 'appearing', AFAIK the MM's animation and time before effect is how longer before the pet window shows the hench) AND server-client delay w.r.t. to "mouse click"/"target selection". In the scenario quoted here, if the T3 is *in* the pet window and has completed its animation/position registration at the server, tossing the upgrade on a hench/pet near the newly summoned hench will apply the ugrade to a henchmen (sooner than you could have by waiting to click on it). This is similar to how during something like a Nemesis invasion players can't target some spawns right away, but henchmen and pets can. I believe the client/server positioning lag can also work against MMs in certain examples when there is an asynchronicity in times when MM (in bodyguard mode) gets to an enemy, henchmen get to enemy, enemy hits the MM, henches take damage (from bodyguard mode, and/or AoE) before the game gives them credit for being close enough to qualify for certain buffs anchored to the MM. I've zipped up adjacent to enough Giant Monsters "too quickly" and the henches end up taking a LOT more damage than if I approach the Giant Monster more sedately.

I almost never dedicate 'extra' slots (beyond Endurance Reduction, and possibly a secondary effect if it relates directly to surviving) to Damage Auras, I can offer my personal thinking: #1: %procs in auras still rely on a successful ToHit check , and there are some Auras with poor ToHit chances (especially against +N) #2: I almost always have a more optimal (to my eyes) place to put extra slots, either for more damage in attacks, set bonuses, Q-o-L, whatever. For example: a Travel power can usually take something useful to my builds (slow resist, KB protection, faster travel) #3: As noted in passing above, sometimes a secondary effect can offer value. Buffs/Debuffs are on a lower enhancement scale, so franken-slotting may not offer much... but if I'm already hitting the ED cap for Endurance Reduction I may re-jigger to use Boosted/HO pieces to get a little something extra out of the aura. As for the pieces mentioned in the OP... I have (with minimal testing on a couple of characters) yet to find a place where I think the Cupid's Crush %proc is really helping by itself. The short-duration, relatively low magnitude, and lowish PPM simply doesn't sing to me sweetly. It is of course a straight-up Damage enhancement, so it has that going for it. Of the Options in the OP, I would go Overwhelming Force Damage/%KB. %-Resistance is IMO best used with teams, I'm aware of how they can perform in something like a Pylon test, but aside from bags of HP I think straight %damage is probably better for most characters (not sitting at the damage cap) for most content.

Like @Camel , I often only worry about suppressing KB on Nova, because PBAoE, and maybe one of the other AoE. I like it paired with Martial Combat, which also has KB from Ki Push as well as Burst of Speed to get in close for melee. You get more practice with KB and a tool to help you reposition after KB affects enemies. EDIT: while I still like my pairing (for Blasters).... it probably isn't helping Corruptors! Combat Teleport can work as a substitute for Burst of Speed I suppose!

Bluntly: it sounds to me like the "I canna control my explosive nature" pretty much sounds like an Energy Blast Primary (or Secondary) with Knockback Enhancements. There is zero reason to have to wait for Nova in order to demonstrate 'poor control' in game.

There seems to be a peculiar reliance on rather childish "go-to" metaphors that perhaps belies the level of critical thinking in the original idea. This isn't a tea party, this is a well-established MMORPG that has a pretty clear connection between character powers/impact and content... by level. If there is a perception that someone has reacted like "the sky is falling", perhaps it is because someone is inviting an asteroid strike onto a well-established ecosystem. If there is some sort of sub-20 content that you stridently feel demands players have access to nukes,a player has the personal freedom to try to alleviate whatever suspected boredom might exist because players lack T9 primary powers below level 20 by constructing similar missions in AE using Skulls, Hellions, Snakes, whatever... and then just playing that content. If *this* is too much effort for a true believer in the "gotta have a nuke to get (rewards from) those Hellions" cause., even as a proof-of-concept... it is probably too much of an ask for the dev team to implement and a large majority of players to get behind.

How is the current game actually preventing you from playing Deity Man? At best, the current game prevents can't street sweeping level 1-15 zones with primary T8s and T9s for XP. Most of the zones can give radio/Newspaper missions in them, at level. Many of the zones have contacts that will auto-exemplar to the highest level of the zone. This ask has no functional difference than the ask to have all the power pool powers unlocked instantly. It isn't my fault or gatekeeping that is making players "bored" with low level content because they don't have "I Win" buttons. The game is configured to have the powers unlock at certain levels, sometimes with prerequisites. It sounds like you want a radically different game. the game is not Level 50+ characters herp-derping their way through level 1-15 zones/content. Frankly: If ->you<- (points at @battlewraith ) are so bored that you must toss out the pre-level 30 content, I question how long before it would be before you get bored with this suggestion, and ask for another radical change to a game design that has worked well for a majority of players for decades.

