Redlynne

Depends on your secondary (and the rest of your build plan) and concept.

Yes ... but ... You'll need to be able to consistently stack 56+ Mag worth of Confuse on them in order to do so, which will be hard to do AND be able to do anything else. You'll essentially need maximum Accuracy, Confuse and Recharge on a single target Confuse power in order to even make the attempt. Power Boost and Domination will go a LONG way towards helping you reach this goal. Dominators will have the easiest time of this (especially with perma-Domination to help) since Domination will double the Mag output of Confuse powers. 56 / 3 = 19 Confuses (Controller) 56 / 6 = 10 Confuses (Dominator with Domination) And keep in mind that most Confuse powers require a ToHit roll so some of your Confuse attacks will miss, meaning you're going to need even more Confuse attacks to account for the occasional MISS result when building up your Mag stacks. And that's before you even account for the Purple Patch reducing the duration of your Confuse power(s), making it harder for you to build a deep enough Mag stack to consistently sustain Confuse through Purple Triangles. So it's possible, but it takes a LOT of effort to accomplish for a Controller. It's easier for a Dominator with perma-Domination, but even then you are going to need a fair bit of margin so that you can reliably sustain the Mag stack of Confusion.

Right. It's still a toggle ... it's just a Cone instead of a Target AoE. The 15º Cone angle is an attempt to keep the area of effect equal(-ish) to the legacy power (see linked other thread for math computations for how I got to that answer). Right ... different challenges with using the power as an anchorless Cone. It would basically be a case of once you've got Telekinesis actively Holding $Targets you need to keep your focus on them, rather than shifting your focus around (such as buffing teammates and so on). The temp power power that kills Telekinesis is a PvP only thing, and it's in the original power (see the linked City of Data page) and has been since PvP was introduced. I didn't add that (and I'm also not advocating changing that either).

No argument, since it was totally napkin math in which each factor is weighted 1:1 when making cross comparisons. So not exactly definitive, but useful as a starting point for calculating when "Too Much Is Too Much" in the buffing department for Telekinesis, relative to the performance of Total Domination. AGREED. You have to playtest it to get a good sense of how it changes "the game" (so to speak), in large part because HOW the power gets used as a Cone Facing power will determine how effective the power can be. Strategy and Tactics and relative Positioning would all become factors with how the power "plays" in real time ... all of which are the province of Player Skill. Similar but different, for sure. I'm trying to be as conservative as possible with the changes, so as to make the fewest changes that yield the most amount of leverage from those minimal changes (5 to the power parameters, 3 to the enhancements, zero to the power's effects). That then gives you something to springboard from if additional changes need to be made above and beyond that (later) to account for the differences in Player behaviors and how they tend to "use" the power in its new configuration. Of course, the solution to the "push beyond the Cone range" problem is just to advance your avatar fowards as the affected $Targets get repelled away from you so as to keep the relative distance between you comparable (if not constant) so that you move forwards as they repel backwards away from you. There will be other little tricks of movement control that could be used on top of that which would have VERY interesting implications for skillful gameplay though ... which I'll leave up to your imagination on how to take advantage of those. 😎

This was posted in the Controller forum, but I'm cross-posting it here for ease of reference for staff. Additional explanation (and obligatory WALL OF TEXT CRITS YOU!!!) showing methodology for computing equivalencies between Target AoE and Cone versions of Telekinesis can be found in the original post HERE. And yes, there are ... implications ... in changing Telekinesis from a 10ft 360º Target AoE into being a 50ft 15º Cone power, which I lay out in the original post in the Controller forum (for anyone who is interested in reading up on that). I would like to think that the above edits (8 in total, 3 of which are slotting related) are within the capabilities of the present staff for Homecoming ... and that this change could be applied to Controller and Dominator versions of Telekinesis with "no fuss, no muss" in less than 10 minutes worth of powers database editing.

