[Homecoming Servers no longer showing up on Google search/Chrome?]

To further fuel the anti-Google sentiment: It appears (to me) that whatever they did in March includes a new variant of digital finger-printing that will force certain users, under certain conditions, to solve captchas to use the default Google search. For example, I don't have to solve the captchas on one machine (of several) unless that one machine is using a browser in incognito mode. I had another machine start down this path when it was on another network, but it seems like (for the time being) I changed networks/cleared caches/etc. enough to get it off that "list". Ultimately I simply rely on other search engines.

 

I don't have extraordinary measures in play: I use Firefox "strict" policy (except for one service that the mode otherwise breaks), and a handful of common blockers. The only thing I can think of that mimics 'bot behavior' on my end is possibly quickly flipping through sites and leveraging an external text file of bookmarks (as opposed to having them in a browser).

[What do you plan on running once we get the update?]

I will probably opt for a Regen Tank of some sort depending on what sort of concept I can come up with. I'd say the same for Psi Armor... I may reroll a stalled concept character using it.

 

Energy Aura is quite low on my list: The current HC version (pre-beta) is something I like on my Sentinel but I don't like the way it make me play my Scrapper. A Tanker with more HP might handle it better, but I am in no rush to find out. 

[How would you nerf tankers?]

4 hours ago, WumpusRat said:

 

I think I'm really curious as for the people arguing balance back and forth if they're comparing the ATs and builds and such the way balance is supposed to be achieved?

As in, SO's only. No IO sets, no incarnate powers, no temp powers, etc.

 

Cause just from personal experience, I think it would shake out a lot differently if people were using purely SO'd builds instead of fully tricked out ones.

 

I think you are correct. IOs, and IMO the lowering of levels at which powers can be chosen, further reduce how much certain ATs are 'valued' for even more content than just 45+ when incarnate powers come into play. It was always true that exemplaring down (with slots and more inspirations) was good... now exemplared characters have access to T9s for even lower level content. BTW: I think the lowering of the power choice levels was a good thing, some of my ATs used to really flounder for some lower level content when exemplared... I point this out because it was a dev choice that directly reduced the disparity (for much more content) between ATs like Tankers/Brutes who have flip-flopped primaries and secondaries.

 

Writing for myself: %proc damage gets some amount of hate, but I find the PPM %damage to be one of the few ways the lower-performing (DPS-wise) ATs can stand a chance to finish most content within an order of magnitude of other ATs... and I'm NOT thinking about +4x8 content when I write this! At the 'finish content uber-fast' end of the spectrum, I simply don't care if a bunch of fully-tricked out solo-ists all finish some content within a minute of each other. The ATs that can already do excellent amount of damage don't need to rely on %damage, and through build choices can concentrate on something else.

[A more even distribution of Hamidon, D-sync drops]

6 hours ago, macskull said:

Eh, I’m not opposed to the idea at face value, or at least the idea of a better potential reward for spending more time on the content. I’d rather see that happen than have the encounter’s rewards nerfed, which to be entirely honest I’m surprised hasn’t happened by now.

 

I am simultaneously surprised and not surprised that certain things that brush up against the idea of 'farming for rewards disproportionate with effort/time' haven't been touched.

 

Hami raids are at least somewhat social. The social aspect(*1) is IMO the only reason why SNS is still accepted, otherwise the idea of flooding a zone with players and GMs was something that used to result in caps on the number of players in a zone.

 

(*1) unfortunately, SNS has long been showing signs of 'this is something we're owed, so conform'. I think it was a cool proof-of-concept idea, but it generates some amount of groupthink that isn't always pleasant.

[A controversial topic: is it time to make all items free?]

On 6/7/2025 at 11:04 PM, Yomo Kimyata said:

What do you see as plusses and minuses if the devs, for example, made items available as they currently do on Beta?

 

(+) The AH offers me something to do with my 'loot' drops,

(-) which would go unwanted if everything was 'free'

 

I like the progression upwards... even if I can get stuff for one character by having another 'pay' for it, it still feels like I'm engaging with the world of the game.

