tidge

I agree with Senator @Neiska response above, with slight additions: Blasters "two sets" of attacks is allowing for ~2x higher tier attacks that can be chained because of high Global recharge, One of the largest advantages of Blasters having attacks in both primaries and secondaries is the greater variety in slotting opportunities for (IMO, the better) set bonuses. In the case of #1, I think we can make a strong case that Blaster DPS is as large as it is because of Global recharge... and if there was a 'diminishing returns' on Global Recharge only affecting Blasters... I think we can reliable predict what the reactions would be. If "Tankers kill too fast because targets" is a problem, I think there is an argument to be made that maybe Blasters are achieving too high of a DPS because of global recharge (and crashless nukes, etc.) This is NOT an argument I would make, because the game was a lot duller when it was a grind. In the case of #2... "the game isn't balanced around IOs"... yet... It does usually sit uncomfortably with me that all flavors of blasters can slot their ATOs in either Primary or Secondary powers, which gives them even more opportunities to slot the offensive Winter, Very Rare, and PVP sets too. This isn't a freedom of slotting choice that most other ATs have.

Issue 1: The level cap for Tankers is increased to 50; the level cap for Brutes remains unchanged.

This makes me wonder about the Tanker-targeted scale changes to self-buffs (and debuffs). I'm not thinking these changes are the end-of-the-world but they have the stink of "everything and the kitchen sink" being thrown into the mix (to scale back Tanker performance). My opinion: the majority of the inspirations do what Tankers do via having to pick powers... and not all Tanker primaries are created equal... so if enemy is dead before needing most of a Tanker can bring, it's not like most content requires a Tanker. Not needing an AT doesn't bother me, I'm more interested in seeing regular mode content be able to be completed in roughly the same amount of time across ATs. I don't farm, and the stuff I solo that might look like farming isn't at +4, so I won't notice as much of the effects of those as others might... but on +4 team content I can't say that my Tankers have been providing that much of the teams damage... although I have been applying debuffs when possible (and when they would make a difference).

By many accounts, the only reason Scrappers pull ahead of Brutes (to the limited extent Scrappers pull ahead) is because of the Scrapper ATOs (increasing critical chances, *1), so I really want to know what it was that "kneecapped" Brutes. I think everyone can agree that Tankers pull ahead (again, to the limited extent shown in Ston's tests) were because of %damage chances improved by the +AoE +Cone changes to Tankers (which are going to be addressed in i28p2, scaling those back). (*1) I think Brute ATO procs are mediocre, but I'm not sure they are the worst. I don't think that ATOs should be what the ATs are balanced around.

No real recommendations, but I can share the following: CoX plays great on my couple-of-years-old Lenovo Legion "Gaming Laptop". This machine travels, but it was slightly bulkier than I prefer, especially if I have to travel with multiple laptops for business. It is the extra 230W power supply more than anything else, although my laptop carry-on get cramped. To support my business travel, I recently bought a slightly older refurbished Dell Latitude. It can play CoX, but without a dedicated GPU it is a somewhat miserable experience. I somewhat expected this. The biggest drawback for me of a 'small laptop' when playing CoX (after GFX) would be the size of the keyboard.

I was disappointed that this was only one of two "Reaver" GIFs I could find pre-made. Somebody ought to throw the Book at them.

IIRC, the article casually mentions "Kallisti Wharf" in the context of "missions"... but that is it (aside from them "OMZG, Controller Nerfs incoming!"), but *shrug*.

Long ago I started to use the %Psi piece in Taunt, but I found that it wasn't a great use of a slot: The %damage piece still requires a ToHit roll, even if the Taunt effect does not. Threat pieces have minimal choices for Accuracy. This lack of Accuracy choices is probably an oversight, as there are powers that don't have auto-hit components for Threat. Generally I prefer the set bonuses from Mocking Beratement Psi damage ends up being resisted hard by many enemies. I do often drop the %Psi piece into other Tanker attacks, when I want the extra proc (or off-type damage).

