Replacement

Most attacks (to my understanding, these are the Powers you don't intend to use) don't really fall into the category of having useful "global" benefits. * If your primary has a heal (dark, water), you can slot your Preventative Medicine there and it will activate even without using it. ** This is not true of all the rest of the "special" Healing or Endurance Modification enhancement, i believe. If you read the descriptions, most say they give a buff for 120 seconds or so. Those ones rely on you to keep using the power to refresh. ** If you grabbed Aid Other, that's another good home for Preventative Medicine. * Most of the "always on" character benefits, like the Steadfast Protection +defense unique, will end up in your armor toggles you're leaving run anyway. * Unlike what's mentioned in that linked Guide, Power Transfer has been updated -- if you slot two of them (Health and Field Operative), they can now fire at the same time. * Some other ATs have global ATO enhancements which fit the bill, like Scrapper +3% crit chance and Soldiers of Arachnos global +toxic damage. Blaster doesn't get anything like that, but that is not a compelling reason to remake as one of those (though SoA has really good damage multipliers and leadership), since I cannot imagine either ATO effect applies to Temporary Powers. *You mentioned crowd control with Presence pool, so I gather this is more "Temp and Pool powers.". The chance of disorient on the aoe fear is surprisingly decent at breaking enemy alpha strikes, if you feel like the fear isn't good enough. Though I prefer the psi damage procs. ... Hi. I typed this up about 4 days ago and just discovered I didn't close it out without saving.

The understanding was that Taunt isn't like traditional mez: only the highest magnitude takes effect. This means a tanker taunt always completely overrides brute taunt just because it is 0.1 mag higher. The relevant point here is the "direct" taunt effects do not stack with the proc to mag 7. I believe what you are actually seeing is a power where the new implementation (proc) is overriding the old implementation that just hasn't been removed yet.

That is what I referenced, yes. Of course, the Discord wait on HC is set to something like 30s in most channels, and the general pace of Discord is not conducive to dev cycle feedback. The goal is to take the idea of Discord's slow mode and dial it all the way up into something a developer can easily digest and reference (Discord's greatest weaknesses for feedback), a moderator can easily moderate, and a player can quickly understand and evaluate what is worth responding to. It will definitely lead to very verbose posts, but I imagine it would easily knock 20 pages off the more controversial topics.

Basic idea: a type of thread that any given user can only post in once/day. If possible, an extension to the idea would be the ability for site staff to use a reaction (probably Thanks) to unlock that user to supply an additional post before reset. I envision this as staff-only, mainly for making focused feedback threads. It could also feasibly be opened up to regular posters when creating new threads, but I think you would need to omit the "thanks, please continue" mechanism. This is not a perfect idea, but it's something I think could really cut down on The amount of loud minority posting The amount of forum warrior battling that makes those threads stupid amounts of long.

Bumping with some more info. I've recapped the performance of 4 separate powers at the bottom of this post with a quick breakdown. But first... The meat of the argument: Reaction Time is working correctly. Whatever magic is at work with Reaction Time's "House of cards" power definitions, my attempts at testing the Slow field show it correctly targeting 10 enemies, while allowing the self-buff portions to correctly activate their procs. (There is a Requires check of "Ne(target>entref, source>entref)" and a "SecondaryTargetsOnly" flag -- I'm not sure which part I should thank, but it's allowing the "targets_affected" field to include "Self" without reducing the target cap artificially down to 9.) Frigid Protection (which is nearly identical in terms of game effects), Cauterizing Aura, and Dynamo are all behaving incorrectly, and in the same way. It should be possible to set up all 3 identically to Reaction Timing, thus fixing this issue without code changes. Easier, really, since none of these other 3 powers have Reaction Time's complex "deactivation" effects to worry about. The 4 powers I tested today (Brainstorm): (All of the following powers are Blaster Sustains with an "aura" effect. All listed set pieces refer to their Special proc enhancements.) Martial>Reaction time: Power Transfer and Performance Shifter works at all times. Panacea works at all times. Ice Manip>Frigid Protection: Power Transfer and Performance Shifter procs only work while enemies near. They also seem to have a much-reduced proc rate, relative to Reaction Time and Dynamo, but there may be significant bias here. Panacea does not work regardless of context. Elec Manip>Dynamo Power Transfer and Performance Shifter procs only work while enemies near. Panacea does not work regardless of context. Fire Manip>Cauterizing Aura Power Transfer and Performance Shifter procs only work while enemies near. Panacea does not work regardless of context.

