Leogunner

I'm sure PvE combat is much different and more engaging.

Also, if I were adding to the set, I'd put more "trick" into the set. What does that mean? Well what is Trick Arrow? It's suppose to be Green Arrow/Hawkeye/Robin Hood/etc type cunning and skill. Put more cunning and skill into the set. They started out with it, making Oil Slick Arrow being combustible with fire/energy attacks but then gave up after that.

I'm going to go against the grain and say Tactical Arrow needs to be nerfed (among a few other AoE control powers in Blaster secondaries).

I find this comment slightly hypocritical and kind of funny. It plays the same victimhood angle for rationalizing irrational hatred or biased judgement (not categorizing it as, but also see: prejudice, racism, sexism, etc) while also doing a self-wank off by expressing superiority both technically and morally and at no point acknowledging that there just might be antagonistic players that are just better at PvP or that have standards to not bother with people that don't fight back. It is a bit tough for people to accept when they're caught in a moral conundrum when you shine a spotlight on it. Don't be too hard on 'em. As for you @Glacier Peak, luckily I am a self-proclaimed Devil's Advocate and you have been thoroughly painted as the devil. I think the main drawback to the idea of a free-for-all PvP zone made of these echo zones is your purpose. You say you want to increase traffic into those areas but the PvP in and of itself likely won't do that...now if it were coded as a cross-server PvP free-for-all zone, maybe the sheer novelty of being able to congregate with other servers' players might be kind of draw although I have a feeling that is far more difficult than just using a console command to tag the zone for PvP. Another thought I had was with regards to another idea rolled around in another thread about friendly-fire mode. I personally wanted to give it a shot, having missions on teams where friendly fire was a thing and how much it could change the way we play. The zone would just need objectives/missions and you could get a bit of a taste of reality to spice things up. Posters mentioned people RPing in that zone and I personally feel if there were a unique flagging system implemented in a specific zone like this where you have extreme control over who can attack you (like a dueling mechanic), that would give an even richer RP experience since a big amount of the game and lore revolves around morality, law and order, vigilantism, so on and so forth. Now there are 3 separate ideas. Not particularly for or against the OP, I just enjoy kicking around ideas.

The cliffnotes version had to do with changes to the Tanker AT where they wanted to give the option to pick the tier 2 attack to assist in the AT's damage. Because it caused issues, they tried instead to just swap the position of the tier 1 and tier 2 attacks but I recall that causing some issues and backlash since it actually weakened some sets. Personally speaking: since the powersets aren't trees but pools, having some mandatory options to get to other powers is a balancing mechanism. Asking to skip out on this mechanism is very similar to asking to pick higher level powers at lower levels or if it were a tree, just skipping to your choice in a tree. The advantage is, powers you are choosing to get to other powers but not to slot open up more slots for other powers.

If you're following the line of discussion rather than cherry pick rebuttals (and I'm annoyed that I have to outline it for you), it started with a reply saying "No set has "bad" ST damage in the same realm of how say, EM has "bad" AoE. " by the OP, mind you, that was then replied by a more joking response (but still had an important point to make) about Water Blast followed up by another more serious reply about other sets that are supposedly "bad" at ST. So the line of discussion is more a measurement of what is and isn't considered bad which would be more the opposite of meta (anti-meta perhaps). The thing is, I'm arguing those sets are not anti-meta, merely not-meta which is a very important distinction since we don't need things shifted so a meta set now performs "bad" or a not-meta set to become meta.