This was pure theorycrafting for me, in case I ever wanted to make a Beast Mastermind (which I may do at some point). Right now, I just haven't got the time I need to play the 9 alts I've already got, let alone more. For Beast Mastermind, it's basically a toss up between Kinetics and Electrical Affinity (for me). I haven't made a Beast/Kin build yet so kind of hard to cross compare them.

Interesting data. It does however show that Standard Ammo can "keep pace" with Incendiary Ammo against a single target when doing a SF > P > DW > P > PR > repeat single target attack chain when accounting for the 20% Resistance debuff. 0.9833 * 0.9984 * 0.9833 * 1.0495 = 101.31% But that's completely discounting the effect on the slotting of Suppressive Fire as a proc monster damage power (that also increases accuracy and mez duration!). The increase in damage there is just going to swamp the rounding error of difference between Standard Ammo and Incendiary Ammo ... hence why I'm thinking it would be severely advantageous to switch to Standard Ammo for the single target rotation, but stick to Incendiary Ammo for the AoE target rotation, due to the debuffing multiplier effect on those damage procs in Suppressive Fire for the single target rotation (to say nothing of the team benefits). Validation/verification appreciated.

There CAN be gaps, yes, if there isn't enough combat going on. But then again, how much of a gap? Well, in practice ... at worst ... with a fully slotted leveling build the gap would be ... 6.91s ... when there's (by definition) no combat at all going on for the previous 90 seconds for Light Form. For the Superior+Purple 50 alternate slotting, the gap would be ... 1.73s ... when there's (by definition) no combat at all going on for the previous 90 seconds for Light Form. Those would be the only conditions where Force Feedback procs simply could not happen (at all) ... and if you're not in constant combat, how necessary is it to close that gap to be absolutely perma? Short of that, you'd need intermittent combat where you can't manage to get either 5 or 1 Force Feedback Procs from any one of 3 AoE powers (one in each form) during 90s of intermittent combat depending on how Superior/Purple 50 your slotting is, with respect to Light Form. So it's not like you have to fight in Human form ONLY in order to get the Force Feedback procs you "need" to close the gap on Light Form. Now, on the way up while leveling from 38 to 50, the problem is going to be more acute than that, because you won't have all of your slots and enhancements (and therefore set bonuses yet) ... but that's not a permanent state of affairs (since you're still leveling, right?). Eventually you'll get past that and settle into the 50 build posture where that becomes a non-issue. So long as you're willing to accept that Light Form is perma when you need it to be (plentiful combat) and isn't when you don't need it to be (just standing around with no combat going on), it works out just fine. Considering how absurdly TIGHT on slots most Tri-form Peacebringer builds are ... I'd say yes. I mean, we're talking about a gap of less than 7 seconds on Light Form under conditions of light to no combat per 90s when no Force Feedback procs happen, versus a power pick that takes a slot I haven't got "loose" to dedicate to that purpose. But then, it's a value judgement as to whether or not it's worth it to you. I just wanted to demonstrate what the trade off involves so people can make their own value judgements. For me, the big advantage is being able to put Light Form on autofire and not needing to even worry about Hasten at all.

For the dozenth plus two times ... because the game engine does not support "reverse repel" ... no matter how much we wish it did (and believe me, we wish it did!). Reverse repel is one of those things that is easy to say in a forum post and which is intuitively obvious when said ... but which the game engine completely fails to allow for or support. You know what happens when you apply negative Repel to something? You give it protection against Repel ... rather than causing it to move in an opposite vector so as to "negative repel towards" a location. Easy to say. Doesn't work with the codebase we have.

I was confining my analysis to Dual Pistols only so as to keep the findings generic enough to pair with any other powerset. However, stacking Resistance debuffs is definitely going to be a feature of this build!

Now to figure out if slotting the Gaussian's proc into Siphon Power inter(re)acts "usefully/favorably" with the instant recharge of Power Siphon upon Concentrated Strike procs ... and how to maximize the number of Concentrated Strikes in a "useful/favorable" acceleration of tempo strategy.