Folks... you guys are really starting to show why other communities think this one is exclusive and hostile. RogueWolf's suggestion doesn't impact you in any way, so what is the point of posting multiple times about how unnecessary it is? It's not your place to decide what the devs think is worthy of their time, so the only meaningful commentary is either developmental roadblocks or explaining repercussions it could have. You're good people, I know it from other threads. Take a sec to assess what you're accomplishing here?

You know how players have the option to decline teleports? What if NPCs had a similar mechanism, where they only accept TPs from any source they are aware of, i.e., the player they are currently following? That would let you drag them forward about 30 yards at a time, but get too far ahead and they say "no thank you."

Does anyone have the link handy to Powerhouse' thoughts on this? Iirc, he said the direction he was leaning (this is not set in stone for direction, nor indicative of intent to port) was to actually replace the attacks the phantom army has access to for the dom version. I don't remember the rationale, but it's something that happened. Unless the entire thing was a dream. Or a Mandela effect event if I can find someone else who remembers this...

I had considered something like adding an effect so your standard attacks generate stacks, like combo points, and your judgement can only be used when you achieve X stacks, but a delay would work (though 30s is unrealistic. Even 5 seconds would be too slow for many [softer] players). Frankly, I would just like to see HC push through the gnashing of teeth and increase all Judgement base cooldowns by 50% to start: "you are just as awesome as you used to be, but less frequently." I bet it could even be flagged as a recharge penalty that only applies in non-Incarnate content. Ohhh how I would have gone a completely different direction with the entirety of the Incarnate system...

Thanks. I've wanted to see something like this for a long time but didn't know where the numbers would fall. If nothing else, you've provided a nice "possible high-end average up-time" value to make the math easier. I am all for the extremely minor impact to builds that already kill so hard they won't notice, in exchange for a better experience for other builds (and sets with lower ATO reliability). Especially when you notice that it's only a 3% ping to high end builds vs minions. The loss is lower against anything worth the crit anyway. I know you didn't do much more than mention that it would implicitly buff pre-50 builds, @aethereal, but it's worth noting Scrapper's Strike (the other ATO) is only +2/+4% for the non-Superior version, as opposed to the Su version granting +3/+6%. I would suggest under your change, also improving the baseline version of SS to +3/+6% (and +4/+8 for the Superior version). I would honestly prefer even more of the power redistributed into Scrapper proper, but I can see how you are taking a more reasonable and acceptable approach. Still, here's the numbers assuming your 50% uptime for a 35% Critical Strikes, 10/15 baseline crit chance, and keeping your 4/8 Scrapper's Strike: 10/15+4/8+35 = 49/58, 14/23 (average: 31.5, 40.5).

Fair! Bring on the nerfs! But my point was that I can anecdotally counter any "a change happened and I liked the game 1 reason less" with "that change gave me two new reasons to enjoy the game." It is ultimately not about procs though, so I will not pursue the topic. On the topic of procs: I tend to think @America's Angel is pretty close to the mark that the issue is very specific procs, with the additional caveat that I would like something changed so Powers devs do not need to fear introducing aoe damage powers on 60s cooldowns (Dark Melee rework v1.0, you will be missed) . But if a more general proc slap-on-the-wrist were to occur, I would be interested in seeing it paired with changing all the tiny "+x% damage" set bonuses out for a global "+x% PPM" modifier. Those stupid +2%s are laughable in comparison to just about any defensive benefit, whereas a 2% bonus to PPM would maintain the same "overcome your AT's weakness" benefit as +defense set bonuses currently perform. I haven't ran any numbers, it could be a disaster idea, but it seems like an interesting way to bring back some parity within the systems we already have, and still encourage diverse builds. Example: pair it with a clamping on the current formula that makes PPM about 75% as effective (so attacks that are barely hitting 90% would be more like 65-70%, but you could slot +20-30% in set bonuses). This would reduce proc bombs indirectly by adding pressure to slot for proc reliability. Pre-emptive tweak: I think 60% formula penalty would be better, but with a cap performance increase to 95% (maybe even 100%).