That was actually a suggestion I once made to assist in giving more benefit to certain types of mez. You'd first need to give more of the foes more powers that are meant to keep them alive or suppress your team, things like armor toggles, debuff auras, etc. Then you also have to vary the detoggle effect. Like for Holds, I feel these are more the universally useful mez so limiting Holds to have a low chance to detoggle every few seconds. Things like KB have a moderate chance upon knock to detoggle one power that greatly increases in chance on the magnitude of the knock. For Sleep, if they are put to sleep have a 100% chance to turn off a toggle and an additional toggle every few seconds they remain asleep. I suppose if Fear can inhibit actions, retoggling will be limited. You could actually use a combination of approaches too. On top of that, if we're looking more into adjusting things hypothetically, I recall an interesting suggestion to vary power effects depending on number of targets, either the calculation of the dice rolls or diminishing returns from piling more foes up. It doesn't have to be drastic if other kinds of changes are combined. Another alternate approach might be to lock a kind of "synergy" bonus for sets, giving like powers positive gains on ST and negative gains on AoE and positive gains on secondary effect per power. For example, in the Darkness Blast set, taking the AoE powers boosts the damage of AoE powers and reduces the damage of ST powers. Taking more/all of the Darkness Blast power will neutralize any bonus but increase the -ToHit effect. You could try to create a build for teams that focuses on AoE by not taking some ST powers (maybe aiming for ST powers outside of the set) or vice versa. That would require a lot of rebalancing and probably better for a power tree with like 14 powers instead of 9... You'd probably want to reassess mez received as another aspect since you have ATs that literally ignore mez. Like if the detoggling aspect were considered for players so it doesn't have to actually mez you to have the detoggle chance (with the mez protection powers being immune to this mechanic), mez can still be dangerous to everyone.

A lot could be said about rebalancing the pet sets for both MM and this AT which might lend themselves to other differentiation between the two. As for the inherent, I'm usually against inherents that remove opportunity for thematic strengths/weaknesses like giving passive resistance or defense but pets are rather different from your standard fare. For example, I'd rather my ninjas be more dodgy while my demons can resist their elemental affinity, etc.

Someone else mentioned reducing the range/radius/target cap as well. Keeping the set the same with durations and magnitudes but making it so powers like Seeds of Confusion, Wormhole, Conductive Aura, etc either affect fewer targets at once, have a more limited range requiring more slotting or simply are smaller. You can even do that AND POSSIBLY reduce recharge (so instead of 240sec AoE holds, they get 180sec AoE holds). But ultimately, the viability and payoff of such measures will hinge more on what the primary powerset is, how it's tuned and what the AT's inherent does.

I don't have an issue speculating. I only say "I feel" with regards to a Manip/Pet AT because it's not discussed that often. I think, if you actually do dig into it a bit and maybe alter some of the ways pet mechanics work (maybe removing the whole "pet upgrades" mechanic and just have them be baseline to the pet while exchanging those powers and maybe the blasts for something more unified) and then possibly rework the Manipulation set slightly to just exchange the "sustain" for just offense or control. I feel that the Blaster sustain powers, while good, are practically broken for anyone else besides Blaster, or at least anything with a Bodyguard equivalent effect and 6 resummonable pets. That or the AT would feel underpowered and clunky without a means of keeping the pets alive. All in all, I feel MM and the pet sets need a rehash in how they function, from the pet upgrades to the pet levels to the weak blasts and the funky specialty buff some sets are bogged down with.

You have a habit of accusing others of things you do yourself. If what I wrote was an ad hominem attack, you tell me me I'm diving into wrong answers would also be considered an ad hominem attack. Me saying I view your interpretation of Castle as an interpretation and not as the word of God simply means I'm being skeptical, which last time I checked, is not attacking anyone. Secondly, lower numbers is a correlation which I explained before. Just because a set is a secondary doesn't = lower values. This hasn't been the case, it isn't the case now and it likely won't ever be. I'll restate why I expressed that in some examples: Defender vs Blaster ranged blasts, in many cases have the Blaster damage values as higher than the Defender's but the secondary effects like -ToHit, -res, -def, mez effects, etc have higher value on the Defender vs Blaster which means an exception exists. Another is current Tanker vs Scrapper/Stalker melee damage sets which has more damage for the Scrap/Stalk version but the Tanker has larger AoEs and target caps. This is another exception. Since exceptions exist, your rule has loop holes and thus, a control set as a secondary can be built to function *differently*, being less effective in some capacity and more effective in others. Good for you. I'm still skeptical. I'm sorry you didn't get a chance to marry the guy so that you'd then be able to practically read his mind. I also don't believe you can read minds since you haven't done a good job reading the thoughts of your critics. I've read other posts about exceptions in this very thread that could be avenues besides "full magnitudes". I think the difference between your interpretations and mine are that I see mine as fallible and remain skeptical of other possible approaches yet you feel you have more expertise than those around you thus you reject possible paths before fully considering/exploring them.

