Monos King

Good idea to post that here, just think you'll like those changes.

Between them and bots, yeah. And bots have the potential to be pretty good once you've got the full upgrades anyway.

Uhhhh...so regen is fine. It's heals are immune to -heal, so you've got that safety net going already. Let's not even talk about PvP where it's flagrantly overpowered. I'm not opposed to anything yet but I can't see why it needs anything else. I always thought regen res was for sets that didn't already have insane regen and was an alternative; you know give them a situational one up over the similar set. Kind of like how dependent on the situation, having high slow res is superior to high recharge. Different mechanics. Regen (despite it's name) is a heal set, and the heal armor champion by far. Again, it is immune to -heal. Sentinel regen is even more crazy. I don't know why anyone is treating it like it's lacking; it has no res or def speciality in exchange for great regen and very strong and quick heals. It's not gonna cap anything because that's not its thing. Edit: Nevermind I see some reasons it needs updating.

Appreciate the contributions, I'll be sure to look at those tables you added! It's important to note that we absolutely cannot be balancing off of IOs (procs included), and that masterminds actual source of damage is not currently very slottable, however. Enforcers is a nice exception, but not every powerset has the secondary effects to making proc blasting viable or even possible for the pets. Damage alone is not the sole concern as well, as auras currently occupy high priority in slotting because it doesn't matter how much damage you do if you are dead. Any set can do decent damage with procs, but if you would rather slot for endurance and recharge (which with MMs end penalty is definitely something you will want to do for viable attacking) proc space is an eerily painful route to go if you aren't an uber incarnate IO'd monster that can handle it. I personally have little issue with the current damage of mastermind attacks, but various people that play masterminds do, and I see where they are coming from. The primaries are definitely not comparable to overall pet damage either at higher levels, so they are about as good as people consider them to be.

Yeah that sounds perfect, I'd like those terms. I'm sure a lot of other people would too (although I'm sure there'd be the odd few that insists on getting the full extent of rewards).

There has actually been precious little discussion there (because our proposals were so perfect?) so that'd be cool to see.

You're 100% right, and actually that was pretty effective then. And I loved the storylines in this game, that's why I want to open up these storylines to other people with suggestions like the OPs. It's just that that role of Ouro just doesn't really hold up anymore. Not in Homecoming anyway. I mean you're able to unlock post-Tyrant defeat arcs from Mr. G at the 30s, the timeline progression concern is kind of dead. Earnestly, I actually think that's dumb, but Mr. G isn't the only instance anyway. So, let's remove the contact out-leveling mechanism. We've seen from various people its outright harmful, annoying, inhibiting and every reason it's still here is now archaic. In the process of innovating, it would be possible to clear up certain things for new players that weren't cleared up before; the fact that your enemies might not scale with your level and that you have outgrown the difficulty of the contact, and that you won't be given the same extent of rewards for completing the content as you would during the initial levels. There were some suggestions on how to do that earlier in the thread. Adding that explanation to the tutorials in blue text from your first contact for instance. Hell, even before Homecoming if the issue was that it would be confusing to the timeline, that could still be addressed pretty easily while implementing this suggestion. Progression is not impeded by opening up the entirety of a contacts arcs to you while you are progressing. Progression is impeded by it literally being ceased by losing access to a contact. Being forced to go to another contact isn't progress, it's subversion. A lot of people have never liked that aspect, I suppose you're just hearing it now. If anything this proposal assures it, by ensuring the aspect of arc progression is intact, moving through the missions and stories without a sudden cut off.

Or we could remove some of those drawbacks because they're silly, and make praetoria somewhat appealing so that people actually want to play it unlike in the OG game. Good old improvement. People were so sick of playing praetoria and praetorian limitations that they just opted to not. Why introduce an entire new world just to give it nothing the other two alignments get and a lot more difficulty doing the things they do get for nothing more? That could at least be fixed. But.... @Oubliette_Red On the matter of ouroboros though, it'd be nice if praetorians could unlock it at level 20 or so through their encounters with the primal earthers, this suggestion aside. The devs kind of gave up on Praetoria and just made it a transitional space so choosing to play as it solely comes with a bunch of disadvantages that are consequences of the fact. It sucks, but praetoria is so not developed to stand on it's own that you'll be bound to run into even more problems if you are taking that route. Anyhow. Ouro is a good supplementary feature but it can't continuously be alluded to as an actual solution to elements that should be apart of ordinary gameplay. If it were, why even have contacts when ouro was made, could've just added everything there from the get-go. You can level up doing other things, who needs contact progression? That's what the end ideology of what I keep hearing. Ouro is there to repeat arcs you liked, to do arcs you simply could not do through ordinary contact progression (even if you had XP disabled the contact choices simply disavow you from getting those arcs) and to get badges you missed or aren't able to get on your own, and not to compensate for doing what contacts are supposed to do in the first place -- giving missions. Ouroboros is additional, not fundamental, so when a fundamental issue comes up like I literally cannot complete or gain these missions and arcs when the point of missions and arcs is to be gained and completed, we have an issue. That's really for other people/devs Snow, I already know how you feel about this one.