So ... as promised (threatened?) ... how about trying this on for size? Change Telekinesis from an anchored(!) Target AoE to an anchorless(!) Cone Facing power. Okay, do I have everyone's attention? After saying something like that, I would hope so ... 🤔 So the first thing to figure out is how large the Cone ought to be relative to the Target AoE. Since the Range is going to remain fixed (at 50 ft, before and after), all that needs to be done is to figure out the area of a 10 ft radius circle and then solve for how much angle ought to be given to a 50 ft cone to achieve approximately the same area. 102 π = 314.159 ft2 502 π / 24 = 327.249 ft2 502 π / 25 = 314.159 ft2 360 / 24 = 15º 360 / 25 = 14.4º So we're looking at either a 14.4º Cone to achieve EXACTLY the same area as the 10 ft 360º Circle Radius ... or allow a 15º Cone for an ever so slight upward bump in area (equivalent to a 10.2 ft 360º radius, basically). In practice, the 0.6º difference between the two amounts to a mere 0.3º "widening" to either side which really isn't enough to fret over since it's 0.26ft worth of extra width on either side at 50ft range, so hardly game balance impacting. I'm willing to say a 50 ft Range 15º Cone equates close enough to a 10 ft Radius 360º Target AoE for area coverage equivalence is good enough for our purposes here. 50 ft Range 15º Cone from a 10 ft Radius 360º Target AoE. Everyone with me so far? In order to get an anchorless Cone Facing power, we can look at the example of Regrowth in Nature Affinity to compare and contrast with a Ranged Cone power (that requires a $Target) such as Heavy Burst for Arachnos Soldiers. Here are the differences between these two implementations. Regrowth Entities Affected: Caster, Friend Entities Autohit: Caster, Friend Target: Caster Heavy Burst Entities Affected: Foe Entities Autohit: Target: Foe So in order to implement a change to Telekinesis in order to switch from anchored Target AoE to being an anchorless Cone power, here is how I would rewrite the parameters for Telekinesis, with the changes highlighted in font size increased bold text for ease of access and clarity and obviousness. Telekinesis Level: 12 Type: Toggle PvE damage scale: 0.000000 Accuracy: 1 Modes required: Modes disallowed: Disable_All, Defiant Range: 50 feet Activate period: 0.5 seconds Interrupt Time: - Cast time: 1.13 seconds Recharge time: 60 seconds Endurance cost: 1.56 Attack types: Effect Area: Cone Radius: 50 feet Arc: 15 degrees Max targets hit: 10 Entities affected: Foe Entities autohit: Foe Target: Caster Target visibility: Line of Sight Notify mobs: Always Enhancements allowed: Endurance, Hold, Range, Recharge Reduction Invention Sets allowed: Hold, ATO Self: Grant power: Temporary_Powers.Temporary_Powers.KillTk Target: 1.397s Held (mag 3) 1 Repel for 0.75s 0.75s Held (mag 3) Note that the endurance cost remains unchanged and the Repel factor remains unchanged. All that gets changed is increasing the number of max targets from the insulting 5 to a reasonable 10 along with converting the power from a 10 ft radius Target AoE (that requires a $Target) into being a 50 ft 15º Cone (that does not require a $Target) ... and adding Hold enhancement and Hold sets and Controller ATO sets to the slotting. That's it. That's all that needs to be edited and changed. A mere 8 changes ... and 3 of those changes are on the enhancement slotting allowed. Yes, Hold enhancement (proper/singular) does "absolutely nothing" for Telekinesis due to the "does not stack from same caster" factor on the Hold effect, so the duration is longer but the mag still cannot stack deeper to greater mag ... hence why Telekinesis did not have Hold enhancement as an option pre-Inventions (which makes sense) when all you had were TO/DO/SO/HO enhancements. But as soon as you put set procs (particularly damage and +2 mag Hold and Absorb procs!) and ATO sets (Controller and Dominator for the respective archetypes) into the mix, that calculus changes dramatically. Preventing the slotting of those enhancements, especially the procs and ATO sets, flat out ROBS Telekinesis of not only potential but also differentiation and personalization options between builds and strategies ... hence why it is time to allow for Hold