Focused Feedback: Dark Melee Update (Build 1)

[@Ghost]

I think when you hit the point that you’re dampening the interactions of archetype and set mechanics, it feels like you should reconsider the basic design of the power instead.

 

I’d much rather have “crits do X instead” or “damage boosts are lesser but also do Y” than just... not having those interactions. Or just having the power in a place where those extras aren’t necessary.

[Jimmy]

On 2/26/2020 at 4:57 PM, Captain Powerhouse said:

Good catch, someone give this person a bug hunter badge. Tool set was erroneously thinking the power was doing 5 ticks. Issue has been fixed and power will be adjusted in a future patch.

Missed this for some reason. @siolfir check your in-game email! 🙂

[Grandfeatherex]

On 2/26/2020 at 10:02 PM, macskull said:

Well it's a good thing that Dark Melee's not exactly hurting in the single-target damage department then, isn't it? These changes are simply making it also competitive in the AoE department.

 

I could make the same argument and assume you're playing the same game I am, in which case I have no idea how you're moving so slowly that clearing a spawn takes 30 seconds, but I'm not going to and I'm going to point you to the fact that game's balanced around SOs which means absent any other buffs this power will be available every 45 seconds tops. I don't see how adding some AoE damage to a set that's sorely lacking it is a problem, but okay.

 

Let's look at it this way:

• Single-target-heavy sets are useful in encounters against single hard targets with lots of HP (basically, AVs and EBs, maybe multiple bosses) which, let's be honest, are not the majority of encounters.
• AoE-heavy sets are useful in encounters against pretty much everything else, where there are lots of targets, which is the majority of encounters but they can struggle against harder single targets.
• Sets that have good AoE and single-target damage might not perform as well as either of the above sets in their applicable scenarios (which isn't even the case, since they'll perform just fine) but they're going to be pretty much universally useful. There's no reason most or all sets can't fit in this category.

I don't think any consideration has been put in to balancing around SO's for a while, or even +0/x0 settings, that seems to be what lead to the whole tank rework debacle in the first place, complaining that brutes can get to the same resist as tanks... ignoring that a tank could do it with SO's and a brute needs sets to get there


this change again just furthers making tanks farm equipment,  for low lvs and at +0/x0 tanks are going to suffer with longer cooldown on shadow maul since you aren't fighting enough mobs to need the increased area. at lower levels or without sets you aren't going to have the deffence to pull off +0/x8 where the damage really improves, especially how much longer it takes waiting for the attack to come up now.

keeping the recharge time, area, and damage the same, but reducing the cast time would have seemed more ideal to me as it would have been a flat net gain both for aoe and ST attacks, now it's a hindrance to ST and AoE damage unless you artificially inflate the number of mobs you're fighting, and even then it's still increasing overall AoE output at the cost of ST dmg and anyone playing the game at default settings

[ScarySai]

1 hour ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Dark Consumption is getting less boost from +Dam, not the whole set.

 

He knows, but based on conversation in the AT Discord and personal messages with some people, the main fear is they go way too far with the pre-emptive nerfs.

 

Dark melee's main claim to fame is huge self damage buffs from soul drain. Reducing the benefit too much would be a weird contrast with the rest of the set, or potentially make the ability worse than a spammable like spin, with a much longer CD, and can't crit.

[Murcielago]

9 hours ago, Captain Powerhouse said:

The alternative is to significantly lower the damage of Dark Consumption for everyone just to prevent high end scrapper builds (And some brute/tanks too) from getting out of hand. 

What I read out of this, buff enemies so they're not so easy to kill. 

[Murcielago]

31 minutes ago, Jimmy said:

Missed this for some reason. @siolfir check your in-game email! 🙂

Can I have one for pointing out the sound was missing on Shadow Maul?

[Myrmidon]

1 hour ago, Murcielago said:

Can I have one for pointing out the sound was missing on Shadow Maul?

The old Devs never gave Bug Hunter to anyone that asked for it, Murci. Don’t hold your breath.😂

[Leogunner]

10 hours ago, Captain Powerhouse said:

To clarify: the change is going to be specific to Dark Consumption and nothing else. Right now, Soul Drain X10 foes (potentially with BU proc) followed by DC at full endurance is just too much damage at the start of a fight, especially on Scrappers that have a 25% higher  DMG Buff modifiers.

 

Every bit of +DMG will still increase damage, but it will work as a curve.

 

The alternative is to significantly lower the damage of Dark Consumption for everyone just to prevent high end scrapper builds (And some brute/tanks too) from getting out of hand. 
 

I prefer to try control the max damage than to try to control the base 3SO damage.

OR you could reverse it so having less END does more damage. At the very least it might conform to a unique kind of build that tries to burn some END rather that build for max END efficiency. 

