tidge

The argument about "buying low level HO/D-Syncs" doesn't seem particularly strong: Is it not the case that the Homecoming Auction House buckets them all, so that the price of any given level of an HO is the same as any other HO?

I don't think there is any need to boost MM Henchmen "Survivability".... especially since the homecoming resummon times are now super short most buffs applied to henchmen hit them all the "survivability" enhancement pieces are pretty easy to come by players have a very wide variety of secondaries and power pools (also Incarnates, for those that rush right to level 50+) to choose from Learning how to play with henchmen, across all content, is a pretty important part of the MM experience. More that any other AT, MMs have to be able to adjust their play style across all content in ways that other ATs don't have to... this is a feature of the AT not a bug.

I'll join the brigade: getting to mission doors in the new RWZ is much harder than I expect it to be.

I know I have a mini-mode for one character... and maybe on another... but that was for specific costume reasons that fit the character concepts. I don't enjoy how the collision box/map navigation works for mini-mode, so it is not a high priority for me. I have alternate prismatic costumes for several characters, mostly for concept reasons.... and a little bit for nostalgia, because on Live I would occasionally try to make characters look like enemy critters.

Some small, but not insignificant, part of my mental model for the argument in favor of "Tankers must be nerfed" is that there is a large overlap between people who make that argument and those who used to be the loudest proponents of "Brutes make Tankers irrelevant" not all that long ago. In the years before CoV, the argument was "Scrappers make Tankers irrelevant"... at least after the critter AI change that kept them from being willingly immolated by Fire Tankers. CoX isn't a zero-sum game! Embrace the difference in play-styles and build choices (across all levels of content) and try to avoid thinking that a particular AT is somehow gimped because you witnessed a player using another AT do something "better". The Brutes v. Tanks argument is a corner case that relies primarily (my PoV) on very specific build/slotting choices... so it isn't appropriate to plead for "Tanker Nerfs" just because a particular set of choices relating to attacks and slotting can have a Tanker cleaning up minion-level enemies slightly faster than a Brute that makes alternate build choices.

I choose Blaster secondaries for reasons, roughly in order: Character concept How I want to play the character How I want to build the character (1) Concept over all. (2) Many blaster secondaries offer excellent melee options, so I pick those if I want to BLAP. Only a few do not, such as Tactical Arrow. (3) Sometimes, when I feel like the Primary and Pools will do a good job getting me what I want from (1) and (2), I'll pick a secondary based on what I can slot/toggle/click to cover one or more (perceived) "holes" in the build.

I definitely feel that players who advertise on LFG for a "Master of..." Task Force should be willing to patiently explain what is necessary... especially if this is explicitly for a "badge run"... because I don't believe all "badger" characters are built equally to earn the "Master of..." badges without good communication, teamwork, and managing expectations. It is completely possible to run a MOTF without resorting to LFG, and for them to be run with fewer than eight.

The Fighting pool is commonly used to get Tough and Weave... adding Cross Punch isn't a terrible choice if a player wants more Melee AoE on their build once they've committed to those other powers... for Kheldians this would be more about having Human form melee attacks. My guess is that this wouldn't be a bad choice for a human-only PB, and maybe a bi-form WS... I have trouble imagining a WS without the Dwarf form at all, but that's my limited imagination. Writing only for myself: While I have at least one character with a full suite of the Fighting pool, that was 85% for flavor and 15% for wanting another fast-cycling Melee AoE attack. I typically have a hard time finding enough slots for multiple Power Pool choices... often two pool powers get the full 6-slots... and since multi-form Kheldians will already have so many attacks I'm thinking a Fighting pool set of choices is adding some of the "missing" attack options to the Khelds, along with powers to boost inherent survivability. An earlier version of the game (and on Homecoming) rather highly prioritized S/L resistance in a way that doesn't precisely matter any more, so Tough was something of a no-brainer for a LOT of "tanky" builds. S/L attacks are still a thing of course, it's just that over the course of several pages it no longer helps as much to have the S/L resistances over the cap. I suppose if the Dwarf form is not taken, Tough is good place to add some mule slots. Most of my characters that end up with Tough almost never toggle it on.

I giggle for the same reason. I feel like there is a common set of reductionist thinking when it comes to both "procs" and "softcap"... and it seems weird that there can be such polarization about %damage... often declaring it a crime against game balance... yet there is so little vocalization about things like critter ToHit chances. I think @PeregrineFalcon had it right: There can be a strong current of evangelization for %damage that I think a lot of the subtleties of how to use them is lost, and also has triggered a sort of iconoclastic reaction in some people patiently waiting for them to be destroyed. Personally, I think %damage is in a good place because it has the possibility (if used, %damage is a build choice, just like trying to get to a "45% defense" ) that makes the rewards-per-unit-time across ATs more even than it would be otherwise. The current game is in a surprisingly pleasant island of stability such that I see no reason to evacuate it for a variety of decades old notions of "how the game should be".

