Lockpick

I didn't say anything about pay, I mentioned terminology. It seems to me like you just don't agree with the definition of power gamer. If you don't like the definition of power gamer on Wikipedia, please feel free to edit it. I'm not sure why you are arguing with me about a definition on Wikipedia or terms like "power gamer" and "casual player" that have generally been used to describe players in MMOs for years.

In this game, especially on Everlasting, there are players that are more focused on story and role play as opposed to maximizing their results. The definition of power gaming is what it is. I didn't make it up. It is just terminology. I usually hear the terms casual or power gamer for MMOs. I'm not sure why correlating to dancing or football helps make your point. Someone playing football to progress has different terminology that they use and a player might go from high school player, to elite recruit, to college player, pro, etc. I don't get the negative connotation myself since I pretty much agree with the definition. I consider myself a power gamer because I do, in general, what the definition states a power gamer does. I generally try to maximize my character's potential and I tend to focus on content that allows me to progress efficiently enough to suit my needs.

I thought they would be more valuable on tanks for sure. My character is a StJ/SD with soft-cap M/R/AoE and S/L resistance above 60%. I have been playing with the 2 regeneration IOs and I feel as though I can tell the difference, but not sure if it more valuable than just sticking 2 Health IOs +5 in True Grit which (according to Mids) will increase my Health from 1755 to 1870. I actually find my endurance to still be challenging in long fights despite 4 slotting stamina and getting Superior Conditioning and Physical Perfection with +End IOs, so maybe I should look at endurance slotting with these 3 slots. Decisions, decisions... Here is the build:

I think the term power gamer is not defined well or people have different definitions of it. I tried to define it earlier based on my thoughts, but the definition from Wikipedia is below where player focus on maximizing potential. In that context, there are probably a lot of power gamers here. I think there are negative connotations around power gaming, so people may not be comfortable being called a power gamer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powergaming Powergaming in roleplaying games can take several forms. One form is the deliberate creation of optimal player characters (PCs), with the aim of maximising the power the player wields in the game world. This is known as min-maxing, due to the practice of maximising desirable or "powerful" traits while minimising underpowered or unuseful traits.

This seems to align with my experience as well. I have a bunch of characters and by 40 I will usually have a full IO set build. At 50, I will pull out set IOs that are not part of my final build as I buy the sets for my end build. Between 22 and 40 I will have a mix of basic IOs and set IOs depending on what I can afford or what drops. I guess the point I am trying to make is that the character with end game min/max builds are usually going to have set IO bonuses and have several vet levels. They will have several incarnate powers. They will be powerful. They are supposed to be powerful. The end game content needs to align to these end game builds. We don't need to change the 1 to 50 experience to make it harder when the concern is high end content for end game builds. I am also curious about the amount of time played at 50 compared to 1 to 50. I guess I can understand a bit better the issue some are having if they are focusing on one character at 50 and finding the current content easy. I focus on leveling for the majority of my play time, so for me the amount of time I am godlike is more limited. Again, I would suggest that the answer is to create harder content for the end game builds as opposed to balancing the 1 to 50 game to make it harder. I would also suggest that people that think the game is easy should try to create AE content they find challenging as Lines did. If 5 to 10 people created the high end AE content, we might be able to convince the dev team to add appropriate rewards for that content and could have a rotation of high end AE content added to the WST. That would be a win for everyone.

I do this as well. If I look at Info at a Hami raid or iTrial I will see players with a lot of IO set info (and a ton of vet levels), but if I am leveling up (which is the majority of the game) I see few characters with IOs. I start slotting my IO sets as soon as I can, but I think I am rare compared to most of the community. We on the forums probably do it, but we are the power gamers.

