Leogunner

But is it a universal play style couched in pseudo altruistic motives or is that the conclusion you've ended at? Personally, when confronted with such a conundrum of attempting to discern reality from my own perception, I consider their point but from a neutral or seemingly beneficial (from my perspective) direction and compare it to the other persons example. Confronted with your conclusions, I find it difficult to do that because I have no idea why you've taken such a defensive position to conflate or dismiss the motives of others.

You're invalidating yourself from the discussion. If me making thought experiments and crazy suggestions makes me some kind of ant to you, I guess I have nothing more to say to you. [EDIT] FYI, I'm not angry or offended by you (I still don't know what would end up causing those emotions in me, frankly), I just don't think we'd have anything to ever exchange. I like making suggestions or entertaining off-the-wall ideas because I know, from the perspective of reality and this all-volunteer team working on a over-decade old game, a lot of the stuff discussed will never happen.

And the point I was making quoted yours and put for a different perspective. You can still have your private conversation with whoever you were quoting in a public thread lol All non-controversial statements. No one is arguing any of that. The only thing I'm even responding with is my personal perspective of a person who enjoys a particular aspect of the game, does not demand such of others and feel like expressing my opinion on the forum of literally hog-tying myself from a lot of content to get the enjoyment out of it I want. I'm sorry if you feel it is selfish of me to share that opinion with the forums while not enforcing it on others. How rude of me.

~ahem~ Just for some perspective: This IS a thread about balance and changes and future content, yes? I would assume people would then be talking about said subjects and not trying to burn people that do want to talk about it on a stake. Just because people have opinions doesn't mean they're trying to bring the sky down on everyone. If you can't entertain some opinions, hypotheticals and facts, I wonder if you are even interested in participating in a discussion at all.

No, I'm more saying you can have fun by contributing to the success of a team. Having fun shouldn't mean you're the center of attention but I'm sure to some it should. And even if being that core is fun, isn't it more benevolent to spread that fun to others and not just yourself even if you have to endure some lows amid the plateaus? But then I'm not saying who can or can't have fun, just sharing my perspective but I can be an odd one. I tend to not "try hard" on teams if only because engagements are more fun and chaotic that way and it's also a bit more fun when situations start to turn sour and I still have fuel in the tank to try harder and attempt to stop the situation from going full south. In such cases, I will hold onto Domination or my nuke or only use some of my control or focus on using ST instead of AoE or only bother picking off annoying targets and leave the grunt work to others. And beyond that, there's also just splitting off into smaller groups/soloing spawns. As for what I'm trying to say: I tend to play devil's advocate a lot. When people readily dismiss a point too quickly without consideration of why it was brought up or for whatever other reason, I like to bring it up with a different spin instead.

So does that mean DM doesn't need anymore damage buffing? Is changing Dark Consumption into a mini-nuke or even a standard-ish AoE even necessary anymore? I still wouldn't mind changing DC into a low damage, better rech self +END AND a foe -ToHit because even with its utility, I think it could manage some more for GP.

Well I'm not the one you were replying to with that question so I don't see why I would need to stick to that outline. I was offering a separate situation where nukes do crash. The fun is supposed to be the absolute destruction, not the self-efficiency...because they were initially not efficient from a personal perspective, it is something a team can cover for. Does the Empathy defender not count in your narrative that then uses Adrenaline Boost/Recovery Aura to nullify your crash? Or the Tanker that swoops in to take any aggro that you got for the nuke? Again, I'm forming a different hypothetical that is targeted toward using more of your team rather than pushing certain outliers to carry everyone else. I'm also not really assuming the team isn't doing anything, that is the assumption of the consensus of the thread. People are talking end-game and discussing aspects that get marginalized. Technically, my hypothetical wasn't targeted at you but more a general talking point put forth to the participants in the thread, especially since I didn't ask a question for you to answer, I just spoke of a point. You can dismiss it or whatever. But let's not use selective memory here since a lot of valid points regarding overall balance have been presented.