enhancements as well as Hold and ATO sets to be slotted into Telekinesis. Now, one really HUGE change that this would make to the power is that you'd be able to toggle it on and leave it on full time, even without a $Target around to be affected by it (at a ruinous cost to your endurance, mind you, since it would still be a base 3.12/s cost). Also, it will be quite possible to Repel affected $Targets beyond the Cone range/radius if there isn't intercepting terrain around to "push back" against the Repel effect because the Cone has a limited range originating from the caster. This means that unlike the previous Target AoE implementation, affected $Target(s) do not Repel away "forever" past draw distance until they drop targeting due to sheer distance. In order to maintain the Hold Cone on $Target(s), the Mind Controller needs to stay close(-ish) to the affected $Target(s) AND ALSO needs to maintain their facing towards the $Targets in order to keep them Held. That's because the Cone is a 15º wide forward facing that turns when the caster avatar turns ... so while Telekinesis (Cone) is toggled on, you can't spin around and buff someone beside/behind you without also spinning the orientation of the Cone off into a different direction. And just to be clear, the Cone is aimed by the avatar facing ... NOT by the camera angle/facing. So you can keep your avatar stationary and slew your camera angle around (so camera look but not mouse look, to be specific of the distinction here) and not upset the direction you're aiming the Cone. But as soon as your character avatar changes facing, the Telekinesis (Cone) will change aiming with them, potentially dropping $Targets out of the Cone. Personally, I'm of the opinion that converting Telekinesis into an anchorless Cone over an anchored Target AoE while retaining all other parameters "as is" (aside from the expansion in slotting options) simply makes TOO MUCH SENSE™ in part because of how the Repel mechanic works. Since the Repel is pushing $Targets away from the Caster (still) with the Cone configuration those $Targets do not inherently "spread out of the AoE" all on their own. If the Cone is redirected/aimed elsewhere then they'll drop out of the effect, but so long as the Cone remains on them they won't "push out of the area" to the sides (although they could be Repelled beyond the range distance of the Cone). Additionally, by converting Telekinesis into a Cone power, the ability to slot Range enhancements into Telekinesis suddenly gains incredible value(!) since the Range of Cones CAN BE enhanced, increasing their area. An increase of 1.5x Range will effectively DOUBLE the area of effect held at risk by the power. At +60% Range enhancement (the ED limit for Schedule B enhancements like Range) this increases the Cone radius from 50 ft out to 80 ft ... which just so happens to be the stock 'n' standard distance for ranged attacks (80 ft), so even that lines up well. Essentially you wind up trading "unlimited reach" (once toggled on as a Target AoE) for a more "limited reach" (once toggled on as a Cone) in exchange for a 2x increase in the max targets (from the insulting 5 to a more reasonable 10) in which the Repel "spread" becomes more of a non-issue (so long as the caster remains stationary). To put it mildly ... with such a change there is (in my not so humble opinion) almost no reasonable objections that can be made along the lines of Telekinesis (as a toggle Cone without an anchor) being put in direct competition with Total Domination (a click Target AoE that requires a $Target) ... even though both are Hold powers. YES ... you could potential toggle on Telekinesis and leave it toggled on indefinitely (effectively making the power "perma" as far as that goes) ... but the endurance cost for doing so would quite literally be the highest in the game (3.12/s base) for the privilege of doing so (the word I'm looking for is "ruinously expensive"). However, Telekinesis would be UNIQUE and still "finicky" to manage but would be more predictable/learnable for Players to master and control ... so Win, Win, Win from my perspective. I now yield back the floor on to the topic of discussion after the whole WALL OF TEXT CRITS YOU!!! performance above.