Fair, it'd have to be higher priority or already being discussed by them. Hopefully it shows up in a weekly discussion pin or something so it can be deliberated or rested.

Really hoping to hear on if either the Outlevel removal or Installation of all missions or arcs into Ouro is plausible. I have strong preference for the first option for aforementioned reasons but either would solve the main issue.

They have the rest of their rotation though, along with the rest of the pets rotations. Blow for blow, MM pets do far greater double hit damage than the ATs do simply because of the larger tray of activation times and such. The other AT's hit harder on base (generally) but that's not relevant to the topic at hand anyway. I'll relent though, assault hybrid probably wasn't meant to be operating the way it is now for MMs, and it being changed/fixed wouldn't hurt anyone. But because of the existing benefit, I'll just say I wouldn't call it a priority or anything.

I think it actually does less double hit damage the faster your attack recharges.

Oh that's definitely true; double hit affecting pets is crucial to getting it as an MM. It's just that the 'Double Hit' is a lot less based on attacks actual damage than it suggests. Radius and activation time appear to be far more significant factors (Bopper or someone else fact check me on this one) so essentially just having more attacks that meet that criteria = better double hit. Each henchman has their own individual entire tray of powers, so they can actually pull put enormous double hit values based off of each of their long activation time and/or single target attacks. Thugs bruiser alone for instance would be doing double hit damage not far from what a brute would do. These images will display what I mean. So you'll notice that despite the Scrappers Rend Armor doing more damage than the Bruisers Knockout Blow, the double hit damage it does is substantially less than the Double Hit of the Bruiser. In fact, the first rend armor has only procs, and no damage enhancements at all, and the second Rend Armor has +106% Damage Enhancements added. Despite this, the Second Rend armor actually gets LESS of a Double Hit damage than the proc bomb version. Essentially, the Bruiser alone does more Double Hit damage than most players will, and then there is the mastermind and their other pets on top of it. That's why I say it's a fair trade off; there is definitely a disproportionate Double Hit benefit for masterminds. It's one of the few things we actually get going for us.

Some things I wanted to elaborate We aren't trying to buff MMs to make up for intentional shortcomings of the set, like the fact that summoning pets in combat is hard. That's the point, it's a byproduct of MM structure. The issue there is how frequently it needs to be done because pets have no survivability. We want to make MMs viable. @gameboy1234 You are correct on one thing for sure; the nature of MMs yields that they will never be too good in certain situations as compared to the other ATs. I think I know what you're saying, but the changes here are focused on making them go from "almost universally useless" to "good in more instances". Attempting to make them viable in everything will not happen without huge scale changes, this is true, but at the very least these threads are not aimed at something like that. The individual threads in particular focus on making those lacking sets do as advertised/expected. We want to ensure they are not worthless compared to the strong MM sets, not compared to other ATs. We are using strong MM primaries as reference for individual changes, and the general MM intended strengths as reference for global changes. This means for something like necro we look at what it's supposed to be good at, why it is not as viable as something like thugs, and make changes to maintain its specialty and to make it worthwhile. For global changes, we look at what MMs need to function (not what they are bad at) and add features to them to improve those functions in a way that might improve their weaknesses. The shortcomings of the set will remain the shortcomings, but if something that MMs are supposed to be good at, like summoning and manipulating pets as a source of contribution, is jeopardized by their immediate deaths, then that's an issue. We see why that happens, and try to improve that element accordingly. Essentially it's never "oh man MMs suck at this lets fix that", rather it's "aren't MMs supposed go be good at/aren't they supposed to benefit from <blank>" and then fix what is lacking from that side of things. The only exception to that process is MM slotting and enhancement issues because EVERY AT is supposed to have the option to slot in a way that is optimal to their preferences and not inherently limited, which MMs do not recieve as they must make a mandatory sacrifice in order to fulfill the basic function of living pets (6 aura slot tax), with precious few exceptions.

