Leogunner

Imagine being censored or labeled ugly because you think differently and you can't do anything about it. While I liked Shock Therapy, I felt it would be easier to change it so I suppose I have different reasons why I've changed my perspective on the previous name and why it should be changed.

The reason the name was changed was because it was insensitive to certain players, not because it was too specific or convoluted. The name was changed to something generic and that is the feedback given. Whether you feel being generic is a good thing is your preference. I think my official suggestion is Electrical Interface. No one else suggested it and I feel it's more indicative of a support set, it's function and having a better acronym (ei/elec, robot/ei, dark/ei, etc).

This is a feedback thread about a name. Feedback was given. Don't put "bad" in people's mouths when no one but you (and 1 other person saying "not so bad") are the ones that said it. Like I mentioned elsewhere, it's funny you mentioned people being "wrong"...those that were vehemently against the devs explaining their use of the term "Shock Therapy" were labeling those very devs you're defending as "wrong" and vilifying their motives. Why is it so wrong to express the distaste for a particular name (like Affinity's use here) but it's not wrong to shout down the devs for using a term they deem sensitive? Am I the only one seeing the hypocrisy here?

It's implied that it's used on biological creatures or material or making a circuit out of them. Origin-wise, it would wholly depend on if it's only used as a circuit for inorganics. If origins come into place, how does a Robot/machine have an affinity at all? Perhaps a better name for cross-origin function/emanation would be Electrical Interface. It has a stronger link to the use by science/tech origins but has a wide range of grammatical links to other powers such as communications as well as physically forming a connection to multiple bodies/systems. Again, Affinity is generic. No argument about other powersets being also generic will change that.

Support sets are different than blast, armor or melee sets though. And they aren't literal chains. I would like a cool "chains" aesthetic to a set as I have a concept for one but that isn't here. They're a circuit, not a chain. A more apt name (suggested by someone else) would have been Bioelecticity or Bioelectric Circuit. Affinity is generic.

I know that but that wasn't the argument being made. That therapy has and is still used for various other purposes as well. My statement is that most don't know about the various other applications and only the most virally spread. So is it nope? Maybe if you'd rather not take in other people's perspectives. I shared my opinion. You wanted to criticize my opinion. That's fine. I hope you share that same perspective.

It's a comparative argument. Dark Affinity is generic in comparison to Dark Miasma. Electric Affinity is more generic than a lot of other suggested names. Nature Affinity, while one might assume is also generic, more conforms to the various meanings that fall under the word "Affinity" (relationships, kinship, natural/biological/sexual attraction, etc etc). The other uses tend to fall under more basic version of the term meaning "a liking of something". Super Strength is iconic and not generic because the only other place it's used is in Super Speed.

Darkness Affinity is also pretty generic and wasn't necessary to change. There are plenty of powersets that have powers swapped out for new things (every Stalker melee set, Psi Blast, Poison, Dark Armor, Traps, etc) without changing the name. Affinity does have a connection to empathy and relationships between things like people, plants and animals. Nature Affinity works.

That's the more "layman's" interpretation of the term more bolstered by internet memes and wikipedia education. Criticism where criticism is due, it's change is necessary mainly for a vocal minority and merely being easier to change than to continue going down this road of narrative victimhood.

I don't think anyone is arguing that anymore although, to me, advocating for Combustion instead of Incinerate is almost like asking for fire splash damage. Is Combustion even that good? And I mean without putting a bunch of procs in it. I think the bigger problem is Greater Fire Sword (and to a lesser extent, Greater Ice Sword). They should probably closer in-line with Greater Psi Blade in damage or have some sort of alternative mechanism to them like being narrow cones, dropping a mini-Burn patch or something, especially for GFS being the capstone of the set. Also, you might omit the Tanker version of GFS from improvements if Combustion is really that good.

I like the name "Therapy" more than "Affinity". Affinity has no correlation to electricity at all. If you're looking at sets like Sonic "Resonance", that has a connection to reverberation and sound. Nature "Affinity" does have a connection to more biological connections. It also doesn't follow the standard naming conventions like Ice>Cold, Fire>Thermal does for elemental sets. Personally prefer Shock Therapy but would settle for Electro-Therapy, Electric Therapy or some more thematically linked name.

Someone caught a bug with the 1st changes that didn't apply the damage scale to its rech/end costs properly. They are just correcting that but in the process, SM has a slight reduction in its costs.

I think it's a typo.

Considering it already has a "Soul" power, I think it could stand to diversify its vocabulary. Oddly enough, Dark Consumption is the only attack in the set that has "dark" in the name. Dark [something] sounds more thematic since the set isn't really about souls anyway. Some synonyms: Ruin Devour Decay Dilapidation Atrophy Deteriorate Decline Rot Decompose Abrasion Attrition Corrosion Disintegration I like the alliteration of Dark Dilapidation but it's a bit of a mouth full. I'm not sure why Equilibrium was the next option. I guess since it's "equalizing" between harm and benefit? If it's bringing things to a state of ballast, maybe something less syllable-iness like "Darkness' Rest" (Sable Stable?), "Hushed Dark", "Night's Silence", "Tranquil Void" or "Dark Famine".

It's really only Fire Melee that has trouble. Fire Blast is pretty effective and Fiery Aura has its benefits.

I almost forgot to ask: Is the the radius for the extra damage (the 3ft range) extended for Tankers?

Why not just use whatever tech that prestige transformations use and deactivate any powers (click, toggle or passive) the target has on them? That is, the "Exhausted" granted power deactivates all other powers except it and outside buffs.

While having a larger AoE but reduced damage does aid in higher DPS and usability, I have to admit I like the concept of an exceptionally lethal close-ranged attack like it is now. Smacking bigger AoEs on everything is starting to get over-used.

Agreed. In that respect, what if Faraday Cage summoned a pet that then spawned the AoE? Would be a +1 if you could also target that pet and use your powers off of it.

I did make a proposition in another thread that gave mobs more variety of powers (as well as some randomness so you're not sure if that sapper has Vengeance or personal force field ect). I think the only thing missing is incentive.

That's not impactibility. These changes are in beta, I remind you, so it's not changing anything from how it is live. If you want to prove impactibility, you probably need to touch on what the goal of the changes are. Trying to do that by discussing function kind of flies in the face of any changes, including the one trying to be balanced here. Well the argument is still being made. I'm sure removing its ability to crit is in agreement but few want powers moving forward to be balanced this way, and this that discussion continues.

And the focus of the changes now are to bring the damage down because having access to the reliable and near max powered version is too strong. You don't explain how it's impractical and I have no idea how you'd come to the conclusion that it creates a dependence in the context of your other arguments. You're also under the assumption I'm disagreeing? I'm just suggesting a different approach. I suggested the approach even before they started posting about reducing the power's yield and, and now I'm suggesting it as an alternative to outright limit the power from working with the other aspects of the AT's inherent and soul drain.

What reasons?

Like I said, my suggestion would be more in line with reducing the standard damage to be in line with the direction the devs are moving toward now but giving the bonuses (reg +DMG, crit and all) tied to a situation less capable to control (low END). It's aiming to shift those bonuses rather than outright remove them.

The only thing unique about that is you pop a blue insp to power this up (kind of defeats the purpose of the utility too) Making power choices/ usage to try to burn END isn't actually a thing. No one tries to burn resources before regaining them because it's not been done.