 

The biggest 'plus' for me would be we could eliminate all forms of storage (AH, Vault, SG base) to simplify the database. I suppose we'd have to keep personal enhancement storage.

 

[Make Lady Jane more intelligent]

I always run to the end of that mission and defeat my way back towards her. It doesn't make her any less chatty, but it reduces my stress levels.

[Focused Feedback: Tanker - Archetype Inherent Changes]

15 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

 However that only holds true if attaining those survivability thresholds is necessary for survival in the first place for whatever content you're running. And a very common view is that the majority of this game's content is so easy that building for additional mitigation simply isn't required (even for diehard soloers, in these days of Incarnate clickies and being able to type /AH before each mission!)

 

 

I've bolded the part that I think is fundamental... Tankers (and Brutes) are both pretty close to the "Imma always gonna live" limit for 99%+ of the games contents, no matter the Primary/Secondary choice. Scrappers and Stalkers (and VEATs!) are also pretty close. When we factor in Defenses only... the field has more room for variability, but in comparison Tankers and Brutes have essentially run out of headroom. From my PoV the differences between Brutes and Tankers mostly comes down to the level at which certain powers can be chosen, and the slightly different base scales. I'm not at all bothered by the possibility of nearly identical performance (survive/defeat) at level 50 and beyond... especially if the final equivalence comes only from specific slotting choices.

 

The rumblings about the motivations for the deep pull-backs on Tanker damage don't strike me as entirely well-considered... because (1) Tankers don't really get more AoE 'out-of-the-box' than other ATs and (2) I can't imagine scaling back OTHER ATs to make those easier to be hit (or given fewer HP, or made easier to get mezzed, or whatever) because 'Surviving is the role for Tankers and Brutes'; there would be a riot.

[Focused Feedback: Tanker - Archetype Inherent Changes]

3 hours ago, Maelwys said:

IMO the Sentinel and Brute ATOs are probably tied for "worst performing"; but at least Superior Opportunity Strikes means Sents get to trigger Vulnerability a bit more often.

 

Personally, I'd rate the %Orb/%Font procs at the bottom, and the "%minor PBAoE" ones fighting for last place. MMV. "always on" ones are usually the best IMO, and the Tanker ones are 

good... but they aren't exactly needed for most Tankers, such that they are practically passive.

 

More often than not: aside from the Stalker and Scrapper ATO %procs, for me the choice to include those sets in a final build (I'll always use them while leveling, because level 10) almost always comes down the set bonuses over trying to make the most of the specific ATO %proc. My choice to (not) leverage ATOs is HIGHLY complicated by the powers available that can hold the ATO sets. Blasters are golden (since primaries and secondaries are full of powers that can hold them), other ATs often have far fewer places to slot such sets.

 

I used to be bothered that Tankers (and Brutes) didn't have one (of the two) ATOs be slot-able in a the Primary (Secondary for Brutes) until I realized that most Armor sets would probably end up being way past the ED limits after 3 or 4 pieces... and for some powers in some sets the sorts of things that would be in combination (Endurance, Recharge) wouldn't matter. Of course there ARE some armor powers that could stand to also take Accuracy, but its kind of uneven across sets.

 

 

[Focused Feedback: Tanker - Archetype Inherent Changes]

16 hours ago, Gobbledigook said:

If they ever get around to giving the Brutes a decent ATO which they need, this could change even more. Brute ATO probably should have been done before Tanker nerf.

 

I'm unconvinced that Brutes have the worst ATOs. Certainly they aren't as good as Scrappers' or Stalkers' ATO (procs), and the Tanker ATO (procs) that lean into more survivability will make Brutes jealous.

[Length of game session - curious]

I usually have 60 minutes before work, sometimes I can stretch that to 90 minutes. After work, it depends on my household chores and evening activities. I can usually sneak in about 2 more hours before daily exhaustion sets in. This makes it hard to coordinate with on-line pals. On weekends, I usually try to stretch the morning session further, and then come back for some more time if I've done what I RL wanted to do for the day.

[How would you nerf tankers?]