So your argument against %procs is that some players have to play a certain way to get rewards equal to what other players get?

This is me, but substitute "softcap" for "proc". Do I look forward to the day when the devs finally raise the base ToHit of all enemy critters do defense discussions can focus on alternate play styles and not "Softcap softcap softcap SOFTCAP!!"?... mmmm... get back to me on that one.

I tend to play "off hours" when population is low. So... If I come across a GM in a zone... and that GM didn't just spawn... I will always do a whoall to see if anyone is in the zone, and if there are players in the zone I broadcast asking if anyone wants in. If a player is hidden, let's just agree that they chose to be hidden. There are enough GM hunters that when I'm the first one to the monster I'll either wait or start slow(*1). If the server is populated, I'll announce in the LFG. My monster hunter is capable of slowing down, but I gotta be honest... I don't like waiting 10 minutes for people to get to the zone before starting. I've been doing this long enough I feel like I have a pretty good sense if anyone is going to join in. If I get a tell, I'll wait. Most of teh monsters will be back up in 4 hours anyway. (*1) for me: when I want to take my time, I don't pop Lores. A couple of reasonably well-built level 50s should be able to finish off most GMs if one of them can do damage, without Lores.

Kismet works "on activation", so having it in an Auto or always-on toggle is the way to go.

I'm not making an argument about the baseline, I am arguing about REWARDS. A Blaster at +0x1 will reap rewards an order of magnitude faster than a Controller at +0x1. This is inherently unfair. A Controller that is able to close the gap by making specific build choices to use %damage is not cheating nor iis it breaking the game.

Jack E, is that you?

This deserves more upvotes. If there is ever a Homecoming change to %damage, I feel like we will see solo players mostly focusing on Blasters and Scrappers, with some evangelists for Brutes and Stalkers. The only way some AT can keep their map-clear times (especially at x8) within an order of magnitude of other ATs is by leveraging %damage. There are some folks that see %damage as inherently unfair because with them it becomes possible for all ATs to clear large maps with x8 spawn sizes in less than an hour. This is exactly the wrong definition of unfair. Game rewards are (with the exception of Prismatic Aether Particles and merit rewards) directly scale with the number of enemy defeats. I don't want to play City of X where the game rewards is NOT tied to enemy defeats, and I don't want to go back to a game where a Defender has to take eight times as long to clear a map as a Blaster. Characters that leverage %damage must carefully pick and slot powers to do that leveraging. It is so much better for the health of the game that all ATs have this option. No players should have their feelings hurt because %damage exists.

Because I was using the Concealment pool (many of my Blasters use Infiltration as a travel power), I took Phase Shift to see if I could use it to fight Carnie Illusionists and Diabloque (while phase shifted). I could not.

This wasn't me! Maybe they wanted Hover on because they have the Kimset +6% ToHit slotted in it? That might make more of a difference on a Positron TF. Many of the enemies on Posi 1 and 2 have ranged attacks, so it isn't as if hover-blasting out of melee is doing much.

I wouldn't try to enhance the -ToHit on attacks... you need those to do damage. Writing only for myself, typically, I will enhance -ToHit in a small number of circumstances: The power takes a -ToHit set where I want a set bonus (often the case with Cloud Senses) and there aren't other sets going in the power. The power has one slot left and I haven't put any -ToHit in it, and something like a Lysosome (Accuracy and -ToHit) or Enzyme (Endurance Reduction and -ToHit) would benefit the power. Another personal attitude is that -ToHit is an inherently unreliable means of survivability, because RNG. It does help... and I have seen it improve the survivability of certain squishies... but for a Tanker I think it would be a somewhat marginal improvement.

It was the case (before the most recent page) that the J-Rubbles (and grand-baby Rubbles) left in Crey's Folly would prevent Jurassik from respawning... just like the Clockworks in KR and the Grim Vale extras in Croatoa prevent those site-specific zone events from re-occurring. I want to say that the Boomtown Babbage was the same, but I could never verify. I don't think any of this was changed in the most recent page, except that now it appears that the Boomtown Babbage no longer summons -3 minions.