So this thread is still a thing? I'd argue that the concept of AT specialties being reflected in which set is a primary and which is a secondary is mostly a tertiary balancing point with regards to overall strength, i.e. the level at which one obtains a skill for that AT being delayed if its in the secondary. The strength or power of those skills, while a correlation can be had, does lean toward secondary powers being less effective at their primary purpose, the ultimate determining factor of a power's strength are the numbers, not whether it's a primary or secondary. Even for an AT like Defender who clearly has less damaging blast effects from their secondary often have much more powerful additional effects. Since you've likely never archived the exact text exchange of your discussions with Castle and we have to go on your interpretation of his text, I'll happily criticize your interpretation since likely Castle may have had a different actual intent and conclusion. Control as a secondary most certainly can work. A reverse Dominator most certainly cannot work. I say this because the sum of Dominator is a product of its powersets and inherent. Even as a primary, Dominator has weaker base control effects compared to Controllers. Dominator temporarily surpasses a Controller's potential because of their inherent and that likely wouldn't care about whether the powerset is a primary or a secondary. Even if weakened further and placed in the secondary, the control effects would be too strong with a Domination equivalent. Without the domination effect and swapped to the secondary (the set is already weakened), can and does function...you just have to hop on a Dominator and hold off using Domination and that is what it would be like having controls as a secondary. If anything, that'd be more a superfluous AT that has no purpose. It would either end up being a copy of Dom or a crappy knock-off of Dom. Now this I do agree with. But this has nothing to do with the powerset being a primary or secondary, but rather the set (Manipulation) being a mash-up of different types of powers. I actually feel the reason you won't see a Manipulation/Pet AT has more to do with the Pet powersets being a mash-up of pet summons/upgrades and ranged attacks and manipulation being a mash-up of melee damage, control and sustain, thus amounting to a lot of different powers mashed-up...too many, you might say. Mitigation caps are really all that matters since it actually is common not only for the user to cap their own resistance, def or MaxHP but also external buffs/inspirations capable of doing the same. It is correlation to assume balancing is wholly done by using primary/secondary placement of sets rather than the ultimate deciding factors being the numbers (AT mods, inherent abilities, and caps) which can be shifted independently.

"Not that bad" is in the context that posters are saying it's unplayable, terrible, ugly and irredeemable. I just think it's niche and maybe a bit slow. I am here to express my opinion and that is some people are requesting to add more AoE to other attacks of the set while others are saying keep it ST focused and they don't like gimmicks. I feel I'm somewhat in the middle. I don't want more AoE attacks added in but I think putting in the Charge effect from Energy Assault to make Whirling Hands a situationally stronger AoE is a good middle ground in the aspect of AoE. I am also one that enjoys the current animation of ET although I could see shaving its animation time down a bit (and TF). I'd also advocate for reducing the cast time of Stun, and slightly reduce the END and rech but keep everything else about it the same (a slightly more available mez tool that can be skipped). If there is a problem with stun IOs, you can make a suggestion elsewhere adding a unique or proc to a low level stun set (and add a set bonus at the end) but that is more an argument for IOs and not Energy Melee. If the set doesn't end up as high-end meta with massive proc potential coming out of the change, I'm okay with that...in fact, I'd prefer that.

Wow, perhaps I was wrong in you being obtuse and should have just said you aren't being observant. The Brute example is just that: an example. No idea why you would laser focus on an example to get a point across. The point was actually that the amount of mitigation an amount of defense gives you vs a similar amount of resistance is very skewed in favor of defense and that skew is further exacerbated by the values of the IO bonuses. There are other factors that skew this in favor of defense, which have also been outlined, but you seemed to have ignored that, which is why I would have said you were being obtuse about this. If you're so versed and studied in the realm of game mechanics and their uses in RPGs, this should be an obvious fact to you...which is the point you seem to be taking a country mile detour to avoid.

And why would you assume that?

There's performance and then there's preference. If your preference is more angled toward meta-game measures, it's probably best to understand that circumstance moreso than performance overall. Personally, I don't see EM as that bad, especially if you like mezzing things as a melee. If that isn't your cup of tea, making it into something else entirely is a measure different than making it more palpable for more varied styles. I can understand the desire to push a build into meta territory but that isn't and shouldn't be the goal of changes.