Challenge accepted. Let's do some napkin math comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges when comparing the two powers then, shall we? Max Targets Telekinesis: 5 (currently) ... 10 or 16 (proposed) Total Domination: 16 (currently) Radius Telekinesis: 10 ft (currently) ... 15 ft (proposed) Total Domination: 20 ft (currently) Endurance Cost (comparison) Telekinesis: 3.12 endurance per second toggle (currently) ... 2.08 endurance per second toggle (proposed with removal of Repel factor) Total Domination: 15.6 endurance per click Toggle duration of 5 seconds (currently) or 7.5 seconds (proposed) equals total endurance cost of using Total Domination Duration and Magnitude Telekinesis: 1.397s mag 3 Hold that does not stack with no chance of Overpower (currently) Total Domination: 14.9s mag 3 Hold with 20% chance of 11.175s mag 1 Hold on Overpower (currently) Invention Sets Telekinesis: no (currently) ... Hold and Controller ATOs (proposed) Total Domination: Hold and Controller ATOs (currently) Recharge Telekinesis: 60s Total Domination: 240s Total Domination advantages (Total Domination vs Telekinesis): Max Targets (16 vs 10 or 16) Radius (20f vs 10 ft or 15 ft) Endurance Cost (15.6 for 14.9s vs 15.6 for 5s or 15.6 for 7.5s) Duration (14.9s Click vs 1.397s Toggle) Overpower (Yes vs No) Invention Sets (Yes vs No or Yes) So currently ... Total Domination: Hits 3.2x as many $Targets Has 2x the Radius Has 3x the Duration for the same Endurance Cost Recharges 0.25x as fast Can Overpower while Telekinesis cannot Can slot Inventions while Telekinesis cannot 3.2 * 2 * 3 * 0.25 = 4.8x as powerful as Telekinesis ... not even including Overpower and Invention slotting advantages With the more restricted proposed changes to Telekinesis ... Total Domination: Hits 1.6x as many $Targets (max 10 targets for Telekinesis) Has 2x the Radius (10ft radius for Telekinesis) Has 3x the Duration for the same Endurance Cost (2.08/s with Repel effect removed) Recharges 0.25x as fast Can Overpower while Telekinesis cannot Both can slot Inventions 1.6 * 2 * 3 * 0.25 = 2.4x as powerful as Telekinesis ... not even including Overpower advantage With the more expansive proposed changes to Telekinesis ... Total Domination: Hits 1x as many $Targets (max 16 targets for Telekinesis) Has 1.33x the Radius (15ft radius for Telekinesis) Has 2x the Duration for the same Endurance Cost (no change in endurance cost) Recharges 0.25x as fast Can Overpower while Telekinesis cannot Both can slot Inventions 1 * 1.33 * 2 * 0.25 = 0.665x as powerful as Telekinesis ... not even including Overpower advantage So clearly, there's going to be some sort of "happy middle ground" between those two options of restricted vs expansive proposed changes, relative to the "value" that Total Domination has. The objective here is to move the "multiplier factor" for Total Domination to be closer to parity (nearer a 1x factor without going below a 1x factor) relative to Telekinesis. That way Telekinesis "pays more" for similar performance as a lower tier power (Level 12 vs Level 18 required). In which case, the way to bring Telekinesis "up to" Total Domination power levels without surpassing Total Domination power levels is to do the following to Telekinesis: Max Targets changed from 5 to 10. Radius remains 10 ft. Endurance Cost changed from 3.12/s to 2.08/s and the Repel effect is removed entirely. Duration and Magnitude remain unchanged. Telekinesis cannot Overpower (unchanged). Telekinesis allowed to slot Hold and Controller ATO sets. Using these parameters as a blended mix 'n' match of the restrictive and expansive changes options yields the following differential between Total Domination and Telekinesis: Hits 1.6x as many $Targets (max 10 targets for Telekinesis) Has 2x the Radius (10ft radius for Telekinesis) Has 2x the Duration for the same Endurance Cost (2.08/s with Repel effect removed on Telekinesis) Recharges 0.25x as fast Can Overpower while Telekinesis cannot Both can slot Inventions 1.6 * 2 * 2 * 0.25 = 1.6x as powerful as Telekinesis ... not even including Overpower advantage Which I look at and start thinking that's the Goldilocks Point for what you can do to improve Telekinesis without "overwhelming" Total Domination in the process. However, doing this analysis right here has suggested another possibility for how to change Telekinesis which is DEFINITELY going to be "out of the box thinking" that I'll be writing up here at some point. Just you wait ... 😎