In addition to "classic" franken-slotting (mixing Enhancement pieces from different sets, so there are no set bonuses to be had), I will occasionally use boosted (rather than attuned) pieces of sets when I don't particularly feel the need for the set bonus across all content. Some examples: I will use attuned Luck of the Gambler Defense/Global Recharge, and every once in a while there is a Defensive power that will get a second slot... I don't find the +10% to Regeneration 2-piece set bonus to be that useful for all content, so the second piece will be a 50+5 from the set (if I'm not using a Hami-O). I'll get the bonus for extreme high-level content, and boosted values of Defense (or Defense/Recharge, or Defense/Endurance) at lower levels. Another example: Every once in a while I am using multiple pieces of an Enhancement set that has a level range that tops out at level 30. If the set bonus isn't that critical at lower levels, those types of sets will get boosted, especially if Enhancement Diversification isn't factoring into the power.

Obviously players should follow their own path. I leaned on %damage for several reasons: 1) As a tri-form, I knew I was going to have a LOT of attacks and I knew I wouldn't be able to 5-slot them all... or build a single "attack chain" that made sense to rely on a complete-ish enhancment set... so as a compromise I (mostly) picked the 3-slot bonuses that I felt were optimal and reserved 5+ slots for attacks that I felt I was going to get the most use out of. The Very Rare sets slotted with 5 pieces use a %damage piece because the little bit of ED damage (and/or recharge) didn't add much enhancement to the particular power. Of course more from set bonuses would always be good, as a practical matter I don't want more recharge (and if I did, I'd put a one-slot Hasten in the build late), and the little bit more I could get in terms of global additions to resists/defenses wouldn't make that much of a difference considering where the build is now. The one global bonus I did try to chase more than usual was Slow resists. 1b) The tri-form is why I took both Ebon Eye and Shadow Bolt. I had planned to replace one with Shadow Blast, but I'd still only have the same number of slots... so I opted to take the two powers that would carry over from Human to Dwarf/Nova forms. I'm really not crazy about single-target controls, especially ones I can't stack. 2) Most of the WS attacks are skimpy enough with base damage that adding 72 or 107 extra damage, especially in AoE, feels like a better yield than trying to enhance damage. 3) With Quantums in the game, I wanted the %proc damage such that it takes fewer hits (of attacks I will be using anyway) to drop them. 4) I am comfortable with AoE %damage. I find I don't need to be super precise in my targeting to spread the pain.

Quoting myself, because there are a few Quality-of-Life aspects I have noticed while playing: Without using Antagonize, it is quite difficult to hold aggro. I mean... I get that isn't supposed to be trivial to get/hold aggro... but even while cycling through every trick in the Dwarf playbook, I am losing aggro to the Extracted Essences. I have Antagonize slotted for Threat! When using Shadow Slip, enemies that are 'ported will continue vectoring towards their chosen target. Extracted Essences that become separated can be teleported to adjacency with Shadow Recall, but they often vanish back to where they were summoned fomr... whatever has kept them from following has summoned them back! (1) I don't really have a suggestion, except this: maybe something like a punch-voke for Dwarf form? (2) Maybe to fix this one the power needs a buff... something like a VERY short duration mega-Slow or a Taunt? I'm not looking for an(other) uber %damage power... but I try to use this power to help out teammates and often they stay as targets, or the enemy critters just sprint past me to their original target. (3) This is AI wonkiness, but perhaps if after teleport, pet classes could simply reset their path-ing?

I recommend using the Unbreakable Constraint %Smashing or Gladiator's Net %Lethal in Gravity Well, instead of Touch of Death %Negative as the Very Rare and PVP pieces do higher %damage than other pieces. The Very Rare's have an inherently higher %proc chance than the PVPs (4.5 IIRCv 3.5 PPM IIRC). I also try to mix up damage types... every once in a while there will be an enemy group that highly resists the inherent damage type of any character. As long as powers with a 15+ second inherent recharge time have decent Accuracy slotting, %damage should be reliable. IIRC this is because the %procs also have their own post-hit ToHit check to see if they fire, and that ToHit check... independent of the %proc chance, and the character's ToHit check... is only using the power's slotted Accuracy... this was mentioned a long time ago via code review but it seems to hold true to me. I typically cycle between forms to fire off the PBAoE/AoE, using single target attacks (typically in Dwarf form). Note that the Ebon Eye %proc chances aren't terrible (~40% for a 3.5 PPM?) but without moving slots around I think I'd replace at least one of the pieces with a boosted Accuracy/Damage piece, possibly for a set bonus.

Oh thanks, I certainly don't have two of the same %damage in any power 😉