Much of your complaints amount to meta-game complaints which are, IMO, the least relevant of complaints. Procs and uniques are meant to be bonuses and utility and you should probably keep much of that slotting in that context: bonus and utility. But because you guys shill them so hard is probably why procs are in the crosshairs to be readjusted so keep on the lookout for that at some point as well.

Is it just me or have some foes adopted corpse guarding AI? I remember on 2 occasions where I died soloing an objective in a group TF and when I was getting drained by clockwork, I found a secluded spot before my toggles dropped and soon after my HP. The 2 that took me down actually stood there waiting. I gave them a bit more time as I started converting some other insp into another rez to replace the one I was about to use, popped 1 of my awakens and a break free, got further away by jumping up onto those ceiling high shelf things in and they flew up and waited at my new location. I was actually curious so I waited for a teammate to rez me and they didn't go away.

You must be intentionally remaining obtuse to the points being made.

That's probably a good argument for NOT having old ET. Such an attack is now the niche of Stalker and having that niche also contributes to why Stalkers have that comeback. Putting that niche out to any melee via EM also really funks up ST focused Stalker sets. What do we do about Stalker EM, MA, DM, etc? Give them more AoE? Uhg, we already have AoE-oriented Stalkers...

I haven't ever played CO but by the way its described, it has some fun mechanics to play around with. I think that might be the fun factor with regards to making a game interesting: find an aspect to excel in and focus on specializing in that thing. For CoX, while the mechanics may be limited and dated, I feel that is part of what can make a game fun. I look back on all the old online games that I played in the past and the ones I remember the most are the ones that are limited and niche....funnily enough, most of them are still around too. Wizard101 is a pretty unique game that I played for a long time and even got my mom to spend money on it for me. It being a turn-based online card battle team v boss hybrid made it stand out a lot and the different schools of magic being distinct in both mechanics, flavor and specialties gave weight to your choices of schools and cards. There was also a charm in its art style and attack animations that I still would go back and play. Final Fantasy XI is also a kind of derivative kind of MMORPG in that it was one of those auto-attack old-style games...it also carries the punishing mechanics and team tactics that many early MMO players grew fond of over time. It's combination of races, jobs, subjobs and weapons gave a bit of weight to your customization and style and allowed a bit of leeway in how you go about doing the content. There are a lot of ways to do a lot of things and the world is so large and vast, there's no harm in just trying different things. The feel of progress as you level jobs to use as subjobs, train skills, explore new places, get more and better gear, so on and so forth...oh and the story and characters are quite the wild ride. Atlantica Online is probably the most niche and strange game I've ever played, being a quasi-tactical turn-based MMORPG where you gather and train groups of mercenaries to build up your team of 9 characters and dungeon crawl to boss fights that often spiral into hectic mass mobs vs players unless you've got a partner or two to help you through. As you train your mercs, level them and change their jobs/weapons, equipping them all, discovering/hiring specialty mercs, it's just an intriguing system of combat, like playing an advanced version of classic Final Fantasy but possibly with other people...and enemies gang up on you hardcore and it's frikken hard/unfair...there's also mechanics to take/support towns with your guilds that I never got into but seemed cool getting to a city that was actually kept up with and had a good amount of facilities to use....oh and it's based on a bizarre fantasy version of our world that uses multiple time periods at once across multiple continents.... yeah, it's weird...but great. There are some others but ultimately, having better of something doesn't make the game better or more memorable....that's all going to be subjective. There are some players here that likely have tried Wizard101 and thought it garbage kiddy-game fodder, but that's beside the point when the appeal is the aesthetic and unique combat style. I think the story wasn't that bad either but my memory of it is vague... Anywho, OP, I bet there are aspects of CO that are just flat out better or just different from CoX. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Adhering to brand loyalty, IMO, is wrong though. You can now play both CO and CoX or just the one you like better. I never understood the need to decide which is better and then playing that one only. Rather than playing one ad nauseum until you're bored of it and then continuing to play despite that thus becoming a bitter angry player is just not smart.