I find a way to say "I am pro nerf" in every other thread, but that's hardly changing the outcome on the topic of parity. This isn't about power escalation (we have other 17-page topics on that), so let's not make this about how we could have achieved similar result by nerfing brute resist caps. On the topic of making balance changes alone, I used to both: - make a tanker and be unhappy because I could not shed the knowledge I could have everything the same but better. -make brutes and let them sit at level 8 because I knew I was being handed more power budget than any other AT.* Due to one update, I now enjoy both. Let's use a score card: If Tankers were overbuffed (which I disagree with), it's like brute gets an 8 and tankers get a 9. Pre-p4, it was more like brute gets an 8 and tanker gets a 4. This continues to be my biggest beef with your "Tanker was over buffed" takes: you are mad they are even close, instead of remembering how bad it was. *Blaster sustains are the new rule-breakers on power budget, but no one wants to talk about that...

I'm sure a lot of villain enthusiasts will oppose this vehemently, but I would love to see a short, optional arc added to the list of Redside starting contacts. Levels available: 1-5ish Purpose: Add some player morality decisions right out the gate, to determine just how villain you are. Ok, but why do we want this? My biggest blocker to redside is not enjoying being an ass. I am invariably 70% into an arc when my own character reveals their intent to betray someone. Frankly, I just want an in-world way to declare "I am actually a double agent/being manipulated and everything I do going forward is part of a master plan." Ideally, it would give you a Rogue alignment out the gate. Very much in "wish" territory, but it would be excellent to have such a mechanism guide your future contacts. After a decision or 2, a relevant contact with a matching arc is introduced to you every 10 levels or so. E.g. selfish and greedy, world dominator, sadist, or the Vigilante grant. I cannot speak for others, but this would greatly increase my redside participation beyond "just pretend you are a double agent" headcanon.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence A sweeping indictment against all attempts to improve the game because you found an example of something where some people feel the team went too far. Remember: right now we just have some people saying "well tanker is the best now." Previously, it was just standard knowledge that Tankers were the inferior class on every meaningful metric. You ignore all of this context to declare "balance bad." Like @Bill Z Bubba, it impacts my enjoyment of the game to know some things are grossly out of line, that there were choices I was "supposed" to make for my character to be far stronger. But I get just as frustrated when I know I'm overperforming, which is why most of my Brutes were made post-Tanker buffs. I could not stand playing what I viewed as a cheater class until Tanker was allowed to compete with it. It's also why several of my characters were parked while awaiting bugfixes (like when Hail of Bullets was giving Defiance per target hit). So here's a counter anecdote: the Tanker updates added two entire ATs to the list of characters I could enjoy. Balance is good.

I'm guessing Walk isn't so simple? Even before the last round of work that made Walk only enforce "only affecting self" instead of detoggling, the shield mez click would break Walk. I'm guessing that's animation state bits and not at all similar to the emote thing. Does it persist? Like you can leave your character there and they won't loop through the arm motions indefinitely?

As Doomguide said, this actually is not the case. Mobs tend to have very large endurance pools, but otherwise follow PC rules - namely, end recovery is a percentage per tick. They queue a power like we do, and so the very moment the server grants them a tick (representing a massive chunk of End), a portion is spent on the queued attack. I haven't looked into it, but I bet their Brawl is free. But reducing them to Brawl is a feat is a worthwhile outcome as well. Once they've been floored, -recovery is the most way to prevent them from acting. Sapping needs work, and there are lots of ways it needs help, but it is actually quite effective with the right build. I've found any two toons bearing a single elec set each to be enough to justify a change in strategy across a broad range of content.

