...

Or maybe a small damage buff, tAoE version of the decimation unique? The original version of decimation was extremely compelling exactly because it had recharge and ranged defense. That said, I'm not entirely convinced that the ranged defense and recharge need to split; obliteration exists. And to get 5 copies of any set 6 set bonus you need to use 30 slots. That a lot of slots.

Another option might be to keep the original bombardment, but make the proc unique. Leaves us with a great set and solves the stackability concern.

Might be time to lock the thread.

I think the devs are doing a pretty good job. I get the feeling they actually do listen to player feedback. Focused feedback threads, discord, etc. Sure, sometimes we may question certain changes. If there is a specific change you question, just ask though. Maybe you'll get an answer. We may have different priorities. For example, I'd rather see Khelds get a rework than Electrical Affinity. But I'm not going to tell someone else how to spend their free time. As to whether the game belongs to the players or the developers - this is kind of a pointless debate. Homecoming wouldn't be what it is without both players and developers. It's a community. Obviously the people working on this game care deeply about it - but I do think they get shit on a little more than they should (in fact I've recently been guilty of shitting on them myself). Anyway, if the OP was motivated to create this thread by a specific instance he was concerned about (DM?) - then maybe just ask about that one thing in particular.

Yeah it's an amazing set. Many other sets offer ranged defense and recharge. Basiliks gaze, expedient reinforcement, dom & troller ato's, one of the sniper sets. None offer both the stackability and bonus values of bombardment. Then again, melee types have obliteraiion. But melee defense is probably not as widely as ranged.

You're right. Must have missed it. I like that version better. I think we we're coming at it from different angles: you for the enhancement values, and me for the recharge stacking. But either would be great!

Regarding bombardment, I started thinking it might be preferable to have the recharge bonus at 5%, and increase the enhancement values somewhat. My rationale is that most ranged and ranged AoE sets generally have 6.25% as a recharge bonus. This would increase variety and facilitate recharge stacking on ranged characters. Then again, maybe 6.25% was chosen by design to prevent excessive, easy recharge stacking. Or to prevent conflict with melee and PBAoE sets, which generally have 5% recharge. Either way, I think it will be a great set.

Gotcha. Yeah I don't like your proposed change. Better to have good set bonuses than a little more enhancement values.

Does 100% slow resistance negate the movement and recharge penalty of Granite armor? If so, electric melee + 5x this set solves most of Granite's downsides. Still can't jump though. And as stated, the damage enhancement value is not that good.

Please do not change ranged defense to aoe defense in this set. AoE defense is the least useful defense. Ranged, on the other hand, is extremely useful for dominators, blasters, defenders and corruptors.

Cross posted from the dominator forums. Not entirely sure if this is a bug or not, but it seems like one. Domination does not apply to a variety of pseudopet control powers such as synaptic overload, static field or volcanic gases. This is well known and long standing. My guess is that this is a "spaghetti code" issue. Anyway, having the class mechanic not apply to key powers in your primary powerset is kind of ... terrible. Scrappers and stalkers have a similar problem with shield charge and crits, but at least there shield charge doesn't break stealth. Anyway, I know a lot of people don't play dominators, but for those of us that do, a fix would be deeply appreciated, if at all possible.

I know it doesn't. My question is: is that by design, or is it a bug? Seems kind of strange to that the class mechanic just doesn't work on some powers.

I know domination does not effect pseudopets such as electric's synaptic overload or static field, earth's volanic gasses, and maybe a few others. My guess is that it wouldn't effect spooky, if illusion ever gets ported to dominators. Is this working as intended, or a bug? Has it ever been addressed by the developers? Same kind of question: if the first hit in a chain misses, then the entire chain misses. Intended or bug? I'm getting more and more interested in electric dominators, but these two issues really bother me.

I can respect that developer time is a limited resource, and agree that they should focus their efforts. I do think, however, that toggle supression has been widely requested. See for example the weekly discussion thread.