Okay, what is your definition of a power gamer? And how would you classify yourself? I generally see gamers labeled as casuals or power gamers. If you are meeting the definition I provided I don't think you qualify as a casual. Not sure if there other classifications I am not thinking about. Here is a definition from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powergaming

I'm not sure I get your point. If you are indicating I am a power gamer, I agree. I indicated earlier that I am a power gamer, but even if I am a power gamer there are others that might be considered super power gamers like @Werner, @nihilii; @Bill Z Bubba that can take that next level step to do insane challenges. From my perspective, if the game was made harder I would adapt because I play a lot, I make builds, I read the forums, etc. My concern is more for what I would consider the average gamer that really like the non-trinity casual nature of this game. I don't know that percentage of players, but I expect it is much larger than the power gamer percentage. A power gamer in my mind (just so we have a starting point): Plays a lot (this is different for everyone; I play a lot, much more than I should) Has multiple 50s Min/max builds Plays multiple aspects of the game to earn inf IO sets Incarnates Forum regular Veteran player who understands the ins and outs of the game well enough to have a reasonable developed opinion on the topic at hand

I really respect your builds and performance discussions, but you are killing me... You do realize a billion inf is not much for a power gamer, but will never be reached by the vast majority of players, right?

Thank you for supporting my points from earlier in the thread. I agree that Tankers are now OP. This is what happens when you have wholesale balance changes. Now we have to have more balance changes so other ATs can get to the level of Tankers. Then we need more balance changes so the new Flavor of the Month under performing set now meets the new performance metrics. It never ends, which leads to my point that we should leave well enough alone and only target clearly under performing or over performing sets. The development time would be much better spent providing value in new sets, new power pools, and solving the player created end game content challenges.

I don't know how much work it would be, but I can speculate on what the outcome would be and that would be players migrating to other options. When you take stuff away from players who believe they earned them through the existing rules to satisfy a minority of other players you get one group of players pissed at another group. It's not worth it IMO. I don't think this change would be as bad as ED and some of the other nerfs from Live, but it would be a significant nerf that few people would likely appreciate.

A few power gamers feel the game is this easy. I doubt if the larger overall population believes this and even if some do believe it is easy I don't believe they would advocate for wholesale changes to make the game harder. They probably like it as it is. This is not true for most players. For this to be true you have to be: A power gamer with enough time to level to 50 Have a strong AT and power set combo with enough damage and survival mechanisms Min/Max builds with IO sets costing north of $300M inf Incarnates My buddy that I mentioned earlier in the thread does not even have one 50 and his highest level build may have a few IOs from sets. He is not doing +4/8 solo. I expect there are many more players like him than there are players like us (power gamers). On another note, we keep talking about incarnates and high level content lack of challenge. I look at my play style and 90% of my gaming in CoH is leveling 1 to 50. I spend a bit of time at 50 to get T4 incarnates, but then I start an alt. Basically, my play time is mostly spent in the base game. Why would we change the entire leveling game experience to solve some lack of challenges that min/max 50s are having? Why not just make new level 50 content that is harder? The guys here that are advocating making the game harder are not explaining it well enough for me to understand why I and others like me who like the game as is should want the entire game harder because a few power gamers want a challenge at end game.

But why not add +5, +6, and +7 notoriety levels, so you get back to +4 when you have a +3 level shift? Might need some changes to the purple patch as well, but likely would be much easier than making a bunch of balance changes. By the way, you do realize that player like you and @nihilii and a few others in this thread are in the top 1% of 1% of players, right? You guys tackle challenges that very few would attempt. I have a number of 50s, semi-min/max builds, T4 incarnates, and I cannot do some of the stuff you guys are accomplishing. If I (as an example) am in the top 10% of power gamers that means you guys are the gods of power gamers, but I expect 90% of the population are not power gamers. Numbers straight from my 4th point of contact, but I think the thought behind it is accurate.

How do you figure that anyone can solo +4/8. I started soloing +4/8 in DA on my Savage / SR stalker and was able to do it okay. I tried on my Psy/EA stalker and kept getting wrecked. I couldn't imagine trying it on my Illusion / Radiation controller. I think my Time / DP defender could probably do it. I think to say anyone can do it is a stretch.