The "unlock" wouldn't matter, because either it is going to be ridiculously tedious (every character in the account has unlocked all the mission badges, and then it has to relock again... because that 'new character' won't have 'enjoyed all the low level content' yet) or ridiculously easy (have a level 50 character on the account). This dance around game balance where the argument in favor of the ask to toss out the established power progression is IMO revealing. The prestige and temp attacks existed for a LONG time before HC, and they helped to improve the low-level experience. Those *were* and *are* balanced against the low level content, because the lack of attacks (for some AT) was a grind mechanism (intended or not) that was holding some ATs back from getting to the 'good stuff' that can define the ATs. If nukes become available at lower levels... then the nukes will be scaled down, very much like how Kheldian Nova form attacks are... and if a player has truly experienced "all the content and is bored" they probably know just how poorly those Nova form attacks play out above levels 20, 30, 40. The game isn't going to have multiple scales for powers based on a player's boredom quotient. There is no convincing me that this isn't an ask for "gimme the good stuff, NOW, when I want it." The very peculiar reason "um, concept is the character is a literal god with no control over its power" CAN be worked into the existing lore for any character... Deity Man the 'not having the power yet' is the first level of 'lack of control', unlocking the power but not having it slotted is the next level of 'lack of control', and where Deity Man goes next is up to the player. My heart is not going to break because a character doesn't have a x-minute recharging nuke before level 20.

I can't tell that you actually understand your own mindset, let alone my mindset. If a player wants an AoE at level 2, pick up some Fragmentation Grenades or a Plasmatic Taser from START. The game is not going to keep a player at low levels very long, and the Blaster 'nukes' can be had at levels 22/26, which exemplar down -5 levels. The OP ask is for an overhaul to the established (and working) power progression tiers for either: A desire to simply skip lower damage attacks A desire to have higher damage attacks much earlier Trying to rationalize this via some personal character concept is either narrow-sighted and/or a willingness to toss all semblance of game balance across all the game's content and zones out the window. If this is REALLY what you want, I'll sign the petition for a version of Echo Atlas Park that works like the temporal warriors for Recluse's Victory with insta level 50s that can street sweep to their hearts' delight and can't leave that zone.

A strength of the player is that they can use their own imagination to self-explain their wide plethora of power choices within a necessarily balance, by character level, set of necessary restrictions. If I saw level two characters throwing nukes around on a DFB, my thoughts would be more likely to be "there goes somebody looking for an 'easy win' button" than "what a powerfully clever decision to take a nuke at level 2."

Setting aside "closed beta" private discussions... what are examples of "toxic positivity" about HC dev decisions? I am aware that the changes to certain types of farming (e.g. level 49s and XP, Empyrian Merit spigot being turned off, Vanguard merit rate conversions) resulted in a relatively small number of players being very vocally opposed to all of those changes (which were not all simultaneous)... and I am aware that some players were vocally in-favor of those changes. Does this mean that one side is exhibiting"toxic negativity" and another is exhibiting "toxic positivity" for expressing an opinion on the change? I'd like to see some examples of what are considered "sins" by the HC Dev team, rather than just having a small number of users self-identify as being insulting and/or feeling insulted. That sort of behavior is toxic (with varying degress of toxicity)... I don't see what the purpose of calling it "toxic positivity" or "toxic negativity" serves. From my PoV this is just an exercise in othering, here: "I judge that group of people to be toxic/dirty/stoopid, and I am superior to that other group by putting a label on them." I know that the high-level Council update was poorly received by folks, but I think it was well explained. I had to make some changes in build philosophy but I don't think this was a "sin", as it was pretty well explained what the reason for that change was. Is the N-star content a sin? Are D-syncs a sin? Is not allowing henchmen customization a sin? Lowering the levels at which higher tier powers are available was sinful? Not eliminating all knockback across the board is a sin? Not granting requests for 'tribute NPCs' is a sin? The quote without context is meaningless at best, with a high likelihood of simply being absurd. Was there something that was actually done that is an undefined sin, or is this just sour grapes?