Hypothetically, those blasters would get to experience the same feeling others feel while the melees or support holds back the mob while they recover from using a crashing nuke: they get to watch their teammate doing awesome things.

I kind of had a reverse of that where things that seemed normal sized would be ultra small when close to me and locations/barriers in the space around me would appear to be further away. I'd sometimes feel like I was falling as things around me would seem to get further away.

There has been a strong shift to solo performance parameters thus a shift in the window of acceptable performance. With a more team-oriented gameplay, being "shut down" because you used your nuke just means your other teammates get to catch the slack. If that is unacceptable to some players, your bias is likely to push for more solo-oriented play rather than team co-op and combination adaptation. Considering the game has fewer players than it did before split among different private servers, I can follow the perspective of solo-oriented content, however.

Why is Dark Melee so high? ...but it's pretty much as I assumed with respect to blast and melee. I can see the general deviation in performance shifting further when you take into consideration the ATs that use them vary much more than Scrapper does to Tanker/Brute/Stalker. You'll have Sent able to overcome a lot of the mitigation downfalls of fire/ while Defender gets minute advantage and things like Corruptor capitalizing off the Dot or the -res from Sonic. Even talking about just Blaster balance, you'll see a huge shift by merely changing the secondary to something with more offense or more defensive/control options. All in all, saying TW needs adjustments and countering that by pointing to Fire Blast is still pretty apples-to-oranges rationality.

Even though my suggestion was likely seen as more a comical suggestion, I'll make a caveat on my previous post: How about introducing a new rank into the mix? You could call them anything, really...Knights, Sergeants, Minions(P)...but it would be a rank between minions and Lts. They are very similar to minions in damage and mez resist but with the HP of an Lt...the difference is, they have the unique ability to count as more targets. For a Minion(P+), they are common among minions and count as 3 targets but of course, only take damage as 1 and with the HP of an Lt, they aren't as easily disposed of with a standard AoE. You can even have Minion(P++) and Minion(P+++) counting as 4 and 5 targets and as the difficulty increases, so does the frequency of these replacing your standard minions. If the Minion(P+++) thing is a bit weak, you could just amend the (P) (fyi, P is supposed to stand for Promotable), to all ranks, just giving them the ability to count as 3 targets (so you'd have Minion(P), Lieutenant(P), Boss(P) and Elite Boss(P)) that replace standard Minions, Lts, Bosses and EBs the higher you scale the level.

I don't mind being carried every now and then but it is NOT entertaining which is why I avoid it.

I'm guessing you want to parley... Is it though? I can assume that Fire Blast has a prominent gap between it and the next up and coming blast set, but is that gap "as wide" or are you just saying that? When @Galaxy Brain posted a comprehensive comparison of the melee sets using controlled elements, I'm convinced it does perform quite a bit better than other melee sets but it also takes into account death and needing to return to the map which seems more fair than just assuming a build is IO'ed and needs no effects except damage. I'm actually asking, is there any testing done with a similar approach for blast sets? I think the point of contention here is you're trying to compare TW to Fire Blast. The thing that you're not acknowledging is, you're also comparing Melee ATs to Blast ATs. They have completely differing balancing paradigms here and, to my knowledge, the blast sets are far more standardized than melee. That Fire Blast or the equivalent highly-effective blast set doesn't have Momentum is a testament to how standardized the blast sets are. The balance used to be a lot more shifty but with the change to Blaster inherent, the first blasts were standardized across ATs and with the nukes being de-crashed, it unbalanced them on the high end. The only real difference in the blast sets beyond "gimme d33Pz" is the mez blast (some do good damage, some barely any), the presence of Aim and the presence of a Snipe. They're all just varying levels of "shoot em dead" to "shoot em dead safer" with some exceptions (AR and non Defender Sonic). Elec Blast's position has shifted thanks to the Snipe change while still maintaining its shut-down features. But all that is irrelevant when compared to Melee because they are not the same. If you feel Fire Blast needs a nerf, then make that argument. If your only argument is to defend TW because Fire Blast, and the only thing you can do is point to popularity data, you're wrong. Try again.

