WindDemon21

Would definitely be nice to get this fixed asap so i could play my toon 😕

The toggles don't drop now but because of the stupid suppression you still get mega screwed quite often, basically forced to go psy epic for the mez protection. I agree too while rad can be very nice, the toggles can be annoying every mob too, but at least they're faster to cast now.

Also, since the dumb defense nerf so defense only works against one type, defense sets like, and if not especially ice armor should have also had fire and cold defense reworked into their primary armor toggles, as these are sets that were DESIGNED with that dual-type defense in mind, they got hit extra hard by the fire and ice damages coming through now where the smash/lethal defenses aren't protecting them from that any longer. Stone armor, though the revamp was nicer, still also greatly suffers from this and should also have those defenses included in the defense armors, though ice notices it a lot more IMO, the same logic applies.

Ice Armor: Wet Ice (all ATs) - This power now adds Psionic and Toxic defense. Energy Absorption (all ATs) - This power now grants Psionic and Toxic defense. Up-front defense increased from 1% to 4.5%. Per-target defense reduced from 0.6% to 0.25% (Tanker values). Total Defense at 10x targets remain the same. Moisture Absorption (Sentinel) - This power now grants Psionic and Toxic defense. Permafrost (all ATs) - This power now grants 5% resistance against Smash/Lethal/Energy/Negative/Toxic/Psionic (Tanker values). Since this change took place, there is a bug where now the main buff of the power is not stacking. Only the tiny miniscule additional target buffs are stacking with the power resulting in a HUGE loss of defense for ice armor which has always been key to it's survival as it's mostly all defense as an armor. Especially with more of the defense being IN that up front buff now, this REALLY hurts ice armor. Praying for quick fix on this one. While we're at it, chilling embrace on scrappers also needs it's taunt back. As the reason other armors on scraps get taunt is that it's needed for their survival or damage for the enemies to be in their aura, ie AAO on shield for more damage, or the resist aoe on bio, invincibility on invuln etc, the EXACT same thing would be said for chilling embrace, so the enemies have their recharge reduced, AND more importantly keep that -damage on them. Please fix this as well. Less important but also should have always been the case, to allow to slot wet ice for defense for set/proc mules, woudln't cry if this didn't happen but just doesn't make sense it's even there if you can't slot it even if it is tiny.

Right, I have thought several times if 12end/rech would work, but even then that would be the absolute MAX for those for the powers current damage. Even then it's still high though. That would make it a 50% tax for the set synergy/taoe nature which is still a bit much, I can't think of another partial or full aoe that has that much of a tax on it just for knockdown, and even then it would be debatable if that 50% knockdown is better than guaranteed -defense, -resist, slow, stun etc, at which point I wouldn't even say its better, just different, even if it was guaranteed KD. I certainly wouldn't complain if cyclone was 100% kd chance, but given the shorted cast time I think the power itself was balanced as is with the longer recharge time and pull-in addition. I think pendulum at the 5 target cap though, only a 50% chance to KD seems pretty weak even with corrected end/rech values meaning only 2-3 enemies KD'ing at a time. (especially given its current rech/end costs, but lets assume that would get fixed properly given this thread I'd hope)

I'm not missing your point, I'm explaining that you're bringing up a point, that is just semantics, and didn't need brought up at all because you don't understand what I was saying. You: "this word means this, it can't mean something else" Me: It CAN mean something else, there just wasn't another word I was aware of. Lots of words have different meanings based on context. In this case, from here on out as mentioned, I will refer to the aoe types as full aoe, partial aoe, and nuke aoe.

I understand what it says, again, you're arguing semantics. I get what it's "classified" there, but you're looking at the wrong argument based on a word that in this case had two meanings because I'm unaware of another term for it. You're not WRONG, you're just arguing the wrong thing. To sum up, we'd have to clarify the types of aoe, easiest way is "full" aoe, which means and aoe with the maximum targets for that type, ie in this case, 10 targets for those aoes in the 11-20ish second recharges, like cyclone, whirling sword, whirling hands etc. Another example, while technically frost is a cone, it's area size and 10 target cap, basically puts it in the "full aoe" column. Then two more "melee nukes" or "nuke aoe" which isn't part of this but just for reference, like lightning rod, shield charge, savage leap, and ground zero. And then the main one in this discussion, which is "partial aoe" which can be usually cones, or in this case pendulum, since it only has a 5 target cap. So from here on i'll reference them as such as to avoid this confusion for you. As Pendulum is a "partial" aoe, it's end/rech for it's damage as such then should be 8.5, adjusted for set synergy, 10.5 would be agreeable, 15, is FAR too much. Edit: "Edit: So insisting on calling it something other than what it is classified as detracts from your argument." It doesn't detract from the argument, it's just a semnatic you're bringing up which isn't actually part of the argument, and is just a terminology miscommunication, and again, I didn't CALL it a cone, I sait it should be TREATED like a cone.