On one hand, I appreciate the effort to prop up a (IMO, very weak) "breathe new life into old content" argument, but ^this^ is isn't helping IMO. Reasons? #1. This example is almost certainly the same AT with the exact same choice of primary and/or secondary. If a player is going to roll up nothing but these sorts of characters (i.e. duplicates of what they have already played), I don't think it is the game that is unreasonably limiting the player choices. #2 This argument is entirely focused on a level range (level 1-3) before power pools become unlocked at level 4, when all that in-game diversity becomes available to builds. Is this hypothetical player really seeking more build diversity solely to "breathe more life" into City Hall contacts? You can't even get a newspaper or radio contact at these levels, never mind that players at these levels can't accumulate debt.

I don't think the suggestion is a good one for this game: #1 I don't know what the OP is considering "lower level content", I'm going to proceed with teh assumption that the 'upper limit' on "lower level" is far below level 49. I'm a veteran player who plays with lower level content. I find it all completely palatable, no matter if I am encountering it organically via leveling up, or revisiting via exemplar/Ouro/TF/whatever. #1b At most, I end up with one power I am not going to use/use minimally in a Level 50 build. My hot take is: if there are more than one of the first four powers (T1, T2 from primary and secondary) that are completely useless for a player... the player has likely picked the wrong AT and almost certainly isn't really interested in low level content... which is easily handled by low tier powers and/or START vendor freebies. The most reliable case when *I* end up with a T1/T2 power that is nigh-but-useless is on perma-Dominators, because the one of the first three power choices ends up being a poor choice (for me, MMV) for dedicating many slots towards as I chase sufficient +Recharge set bonuses. #2 Build's can already be pretty diverse (suggestion: Skip Hasten and the Fighting pool). #2b The sort of 'exoctic builds' implied by a "lemme have T6, T7, T8, T9, powers with no prerequisites" would pretty much imbalance the game for content in which the enemies don't also have access to such tier powers, e.g. at "low levels". #3 This appears to be a rationalization for #2 that really wouldn't be born out by the game. The reason a level 4 Blaster "doesn't have control of their nuke" is, like-it-or-not, narratively explained by not having a nuke. IIRC "Every couple of minutes" was the pre-sunset timing on Blaster nukes!

I found it (non-Nemesis) to be pretty easy to run with level 50s, with better performance from support-oriented characters (because allies). I didn't run it as a farm (across alts), but if I was doing something else with a level 50, I'd try to run it for the rewards (and to unlock the Safeguard/Mayhem contacts). As for the Nemesis event: probably only about 20 times. The (personal) problem I had with the Nemesis event was that I had one (semi-retired) level 50 character that really wanted to complete it, but she kept ending up on either under-powered teams or teams with less-skilled players or players with a radically different (and IMO, inefficient) approach(*1) to tackling the Nemesis event. I'd guess that 10 of those 20 runs were evenly divided between (five runs of) the character I wanted (to complete) being on a team that failed, followed by a run with a different character that rejoined the team to help the others get their completion. (*1) There isn't much to be done when defeated players won't go to the hospital (waiting 2+ minutes for a rez), or the team has a whole lotta level 20s and 30s for Nemesis, but I found that a resistance based Scrapper with some self-heals was generally capable of both standing toe-to-toe with the wAVes *and* doing enough damage such that focused fire from the team could drop targets without too much fuss. A Scrapper with a Patron Snipe and a willingness to drag another bunch of AVs was also useful. As for "inefficieny",... anybody who successfully completed more than one of the Nemesis event is likely to have some idea of "what works", but I did have a few runs where an otherwise good player with a good build was calling out targets that made no sense to me... except in the context of that character maybe had a weakness (or annoyance) to something like holds, or defense debuffs, or whatever and didn't realize which of the AVs was actually making the fight hard.

Some characters would ask for a Dark roast coffe blend. Others may just stick with Ice Water. I've sure the submarine sandwiches are a new popular item on the menu.