For this argument, I'd say play a single player game then. Not gonna lie, I worked from home for about 4 months myself but I just didn't play at those times....but I will admit, I tend to only enjoy MMOs if I'm also drinking alcohol which I won't do while working from home so there's that. Basically, if your responsibilities affect your gameplay, you should take the courtesy of choosing your games in kind, not subject other players to your circumstances. I know it's common courtesy to tell people "yeah, irl is more important" blah blah blah, but there are so many great mobile games (that aren't cash shop money sinks) that don't lock you to a console/desk (the Switch is a life changer) that people should be more concerned burdening others with their limitations. But at the end of the day, a lot of games are made more casual with some of these types of concerns in mind. I guess the crux of my criticism is that gameplay can suffer by making it conform to casualness and there is a reason a market for said game type...I just don't think MMORPGs should be vying for that market....but then I guess that just depends on your level of dedication. I'm a casual in every definition of the word but if some hardcore content was pushed out, I just likely would never reach it...which is perfectly fine.

It was an intentionally charged remark mainly to drum up posters to respond. Frankly, I am just over the aspect of the game revolving around IOing a build to a certain level. I just don't care if people do it or not lol. IOs have been in the game for quite a while, even on live, the main difference between then and now being the speed at which one acquires such a build. Of course, there are other reasons to IO a build (my main one is just having a certain vision of a character usually dictates if that character is a step above the rest of the roster of my characters, slightly below or in between) but frankly, I chalk that up to the "not having anything better to do" category. Not a dismissive categorization, just not something pertinent to the game's balance or the discussion of rebalance unless the consideration of rebalancing IOs is on the table.

I don't dismiss any of your rebuttals but I will restate a common enough statement made in various threads about balance and IOs (even in this thread), but the majority of players that play aren't IO'ed out to the gills. There are notable exceptions and it can even be considered an incentive to continue to build out a character and progress them as high as possible, but it is not the majority. Posters on the forum skew perspectives since most that chat about the game likely can, will and do often min/max characters (I've done it a few times on live and HC) but people have made the argument of #NotAll. If that is true or not can be up for debate, I just know people will use it when it's convenient for their argument and reverse it when its not. I actually do have a problem with a lot of the changes you made note of as above. Like for the Tanker changes: I don't take credit for the suggestion but I did suggest on live and these forums before the change to give Tankers an identity by increasing the range of their AoEs primarily because people just like seeing lots of orange numbers when they hit lots of foes...but I also advocated that those orange numbers shouldn't be that big. When they buffed up Tanker melee mods, I was against that (also against them reducing the AoE size/caps from the initial iteration). They should have been kept low(ish) damage but big range. Big range/big caps = more debuffs/controls/taunt and that should = Tanker identity. Regarding the Nukes, I think that was also a mistake done back on live if I'm not mistaken. It took away the identity of Archery/Assault Rifle/Dual Pistols and made the nuke just a hallmark AoE. I liked the aspects of the old Snipe/+ToHit as well and don't agree with that change. They missed an opportunity to create a Snipe IO unique that just gave you fast snipe (bonus damage when out of combat or with enough +ToHit). Similarly to how Stalkers are made quite good with some conveniently placed IO opportunities, it works as a build incentive and player goal to get these "gears" but it's still a choice. Softcapping is an endgame thing. It's not necessary and, to me, a waste of a player's time and effort. Similarly, a perma-dom Dominator is pretty pointless when most things don't need 5+ mags of control outside of certain (Click it then!) situations. It really only matters if you decide to min/max on paper or because you've got nothing better to do with the character. A softcapped players is no more useful than a player with a bit of defense that keeps and pops some purples at opportune moments. If you do it, you enjoy wasting your effort for minimal gains outside of superfluous circumstances and likely have nothing better to do. There, I said it.