"It" in that context is the nerfs to justify it, since it would be taking power selection/slotting away from the rest of your build. So I am declaring "I don't even believe we would need nerfs elsewhere to get to it." The fact that I'm not afraid of nerfs is neither here nor there. This was a good talk. I hope you understand this is the absolute, literal definition of taking something out of context to make yourself look like a winner.

On SOs, a Tanker's Unstoppable works out to about 12-32% resist over time (measured from baseline to 3x SOs [well, 2 in the case of Resist because you're hard-capping]). For reference, Temp Invulnerability (the primary toggle) is 30% unenhanced. Even that analysis above is way too forgiving to Unstoppable though. More resist than you will need if you've taken basically any of the rest of the set makes the power look more favorable than it is. The actual Resist gain isn't the 90% listed on the power -- it's going to be closer to 20% S/L and 59% F/C/E/N/T on all SOs. Even ignoring the trivial S/L boost and using that 59% number, we see a more typical player getting - at best - about 21% resist over time (513s recharge, 180s duration, 59% resist = 20.65% average resist). A guaranteed detoggle at the end (an end boost not available to the set paired with a keyboard or mouse macro isn't something you're going to balance around, right?) and -90% of your health as a crash at the end. We would still be arguing if the power was worth it without the crash, given the spotty uptime and the general feeling of it being too easy to waste a once-per-15-minute power. Given the statistical overlap with the rest of the set, and the fact that it does its very best to kill you? No, I do not think this power is good for SO players. I do not think it's good for moderate IO players (which, given I tend to self-fund and level off of story arcs, is where I typically land). And as you showed in this thread, it has no value to a high-end pve build (even without the p2w amp). The options are not good if one of them kills you. Which is an issue when you are opposing development on an objectively bad power, because of your extremely narrow use case and PvP horse in the race. This is kind of a forum problem overall. "Balancing" options for fully-completed characters is kind of missing the point. We have options and so they should be good, and they should be helpful in a general portion of the content.* I believe a power entry that is always skipped to be a waste of space- one that can lead to a worse outcome than doing nothing at all is just player-hate. *I don't think Invuln needs it, but I would pay minor nerfs to other powers to get there.

"This power does literally nothing for me so it does not need improved." This is not what logic looks like. If it were good, it would justify spending a power selection on, or slotting beyond a mule. Things which would cause sacrifices other places. A 0.01% build with a p2w amp, at level 50+ should never dictate power parity for the other 99.9% of players and content (like 1-49, which exists). Instead of keeping Unstoppable in the suck, this only convinces me more the p2w amps are sin.

Wishing away the Scrapper ATO doesn't change the reality of the game. They have it. On the first part, fair, thanks for the correction. You're treating the 0.95 modifier as 0.9975 then. On the 2nd: the moment you bring up the Scrapper ATO, you are now discussing AT potential and high end performance instead of baseline, which would mean charting a performance curve. The ATO is miserable as a performance wedge specifically because it messes up comparisons like this. "Well x AT is better than y until you invest z amount of influence" is not something I want to have a spreadsheet battle over. As much as forumites want to believe otherwise, there are 49 other levels and a jury-is-still-out number of poor, un-setting players who want to have fun. Either way, I want to restate: I would gladly test your version with an open mind. The willingness to be wrong makes game design better.

I feel like this is specifically because of my mention of "full scale" on the mez attacks, since you didn't clip it out? To clarify, that isn't me talking about the Sentinel ranged modifier (0.95) -- I'm talking about the damage scale the AT modifier multiplies. Mez powers on every other class (with specific power exceptions) deal drastically reduced scale damage. For example, Stunning Shot deals scale 0.25 damage while total focus deals 3.56 scale damage -- both on the same cooldown of 20 seconds. One thing I should actually mention is how many of those big t9 type melee attacks also have guaranteed mez. The difference between them and Sentinel is the 8s cooldown vs 20. Anyway, cheers, just wanted to make sure we were talking about the same thing.