The Crabbermind plays very different to a mastermind, and I think they would be a cool format for a different AT or a new wave of mastermind primaries, an opinion I share with your MM revamp ideas which I'm definitely a fan of. But crabbermind are very different, have different strengths and weaknesses, and while pets are up, are most certainly not tankier than even current masterminds. They don't have body guard mode (far far far FAR squisher) They don't have an assortment of debuffs and buffs from the pets The pets are not self sufficient The pets are not permanent without enormous recharge The pets are not easily resummonable The pets suffer the same level difference issue as mastermind pets The pets are not controllable The pets recieve no supremacy The pets cannot be buffed or protected by a secondary devoted to it. These are totally fine because arachnos soldiers are wholly self sufficient and have pets as an added cool factor that can play for great performance, but they are not at all more potent of a pet set than masterminds. The pets die way faster than even mastermind pets under pressure, which is hilarious considering each of the spider pets have health maybe two hp shy of a masterminds strongest pet; even the spiderlings. But that is okay because as you noted, the crabber is totally powerful on its own. But it is a very different set, that just happens to have a lot of pets. Illusion/dark and dark/elec trolls are another example of a pseudo MM, but they are completely incomparable. Also: Nah, every MM needs their pets 100% period no exceptions. You could consider than an issue on it's own, but it is through and through a pet AT. Crabs might be able to do more things than masterminds, but so can every AT. Only a hyper built super MM can contend with the other ATs, and then only in a few limited scenarios exclusive to a few very potent primary/secondary combinations. That's kind of what we're all up in arms about. It has little to do with the crabs being better with pets and everything to do with the MM issues we're trying to get fixed now. But as far as actually being a pet set, not a chance is a crab better. And an absolutely elite MM will do things like farm and AV kill superior to an elite crabbermind, due to its tankiness with the right set.

I'm a bit confused. There will only ever be one type of mastermind; the one that controls pets. You just want powers to be somewhat useful on their own right?

I'm of the same mind, actually. The big issue is trying to fit something to do in the existing MM primary format, without making them immediately far too powerful since the pets are already there to effectively compensate for said constrained participation. If it's only a matter of giving reason to pick up the existing powers, then debuffs are the way to go. That's why we'd like to see ninjas get some -def and -dmg between their last two abilities. Something like thugs, however, is so potent currently that any additional changes would just elevate it to over-potence. I like that idea, giving the upgrades something special. As you know we're currently in favor of embedding the auras with the equips, but seeing a thematic improvement or temporary boost of some sort (access to a unique move for a little bit perhaps?) would be really engaging and fun. Maybe using upgrade on the assault bot gives it temporary use of the gas missiles for instance. But what's important to keep in mind is that we can't just give increase after increase without considering the actual need for said changes in real performance. If we look at changes that are pretty much mandatory like level increase for t1s, the updates will immediately improve aspects across the board and render the validity of things like small damage buffs quite little. MMs do need to have limitations still, and while I'm certainly down to encourage the use of the personal powers I know that if they become too effective it will become a balance issue, as beyond all else, MMs are a pet class. Although the player might want to feel more impactful, if we're putting the pets into a position where they finally already are...it might not seem pertinent to do much with primary personals outside of the most minor things.

There are a few who would rather see the equips removed (or combined) in exchange for more attacking. I was more addressing those who wanted additional powers for the sake of greater participation. It's an interesting approach for sure.

Probably for the existing MMs, but if we end up getting new MM primaries, we should definitely try to see unique interactions and mechanics exclusive to them, like your animus idea. For instance, I could see an elemental themed MM totally ditch equips or even rearrange the order of getting the pets. Getting your ultimate pet before level 17 for instance, or only having one permanent pet and just bumping it up as you level. I saw a few suggestions like that too.

I'm definitely interested to see how the damage/end discussion unfolds, but it makes me again curious about debuffs for the primary attacks. They definitely make engaging in combat with the pets more exciting. In regards to having something to do though, wouldn't the pool and epic abilities suffice if you really want to jump into combat, or is that just not the same as what people are hoping for?