You indeed flipped the script. In your perspective, the flaw is the "old" version of buffs and the new paradigm is the flashy updated new buff sets. I can see that perspective but it upsets "a ton" that you've just decided to dismiss. Could they just update all the buff sets to buff the user? Of course. But why should a defender/corruptor get 2/3 of a 9 power armor set from 3 powers? They could technically have more armor than a Scrap/Stalker by dipping into the epics. Not only that but powersets that are single target focused have to also be completely reworked and the already most effective combos (the buffers) would have an even stronger reign. No, I feel the game was more designed around team combinations, not being a one-man show. The support ATs pay a tax in that they multiply teams at the cost of themselves which is why team support can be as potent as it is. IOs just shifted the meta which shouldn't be the targeted balancing level range. Take IOs into account but don't chuck the whole game's balance off a cliff just because we've already got our toes hanging off the edge. And it's far easier to balance "two powers that come late in their build when most players will soon get an incarnate to cover the shortfall anyway". If it's so inconsequential, then it shouldn't be a problem to nerf to bring it in line.

That is a HUGE HUGE deal it's not even funny. If Time could only buff ally def and only applied +rech to itself, how much of a difference do you think that would make to that Time/ or /Time build?

Could buff all enemy sizes and make them bodyblock every other NPC so you can't get them to stack. Take the Digimon route and have the weak minions be these hulking bulky masses while the strong EBs, Bosses and AVs be relatively normal sized.

What content are Spines/Fire Brutes so important and powerful? Could it be...AE? Maybe specific fire farm maps? Or is it in general. I'm sure a Spines/Fire brute can rip up a lot of content quite nicely but I have a feeling things start to shift when you take them out of that super-heated vacuum and start comparing them to more complex variables.

Sort of running with this idea but keeping the cottage rule intact, let's give AR an ammo system like DP but not as toggles but instead as a system inherent to 3 core powers to the set. So keeping all the powers as is (maybe shuffling them around, though), you get the 3 groups: Automatic Rifle, Shells and Fuel Mix. The powers under Automatic Rifle are Burst, Sniper Rifle and Full Auto. The powers under Shells are Slug, Buckshot and Beanbag. The powers under Fuel Mix are Ignite and Flamethrower. M30 Grenade is a neutral power although maybe it can also be a pivot power that changes effect depending on the currently loaded ammo. For the ammo system, using one of the powers within a group, Slug for example, will load up that type of ammo (so Shells). Doing so grants you 2 auto powers: Shells and Final Shell. Final Shell automatically refreshes every 5 seconds if you remain in combat and its purpose is to stop the "refreshing" of Shells while it's already active and to put all Shell powers on a "global recharge" when it expires as well as force any other ammo type to auto-expire upon its activation. Shells is there to alter the cooldown of all your Shell powers, giving them a much shorter cooldown (NOT 0!) so you can cycle back through them pretty fast but this power but the buff only lasts a variable amount of time (the different ammo types will last different durations). Once Shells expires, your Shells powers all go on a shorter global recharge (Final Shell has a longer global recharge) that if you wait it out (i.e. use non AR powers for a bit) you can simply reactivate Shells and keep on blowing things away. To walk you through how that would look on paper: You engage a group and start with BU+Full Auto. Auto-Rifle and Last Auto-Rifle powers activate on you. Burst and Sniper can be used and their cooldown will be something in the ballpark of 1.5sec and 5sec respectfully while Full Auto is on cooldown (shifted down to 22sec from 60sec). You can cycle through each of these attacks multiple times since Auto-Rifle lasts 30sec but you'll have to use non-primary attacks in the gaps. Or you can use one of your Shell attacks which will activate Shells and Final Shells on you. Final Shells will cause Last Auto-Rifle to expire and put all your Auto-Rifle attacks on cooldown...not really a global cooldown since that cooldown is going to be whatever their base cooldown is except Burst which will go on an 8sec cooldown...but technically it would only be the cooldown of the shortest attack (that 8sec) as soon as that comes up, you can shoot Auto-Rifle again and your other 3 powers will continue their cooldown or whatever their Auto-Rifle cooldown is, whichever is shortest. Finally, there's M30 Grenade which isn't attached to any of the ammo types and won't shift you into any of those modes. So you can utilize this to partially fill in some gaps. Could also have it do different things depending on the ammo, with Auto-Rifle being the default (when no specific mode is active) of smash/lethal +KB AoE. With Shells, it becomes full smash damage + stun. With Fuel Mix, it becomes lethal + fire DoT. Overall, the idea I was chasing here is a set that ignores (mostly) +rech buffs. +Rech buffs wouldn't affect its global cooldown and it wouldn't affect the cooldown of the skills while in their designated ammo type. The upside being you would need a lot of +rech to match the benefits you'd get from this effect (not sure how much it would take to get FA down from 60sec to 22sec but I'm sure it's possible) but that's kind of a positive and a negative. But perhaps I'm biased since I feel certain metas and buffs are over represented, one of those being +rech and rather than nerf +rech, I'd just push for more things not to need/desire it.