I forgot to mention before - pretty sure what you're after is an 18.5% boost, not 13ish. I will not focus on Scrapper. Their ATO is not the AT and I don't think either of us want to see this thread turn into a discussion on that (hint: I hate it). My issue (today) is blaster. All everyone talks about is Sentinel not being good because it's not Blaster. But we have all lived through eras of stalker vs scrapper. Scrapper vs Brute. So on and so forth. This happened because we have too many ATs that are too similar. If you get them within spitting distance of Blaster (or even Scrapper, stupid global recharge distortions), you are setting up tomorrow's forum arguments to still be "which is stronger?" Instead of "which is a better fit for my character or playstyle?" Would I be ok with a scale buff to Sentinel? Yes. Would I happily shut my mouth and test your version with an open mind? Yes, yes I would. But my preference remains a smaller buff to their damage, and additions to the dimension of the AT beyond direct damage.

I would splash in a bit more from other sets. For starters, it makes sense that it wouldn't protect as well as Shield, but would likely have an additional offensive amp. Using Ninjutsu stats for the initial toggles means slightly higher defense but no SL resist. Willpower High Pain Tolerance clone instead of True Grit gives smaller amounts of resist all instead of larger amounts of just elemental (max hp boost is identical). I would eschew toxic resist, because clearly only underhanded poison can bring down our great warrior. I would not clone against all odds. I'm not sure what I'd do instead, but I would let Shield have its thing. Perhaps something like "while active, attacks generate stacks of +damage" essentially giving you blaster Defiance. A clone of SR's Quickness would help focus DPS towards using your weapon and using it well. Would also synergize well with the +damage stack thing above. Use Battle Ready or Counterattack, but both seems like too many defense powers. You are looking at toggle + toggle + click rotation for any given defense. Compared to SR or Shield which only ever have toggle+auto (1 each) applied to a given defense. Personally, I would drop battle ready for the Quickness clone listed above. Counterattack could (if you wanted) become a shield charge replacement. I imagine something like a short-range savage leap (shield charge is 60, savage leap is 40, and I'm thinking more like 25. Same as an Origin attack) that also gives a non-stacking defense bonus as a fun way to start each engagement. That's mostly recycled but should end up feeling different, yet inline with similar sets

This would only affect Sentinel. If you mean simply needing to touch the files behind the scenes to add Sentinel versions - you are subject to this already. See also: every pool attack having a Containment listing. And don't get me started on Fiery Embrace.

0 - sure. I'm game for anything if the end result is neat. 1 - I would like to see a bit of a damage bump, but not a fan of going anywhere near 1.125. Even with lower target caps, you are still pushing them too close to the Blaster distinction. A class that is almost a blaster will still always be compared to blaster, and never escape its shadow. 2 - could be interesting but doesn't seem like it goes far enough. I understand the devil is in the (subject to testing) details, but this seems to me to essentially be a choice between chemical or cryo ammo vs incendiary ammo. I don't feel it will add enough definition to carry the AT as a whole. 3 - yeah, new ATOs will probably become necessary. Even if we keep the Opportunity bar, Opportunity Strikes feels a bit like a tax on fill rate. 4 - I believe every Sentinel armor set has what I think of as a Sustain-lite -- an endurance assist. Usually it's minor recovery bonuses or a small +max end benefit, but I believe at least one of them simply has a steeply-discounted toggle. If that's an avenue we would like to express definition in, I think it makes more sense to enhance these existing powers (and they don't need the regen/absorb half, seeing as they already have an Armor set to pull from). As for Epics, the original version of Sentinel apparently had a pet, so I'd love to see that come back as a t1 epic option (all sets, not just patrons) instead. --- The big thing I have wanted more focus on is how Sentinel mez attacks deal full scale damage, and their debuffs are applied by attacking, meaning they have an action economy advantage on mez/debuffs (they do not lower their DPS to do so). This is why I keep advocating improving their secondary effects, and other means to emphasize helping the party without breaking stride. Being a "master of none" usually sucks in team games because you're only doing one thing poorly at a time. Focus on doing them all simultaneously and maybe we'll have something where your party has a different expectation than "Meh blaster with meh extra debuffs."