Opinions can change, no need to berate for that. Personally speaking, I still feel that adding the Energy Assault set's Energize mechanic would give the set a bit of dynamic-ness to its gameplay that doesn't step on the toes of people that want a more simplistic set. The energize mechanic is very simple and you don't even have to try to use it, it can just organically benefit you on occasion just like a Scrapper's crits occasionally benefit it. I have, however, conceded that keeping the set ST oriented has become my shared opinion on what the set should be targeted toward. Slightly speeding up TF and ET animations would also be good. Having spent more time with the set recently, I don't feel ET needs the speedy animation anymore. It would be nice, but I actually like ET's animation. If anything, I'd want to exaggerate the flashiness of it, giving the character a large aura of energy that condenses and condenses until "pushing it" at the target. Slightly speeding up Stun would also be good but I don't feel it needs to be AoE. Make it a faster recharging (cheaper) 100% stun that makes the set much easier to stack stuns.

I thought of that when I heard people suggesting alternate animations. Not sure about Fireball, but for Rain of Fire, you just need a zone of intense light. I won't say a column of light as that's just cliche, but just an area of intense brightness that bathes the area in the color of your powers would work good. Fire Breath seems the easiest since the animation is so long. The vfx would just need to be a persisting beam either from the mouth, hand or chest. Anything that creates a moving projectile is a bit tougher, particularly Fireball.

No problem, not expecting a critique or anything but more demonstrating my perspective on some new set direction. As for the arm cannon costume, again, my suggestion isn't so much about "beams" or "arm cannons" but rather the breadth of variation I'd like to see. You can take my idea and reform it into any sort of concept other than an arm cannon, I don't really care. I'm more aiming at something more substantial than a set with t1, t2, t3 blast, TAoE, Sniper, Aim+nuke as the power line-up with maybe some "build tidal forces" or "spread disintegrate" like mechanics on top. I feel a lot of contention to a truly unique set is that people want to build their characters to a concept and extra mechanics get in the way for them. I personally don't care about that. If you truly like concept so much that mechanics hinder it, there are recolors of old sets (maybe add that costume piece to top it off). I'd rather not draw out more power variation that mechanically mirrors other sets...unless, I dunno, the animations of these power variations are backwards compatible with the old sets to flesh them out more.

