Monos King

I think EM is just supposed to re-enact afterburners old purpose, and that already stepped on the toes of hover. Evasive not offering defense in combat is sort of troubling though. Afterburner was only effect self, but could still be good damage avoidance in a fight.

Yes to the first, no the second. Farsight was only an issue as it's support.

Well, the way I see it, previously when you wanted the benefits of the defense while flying, you accepted hovers animation and slow speed. And now, if you want that, you accept the same - except now you can get rid of the slow speed part. So nothings really changed. I do think flight stances in general added to the tailor is a good idea though.

I actually love flying while keeping hover animation. But I was under the impression hover and flight were mutually exclusive before, so there is no "giving up" anything. This is new territory, isn't it?

Pass. Someone else can take this one.

I have a better question. Why would you think otherwise?

Also, as a sidenote, fight vanguard sword or black knights guys. Do it. +4x8. You've been avoiding it, and I want you to do it. It won't be just regen cursing at the character creator then.

Not much of a commentary on regen, but we must be different types of min/maxers. My only interest is being as self-sufficient as possible, free from the need of perishables like insps or temps. And I'm a temp hunter. It just depends on my goal. I would never short on defense opportunities if I want my ultimate surviving blaster, but if I want omega damage blaster then I'll ignore it almost entirely. Inspirations exist just to patch the weaknesses of the set or build through momentary aid. I'm just not interested in needing insps to do what I want to be good at. Here's what's important. You're very correct about some sets having higher potential, and it's similar to why proc play has the highest ceiling. Bio has absorb and regen, which means it has the ability to reach capped def and res on top of those two traits, something a set like elec could never do. Rad has nearly infallible regen res, meaning in a situation where bio has been stripped of its regen, rad can keep going...another non inspiration provided attributes. And to go on the earlier example, you obviously can't use enhancements to add entire different mini attacks to your moves, but a proc player can theoretically hit damage cap regardless. However, that doesn't mean the strength of armors is determined by what inspirations can draw out of it. Imagine someone said "old trick arrow build was way more survivable solo than pain domination because I could layer debuffs and then also use insps. That means I can heal, +res, and debuff lots of peoples, whereas pain dom can only do two of those! I think old trick arrow was pretty well off." You'd call that person insane. You can say that within the realm of the min/max sphere you can make regen work, but using inspirations as the basis won't.

Besides dull blades, I'm pretty sure all of the pure lethal sets had some indirect dmg buff. Archery, rifle, and most of the weapons have an innate accuracy bonus right? And claws just attacks the fastest out of everything. They must've known lethal was going to be disadvantaged and tried to give some thematic compensation. Haven't had much issue with lethal, but there is an argument to be made it wasn't enough to even things out.

Because I meant it from a lore stand-point and not the "Tier: Incarnate" gameplay standpoint that I now realize you might be talking about. But actually, at this point there are actually a lot of enemies that are waaaay stronger than canonically more powerful enemies (and higher spawning enemies) if they get scaled up, so making a move off of solely that would be a bit of a poor precedent...since we'd then go around looking for any low level enemies that were more powerful than higher level enemies based off of what powerset the lower level enemies have. Not to mention those incarnate class enemies, while they do have a weaker t9, are still a much greater threat than the paragon protectors anyhow - PPs aren't more dangerous than Knives of Vengeance bosses. I see what you're saying though.

Anyway I like current PP MoG but I don't mind a duration shortage, particularly one with an added dmg increase like was suggested earlier. The knives of vengeance already have a precedent for this with their 15s Glorious Vengeance move, and aside from that being awesome and exactly what is being asked for here...kinda odd that Crey has some chumps with stronger t9s than those incarnate class enemies. That's here nor there though. Now, I like the current duration of MoG because it's punishing, and I thought it was pretty clear the intention of how it would challenge players was to present this pseudo AV that would run amuck and kill people if they weren't defeated in time and expend tons of resources either way...and not as a time sink. The current PP is still an appropriate challenge in that regard amongst non god players, but the majority of people are basically immortal once they aggregate and the surviving PP becomes nothing more than a nuisance. If you're 1v1ing-3v1ing a protector at the levels they still spawn at, oh yes, it is every bit the quintessential challenge intended and expected. You strategize to get the boss in a position where it can't use or will be killed before popping it's t9, and if you can't then your death chances just went way up because it was already a fearsome face-off. I think of PPs in these instances when I say "yes they add challenge". And I find it very enjoyable as is. They simply lack the faculties to be anything more than a hindrance in well-sustained team play. But shortening the duration and giving them attack buffs? That would be awesome. You guys would probably be executing a bunch of lowbies with that though.

First world problems

Then it's just a neat instance of foreshadowing if anything. Seems all is well.

What level is this arc? Lower level stuff is to have happened far earlier in the timeline.

The title and the actual description are a bit conflicting, so I can see where the confusion stems from. All in all @MsSmart first half could totally be doable and I doubt you would see much opposition for a new "attack present target" command.

Gotcha, totally agree.

I'm confused as to how it would "force" one into anything if it's a deliberate choice amongst various other selectable choices that do different things. If this addition didn't work for you as an expert (though I wouldn't be hampered) I would think you would just keep doing what you did before. Maybe you could elaborate that one a bit more. I'm also very wary of power creep regarding MMs (you should see the insanity of the suggestions on some of my threads) but exactly because this command is something that might be a separate, and not complementary style of play for some MMs as I believe you were saying earlier...it should be fine balance wise.

Haven't heard much about MM changes as of now @TheSpiritFox but hopefully that will be looked into sooner than later. Have updated this thread with more community suggestions.

Not this one though, this'll never happen and isn't necessary anyway.

This would be nice. I'm going to add this one to my wishlist thread.

The drudge ability Trap Soul Currently heals the enemy for a miniscule amount, rather than deal damage.

Oh really? Didn't realize that became a thing. Well that was the only real argument it against it, you guys do you.

Oh I see. You thought I meant the maximum amount. I meant the minimum. As I recall you can't do instance raids with less than two full team. If I wanted to fight pylons on my own, or was forced to queue up a raid with fledgling numbers, I wouldn't be able to do that if we only had the instanced version. So before removing the zone version could even be considered the minimum number to start it up would need to be significantly lessened. And even so I still wouldn't be in favor, simply because I like zone events.

I accept these consequences. Instanced raids are good for people that want that but I'm gonna keep running zone raids. Just a matter of preference, and I like having no player count constraints. Besides if the zone event were removed pylons wouldn't have any reason to be in the zone, and the ship would be there essentially as a relic, and the zone would just lose flavor.

I have to disagree heavily with getting rid of the zone RWZ raids, the experience and interactivity of being in an actual zone for the event (and the possibility of just unknowingly strolling into one in process) were the greatest aspects for me first playing this, and though it's minor, I certainly wouldn't deprive any new comer of that agency.