That basically IS what is considered in that though. You can't just claim it's an "aoe" in regard, but not account for it's 5 target cap. Technically the sentinel heal/regen power in dark armor is an "aoe" at 30ft radius, even though it only hits 1 target. You're talking semantics, and the wrong one at that. It should be considered as it's cone in these regards i've mentioned. If you want to consider it an "aoe" then you also have to account for it's 5 target cap. Which MANY times, per damage value, I've mentioned, the end/rech values are still not in line with the power and are way too high. It's like you're trying to argue something that just isn't there and I'm explaining it. You're arguing a semantic, that doesn't apply basically. Basically, there are two descriptions of "aoe" in this scenario. One meaning it's round, and another, that I keep quoting cause I'm not sure of another proper name for it, meaning that it should hit the capped targets for it's appropriate values, which on melee scrap/brutes, is 10 targets in this situation. Given it hits 5, even though, yes by semantics, it's an "aoe", but it's not a "TRUE aoe" by what I'm saying. I'm sorry i dont know of another term to describe what i mean when i quote aoe, but you should be able to understand what I mean. Maybe "full" aoe would be a better terminology, given the 5 target cap though, even though yes *technically* as a circle it's an aoe, it's STATS need to be CONSIDERED as a cone. So i guess there, "true aoe" or "full aoe" would be the term I'm meaning by this, but again, call it aoe if you wish, the issue is, at 5 targets, its new damage needs the end/rech values to be lowered to compensate, and yes, as also mentioned, this is GIVEN the rest of the set updates. Values per damage, would be 8.5ish end/rech, values adjusted for set synergy/radius, 10.5ish would be fair (certainly not 15 is the point of this thread). Edit: reading that last sentence of yours too, I'm not CALLING it a cone, again, stop with the semantics. I'm saying it should be TREATED like a cone statwise.

I didn't now the right term, that's why i put it in quotes, obv it's an aoe, even cones are an "aoe" by definition. But aoe in this context referring to 10+ targets. As a 5 target power, it is essentially a "cone" the only reason it's a "taoe" is to so the cyclone pull in wouldn't be detrimental to it and NOT work with it. For all intents and purposes this power still needs to be thought of as a cone power given the 5 target limit etc.

If you have to think of it this way, the "needs fixed" essentially is that same argument. If this WAS intentional, it was just a plain wrong assessment. The end/rech values are literally almost DOUBLE what they should be compared to like-powers. No secondary effect in the game on any melee attack is worth that amount of a use-tax. (and certainly not compared to mace which let's face it has always been its co-partner regarding effectiveness, which smashing damage also makes mace more-often better alone vs lethal) I'm not saying I don't understand "A" tax in a situation like this, I'm just stating that 14.35 end and 15s rech is FAR too much of a tax for the power's new damage and tier placement. If whoever intentionally left these as is for this thinks that's appropriate, then it might be time to replace that person with someone who understands powers and sets better, because these are far from appropriate values for the power, looking at the entire axe revamp as whole (even worse looking at the power on its own).

Versus new costume parts and base items? Definitely. Versus mew missions and task forces? Personally yes but I feel equal. Versus power balancing? If that means fixing powers that are underperforming if they actually do it properly yes. Versus things like fixing Pendulum to have the proper end/rech values? No Versus spending all that time just to nerf defenses to one type only changing the way the game has worked since the beginning in a completely unneeded change? 100% absolutely yes. Ie, its still on the list and where on thar list is malleable. Super Packs alone? It's more tolerable than trying to claim character items but apparently it's all the same thing. They are also different departments i hear anyway. So fixing this, doesnt mean we dont get those other things per update.

