Sanguinesun

If paired with powers that do significant slow(ie the mob doesn't fire an attack as quickly and runs almost in place), the confuse instead just simply acts as a "no attacks" used power meaning little to no exp loss what so ever.

Primarily my post was in relation to the exp AE missions, but yes the AE ticket rewards seem to be experiencing some sort of strangeness. The rewards are all over the place. Yesterday I was testing 3 different missions' ticket rewards(since I was noticing the strangeness) and saw rewards that were in the 500 range only being 1 in 5 chances of having that 500(give or take in change) tickets. The other 4 were between 240 and 400 and never consistent in the amounts. Some something has changed for sure. As far as the exp though, its still constant/consistent. I noticed no changes from the previous reduction changes weeks ago. Thus they're still viable as a good source of leveling with little to no down time.

I'm sorry but can you please cite where I made an accusation of others being deluded? I stated a concern that decision making regarding speed of or choices of leveling were mired in wishing to maintain the same intentions of the original development team, which had goals based on making the game take time to encourage spending money(ie micro transactions to enable convenience, subs to facilitate the same and more.); but not necessarily keeping in mind that those speed bumps were in place for that specific purpose. Thus no delusion or "rose tinted" glasses view point was being expressed. As for the other seemingly veiled, churlish statements made, a sears console for some of us was our first gaming console :P. Its great to be excited about the game "being back". (Technically for some it never went a way, mind you I too was not of that fortunate crowd.) But that also doesn't invalidate anyone who express concerns regarding the decisions made in goals towards its remaining available and active either.

The only concern though is that then because the ping pong ball has bounced back over into the ae side of the net, that they'll further pop it etc etc etc. I get server stability concerns that were had due to the AE map server stuffs but the congregating to the trial was the direct result of that change. Limiting choices in the short term is what leads to folks being funneled into something else. Speed of leveling should not be a worry for the team, really outside of server related issues. We're not in the epistemic bubble days of the NC folks needing to figure out how to eek out as much time to play in the game to maintain transactions and subs etc. Its a different perspective now. Personally, my only concern is that there is a desire to continue to maintain nc's previous thinking (or a reluctance to let that go for what ever reason). We're seeing a few of these decisions now and while trying to think of them in the context of the now, it still is compelling to have concerns of the direction that it may continue to go towards. *shrug*.

Without knowing your primary and secondary, its hard to give you strategic advice here but yes, of course lowering difficult will help to some extent. EB's and AV's regen pretty fast so having tools to prevent regen also helps a lot. Debuffing their defense and resistances helps and of course tohit debuffs and -damage so that they do not harm as much your pets.

That and the irony that people are already slowly returning to using the AE again since many missions there are now better exp at the moment than the DFB runs whilst using 100% boosts. Its all about exp per hour with little down time. So its rather wince worthily come full circle once more.

I understand your desire to participate in this(as you general do seem to like post rather prolifically in many different discussions) but I was mainly directing this to the two aforementioned people. But to address your dismissiveness, would anyone prior to the start of it being public be subjected to that? In addition would one truly be considered "have an account" in regards to those who just simply wanted to play the game and ignore the account truly count in what I was attempting to say "ie people who play but don't really have the account in their minds/use the account/" as a distinction from b, those having an account who do participate on the forums but just not in this thread due to having not read it. etc etc. Thus the distinction made with a) has validation as a variable just perhaps not in the worded meaning that you wish to be so quickly dismissive of.

I have a question then to pose to both you and Saiko concerning this discussion: We have a representation of a subset of a subset of the player population here in this discussion: A. People who are playing(The whole) B. People who have decided to participate on the forum(Subset 1) C. People who have decided to voice their for/against concerns related to the DFB changes on these forums. (Subset of Subset 1) People not represented(but implied) are those who: a) do not have a forum account. b) have an account but have not seen this discussion c) have seen this discussion but do not proffer a dislike or like on the forums about DFB. d) do not offer a like or dislike in any medium. e) do not have an opinion that is applicable for what ever reason(leveled differently etc etc) And I am sure there are other variables that I am not accounting for in the broader sense as well in these regards. And I am sure there are other variables that I am not accounting for in the more microcosmic level. So given the uncertainties and number of variables that perhaps not a small number of people see, here is my question: How does one, with any confidence, come up with -only- a margin of error of +/- 3% to the statistical analysis of who is for/against these changes? The unaccountable variables would seem to skew the analysis to the point of being unrepresentative and thus making the evidence rather compelling that one should question the validation of the conclusion. 1. Bias then

Its a shame to hear on the DFB change. Losing choices in the manner this seems to have been done seems to reflect an implementation philosophy is a bit disconcerting.

There is a whole Archetype section for brutes. You may wish to look there.

But that's normal in regards to people wanting different things. Having been playing a game(Ark Survival Evolved) where people can make their own servers but have a decently robust number of people playing(though sometimes spread out), Its a good thing that there is choice but at the same time its important to note that there are good choices in these regards. As for the OP, their concerns for DFB running have little meaning on HC servers due to both the volume and the way exp is handled. The AH is also padded here partially and with the current users/servers its a non issue too. Task force and mission requests are almost by the second/minute as well so that's a non issue too. Thus overall, the OP shouldn't be concerned as their wants, seemingly, will be met.

There are various TW's and WP's that people have listed builds for. I don't think it would be too hard to cobble the two together to give you a working build that may satisfy you. Also lets keep in mind that with how easy it is to level a character and how easy it is to come buy respec's making something that you like and seeing how it goes and then changing it later isn't that hard either.