18 hours ago, Soulsifter said:

 Is this a bit of a knee-jerk reaction to tankers being prime farmers now? Seems so. 

 

I think it is impossible to say, although there have been changes targeted specifically at 'farming'. I'm more inclined to believe that there were a few devs and dev-adjacent folks that were probably surprised that Tankers matched (and in some content, *1) exceeded the performance of Brutes... and of course the Brute champions have been very vocal about this. The scale-back of the way the Gauntlet radius buff interacts with PPM makes complete sense, but everything else feels like "putting Tankers in their place (according to somebody's vision)". 

 

The Controller AT changes and Tanker changes really ought to have been in different "pages" IMO. I don't think anyone cares if Tanker/Scrapper/Brute times-to-complete (for full builds) are within a minute of each other... unless there is some abstract argument about someone else needs to be 'best' (per that metric). I like Controllers a LOT, but solo leveling can be a real slog at times, in way that isn't (currently, pre-p2) for the melee classes (or Blasters).

 

(*1) I can't even imagine which content the devs are focused on for their swings at (re-)balance. Not everyone rushes to 50, not everyone farms, not everyone does 45+ content, not everyone uses IOs, not everyone plays the new HC content. If it were up to me, I'd focus on bringing the low-performers (in terms of mission time completion) up, rather than knocking ATs down. Specifically over-tuned powers deserve taps from the Nerf bat (ehem, Seeds of Confusion) when they get in the way of balance considerations for new sets.

[Fold Space is too good]

1 hour ago, dukedukes said:

It's utility so I don't expect it to be required for your character to function. I guess people don't like TP as a travel power, it's my favourite personally. Not sure if I've ever taken a fly power, not in a decade at least. The problem is less about it being mandatory and more about it being the go to power for any situation where there's spread out mobs, I'd rather see AT's who specialize in controlling mobs to do their job, like a tank taunting, etc. Power pools shouldn't be able to dominate how an entire team engages in a fight, that's too much power.

 

From the multiple threads started in the suggestion forum, and the level of your engagement within those threads... I get the sense that you are passionate about the Teleportation pool. My blunt opinion about Fold Space is that it doesn't dominate entire team engagements, because it has a base 120 second recharge. If a character has invested three power picks to get Fold Space, and invests another power pick to get Hasten and/or invests slots into Fold Space for Accuracy and Recharge... those sorts of characters are IMO "throwing good after bad" just to get Fold Space to reach levels of (what I consider to be) "base utility". Good for them! This is a perfectly fine choice; I don't see that choice as unbalanced, it just isn't a choice I ever make.(*1)

 

I don't even consider Fold Space to be "the go-to power for spread out mobs"(*2)... for a 3rd pick pool power I'd go Wall of Force from the Force of Will pool every time. The pros of Teleportation are Combat Teleport (which as I noted, makes Fold Space practically irrelevant for a melee character) and the greater range of Fold Space. The pros of Force of Will are a great travel power in Mighty Leap, and the other pre-req pick is either a useful debuff or a ST ranged attack (I usually skip Project Will, but not always) and a Cone attack that allows for lots of different flavor (and includes a Knockdown!)... plus Force of Will's capstone power Unleash Potential is preeety goood.

 

(*1) At some point, the player using Fold Space as often as possible simply ends up leaving spawns "spread out" either because of failed ToHit checks, +4 Bosses, whatever. For solo, they may not care, but on teams the eyes will roll, depending on what sort of powers the rest of the team has.

 

(*2) As noted... I just use Combat Teleport to BAMF to those "spread out enemies".

[A more even distribution of Hamidon, D-sync drops]

16 hours ago, arcane said:

I actually like that there’s one single class of things on the market where the price ranges haven’t been completely flattened by converters. If you want a drop pool to yield a more consistent and predictable reward, isn’t the entire rest of the game already doing that for you?

 

My feelings (about the availability of HO/DS/Titans) are in the exact opposite direction, but I can appreciate the above sentiment. My personal desire is that HO/DS/Titan pieces would be available for purchase via merits (perhaps at a cost of something in the 150 merit range) simply so that for the "really useful, highly desired" pieces that folks want in their builds they wouldn't be restricted to membership in either the churches of RNGesus or AH.