I never said it was a bug, I said it was an oversight, or just plain wrong decision. I understand what you're trying to say but your missing the entire point. That is ALL taken into consideration, but the power is still nowhere near justified with everything considered at this end/rech values. As mentioned, when a power is an earlier tier like that, yes, it makes sense having the damage lowered, but ONLY if it's endurance and recharge values are lowered with it as well. The power did NOT need a straight nerf by far. This wasn't (or SHOULDN'T) have been meant as a nerf, but rather a lower tier rework, which should have justly then meant it would have it's end and rech values lowered as well. "In reality" it's a wasnt adjusted properly "suggestion" to which the numbers CLEARLY speak for themselves. It's insanely baffling you don't see that, without trying to be rude, you're just plain wrong, thus power needs fixed. Since you havent been paying attention or arent grasping it, that tax was already considered at about 10.5 for end/rech, where it should actually be at 8.5 for both. Anything more than that is gravely underwhelming the power for what it should be, especially at an insane 15end/rech that it is now. It's appalling and honestly almost insulting that it's values are at that.

It should be noted too for those who didn't know and are going by experiences on tankers, that this power especially will seem skewed on tankers with a 10 target cap instead of 5. Where this also occurs with normal aoe's and cones, with this power's taoe nature, that mean not only is it getting more that suck behind you from cyclone, but obviously the 10 target cap is going to skew people to think its an "aoe" and not still basically a "cone" for all intents and purposes. While that should still mean that it should still have a lower end/rech values on the tanker as well, it makes it not seem as noticeable by feeling like a full aoe. Absolutely this still needs fixed to have the end/rech stats corrected to about the 10.5 for both (or as mentioned earlier 8.5 if looking purely at its damage value compared to other like-powers/cones), with that extra 2end/seconds being the tax for the knockdown and set synergy. But ABSOLUTELY this power needs those fixed. And honestly like kat/bs's they get -defense, so as far as "tax" for a 50% only knockdown ie 2.5 enemies (which really, for 5 targets it should just be 100% knockdown at this rate) :/, I wouldn't think it even needs that by comparison TBH, while cyclones pull-in is very nice, it's actual damage is still nothing to gawk at (though faster cast, rech was also extended to 18s so compensation was already made for it), which is where this type of set needs the better stats on the other "cone" via pendulum to help it on that front, but certainly not at the 15ish end and rech values, that's where that 2end/second tax comes in off of the 8.5s that it should be per damage.

I'll say it again though. The real issue is having to click so many times and now timing it etc. If we could just choose how many to open of this and character items, then let the system take as long as it needs, waiting the hour for them to be claimed isn't the issue, it's the clicking for an hour straight timing the clicks every 3 seconds and getting carpal tunnel that's the issue. If we could also get an option to not show the card flips too that would be nice especially if this option became available so you could actually play while they open.

I thought that but figured it wasn't a "max file size" issue and was a memory/ram "X many per hour" issue.

Yeah that's what I was talking about when I said I could open a bunch oer second.

It just baffles me too cause om this same system this didn't happen before but it does now? Even with the character item claiming. Another bottom line is just the pain (and carpal tunnel) of the same repetitive clicking and mouse holding on character items. Could there not be a way to still allow us to choose how many we want to open/claim, and then just let the system take as long as it needs to do so do we don't have to keep clicking? Thats really the main issue here is all the clicking and timing those clicks.

OK thank you for that! I can understand how that impacts the system for the pack openings, but what about claiming character items? Especially things like claiming converters and such, could there be an option to pop up a window where you put the number in there that you want to claim?

Besides the fact that that would make zero sense at all to do nothing but cause frustration, that's definitely not what this is. They have acknowledged the issue in relation to claiming character items and have said that this is not supposed to be happening. It's just that this has now crept to opening super packs too and it's been a long time that they've known about this with character items with nothing seemingly being done about it so far. Im simply helping to let them know that this is now happening with super packs as well.

The same would work just right clicking and opening it was just more of a pain to do so. You can no longer do it that way either as well. So when something was working, and now doesn't, it's definitely a bug, though may be a system-issue bug and not an actual game bug, but this has been going on for a while at least with the character items. They have acknowledged it as an issue in fact, but that was last, I think almost a year ago since they acknowledged it. I don't think there is a "system issues" section, so bug section fits the best for this. Either way it's an issue that would be greatly appreciated it if was fixed.

PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF CTHULU fix this! This has been an issue for a while where you can't rapid-click the claim button on character items to claim more than one at a time, like converters for example. And there STILL is no option to simply select how many you want to claim either. But even, or at least just as terrible, you used to be able to use a macro to open super packs quickly, and you could keep pressing it as many times and it would open the packs and the system would catch up. But NOW, it's doing the dumb thing the character items do where it freezes and says "please wait a moment". Before I would seriously click the macro to open the packs super fast and this would NEVER pop up before, but it is now and it's infuriating, and the cards flip over SO damn slow its going to take forever!