But why be opposed? As is, your stated objections seem to suggest that you don't see the value of toggle suppression for yourself or your playstyle. Other people do. The suggested change wouldn't weaken the class or infringe upon your playstyle; toggles would remain optional. Why not let other people play the game the way they want? Unless, of course, you can think of something better?

1. Not everything needs 6 slots to be effective. Particularly if you take cardiac for your alpha slot. 2 and 3. You still have at most 67 slots to give to powers. Players will still have to choose which forms to focus on. 4. The Captain suggested that it will not be a perfect zero sum. But he did not explicitly state that something workable is impossible. As it is, multi form and the resist toggles are mutually exclusive. There aren't too many other powersets in the game where some of your powers deprecate your other powers - granite armor being the one that comes most easily to mind. This design hasn't really been repeated since the early game ... because it sucks.

I think a more important consideration for Khelds is the damage per activation time of many of their powers. Honestly, it can feel like you're pointlessly poking enemies over and over again. As an (internal) example, dark nova detonation and dark detonation have the same damage per activation time (and same recharge), despite nova form having a 1.2 ranged modifier and human form having a 0.8 ranged modifier. This makes no sense. Kheld single target damage can be pretty terrible too. Why is Nova form NOT the go to choice for single target damage? Again, this makes no sense. Either up the damage or lower the activation time. Things are currently so undertuned. The other major issue I see with Khelds is that their defensive powers are not very synergistic. As it is, eclipse and light form are extremely powerful, to such an extent that many builds advocate avoiding your defensive toggles (and white dwarf for PBs). And the resist toggles are essentially useless in a multi form build. This is just bad design. Compare this to the VEATs, who offer layered defenses with powers that synergize well. For me, the priorities would be: - make kheld damage per activation times comparable competitive with other classes, and reflective of their damage modifiers. - increase nova form single target damage. - dwarf form taunt aura and dwarf form punchvoke. Dwarves should be able to hold aggro like a brute. - as an aside, I don't think human form needs taunts or punchvoke. That's what dwarf is for. - endurance neutral (or near neutral) toggle supression. This may not be possible per the Captain's comments. That said, maybe something similar to the way bio armor works might be reasonable (toggle shields provide a recovery boost when shifted). - make the inherent give mag 2 or 3 status protection per controller/dominator. Or change it to damage and resist like the other ATs (consider the dominator like a blaster and the controller like a defender) - make the inherent when teamed with other EATS a little more useful. Maybe 5% resist and 10% damage buff (ie half of both the offensive and defensive buff) instead of the slow resistance. - I'm sure this will be controversial, but I'd consider allowing power pool toggles in forms. Honestly, every guide out there for just about every other AT tells you to build defense. Maneuvers/combat jumping/weave is a pretty standard power pool selection for a lot of ATs because it is so effective. Tri form builds are excluded from power pools for flavor reasons... but realistically without game design reason. "Versatility" doesn't make a convincing argument in the post-IO/incarnate game. And Khelds are obviously not overpowered, or we wouldn't see these threads keep popping up. Lets just embrace the usefulness of defense. It's really not that different from being able to use incarnates while shifted.

Just started a SD/WM tanker myself, but he's only level 21 and not experienced with the build or with tanking generally, so take my advice with a grain of salt. That said, my thoughts are: - 3 piece Numina's instead of 3 piece Panacea in True Grit. 2% more regen and 1.88% hp at the cost of 2.5% recovery. This is obviously not a very big change. - I'm not sure how valuable Hasten is. It does allow you to have near double stack Active Defense, but that seems to be all it does. Meaning, your ST attack chain will probably be Clobber > Shatter > Jawbreaker (plus or minus Bash for the -resist) and your AOE chain will be Crowd Control > Shatter > Whirling Mace. Both of these chains are maintainable without Hasten. Double stack Active Defense may be worth it for the extra DDR, but I've read that you can buff the DDR on Active Defense with Membrane Exposure HOs. I haven't confirmed this in game myself though. Worth checking out. That said, Hasten does make Shield Charge come up a little more often, particularly because as slotted your Shield Charge is only at 50% recharge. - grabbing 2 piece Blistering Cold + 2 or 3 pieces of another winter set (hold, ranged or ranged AoE) will get you another 30% slow resistance, which would make you nearly immune to slows at 95% resistance (you get 30% from Grant Cover). - finally the Preventive Medicine chance for +absorb has saved my bacon on many a character. I haven't tried it on a tank though, possibly redundant. Then again, SD has no self heal. Otherwise your build looks very similar to what I've been working on, and I think I'll be stealing some of your ideas myself (namely 4 piece Shield Wall for e/ne resistance).