I feel the primary reason I'd push for such a mechanic is because the drawback is it has more interruptible attacks (I'd probably put in 3 overall leaving 5 regular click attacks) and the toggle is a means of bypassing the weakness of those powers. Mobs with uninterruptible attacks is irrelevent since I can't think of any attacks currently that are interruptible that mobs use. If they have sniper attacks, they already aren't interruptible. Buffs and debuffs aren't the same as attacks and even if a mob had an uninterruptible sniper attack, it's not going to make waves and suddenly be unfair or overpowered...if anything, giving mobs more interruptible attacks would make them underpowered since anything (placed field debuffs, rain powers, damage auras, etc) all interrupt interruptible attacks. Whether Sent is reworked to have a charge mechanic is a whole other issue. I don't play sent though but I would still like a similar mechanic usable for some of the other blast ATs. It'd also be easier to implement on a single set than to change an AT and then change all the relevant powers that AT has. To clarify my mechanic a bit, I might as well outline it and put it here. Not trying to steal anyone's thunder, I just don't think my idea is very good to put in a thread of its own. So here's how I'd outline it: Trinity Beam Arm-Cannon (Ranged Blast Powerset; Blaster/Corruptor/Sentinel Primary||Defender Secondary) It's namesake outlines it's ability to infuse up to 3 powers into another. It utilizes an operating mode called "Trinity Charge" when active removes the interrupt period of some of your cannon blasts but forcefully ends this mode. Other powers in the set can be used to charge another attack (up to 3). Charging past the limit causes fire DoT to the user and overwrites the oldest charge. *1. Arm Buster (Ranged; Moderate DMG(Energy), chance of Knockback, +Special) - Shoot a single burst of energy at a target. The burst of energy has a moderate amount of concussive force that can push a target off its feet. In conjunction with Trinity Charge, instead of firing an attack, you add a buff that adds minor energy damage and a chance to knockback to the attack you decide to charge. Can stack 3 times, adding the minor damage and chance of KB for each stack. *2. Buster Cannon (Ranged; High DMG(Energy), +Special) - Focus a beam that energizes the target with energy until they combust. In conjunction with Trinity Charge, instead of firing the attack, you add moderate energy damage to the attack you decide to charge. Can stack 3 times, adding moderate energy damage. 3. Buster Array (Targeted AoE; *Interrupt*; Moderate DMG (Energy/Smashing), Fire DoT; +Special) - A barrage of exploding blasts that requires a period to prepare. If used in conjunction with Trinity Charge, the interrupt period is absent and you're forced out of Trinity Charge mode. If fully charged (having 3 stacks), this attack also causes additional fire DoT to all targets hit. *4. Cannon Flash (Ranged; Minor DMG(Energy), foe Stun, +Special) - A quick flash from your attack renders the foe dazzled, searing them with minor energy damage. In conjunction with Trinity Charge, instead of firing an attack, you add a buff that infuses stun and moderate energy damage into the attack you decide to charge. Cannot stack multiple times. 5. Trinity Charge (Self Toggle; +ToHit, +END Discount; +Special) - Trinity mode allows you to infuse three blasts into your next attack. Only some of your charges can be infused and only some stack with themselves. These charges, whatever effects they hold, will affect any targets you hit with your charged attacks. Once a charged attack is fired, all charges disappear. If you have 3 charges and use another charge attack, you will receive moderate fire DoT and overwrite the oldest charge. Interruptible powers have shorter casts by removing their interruption period if used with this toggle. Turning off the toggle puts a time limit on the charges you have (10sec) and will apply the charge effects to your next attack. *6. Trinity Beam (Ranged Cone; High DoT (Energy), foe -def, -res, -special; +Special) - Unleash a brilliant beam of energy, engulfing all before you, reducing the defense, resistance and (stun)mez resistance to all foes hit. In conjunction with Trinity charge, instead of firing off the attack, you add a buff that infuses a high DoT(energy) and -def/-res/-(stun) into the attack you decide to charge. Cannot stack multiple times. 7. Cannon Torrent (Ranged Cone; *Interrupt* Moderate DMG(Energy), foe repel) - Immediately unleashes a steady stream of energy that repels foes within 15ft of you back. Foes further than 15ft will continue to be pulsed with energy damage however, interrupting this attack will prematurely end the effect. In conjunction with Trinity Charge and if fully charged, this creates a field for the duration of the attack that continues to repel foes back even after you move onto bigger and better blasts. You are then forced out of Trinity Charge mode. 8. Overcharge (Ranged; *Interrupt* Extreme DMG (Energy), +Special) - This attack requires some time to prepare. Fires a shot that consumes the target in an explosion of energy. In conjunction with Trinity Charge, the interrupt period of this attack is eliminated but you are forced out of Trinity Charge mode. If fully charged (having 3 stacks), Trinity Charge will be turned off but recharge immediately however Overcharge will be put on a longer recharge. 9. Omega Buster (PBAoE; Extreme DMG(Energy), DoT(Fire), foe stun) - Overcharge your Trinity Cannon but instead of you eating the recoil, you give the foes around you a taste, engulfing them in hot energy as well as leaving them dazzled. Has no effect in conjunction with Trinity Charge or the other charge buffs you have. The powers with a "*" next to the numbers would be the attacks that turn into buffs while you have Trinity Charge active. While Trinity Charge is active, those * powers technically have no animation meaning you can move while you click them...they still have an activation so they aren't instant cast though. Another effect is, you can add secondary effects of one power to another, for example you can add Arm Buster's chance of KB (as well as some of its damage) to Buster Array which makes it an AoE chance of KB...or you can add Cannon Flash's Stun (and some extra damage) to Cannon Torrent to get a repel+stun cone. The tier 9 nuke is isolated from the mechanics, making it a good opener or finisher. For an AT like Defender who might be more occupied by other duties, having the option of just overlapping your attacks into 1 strong strike might be more fruitful rather than keeping up a certain DPS rotation for attacking. For an AT like Blaster, it would be very dynamic since you could use the set a multitude of ways, just keeping on your Trinity Charge and charging up your blasts into one strong one and while you build up the charge, you can use your blaps to put on the pressure, unleashing the the attack on a prime target. For a Corruptor, their specialty seems to be DoT and this AT has 3, one that you can infuse into another attack if desired. You could technically infuse Trinity Beam with Trinity Beam if you wait for its recharge without using other attacks....it's a complex opportunity cost that incorporates downtime to your advantage. I don't play Sents so no idea about them. [EDITED x4: reword and clarify]