Why would I ask a hypothetical question like "If the game was made harder, would you use the tools available to make the difficulty easier" as opposed to asking about the current state of the game that everyone is playing right now? You are basically asking would I make it easier if the game was made harder and I had the option to make it easier. Yes, I probably would. I like playing a casual friendly game and am not interested in playing a hard mode game. I guess I would flip the question on you. We currently have the option to make the existing game harder through various options like notoriety, non-IO builds, no incarnates, mission / TF settings, creating your own hard mode content via AE, and finding people to team with of a like mind. Are you leveraging the existing mechanics to meet your play style? If not, why not? If so, why are the existing mechanics not meeting your need for harder content? I don't understand your second point at all. In the current version of the game it starts with a base difficulty and people can lower that difficulty or increase it. It is much easier to leave the current game as is than it would be to do a bunch of balance changes that make the game harder and then give us options to make it easier. It seems logical and easier to provide options like "no level shift", "no incarnates", "no Judgement powers", or add +5 or +6 to the notoriety level to make the game harder than to change it current base state. Anyway, just wanted to pop my head in and provide my experience this weekend. I notice that it seems that the few people advocating to make the game harder are continuing this thread, so I will continue to pop in occasionally to represent the other side of the equation. It depends on the change. People have been quite receptive to new power sets, power pool additions, QoL changes, and bug fixes. People seemed fine with the blaster and snipe changes and the Tanker changes (which I think were over tuned). They were positive about the new story arcs that were delivered. Seems like a lot of change has happened that have been received with positivity. I would be ecstatic to see new power pools, more bug fixes, changes to the amount of pools we could take, new power sets, changes to AE and HC support for player made content, etc. It seems unlikely that people that like this game and have played for years are going to be receptive to changes that massively disrupt the current game, but that is just my opinion.

This weekend I was playing my latest character and doing a lot of teaming. I asked many of the teams if they thought the game was to easy. The opinions were divided with some saying: The game has always been easy and that's why they play it Some said IOs had made the game easier Some said incarnates made it to easy Some said they like the casual and easy nature of the game and if they wanted something harder they could play another game or use the in game mechanics to make the game harder Despite all these different opinions they all had one thing in common and that is they did not want to see mass changes to the game and increased difficulty on the base game. I mentioned this thread on the forums, but I didn't get the feeling any of them except maybe 1 was a forum regular. I also asked a question about if the game was so easy why were so many characters being defeated in PI radio missions as we had a number of people being defeated. I played a number of PI radios which I rarely do. I was on one team that just steamrolled everything with no deaths and we were targeting Council. Other team leaders were just picking anything and there was more difficulty in these missions with many players being defeated. All this is anecdotal evidence, but it aligns with your message that you idea of removing level shifts was not well received. It seems to me people are fine if you add options to missions like "no level shift" or "no incarnates", but I doubt people are going to be happy if it is mandated through change. I'm in this camp myself. Options are good, but making wholesale changes to a game people like as is will not be received well. I did a Yin TF today and in the last mission everyone on my team except me was defeated. I was the only one with set IOs and everyone else had basic builds as they were leveling up and I was ~40 and exemping. I am sure the IOs helped me survive, but I was almost overwhelmed as well. I was able to use the environment to help survive and kite the mobs while everyone else went to hospital.

I read through that thread before posting, but it didn't address the question I have about the value of regeneration on a stalker and whether the opportunity cost for the regeneration is worth it compared to other options. I'll slot it and see how it plays. It seems like between the 3 options I am looking at that there isn't one that is significantly better than the others from a game play perspective.

I'm thinking about slotting the Regeneration Tissue: + Regeneration (25%) IO and the Impervious Skin: Status Resistance (25% Regeneration) IO. How valuable would these procs be? I haven't slotted them previously because I didn't think they would do much, but 50% regeneration seems ok. My other options are to: Slot 2 Impervious Skin IOs so I get 25% regeneration + 1.5% S/L resistance that takes me to 65.4% S/L resistance Add 2 resistance or 2 Health IOs to True Grit (only have the 2 + Def IOs there now) Any thoughts?

Wow, that is good to know, thank you! It was kind of sucky to take 2 presence powers I wouldn't use to get Unrelenting. Unrelenting looks like it could be good too, but guess I'll go back to the drawing board and drop Presence.