[Fold Space is too good]

11 hours ago, Maelwys said:

On a toon with a Taunt Aura and/or punchvoke; IME Fold Space has only a few very niche situations where it's more efficient than you just instantly moving yourself into the middle of one fresh spawn; firing off a regular AOE; and then instantly moving into the middle of another fresh spawn. Because it has a target cap of 16; and power target selection in CoX always prefers the closest targets so Fold Space will always grab the closest 16 hostile targets (and annoyingly, line them up rather than pack them tightly in around you).

 

Quoting the above, as it neatly summarizes the explanation of my own feels about Fold Space. Without summarizing: I see Fold Space as a niche use power that (for 100% of my characters that dip into the Teleportation pool) isn't required if I take Combat Teleport.

 

I'm glad that the Teleportation pool got a rework. I'm happy that some players like Fold Space. I don't feel like arguing strategies for using it (or not). IMO the opportunity cost (in terms of power picks, slot investment, and likely having to use Teleport as my travel power) makes it too costly for my taste. I don't think Fold Space needs to be scaled back.

[Teleport Target on enemies is too weak]

The Teleportation pool is in a really good place right now... of the original 4 travel pools, it has IMO received the best rework and would be at the bottom of the list for changes.

 

Having written that, the one "under-the-hood" change I think might make sense  (but would require serious rework) would be: *If* an enemy critter has TP resistance that prevents them from being yoinked, those critters get a short reduction in TP resistance so that a second yoink could grab them... sort of like how controls can be stacked.

 

Personally, I wouldn't expect such a change... but I don't expect any changes to the way Teleport powers affect critters except possibly to the placement rules for groups.

[How would you nerf tankers?]

On 6/13/2025 at 12:54 PM, Thornstromb said:

I'll throw in my 2 cents, though i have little true mechanical knowledge of the game as I am a filthy casual.

Which feels to me like exactly who the changes are "supposedly" harming?

 

Regardless, I'd actually feel more inclined to support a clearer distinction between Tanker, Brute, and Scrapper. As a Casual, they don't feel very different aside from stat distribution, which limits them.

 

In practice: The differences between Scrapper/Stalker/Brute/Tanker are pretty much limited by which power sets are primaries versus secondaries, at which levels certain powers can be taken, and the subtle differences between "caps" on certain under-the-hood values (e.g. MaxHP, Resistance, +Damage, etc.) modulated by if/when the primary/secondary can boost such things. when many players rush to level 50, and since HC lowered the levels at which secondary powers can be chosen... these things reduce the obvious differences between certain ATs.

 

Never forget that the game's rewards are 99.9% tied to defeating enemies, so there should be NO cause for concern if a whole bunch of similar ATs have nearly identical "clear times" by whatever metrics once they have access to all of their primary/secondary powers. When we see full-kit builds using Epics, Incarnates, and IOs finishing identical content within a minute of each other... this is NOT something to get ego-bruised if a personal feeling that "X should be faster than Y" isn't born out by that result. The 0.1% not strictly tied to defeats is the rando Prismatic reward tied to mission completion.

 

The Tanker radius buffs from a while back don't limit %procs like every other AT gets limited, so THAT should be addressed. Everything else past that... IMO it looks like there is a strong desire to push Tanker completion times into a lower tier (possibly Controllers, or non-exploit Kheldians)

 

[Focused Feedback: Tanker - Archetype Inherent Changes]

Not on Beta: I took a level appropriate Tanker through Tina MacIntyre recently.... nothing fancy just +0x4... the Clockwork spawns (with multiple Repair Bots) are going to be even more of a PITA (for Tankers), as I usually relied on AoE to soften up things while I concentrate on the Repair Bots.

[Focused Feedback: Tanker - Archetype Inherent Changes]

3 minutes ago, Crimsanotic said:

 

To be fair, farming (or more specifically, power leveling) was considered "bad" because it would allow people to quickly reach max level and then presumably quit the game (thus losing money). But Homecoming is free so that problem doesn't exist. Right?

