kenlon

This is the core of the problem with how non-perma Domination works as opposed to perma. If you have 123% recharge, you build your bar once and stay there forever. If you have 122% you have to rebuild the bar every time, despite having almost the same investment in global recharge as the perma build. This is not complicated, and the fact that people are defending the discontinuity as being somehow good baffles me. Doesn't address the actual problem, though. Unless building the meter gave you enough to hit perma, in which case it's pointless.

A man comes upon another man who is repeatedly hitting his thumb with a hammer. When asked why he’s beating his thumb to a pulp, the man with the hammer replies, “Because it feels so good when I stop!”

Hah. Copyright will continue to be extended every time Steamboat Willie comes close to being in the public domain until such time as Disney is prevented from buying congresspeople to keep their IP in copyright. "Intended" means two things, jack and shit.

I don't like Wormhole on my Grav/Psi Dom and will be respeccing out of it soon, but even so, I think this should be fixed. Add another yes vote to the pile.

As someone who mains an Inv tanker, it's not that we think it's redundant, it's just that anything that gets us more Psi def/res is welcome. Because nothing else can kill me.

I don't even know why you're discussing TW AoE like that's the important part of the set when it outdamages every other melee set in ST damage, and then adds in the AoE on top of it. TW badly needs a rebalance, and to be made less terrible to play at the same time. Speed up some animations, bring the damage/endurance use back in line with the standard formulas, etc. Not to nerf it into uselessness, but to make it not hands-down superior to every other option.

That is absolutely true. Which is why you will note, if you read my post, I didn't do that - he said that the issue at hand in this topic was that being able to perma Domination at all was bad, which no one in the thread before him was saying., so I restated what we had been talking about up until that point. *shrug* His idea is the original idea that Replacement posted in the OP of this thread, only with a bit heavier application of the nerf bat, in that the Dominator would not be able to start rebuilding the bar before Domination had worn off. This would absolutely address the issue I had, though I don't think going that far is required. Not to mention that the amount of pushback that current permadom players would unleash in response would be most festive indeed.

Dear sir: You may want to have a look over these beta patch notes, as well as the ones from 4/4.

Having a downtime on Domination isn't the issue. The issue is that if you have 123% global recharge you have no downtime at all. If you have 122% global recharge, you don't have "almost perma" Domination, like you would with other powers (Short a few percent on Dull Pain/Hasten/Practiced Brawler, etc? You'll eat a few seconds of downtime, then the power is back up.) Instead, you have to then build the domination bar back up from scratch, delaying you significantly longer. That discontinuity is the problem with the implementation of Domination. It behaves unlike all other long duration click buffs in the game.

No, I just disagree with you on whether having Domination up all the time is bad. Frankly, Dominators should have just had the mez resist and mag increase baked into their base powersets, rather than having it dependent on a clickie. But if it's going to be on a click power, then that power should not have a situation where having 122% global recharge leaves you with a thirty second plus downtime, and 123% means no downtime ever.

Very much agreed. Fighting has three powers that are very quick, with recharge times that are almost *too* low in the endgame. Might be good to make Leaping a set that gives you slower recharging, harder hitting attacks, since that's what Spring Attack is by default. Not sure what the numbers should look like, though.

Fortunately, ideas like this are going to go nowhere, since the devs have more than demonstrated that they were paying attention during Econ 101. For which we should all be profoundly grateful.

I would have to disagree - the problem is not with the ability to permanently have up Domination, but with the gap in-between perma and not-quite-perma.

Small bug report - the value in the DB for tanker Maneuvers appears to be off. It's 2.28% base in Mid's and 2.63 base in game.

Gah, double post.

This is actually no longer true. With the rework of the Fighting pool and the stacking synergies, taking Boxing, Kick and Cross Punch is a very good deal for some builds.

You do still need the +to-hit to get bonus damage on fast snipe, though. Nothing changed for people who had the old fast-snipe builds, but people who were short of that got a usable in-combat attack instead of only an opener. The parallel to my "Just make it a normal click buff" is very relevant, and I can't believe I didn't think of it before.

You have not asked any question for me to answer. "Stop asking me things that make me look bad when I can't answer!" is not actually a question. 😛 I'm perfectly willing to listen to any argument as to why having Domination work differently than every other power in the game is a good thing - I will almost certainly not agree, but I would at least think that you had some reason for wanting it.

You're dodging my question. What reason, other than FYGMism, do you have for opposing Domination working like other long duration/longer cooldown buffs in the game?

If you're trying to address the balance of a game, then yes, fairness and things working as the player has been led to expect from every other AT in the game should matter. How would it harm you if other people could get smoother scaling uptime on Domination based on how much recharge they have?

I did actually see you mention it elsewhere, but I was too lazy. 😄

My last build was centered around making a soft-capped tank that wouldn't need the Fighting pool for anything. I managed it. The problem is, the psi hole I ended up with is really, really annoying, so it's time to invest a pile of inf into making him a build that addresses that. And I get AlmostPermaHasten, too, which is nice. With one mob in Invincibility, I have defense numbers of: 45.9% S/L 46.5% F/C 44.7% E/N 22.9% Psi 28.6% Melee 24.2% Ranged 25.1% AoE And my resists, with no procs going: 90.09% S/L 69.3% F/C 44.1% E/N 54.3% Toxic - 48.3 in Mid's 43% Psi - 37% in Mid's. This is because Mid's won't allow me to allocate a sixth slot to Ball Lightning, thus preventing me from actually having the Ragnarock 6-slot bonus in the builder, but there's an unallocated slot. I'm not entirely happy about the weaker E/N resists, but I've not found a slotting that addresses it well without losing out on the Psi survivability that is the point of this build. General things: Hasten has a 130s cooldown - I haven't done the math, but as long as I smack Ageless on cooldown, it should be up all the time. I slapped Hecatomb in Total Focus as opposed to another attack because I want to use the proc to help shore it up into being less terrible, because I want to actually use the power, not skip it. Anyone have input? Did I miss anything obvious in my slotting? I've been tweaking and moving slots around, mostly in my defense powers, so I may have missed something and more sets of eyes would be helpful.

So, effectively, "I had to deal with this, so everyone else should too", then? Disappointing. Is it fair that the 1% global recharge between 122 and 123 makes a drastically difference in effectiveness than any increase of a single point previously?

No one's been attacking you, or the AT. No one 'dissed' the psi Epic pool, it was just noted that high damage Sentinels use the epic, not their AT powersets, as a large portion of their damage. Do you feel that Sentinels, as an AT, are well balanced when it comes to damage output? Do they compare decently with Scrappers?

That would be great, but I would recommend not holding your breath - there's a lot of indications that things around sidedness are really, really full of nasty technical debt that would need to be addressed before we get that.