Has anyone tried using Unrelenting with Unleashed Potential in a build? Any thoughts on how it plays? I was looking at a new build with StJ/SD. I have played StJ/SR and StJ/Inv to 50. As I was doing the StJ/SD build it was looking similar to my other builds and I decided to change it up and see if Unrelenting w/ Unleashed Potential could provide some new dynamics. This guy would be similar to Batman with a shield, so the Presence pool is a conceptual fit. Also using Unrelenting before Unleashed Potential prevents the crash on Unleashed Potential according to Mids, Both powers provide nice functionality, but they have long recharges Unrelenting Heal Recovery Recharge (20%) Damage (20%) Unleashed Potential Regeneration Recovery Defense (20%)

While 45% defense on a blaster is nice it certainly doesn't make them a tank. I build all my blasters for 45% S/L/R and I can't tank at all. There is no mez protection like a real tank has for one. I agree IOs have flattened the differences, but to me that is a good thing. On the one hand I agree that I would like to see new villains that have unique features, but putting a villain that can't be defeated without mez would mean many ATs / sets would have no way to defeat the bad guy. Maybe that is okay, but that type of solution should be rare because you are just flipping which AT / set is no longer valid to the point where some ATs / sets are completely invalid wherein the current situation I cannot think of any situation where Support, CC, or Pet classes are completely invalid today.

Blasters can tank? I was under the impression some of the Kheldians could get 85% resists? No Blaster is getting to that level of resist and I would be surprised if Khedlians can push the same level of ranged damage as a Blaster.

I don't see the contradiction. OP is pretty subjective and everyone has a different take on it. My take is there might be a few outliers that can be considered OP and that balance adjustments should be very rare to sets and ATs. Even the TW/Bio Scrapper that seems to be OP doesn't seem like a big deal to me because there will always be one AT and power set combination that is stacked at the top. If you nerf TW/Bio then something else will rise to the top. That being said, I am fine with adjustments that are deemed necessary, although I reserve the right to complain if I don't like the adjustment. So what? There are always going to be some ATs and sets that do better at some aspects of the game. If you take the time to build high end min/max builds you should be able to do high end min/max feats. I'm more concerned about negatively impacting the players that don't take the time to make these high end builds and want to make sure they can play the current content. Harder content will solve the challenge that some people seem to have that the game is to easy. If you make a hard mode TF then there will be a greater need for the control that some people believe is no longer relevant. At the end of the day, damage is always going to be primary because it is damage that defeats enemies. I'm having a hard time understanding why non-damage AT / sets are expecting to perform like damage ATs / sets. If you want to perform like a damage AT / set then pick that AT / set. I don't pick an Illusion / Rad controller and then get upset that I can't push out AoE damage like my Savage / SR Stalker. I don't pick a AR / Traps Corruptor and then get upset that I cannot match the damage of my AR / Devices Blaster. There are going to be things that the AR / Traps Corruptor can do better than my AR / Devices Blaster and vice versa. I wouldn't pick a Dominator and then be upset that I can't push damage like a Blaster. Makes no sense to me, but everyone is entitled to their opinions.

Regen is to clicky for me and I played way back on Live before the nerf back swung. My main was a Katana/Regen and he was never the same. I would push for less clicks like WP.

I don't know that I can argue with your points about the incarnates and level shifting against the current base content. I will argue on your points about balancing. There was every indication on the Live servers that the Devs were going to create harder content, so that the min/max builds with incarnates would have a challenge. The iTrials were the first cut at this content and if the game had continued I am sure more content would have been delivered. It seems to me the solution is creating more challenging content with appropriate rewards for those with min/max builds and incarnates. IMO, the problem isn't the powers; the problem is the lack of end game content balanced around the min/max builds and T4 Incarnates. Just for the sake of alignment imagine that in the next release there was going to be new content that was balanced around min/max builds and T4 Incarnates such as: Khallisti Wharf populated with new enemies 2 new iTrials Hard mode added to all TFs Updates to AE, so players can create new content that was balanced around min/max builds and T4 Incarnates Would we still be having this conversation that has gone on 65 pages? I expect we would all be in game playing the content as opposed to arguing about the game being to easy. If you agree having content that was balanced around min/max builds and T4 Incarnates solves the problem then logically the problem isn't the powers. It's the lack of high end content.