 

Almost all of the past six-years-of-changes aimed at farming were focused on the economy. There have been other changes not focused on the economy that have affected the then-current farming meta, but as @Maelwys points out: it doesn't take a Tanker or Brute to farm.

[Focused Feedback: Tanker - Archetype Inherent Changes]

18 hours ago, Maelwys said:

Procs are definitely borked. PPM mechanics are both unintuitive and ridiculous (adding local recharge aspect is bad?!?) and should be nuked from orbit. But that's not unique to Melee ATs and so IMO is a battle for another day. Notably - Tankers are currently dealing too much AoE damage whether or not you include Proc effects - and the melee AT that is gaining the most benefit from procbombing their attacks is a Brute (due to their low base damage; plus Fury; they gain proportionally more from slotting their attacks with damage procs instead of for damage aspect!).

 

I don't think the (what people call) disparity is due to procs; I think the whatever the disparity is... is due to Global Recharge. I'm not ignorant of the artificial inflation of %proc chances for (current, HC) Tankers that really ought to be addressed.

 

With Blasters having crashless nukes and beaucoup recharge, I don't know why there is such intense focus of Scrapper/Tanker/Brute when those three have repeatedly been shown (currently, on the HC shards) to all be pretty close in performance. Scrappers without their Critical hits ATO wouldn't be outputting more damage than Brutes (in terms of clear times) as near as I can tell. Right now we've got a whole lotta ATs that are fun to play and can reap similar rewards in roughly similar amounts of time. I can't wrap my head around trying to knock one of four (or five, or six) ATs out of that rewards-per-unit-time group. The game is IMO far past the point where we need to have role-specific team construction to earn rewards (in similar amounts of time/effort).

 

 

 

 

[Focused Feedback: Tanker - Archetype Inherent Changes]

On 6/10/2025 at 6:55 PM, Player-1 said:

 

Some use the Trapdoor mission, others use custom AE missions they can do on repeat. As long as the same mission is repeatable in a decent time frame it would work for comparison.

 

I gotta write: Suggesting Trapdoor (and Pylons) as a means of balancing power sets and ATs seems like it is really muddying the waters when it comes to relative performance. Even the vaunted Ston analysis showed fractions of a minute in differences between three different melee ATs (at level 50).

[Enhancements and IOs]

20 hours ago, StompyOne said:

This has been hinted at and referenced a couple of times in this thread. 

 

But take the 41, park it in Echo: Dark Astoria (the portal behind Ouro). Play your regular toon.  Wait for an Adamastor announcement in LFG. Swap toons to the 41 for 10-15 minutes. Tops. Get in on the monster kill. 

 

I'm looking forward to Echo: Dark Astoria becoming a PvP zone.

[The heavy handed history of hammering Brutes...]

It would be too much of a change to the perception and mechanics of Brutes, but this would be my suggestion: if Brutes debuffed enemies in PBAoE as they built Fury instead of self-buffing damage, that would be a somewhat unique mechanic that would allow the Brutes to "hit harder" and have a place on teams. Obviously this wouldn't appeal to anyone who thinks one-dimensionally along the lines of "Hulk get angrier and hits harder", but in terms of game mechanics it would be an alternative to "melee DPS".

[Focused Feedback: Tanker - Archetype Inherent Changes]

1 hour ago, Onlyasandwich said:

Personally I think the overcap mechanic is actually pretty clever, and gives us a more discrete way to tune ST vs aoe damage.

 

Seems like Defender/Corruptor %damage in AoE might be a future target for this "clever" mechanic.

[Focused Feedback: Powerset - Dark Armor]

21 hours ago, Midnight Mystique said:

The entire KB 'hole' thing never made sense to me. 

 

This is my head-canon: Dark Armor lack KB protection (as a feature) because of the ways that Dark Armor relies on nearby enemies to survive. The KB 'hole' was (in my mind) intended to add a blunt vulnerability... if the character is being knocked down/around they can't use their self-heal.

[Enhancements and IOs]

11 minutes ago, Ghost said:

Where did all that come from?