Are you going for aesthetic looks or something else. You can colorize any power set to look green thus justifying a green lantern look so to speak. Outside of that you can opt for controller/dominator sets and colorize the pets green(illusion for example). Defender sets like shield and secondaries could be done similarly etc. It just really mostly depends on what you want to play versus anything else. Green Lantern cannot wholly be mimic'd here since lantern's powerset is more or less imagination/dc universe online mmo sort of considerations.

Last 2 hours have been really bad with lag and rubber banding. Chat delays of 10-15 seconds and worse.

Its a shame that it'll be on Monday. Some of us, especially Oceania/Asia pretty much will miss out on this.

It's always hit and miss for me. Honestly, I prefer being bumped to like 30ish, and then going the rest of the way naturally, because I don't much enjoy most of my hero concepts being... unable to do what they're supposed to, you know? For me though the investment is in the concept, not the time spent. :) There are times I wish there was a ‘start at 22 with SOs’ setting. Relatively speaking there is. Its called "DFB team LFM". 4 free SO's and exp after some runs of it to 22 easily, especially. :P

Whether you find it applicable or not, hem is discussed and tested on stalkers in this thread with some interesting results: https://score.savecoh.com/index.php/topic,1446.0.html

Dark was what I ran before shut down with thugs. The debuffs they profide in conjunction with the other things it did was nice. Time also so far(got a 31 thus far) does well. Kin does nice too and it of course is a team pleaser for grouping. Its going to depend on how up close or how on the periphery your playstyle will be too of course.

I recognize your desire to demean players with different choices as bad, I would say simply that it is perhaps more appropriate to simply say it is a different choice, just as the other choices you outlined concerning power leveling that others found to be valid in the past. Your suggested TF chaining is also equally valid in terms of being a method, but keep in mind it isn't necessarily a valid choice for everyone due to their interests, limitations, etc and thus shouldn't be looked at derisively either.

I'll throw in my anecdotal experience here: No issue or flags and I've used 3 different checkers this week(I usually use 2 per my weekly checks but I threw in a third upon reading this thread today for good measure).

That is disconcerting to read in regards to what you are stating in regards to Tempest's stance. I do hope that is not truly the case. Outside of the stability issues, I'm not sure what is found to be threatening about AE or any sort of farming in this freedom centric iteration of the game except perhaps(and this is just a speculative assumption only mind you) that Tempest or others may be allowing the original game's subscription business model institutional thinking influence too much their stance. *shrug*

It isn't an issue of being defined as a fix. Its a matter of simply inputting different numbers to award more(or less). I think perhaps you are voicing frustration on AE having been turned down in its rewards/incentivization to use the AE system. That was done to address the map server/server stability issues that were occurring with over use. My impression is that the server team has inherently no issue with allowing people to use AE, even if it is just for incessant and constant leveling/power leveling. After all, they've been implementing all manner of things to let people level and play as they wish and with much more freedom and choice. The current restriction is simply to mitigate the issues of stability for the servers. So in the future if there happens to become a better option for them to improve/increase the stability to handle the demand(perhaps the move to the different host, though Im skeptical) then it is possible that they will revert that. They've left the door open to the possibility of it changing back in the future.

THIS, a million times. There are comparatively few outdoor missions in the game, and they made it so that those there are most of them have really good spawn rates AND you get credit no matter how much damage you dealt. If someone swooping in and helping you deal with a hoard of baddies bothers you that much, stay inside where they can't do it. So what you and the other person(s) are advocating then is for people to do this and attempting to invalidate the OP's concerns? I think with the return of the game perhaps there is a compelling argument to be had to perhaps find a better perspective that doesn't promote people being unkind to others and then masking it with excuses/reasons of "Im helping" or "go play indoors". I do agree that with the higher exp rate we all are enjoying via these server iterations and that other changes before and now make such extreme kill stealing for the most part a smaller/non issue in terms of mechanics/leveling but in terms of how it presents itself to various players as someone else stated in a rude or similar (line cutting, perhaps) manner isn't necessarily being necessarily condemned/address except to say "deal with it if you want to be outside" which really sends a rather equally poor message. Another possibility is that the player was trying to test something/do something specific that your help interfered with? It probably wasn't necessarily the case in your example situation, but I have seen folks doing that(as an example seeing how many of a certain level/mob type can be handled by a certain power/combination of powers. Doing such on the streets is typically much easier than in a door mission since its more quickly/readily available. We never know but we invariably make assumptions and a judgement call(at least when intentionally being helpful).

I too will have to protest this change, but I will at least explain my reasoning. There needs to be a 20 hour lockout after doing 5 Tip Missions because that encourages "farmers" to play multiple alts to generate hoards of resources. By throttling the "flow rate" of rewards from Morality Missions in the manner you achieve a greater circulation of characters (alts) through the game than if you throttle the "magnitude" of the rewards from Morality Missions via this reduction. This has long term game health implications insofar as establishing a broader base of characters to play than just having a SINGLE character for grinding out Tips mindlessly (endlessly?) for Merits without stopping. With the game being free and the philosophy thus far seemingly to allow players to freely make choices concerning how they involve themselves in game play, can you better explain why you feel the model you propose(which fits more how it would be per a game charging a subscription model and desiring people to be involved in as much of a time sink as possible) than allowing things as they are now?

I only hope as well, being outside of North America, that the move to Canada doesn't cause any gating/throttling issues. Current server location was relatively smooth, outside of concurrency issues that everyone experienced of course.