I specifically meant support via buffs. Leave the high value buffs to VEATs, defenders, corruptors and controllers.

My apologies for accidently antagonizing you by quoting the Cottage Rule. On the other hand, this is my first time participating in this discussion; I have not been quoting the Cottage Rule as some kind of holy text. Of course the devs can overturn any rule they want. That is what it means to be a developer. But the "how" and "why" to make changes is what matters. The developer responsibility is to make the right changes for the right reasons. Tankers were never melee support. Making them melee support is antithematic to their original design intent. That is the important principle I was getting at: don't break original design intent without sufficient justification. Giving tankers a melee support flair would overlap too much with VEATS.

Tankers are meant to be the most survivable and best at aggro management. This is reflected in their higher base values and inherent power. Brutes are meant to be very survivable, but trade some survivability for damage. Unfortunately in a world of IOs, both tankers and brutes can achieve "extremely hard to kill almost all the time" levels of survivability in nearly all content. So Tankers don't beat brutes on survivability. Gauntlet, for all its intentions, doesn't make tankers that much better at maintaining aggro than brutes. So the devs have options: 1) increase tanker damage 2) increase tanker target caps on aoes and cones + increase areas (remembering that the 16 target cap limit is very hard to change for technical coding reasons most of us don't understand) 3) nerf brute survivability The devs have avoided option 3 because no one likes a nerf bat (and honestly, it would break brutes; they are meant to be survivable). 1+2 seems to fine to me, 2 being the more important in my opinion. Then it is just a matter of spreadsheets and numbers for balancing purposes. Target cap increase (10 to 16 on pbaoes) + base damage increase (0.8 to 0.95) means that tankers will do almost double damage in AOE heavy situations relative to the damage they deal now: 16/10 * 0.95/0.8 = 190%. If the devs think that is reasonable, then great. If not, then it might be worth changing the damage scale to 0.9 or whatever. This may shift the farming meta-game from brutes to tankers. Oh well; farmers will adjust. Finally, I'll note that tankers get a "3" on "Support" on the character creation screen, as user parabola was so kind to include above. Though the Cottage Rule, strictly speaking, applies to powers, I think I'd like to invoke it for archetypes as well; tankers were never support via buffs. Giving them higher base values for things like Leadership toggles doesn't make sense to me. That's the wheelhouse of defenders and VEATS.

I am having a very similar problem. It is beyond frustrating. It seems to happen more frequently with longer macros, notably: powexectoggleon Shadow Cloak$$powexectoggleon Super Speed$$bind lshift+lbutton powexecname Shadow Step$$gototrayalt 2$$powexectoggleoff Black Dwarf keeps getting truncated to: powexectoggleon Shadow Cloak$$powexectoggleon Super Speed$$bind lshift+lbutton powexecname Shadow Step$$gototrayalt 2 I'm spending 20 minutes at a time remaking the macros. Making the macro from scratch doesn't seem to help. Parts of my macros just keep disappearing (or are reverting to older versions of the macros).

Right. I meant I likely can't start until 10 pm EDST.

I'd love to join, but probably couldn't join until 8 pm EDST (kids). My global is @Frad. Yours? I'll try to come next week.