Jump to content

Replacement

Members
  • Content Count

    266
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

136 Excellent
  1. This, of sorts. I have 2 issues with Vigilance: Bad incentive structure. And I should mention my bias here: I do not like vengeance sacrifice tactics. To me, that's the logical conclusion of what would happen if the low hp benefit was actually good. The payoff mostly applies to healers, at least in theory. Ostensibly, the reason for the endurance discount is to help save the low-hp ally. But that context doesn't make sense for most defenders. If you're instead using it for, say, tar patch, then you're back to the poor incentive structure from point #1. Honestly, I can forgive #1. I want to be clear that it's "a thing that is weird" and this isn't causing me great grief. But it would be super if their passive was a little more accurate to their role. And if you clean up point #2, you may as well fix #1 while you're there. Edit: I'd be really curious to know what it would take to kill permadom. I would love to see it become less mandatory. But that is certainly worth it's own thread.
  2. Yeah! Number Six figured out how to remove that limit! The thread I linked at the top is an exciting read.
  3. I think you're weighting my use of the word "optimal" heavier than I'm implying, here. It's simple: if the game says "here is a thing you can do to increase numbers," then they are implicitly stating "it's a valid tactic." It's simply a weird mixed signal. I really don't believe most players would do this, but the optimizers in us see this and it makes us squirm. I'm reminded of an argument in Warframe, where there was a character that had a repeating-aoe that kept getting larger and doing more damage the longer they stayed still. They could be built in such a way that they could do this so long that they would be booted from missions as AFK. Everyone said that's "working as intended, don't use such a scummy tactic if you don't want booted." But the designers told the players to stand still and play that way. The player is not the jerk for simply doing what they're told and optimizing it. EDIT: Leo, I'm reading the rest of your post thoroughly several times over. There's a disconnect between us, here. You're saying I'm saying things I don't think I'm saying? Can you maybe elaborate on what I'm doing that is essentially stacking up such a strawman and knocking it down?
  4. Proposal: Given the shocking revelations of this thread: ...And not having a clue what is easy/hard to implement in the costume creator... I humbly propose a thigh texture option. Goal: There's a section between torso and knee that often requires certain concessions on the part of our fashion designers; compromises to our dreams. This could be implemented as a "leg" category, or as a secondary selection on the Pants/Bottom section. Visual aids to help explain what I'm speaking of. Observe Thigh of the Tiger here: See something wrong, here? I particularly have a lot of female characters where I like to show some skin but... would like a little more cover on the legs! If it helps, I know Titan Icon's NPC creator mode has options for *ahem* crotchless leg parts. As far as I can understand it, if it's a pattern in female's "Bottoms" but not in "Bottoms with skin", it appears to be a separate piece and could feasibly be added alongside any existing bottom. Is this worth the effort? Probably not. I'd sure like it, though. The Steaks are not Thigh, Butt this is just another Leg in the journey to keep our character creator Hip. ...Femur.
  5. There are a lot of options for making this work. My two preferred paths: Combine Recall Friend and Teleport Foe into a single power. Make a new combat teleport with lower cast time, range, and no hover time. Consider slight increase to hover time to actual-teleport now that there's a choice. Simply add a trick to existing Teleport to instant-block the hover effect when needed. I'm fond of the Descend (X) key. If there's a way to make it so the Hover instantly ends on Descend, we'd be golden. And for clarity, when I say "combat teleport," I mean "teleport that a melee could actually use to get around in a fight."
  6. I'd still break the cottage rule with Stone Armor. That would be best. Basically, they need Earth Glide (Teleport that only works when targeting the ground). Barring cottage things, like combining some of their armors and totally reworking Granite, I'd settle for adding Earth Glide as a rider power to Rooted. They definitely should not get it through Granite.
  7. I think it's really worth pointing out there's an implicit bias in that second half of Vigilance that enforces the very thing Defenders are not: healers. It's very clearly meant to read like "you have an edge in delivering Clutch Healing" but most sets aren't heal-based. It enforces a paradigm that most Defender players dislike (and I'm drawing a distinction here between the Defender players and Empathy players). Whether or not Defenders actually would let allies die for an asinine Endurance Boost really isn't the point: it's that the game has told you that's an optimal path. An optimal path for a context (healer) that does not make sense for the vast majority of Defender Primaries. I think picking apart the OP's numbers is besides the point -- that's what balance testing is for. Separate the issue from the suggestion. The issue is valid, and I support changing it up. I'm ambivalent to the suggested fix, but I've come to realize the best thing a community can do for developers is explain the problems; not present the solutions.
  8. I'm always up for an alternate starting zone. Heck, copy/paste of Cim with all the arcs scaled down, make a single new one that ties you back to the city. I'm not a fan of medieval/back in time shenanigans for my Supers, but I've long held that if I were making a super MMO, I would sink a lot of resources into diverse character starts. Basically, the first chapter of your characters' story should still be part of character creation. SR 4e predicted Citizens United.
  9. EA seems to have several "not quite holes" when I look at it. Resist passives include Toxic, but only a token amount (around 9%). Compare to most other damage types, where they're clearly balanced around stacking that minor Resistance on top of almost-SR defenses. Only source of Psionic protection is the base 3.75% defense in the stealth aura The +resist passives curiously overlook Fire and Cold entirely. Instead, their associated toggles gain an extra 2.25% defense. I have a feeling any typical build that softcaps their S/L defense is likely (over)capping their C/F defense, and the complete lack of Resist for that damage type causes problems.
  10. Trying to simply replicate even the first go-round at the moment. This time it's WP/Claws. When I set active build to #2 or #3 and go to train up and I get this: (hey, I really like the little plus sign on attached pictures to insert into post) Level 20, but only trained up to 14 on the 1st build. Logging out and back in (or rather, getting booted for afk and logging back in) seems to have fixed the issue... At which point, I can't even recreate the original bug. All sorts of weirdness here. Don't know what to think.
  11. Steps to reproduce: 1: Create a tanker, choose to start with your T2 armor power instead of T1. 2: Choose an alternate build (level 1). 3: Train up to next level. Expected Result: Choice between T1 and T2 Armor power Actual Result: T2 power is selected; T1 is grayed out. Tested with: level 50 tanker. Primary: Willpower Secondary: Electric Melee Maybe this has been a thing with alt builds forever and I'm only now finding out about it? EDIT: I went to try this again with my 3rd active build and it did not occur. It only happened when I went to Build 2.
  12. So in these instances where it was helpful and/or build-defining, like @Nyghtmaire was outlining... how necessary would you say they are?
  13. "This is how I want to play so it's how you have to play too." k
  14. Ok, but I would. So something opt-in (where you claim on individual characters a bonus your account has unlocked) is ideal. That's the fundamental issue I have with shutting down ideas like this... As long as you're not forced into it, why try to stop a thing for those who want it? It's like hazing... "I had to have it this bad so you must as well" is the same faulty logic as "I don't want a nice thing so even though I could just opt out, I won't let you have it." (This last half is not ranting at you, particularly, Infinitum, I'm just... Musing.)
×
×
  • Create New...