Well I guess it couldn't hurt to try to explain it to you. You received hostility because you tried to shut down an idea proposed for the sake of other peoples enjoyment by presenting your opinion as fact and dismissing others ideas off that uncorroborated principle. And upon being challenged on that principle, you neither offered an argument nor any form of amicability...just coldly repeated your perspective that you are utterly unyielding on without any explanation. Or in my case: Ignored entirely. Despite my best efforts to bring actual evidence out of you. You even focused on a minute aspect that had absolutely nothing to do with the OPs discussion and replies, and deliberately prioritized having an argument instead of talking about the main matter. In fact, even now the only time you've actually replied to me was once I was a bit combative...so you could self-victimize and state that you've unjustifiably been getting attacked. You are proving you are only here to argue, rather than offer anything constructive. And you should probably take a look in the mirror, because the only one being condescending is you. You need to stop assuming you are right. Like I told Snow, you are not a developer, nor a community rep. If all you have to say is "this won't work, I'm sure of it" you aren't going to be taken seriously. Every attempt I've made to get you on topic was dismissed. You wouldn't reply here either, nor offer any of the supposed numerous threads affirming your point despite my admission that if that were the case, then we could just wrap this up or consider other options. In fact, I and everyone else has been very warm to the ouroboros expansion related suggestions, though those in favor of this are, of course, more in favor of this. Where? Where have you given a single "valid factual point"? Where have you given evidence? Was it here? Was it here where you dismissed the entire thread by obfuscating your opinion with fact once more? Where you call out Cole for wanting topic relevancy on an idea he introduced solely with the intention of making the game better for everyone? Go ahead and quote the supposed valid factual points, perhaps I missed them. Here are your biggest issues. 1) You litter the thread with misconceptions without ever admitting your fault. No one was proposing level scaling of mobs. It was not suggested once. Yet you dwell on it. And you adopted a condescending tone in an attempt to make up for your mistake calling the thread "ambiguous". You then presented that statement as fact, despite the OP being very direct. And even if it is not direct to you, if it was to another person it becomes a matter of opinion that you once again held to be utter fact. Nice transition to the next issue which is 2) All you and others so far have offered are your own opinion with zero evidence. Why is XP Lock good enough? Quote to me a single reply demonstrating how XP Lock is sufficient to match up to the concerns of Level 50s that want to go back and do story lines Low levels that want to level up while playing story lines unencumbered Players that want to go in an steam roll enemies that are gray for the funzies I look forward to that task as well. Oh, and finally 3) You are a huge hypocrite! All you have done is offer opinion after opinion, with the most condescending tone possible that presumes everyone else is wrong automatically and doesn't know what they are talking about. You do realize that if your saying to @SurfD Then YOUR perspective is ALSO an opinion? And you can't tell me this isn't condescending, with the implication of incompetence in "look closely" You can't victimize yourself when you are guilty of these issues, when you were the source of these attitudes for many people to begin with. It's because of these issues you have that I'm now going to follow Cole's advice and stop my association with you on this thread. I advise that you acknowledge your own words, Switch. It'd help.

Ah, I see you went with the crying emoji. You have quite the advanced palette sir! We see precious few of those in the trashcan. Why if you scavenge hard enough, you might find some common sense as well. Or maybe some actual worth. Assuming people that are making suggestions for improvement of quality of life are just incompetent. Alright. Hey, why don't you address anything anyone has said? Like others have already asked? About how it harms no one, or that simply because it exists for a while doesnt make it good. Maybe that XP lock doesn't help if you're already past the level, and now want to do missions on a character you've superficially outgrown. I know plenty that do, you're saying F those losers right? Everytime, you state the change is unnecessary because XP Disable exists, we explain in detail why it would be helpful and harmless, how that doesn't actually address all of the issues that are had and barely even addresses one, and then you say it's unnecessary because XP Disable exists. Oh, but now thats followed by "maybe your dumb". No, it's just stupid to rely on that, see the last few pages. It's been pretty funny, but it's cramping the thread now, and you don't appear to be joking. That's been your only argument without evidence, so how about it. If you have something to say you should be able to explain. Why should we be content with XP lock? You think it works? Cool. Various people disagree. We think it's an archaic solution to a heckling matter. If all you've got to say is "it works" all you deserve is "it doesn't". You and Switch, very curiously, spin the same tired statement every time. It's not even an argument. This won't work, and XP lock is good enough. You're not one of the developers. None of you can speak to their interests, so don't speak for them. You're also not the community representative, and even they don't get to decide what is "good enough" and "acceptable a solution". Get over yourself. Did you seriously tell anyone to go look at the code and come back with a solution? I'm cackling, I'm genuinely convinced you're a mockery. What do you think the forums are for? Scrutinizing the code, making a server, and returning here? Come back and comment that on every thread on the forum, I'll be mourning your absence. Until you have something to contribute, I'm definitely not replying to ya though mate. I'm trying to get a few things noticed, can't be spending time in a circle. Oh but if you want to work your magic and bash on my newest MM threads, that'd be fantastic. Apparently the controversy really helps their traction. Thanks best buddy.

Probably, but can't see why we would go in that direction rather than innovate a bit. That's pretty much just an extension of the lacking XP disable feature, which makes the existing problem still stand. I think moving away from that direction entirely would be beneficial. It's just unnecessary irritation to begin with.

I've been trying to avoid giving soldiers leadership like thugs; monotony is my enemy. I always rationed that thugs were aimless and unfocused, thus leadership was appropriate, whereas the soldiers have self-sufficiency and thus don't benefit from leadership beyond the Supremacy. That's just my own stretching in-game explanation. The meta explanation is that thugs don't get resistances so they get to benefit from something else. Soldiers don't really need leadership toggles as much, though we did want to see them receive vengeance.