I'm not on Discord, and so I can't comment on whatever might happen there, but... I've read the articles (not the attached comments section) and I don't think the article is particularly well constructed. (-1) The initial diversion into "why speed, bro?" struck me as a little too antagonistic... at least for what followed. (+1) Controllers can be slow at doing damage, especially when compared to other ATs... but there is a more fundamental issue that I don't think the author understood 'why speed?' matters (to all ATs) (-½) 99%+ of the games rewards are for defeats. <- This is the #1 reason IMO to try to 'balance' ATs such that they can solo complete standard content taking amounts of time that are roughly the same order of magnitude. Controllers can be there, but they need to make certain build choices and/or leverage damaging attacks from START vendors (the latter, especially for low level content). Let's face it: There is no other reward schema that makes sense for CoX; changing this would fundamentally change the game. (-½) I think the article misrepresented what the i28p2 changes are doing to Controllers. I'd dock more here, but the (not mentioned in the article) +Regen critter changes will slow down Controller clear times (for bosses) (-1) The doubling-down on "Controllers being nerfed" by calling out Seeds of Confusion... especially on an opinion piece about "game balance". We all know that Seeds is a level 8 pick that is better than the level 26 Mass Confusion ('better' because of base accuracy, if nothing else). If nothing else, we knew that eventually this T5 power was going to be readjusted for 'balance'... it would be pretty difficult to make new Control sets that could compete with Plant Control. The closing with "I don’t generally play Controllers" is somewhat telling IMO. I'm neutral (leaning negative) on the ignoring of %damage from procs while mentioning +4/x8 content (and Hamidon raids). %damage helps Controllers (and other ATs) so I just can't tell if the author is ignoring them or doesn't know about them. The mention of the "purple triangles" is IMO a weird editor's choice... was the editorial team expecting controllers to all of a sudden lock down AVs without trying, or was it throwing shade that they think controllers aren't needed for some content? (hint: no AT is needed.)

I also remember the max damage cap change, and I also don't remember anything else that would qualify as a 'giant nerf to Brutes'... which is why I want to know what @Snarky is referring to.

You often write this, but what is the 'giant nerf to Brutes' you are referring to?

I hear what you are saying, but consider this: Once most of the enemy critters in the game have a floored 5% chance to hit, somewhat skews perceptions of what 'less survival' means. Blasters have it pretty good on Homecoming... I'd never advocate going back to the nukes w/ crash, or the era before 'sustains' but if you are talking going back to "old school"...

I don't think i28p2 is a massive nerf to Tankers. I do remember Live, and Tankers were more-or-less made irrelevant by Scrappers, especially when levels 41-50 (and all the extra slots) became available. The one thing I remember Takers could do what Scrappers couldn't do was herd entire maps at once.

This is still an issue as of 01 June 2025

These show different 'times' on the order of a minute or less between Scrappers, Tankers, and Brutes. And IIRC (without reopening the builds) the various builds don't rely on what I'd consider typical for those AT... from memory, and I could be wrong because I don't use MIDS, but I think the Fighting Pool's Cross Punch was leveraged. Ston's work was interesting, and necessarily somewhat niche, but it is IMO showing neither a big difference (even if measurable) nor one completely applicable across all content and player builds.

The MOAR REGEN for critters is a head-scratcher for me. I can think of only a handful of circumstances where this can be an issue: low-level characters that have low-tier Damage-over-Time powers... the DoT is going to make less of an effect (AFK) Farming characters that rely on DoT... this is going to slow them down solo-ish characters that get defeated (by a boss) and have to trudge back to the mission from a hospital... to find the baddies completely healed up. If the reasoning was offered, I missed it. Maybe it's because new sets are getting -Regen components?