And yeah the case is definitely there to have it's cap bumped to 10, though it would be nicer for aoe, but I'd concur it's nice at the 5 targets for when the mob gets smaller, it just needs the endurance and recharge values to be lowered to their proper values for it's new damage.

Sorry, it was more about it being left like that from test (honesty i think it HAS to be something they overlooked and not intended, its so grossly unbalanced in a bad way now), and others who might say that, it did kinda sound like you were XD. Getting frustrated too by constant new things the devs are changing but not doing right numberwise, but also mostly getting frustrated that it's making yet another toon i'll have to shelved most likely until it gets fixed, SOOO many lately ughh :(. Talking in game with people about it too they see that, but will try to bring up it's "utility" but thing is, at 5 targets, it's only a 50% chance to kd (really think for this case it should be 100%), but compared to say bs/kat in this scenario, that's only 2.5 enemies. So compared to those which do -defense and can house the achilles proc, it's more or less different, maybe a llittle better depending what you want, but not 15 end/rech different, where that 10.5 instead of "straight end/rech PER damage 8.5" makes more sense.

"As an aoe" it should hit 10 targets. It's still a "cone" in it's 5 targets sense, the only reason it was changed because the cyclone pull in would otherwise be counterproductive for it. But as it is at 5 targets which I'm fine with probably happier if:, it INSANELY needs its end cost and recharge time lowered. If you don't see that then you don't understand how power damage vs end/rech works in this game. If it is concluded, that say over bs/kat cones, that since it is a *SLIGHT* bit easier to hit targets from its previous cone, and that it has kd instead of -defense (which also means Achilles proc would be slottable), then instead of the average 8.5end/rech that it SHOULD have, that it would instead be say 10.5ish to each, I can acknowledge that. But to say it's fine as is is just asinine and clearly shows you don't understand power stats. Edit: to be clear, having that end/rech at 10.5ish instead of 8.5ish WOULD be the appropriate tax for its new taoe and kd, but 15ish on each is WAYYYYY too high for a 5 target cap with its current damage. I'm convinced anyone saying otherwise is just being wowed by its animation and sound, but not actually realizing the numbers, because the numbers are CLEARLY out of balance as is.

I am looking at it as a whole, this is regarding the aoe in the set, I love the pull in on axe cyclone, but fact is the shave off its cast time was combatted by increasing it's recharge time as well. I'll grant the larger radius on it now (though think it's still only on the pull in not damage itself would need to test that, but even so), but pendulum is still the 5 targets. So per target, it actually did take a dive on it's aoe damage with the pendulum nerf, and it's single target was already before considered very slow which is why the ST powers got the buffs. So those considered and the set overall, it's fine having pendulum be a "weaker" aoe, ie less of a big hitter tier 9 you'd expect, and i'm fine with that, but it's end costs and recharge times should be matched to compensate is all that I'm saying, and evidence of standard power damage/end/rech ratios with nearly every other power in the game, back it up as well (of course there are exceptions that still need fixed, but the apalling part is this was recently changed and went live like this AFTER being looked at). At it's damage (and target cap), it's end and rech costs are way too high. I did have an axe scrapper 50+ here and on live, and it was never tough to get them into the cone of pre-page 5 pendulum, and its damage was bigger which was nice, but even then it felt like for the set that it should have been the 10 targets. Again I'm fine with it remaining the 5, but per damage it does not as well, the end/rech at least need to be lowered. Looking at those examples I listed earlier: Pend compared to slice: Pends end should be 9.34, and rech should be 8.76s pend vs steel (equally bumping up values as if it had 2s cast for comparison): 1.05.88dam/10.31end/10.26rech): pends end should be 8.20, and rech should be 8.16s pend vs mace, honestly so tough because its already way ahead of pendulum now even if it only hit 5 targets, hitting 10 it's literally like 4 times better, plus it's knockdown is guaranteed vs pendulum's which only has a chance to kd. but you see where this is headed. Pendulums endurance and recharge times are WAY too high for it's new/current damage it does, averaging between bs/kat at least that it's end cost should be about 8.75ish end, and recharge should be about 8.5s, which is almost HALF of what it's endurance and recharge times currently are. Granting cyclon'es pull in (which was the justification for it being the 7ft taoe instead of cone cause it wraps them around you, which would work against a cone),and the slight area increase, (due to this, though at still the 5 cap it was never tough to get 5 in it's previous cone), I could see more like 10end and 10s recharge would seem like an averaged middle ground the power should be on, but certainly not almost 15 end and 15s recharge. This needs fixed asap.