Community Vote on "Cottaging" Powers?

[Shazbotacus]

9 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

I don't see how it's a strawman. A generalized example? Sure. 

I consider it, the idea that changing a power from +Damage and +To Hit to a cottage-making power is a good argument against any notion of an overhaul, a strawman because it is a fabricated argument by Castle, presented by no one actually opposed to his stance, and refuted to make his point. Castle made that weak argument just to attack it and sound right by presenting something so obviously silly.

[Leogunner]

4 minutes ago, Shazbotacus said:

I consider it, the idea that changing a power from +Damage and +To Hit to a cottage-making power is a good argument against any notion of an overhaul, a strawman because it is a fabricated argument by Castle, presented by no one actually opposed to his stance, and refuted to make his point. Castle made that weak argument just to attack it and sound right by presenting something so obviously silly.

But it wasn't an argument. It was an explanation of their policies. 

[Shazbotacus]

Well, I knew it’d be an unpopular opinion and I stand by it. There are still powers I’d like to see given an overhaul as I believe they have fundamental issues that tweaking numbers alone might not address, like how Time Bomb’s very nature is incompatible with the pace of most groups.

[Leogunner]

2 minutes ago, Shazbotacus said:

Well, I knew it’d be an unpopular opinion and I stand by it. There are still powers I’d like to see given an overhaul as I believe they have fundamental issues that tweaking numbers alone might not address, like how Time Bomb’s very nature is incompatible with the pace of most groups.

And I don't disagree, I just think considerations for power changes being "too extreme" isn't quite common sense.

 

As for the Time Bomb example, I also think considerations for power changes shouldn't revolve around just 1 style of play.  Just because "most groups" blitz groups of mobs at blinding speed doesn't mean all groups can or always could or will.  Some players solo too and they don't all conform their playstyle to min/max IO def softcap standards.  Some players solo *because* they can capitalize on such powers in a controlled environment where optimized standards aren't enforced.

[Shazbotacus]

Well, I suppose I understand that then. I hated IO sets since the beginning for about that reason. Okay then, you make a good point on that power. I still think Serum needs a lot of help though.

[Galaxy Brain]

4 hours ago, Leogunner said:

And I don't disagree, I just think considerations for power changes being "too extreme" isn't quite common sense.

 

As for the Time Bomb example, I also think considerations for power changes shouldn't revolve around just 1 style of play.  Just because "most groups" blitz groups of mobs at blinding speed doesn't mean all groups can or always could or will.  Some players solo too and they don't all conform their playstyle to min/max IO def softcap standards.  Some players solo *because* they can capitalize on such powers in a controlled environment where optimized standards aren't enforced.

It still doesn't make the power good. On Devices, you have stealth and the smoke nade to cover you placing the bomb, but even then  you have instant trip mines and Blaster Attacks that are prop better.

 

On /Traps, you do not have stealth outside the seeker drones covering you every so often which makes the long placement a bit questionable when you could be doing other stuff.

 

Changing the Time Bomb to a placed bomb with the reticle using the "Web Nade" animation for much faster and safer placement, but then still needing to wait X seconds for it to go off would still allow for the current style of placing it at your feet, but overall make it much nicer to use.

[Shazbotacus]

That’s... also a really good point; even solo Trip Mine as it is just isn’t good.