One other point is that some sets (looking at you Martial Arts) have a fair amount of mez effects built into powers, and if you're slotting ATOs but want to enhance those mez effects (so as to perma double stack them) you essentially can't fit mez enhancement AND your ATO sets into the same power(s). So depending on your build it's sometimes necessary to put the ATO sets into powers that don't have mez durations attached to them so as to not conflict with other priorities.

Complete a Dr Quaterfield Task Force to spawn a Nemesis Invasion of 1 blueside zone and 1 Redside zone. DONE. Kind of like how completing a Lady Grey Task Force spawns a Rikti Invasion of 1 blueside zone and 1 Redside zone ...

Explaining it to humans (and robots and Kheldians and so on) who read this forum is on thing. We can afford to be flexible in our thinking. Explaining the ideas to the computer so that the servers "understand" how to implement the idea(s) is the necessary next step. Easy to say and hard to do (and all that). Besides, powers like Telekinesis only need a few tweaks in order to be useful ... not a complete strip down/replacement with something completely OTHER than what Telekinesis either was or should be. Pie in the sky is fun to think about, sure ... but you also need to explain how it would have to work in a way that the game engine (run by a computer) will understand and implement flawlessly. Do not use the Underpants Gnomes Business Model as your first option for how to do this (let alone standard operating procedure for any and all creative endeavors).