BINGO! As for the suggestion, at its base, I'm in agreement with @Ralathar44 and @MTeague in that the regen set isn't as bad as people make it out to be and you can have an extremely solid character using it. The interesting mechanics of the set (which aren't really mechanics but moreso how the set has been built as) is the reactionary and clicky nature of it. So it's good that your suggestion keeps that intact. Overall, armor sets are pretty standardly boring in that they just exist on your character and little interaction is needed on your part besides maybe 1 click. And some might argue that regeneration is supposed to be passive like in the comics and I would just point you to Willpower as comicbook-regen. CoH regen isn't the same as comicbook regen. I don't have any huge objections to your post, OP, only the scaling aspect of the set probably not being necessary. Some sets should have scaling to differentiate it from other sets and incentivize gathering lots of foes...and some sets shouldn't scale by number of foes so you can utilize the set to maximum at any time, any place, every circumstance rather than being corralled into always herding everything. That might make some sets more favorable to some metas like a Tanker/Brute style...but they aren't the only melee ATs and shouldn't formulate everything around their style. Stalkers don't care how many people are around them, for example, so they'd be on an even field with the regen set (until you factor in HP caps) in their approach to dispatching foes. I've posted my suggestions before on Regeneration in other threads. I still stand by giving Regen a niche of nullification kind of like cartoon-regeneration where you drop a piano on a character, they get flattened and show visible damage with piano keys for teeth that fall out...then 2 seconds later, they are relatively back to normal. No other set does that now except Regen. On top of the instantaneous bouncing back nature of the set, give it debuff resistances to nearly everything (-ToHit, -regen, -rech, -movement, even -def) on every click they have that stacks the debuff res the more you have to heal back up. So if some foe shoots a burning laser into your eyes and boils your eyes out, you're visibly screaming as your eyes drip into pools on the ground so you can't see...then you shake it off and you're back to (almost) normal. That would also give the set a unique niche in that it'd be the only set with comprehensive debuff resistances solidifying it as a foundation to receive team buffs and IO bonuses. So you're not reaching the heights of mitigation of more powerful sets like Bio or specialized sets like SR but you benefit from the utility that every point of resistance/def/regen is that much more valuable without even needing to add a single point of it into the set itself.

Might as well throw in a ranged set to go with it: "Heroic" Firearms. One shot that cuts down a chandelier, doing AoE smashing/knockdown and another that hits a conveniently placed gas tank/car that somehow causes it to explode near the target for fire/smashing/stun.

Okay, but did you archive all these supposed comments as well as seek out contrary comments and further commit to the acquisition of a closer consensus? ...or are you just going by what your gut tells you? I wouldn't disagree, I think a lot of people don't like PvP in CoX but it's wholly an inaccurate bias based on personal perception...and that could also be skewed by the weird changes that have gone on the PvP side of things. Maybe if a sort of 3rd version of PvP power balance could be played with without altering current PvE or PvP balance to get a different experience, maybe more would enjoy participating. Kind of like in GW2 where they have various differences between PvE, PvP and WvW.