My attitude and comments on this topic (henchmen upgrades) aren't really any different since the last round of MM upgrades: I agree that the first upgrade should be baked in, it make no sense to me that it should have to be applied because both (a) it comes so early and (b) it comes before the T2 and T3 henchmen are available as power picks. I disagree that the second upgrade should be automatic, because the level is is available at is necessary for the content that begins to appear at that level; it really is a "level up" for earlier level "powers" (the henchmen) necessary to scale MM performance at the higher levels. (This sort of level scaling is IMO observable from an AT that gets appropriate low-level attacks but lacks a similar sort of "power up": Kheldians. It's why the Nova forms are great at lower levels but kinda weak at higher levels... but I digress) I am satisfied with the current implementation of the first upgrade. Aside from all the post-live MM improvements (summon times/times, group buffing, map->map travel, opening up T2 secondary power choice, etc.) the ability to slot certain useful enhancement sets in those first (and in some cases, second) upgrades was a boon to MM builds that choose to take advantage of them. This implementation would not have been my choice; I think the (my words) "ya gots to apply the first upgrade as an intended cost of getting better performance" argument is somewhat weak(*1) but I don't feel obligated to try to analyze/prove/disprove that hypothesis when the final choice of auto/non-auto first upgrade will make no measureable difference (to me). It is obvious (at least to me) that reworking the primaries by replacing multiple powers and trying to come up with something else would involve analysis/effort for both balance and code... and the payoff would be of questionable value (IMO). (*2) (*1) The argument about the first upgrade being auto/non-auto feels "goopy"... or at least more "theoretical" than "empirical"... but as noted in my text above, players did get an improved set of enhancement slotting options, so minimally (from my PoV) there was a buff to those powers that I appreciate. (*2) Having played MMs for long enough on HC (also live, but that is irrelevant for this point)... buffs/upgrades applied to henchmen are 'flaky' in both expected and (somewhat) unexpected ways. The primary upgrades almost always 'stick' (when the henches are fully summoned and clustered) but I frequently observed some applied buffs (mostly Incarnate buffs) don't 'stick' to all henchmen... and others may have discovered that a non-upgraded henchmen will usually 'get a free upgrade' when changing zones/maps. I only mention this because there is more going on 'under the hood' to give us the IMO good state of affairs MM enjoy today.

I am still of the opinion that trying to make "fetch toxic positivity" a thing in place of using a less charged word/phrase like "blind advocacy" or "cheerleading" ... or even a potentially more charged, but in-vernacular use of something like "drank the flavor aid" or "the emperor has no clothes" or "rightthink" is an obvious (and somewhat lazy) attempt to equate some folks support of something that somebody else doesn't like as being inherently poisonous. The workplace examples cited about? Not cool, but they sound more like cult-like behavior with an emphasis on "othering", or at least an attempt at dividing people into in-group and out-group categories of rightthink. It is a real stretch to call out "positivity" as being toxic... it sounds like a term an edgelord would come up with after being called out for "toxic" behavior that was self-recognized as being "non-positive". If person A insults person B... that isn't "positivity" of any sort. If an individual feels they are being poisoned by (or having an allergic reaction to) more than one person disagreeing with them in the same way... that individual should probably disclose their allergy and not simply toss out wild accusations of being poisoned. The blog quote accusing the HC devs of "sins" also strikes me as extremely judgemental, with zero context provided. It is easy for me to imagine that the "positivity" related to the "sin" was that the devs implemented a change that guy didn't like, and some non-dev agreed with the devs approach.

I think the choice of "toxic" as the adjective for "positivity" reveals a lot about both preconceived beliefs and the limited vocabulary of the (blog) author. If the source of the quote was turned off by forum discussion (and not the HC game itself)... they must be incredibly sensitive and likely don't recognize very much autonomy in other people. The author of the article is almost certainly just doing a lazy drive-by 'both sides' piece. Here (forums) I observe a lot of non-dev-team folks explaining why certain things are the way they are, and the potential consequences of certain "drive by asks" in the suggestion forum, but for the most part these are pretty neutral (up to the point of someone posting in a petulant manner, very often the OP)... and the non-OP responses often show more evidence of critical thinking than the original post. Then of course, are the suggestions that are almost certain never to be implemented for which many of us can explain the dev's stated reasoning. I don't think that is "toxic positivity". It strikes me as rather pathetic for a blogger to equate "choice I don't like" with "sin". Pope wolfeyes must have a pretty wild heaven he's trying to get into.

Now I want to see this Ice/Ice/Ice Build that is 'broken' because of the current Epic power pool.

Sure! This was the page 5 build... I may have tweaked it a little since then, but it will be substantially the same. FWIW, I don't think I'd add the new Cupid's Damage/%Confuse to it, as the PPM isn't great and the duration of the confuse is too short (especially considering all the control & KB present). Mass Confusion has %damage to improve drop rates.