Little bit of extra research here. I was basically wondering how much extra damage the Fire DoT adds to raw (0% Resistances) base damage output so as to start figuring a baseline for how much of an advantage you (and your team) gets from Piercing Rounds. So first I computed the multiplier/magnifier for Incendiary Ammo vs Standard Ammo using the 80% chance to proc the Fire DoT and got these results. Incendiary Ammo vs Standard Ammo Pistols: (25.3+10.84+3*4.08*0.8)/(25.3+10.84) = 1.271x Dual Wield: (33.4+14.31+4*4.08*0.8)/(33.4+14.31) = 1.274x Empty Clips: (4*6.58+4*2.82+3*4.08*0.8)/(4*6.58+4*2.82) = 1.260x Bullet Rain: (3*8.42+3*3.61+3*4.08*0.8)/(3*8.42+3*3.61) = 1.271x Executioner's Shot: (53.64+22.99+4*6.11*0.8)/(53.64+22.99) = 1.255x Piercing Rounds: (58.2+24.94+3*6.11*0.8)/(58.2+24.94) = 1.176x Hail of Bullets: (12*11.49+12*4.92+5*7.23*0.8)/(12*11.49+12*4.92) = 1.147x Suppressive Fire was "ignored" for this since it's basically a mez power that also happens to do a token (single digits) amount of damage, where "twice nothing is still nothing" as far as these other powers are concerned. I then took those numbers and flipped them around (numerator/denominator on the division) so as to compute how much damage Standard Ammo produces against $Targets affected by the -20% Resistance to All except Toxic when using Piercing Rounds and got the following results (when doing a divide by 0.8 of the Lethal damage for Standard Ammo). Standard Ammo with Piercing Rounds -20% Resistance to All except Toxic for 10s vs Incendiary Ammo Pistols: ((25.3+10.84)/0.8)/(25.3+10.84+3*4.08*0.8) = 0.984x Dual Wield: ((33.4+14.31)/0.8)/(33.4+14.31+4*4.08*0.8) = 0.981x Empty Clips: ((4*6.58+4*2.82)/0.8)/(4*6.58+4*2.82+3*4.08*0.8) = 0.992x and 0.793x Bullet Rain: ((3*8.42+3*3.61)/0.8)/(3*8.42+3*3.61+3*4.08*0.8) = 0.983x and 0.787x Executioner's Shot: ((53.64+22.99)/0.8)/(53.64+22.99+4*6.11*0.8) = 0.996x Piercing Rounds: ((58.2+24.94)/0.8)/(58.2+24.94+3*6.11*0.8) = 1.063x Hail of Bullets: ((12*11.49+12*4.92)/0.8)/(12*11.49+12*4.92+5*7.23*0.8) = 1.090x and 0.872x The "and lower multiplier" number accounts for the differential in damage throughput onto $Targets in the respective AoE powers that have not been debuffed by Piercing Rounds (which has a Max Targets of 3 and is a 4º Cone, so very unlikely to aid damage throughput against plentiful $Targets). What this research tells me is that against a single $Target, all else being equal (and assuming no additional damage procs) that when fighting single targets the benefit(s) of Standard Ammo versus Incendiary Ammo to derive benefit from the Resistance debuffing for 10s of Piercing Rounds (which can stack??) makes the damage production against a single target when solo "competitive" with the damage boost from Incendiary Ammo due to the Resistance debuffing. The differential with an attack chain that features 2x Pistols, 1x Dual Wield, 1x Suppressive Fire and 1x Piercing Rounds (as detailed upthread) is almost a rounding error in terms of raw numbers (1.0097x) ... except for the effects of Resistance debuffing on damage procs (which this build loads up on in Suppressive Fire where the advantage clearly swings towards Standard Ammo over the alternative of Incendiary Ammo). However, in AoE damaging situations, Incendiary Ammo will remain the clear choice for dealing more damage per power activation over the alternative ammo types, barring vulnerabilities in Resistances of the $Targets being shot at. So the research points to ... when soloing ... use Standard Ammo against single targets when you have access to Piercing Rounds, and use Incendiary Ammo against multiple targets when using Empty Clips+Bullet Rain (and Hail of Bullets) even when having access to Piercing Rounds if DPS is your primary consideration. However, when teamed ... it becomes even more imperative to use Standard Ammo against (hard) single targets when you have access to Piercing Rounds, since the Resistance debuffing applied will magnify/multiply the damage throughput onto that $Target of everyone on the team, even if your own damage production remains "flat" relative to using Incendiary Ammo with Piercing Rounds. Just one of those little quirks about Dual Pistols that makes you go, "Hmmmm ..." 🤔

Yes ... IF you have the slots to spare for it. Any power that takes End Mod sets. Passive powers will check the proc chance once per ~10 seconds.

How? How would that work? I'm hard pressed to imagine a scenario in which that works the way you're intending using the game tech/mechanics currently available. I know what you're reaching FOR ... what I don't understand is how you "get there from here" (so to speak), mainly because that's not the way that toggles work (or most of them, anyway). Are there any precedents you're following for this idea?

If you think that's a good story ... have a look at what happened to Nichelle Nicols when she tried to quit Star Trek to get back to her musical theater career. To put it mildly, like she does ... It Was FATE that intervened.

I see "Known Issue" and you see "Bug" ... I see "an 'unfortunate effect' of how the game currently works" (emphasis on CURRENTLY WORKS) ... and you see "Bug" ... Good luck with that. A closed mind is a terrible thing to celebrate ... particularly when you do so in public.

Sorry, I thought you were talking about Seeds of Confusion ... 1.56 end per activation with an activation every 0.5s ... so 3.12 endurance per second. This has never been changed. Wrong in PvE. It only happens like that in PvP. A 10 ft radius can herd A MAP? When the Repel factor causes $Targets to spread out of the AoE unless there's helpful terrain forcing them to cluster up?

Been thinking about making one, but it takes time ...

Okay ... if you won't take my word for it ... will you accept Positron's? Right. THAT Positron.