I almost never take Hasten, the economy of Homecoming makes it relatively easy to achieve high levels of global Recharge (plus other good stuff) from IOs, on every AT. I also tend to find the Speed pool mediocre, so picking Hasten often restricts other alternate build choices(*1). Many people choose to try to make Hasten "perma", but in practice this isn't really necessary. I can imagine circumstance when perma-Hasten would be preferred, but those are all niche content or for builds that are exclusively running attack chains exclusively relying on inherently long recharge attacks. When I do take Hasten, it is: Dominators, who won't otherwise have perma-Dom, especially a leveling-up Dominator, or "Tankers" that rely on longer recharging powers to survive the hardest content. (*1) There are a number of pools that have 4 (of 5) excellent powers; picking Hasten delays how soon I can get that 4th or 5th power *and* is getting in the way of a pick of a prerequisite power from those pools.

Canasta... the card game with the most grind. IMO, YMMV.

I can't say that I've ever soloed an AV with my Dark/Dark Controller, but I know I 2-man tackled most of the AVs helping someone else run through the MJ stories. The dominant impression of that Dark/Dark was that long before level 50, it was actually unusual for it to be in any sort of trouble on the Citadel+ TFs, even if I was solo against rooms of turned-up enemies. It felt odd that the character could be so survivable without being fully slotted or having a full kit of power picks.

Some of us have to speed through content to get back to costume creating and base building! I don't think Controllers are getting nerfed... obviously Seeds of Confusion was a massive outlier, it was pretty absurd to have THIS level of AoE control at level 8. I wasn't expecting the changes to Carrion Creepers... sure I see the explanation, but I rather liked being able to turn this power into a sort of 'nuke', given that the Fly Trap has always been somewhat meh. Tankers... they get nerfed in a much more meta way (i.e. all tankers are affected by a common set of changes), but this looks to be a dialing back as a result of other recent changes. I don't see how the Tanker changes upcoming in i28p2 are going to make the game go faster. Without testing (on my part) the Tanker changes look to have done more 'turning down' of the AT than I would have expected (less self-buff, less debuff, less damage dealt, etc.) It remains to be seen how this plays out on x8, on x1 there will probably be only a limited amount of content that it will be noticeable.

Of the Tanker-focused, across-the-board changes, I agree that the reduced damage for 'overcap' is a bit of a head-scratcher. In practice: if my tanker is targeting bosses, then I'm slightly less bothered by minions taking less damage... but with PBAoE and some cone/AoE attacks I can't guarantee that I'm actually going to hit the Bosses in the first 5 (or 10) targets. It also feels like one more thing for RNG to mess up. Radiation Armor (on Tankers) is going to take a little getting used to... I was mostly opting for Radiation Armor to use on characters which I didn't particularly crave loading up on offense from the secondary (early-ish in the build) because of the proc-ability of Radiation Therapy from the primary. It doesn't look to becoming a bad power for %procs, but the utility of it will diminish. I'm probably going to have to revisit my choices of Healing/Recharge in it and swap into Accuracy (while leveling, and I have at least one character that has slightly fewer ToHit and Accuracy bonuses that I usually opt for.

Here is a new reason to reject the idea of trudging everyone to the cell block on a TF just to fight "doors"... the number of doors in a cell block is only a fraction of what is needed for the Doorbuster badge.

1) Players have to do enough damage (over time) to overcome the inherently high values of health recovery from the Regeneration GMs get (for being big sacks of HP) 1b) Players debuffing GMs helps 2) Players have to survive contact with the GMs (usually through Defense values) 2b) Players have to be able to "take punches (and controls)" #1 is typically done by players by summoning Lores. #2 is typically done by using Destiny powers. A solo player that can handle 1 and 2 doesn't need Incarnates. A couple of players with full slotting (so close to 50) that have both 1 & 2 covered can usually handle most GMs. Jack in Irons is somewhat interesting since his rework: It's got several melee AoE (so it can hit multiple opponents at once) and several different controls (so it can take some opponents out of the fight). Jack (in the open world) normally isn't a "level 50" monster, and during the Halloween event I believe it is the old (pre-reworked) Jack that can appear in high-level zones.

On my Tankers, if the Tank lacks protection and has an obvious gap in resistance coverage, I'll often try to add the Aegis 20% Mez/5% Psi resistance piece. This is about the only circumstance when I chase more mez resistance.

As this is a low-level arc, extra START vendor attacks may come in useful for many players working on Doorbuster here.