[Myrmidon]

2 hours ago, Grandfeatherex said:

this change again just furthers making tanks farm equipment,  for low lvs and at +0/x0 tanks are going to suffer with longer cooldown on shadow maul since you aren't fighting enough mobs to need the increased area. at lower levels or without sets you aren't going to have the deffence to pull off +0/x8 where the damage really improves, especially how much longer it takes waiting for the attack to come up now.

Have you actually played with it or is this just more theory? I have played with it and it wasn’t bad in the Atlas Park range, which has plenty of 3-5 mob sizes if you follow the actual content instead of just AE/DFB Palooza. 

 

Entirely too much theory-crafting and not enough testing is what brought us the Brute bug and, unless you want things like that to get through every single patch, I highly suggest that you do some actual testing before giving any feedback.😉

[ScarySai]

1 hour ago, Leogunner said:

OR you could reverse it so having less END does more damage. At the very least it might conform to a unique kind of build that tries to burn some END rather that build for max END efficiency. 

This idea is bad, stop already.

 

@MyrmidonSpot on, you can tell very easily who in this thread has never played dark melee and is just working off bad mids math, and who actually plays the set. DM without shield isn't anything to write home about right now.

Edited February 28, 2020 by ScarySai

[Leogunner]

2 minutes ago, ScarySai said:

This idea is bad, stop already.

I don't think that is a necessary response. Especially trying to stifle my right to post feedback and suggestions. 

 

My thought is, rather than systematically stripping aspects of the power to fit neatly into a meta game box, you can have aspects of super powers that are extraordinary but not completely applicable to all situations. 

 

The same circumstance comes with suggesting changes for the armor tier 9s, they aim to make them more usable but ignore the concept of if they need them to be. Keeping the unique aspect (or creating one) isn't a priority. 

 

If you'd rather my suggestions get buried, your best option is to not respond to them so they don't get discussion. 

[nicoliy]

1 hour ago, Leogunner said:

OR you could reverse it so having less END does more damage. At the very least it might conform to a unique kind of build that tries to burn some END rather that build for max END efficiency. 

My issue with this idea is in group play you may not be able to control it. At least mid to high level play I tend to be in a groups where end is always topped off (think powers like AM I think it is). So if you build around running low you may not be able to actually do that beyond solo play.

[ScarySai]

14 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

My thought is, rather than systematically stripping aspects of the power to fit neatly into a meta game box, you can have aspects of super powers that are extraordinary but not completely applicable to all situations. 

 

The same circumstance comes with suggesting changes for the armor tier 9s, they aim to make them more usable but ignore the concept of if they need them to be. Keeping the unique aspect (or creating one) isn't a priority. 

Again, the ability still works as an endurance consumption tool, but you lose damage out of it when it's used that way. If you have good endurance management or recovery buffs from one source or another, it can function as a powerful attack. If you're not rocking full endurance, this thing's damage isn't anything to write home about.

 

The unique aspect is still there, the power still functions the way it was intended to function, but now has the bonus effect that CP is adding to it. Your concern is unfounded while the solution proposed is clunky and doesn't work.

Edited February 28, 2020 by ScarySai

[Leogunner]

11 minutes ago, nicoliy said:

My issue with this idea is in group play you may not be able to control it. At least mid to high level play I tend to be in a groups where end is always topped off (think powers like AM I think it is). So if you build around running low you may not be able to actually do that beyond solo play.

In those groups, there is likely already plenty of AoE, tho. DM was supposed to be more ST focused to begin with. 

 

I guess the question is, is this change meant to just make them more AoE competitive in teams or just all around. Personally speaking though, I don't think the game needs more AoE without some sort of cost. 

[nicoliy]

2 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

In those groups, there is likely already plenty of AoE, tho. DM was supposed to be more ST focused to begin with. 

 

I guess the question is, is this change meant to just make them more AoE competitive in teams or just all around. Personally speaking though, I don't think the game needs more AoE without some sort of cost. 

I think with the damage brought down a bit it should be fine. It makes solo play a bit smoother, but not just a two button slaughter fest. As you level, or if you have an end heavy build, then you can save it as a utility power at the expense of the damage it would have topped off. To me the damage should be ok, but not a nuke. I appreciate your opinion, I just don't personally agree with the idea.

[Leogunner]

14 minutes ago, ScarySai said:

Again, the ability still works as an endurance consumption tool, but you lose damage out of it when it's used that way. If you have good endurance management or recovery buffs from one source or another, it can function as a powerful attack. If you're not rocking full endurance, this thing's damage isn't anything to write home about.

 

The unique aspect is still there, the power still functions the way it was intended to function, but now has the bonus effect that CP is adding to it. Your concern is unfounded while the solution proposed is clunky and doesn't work.

The only thing unique about that is you pop a blue insp to power this up (kind of defeats the purpose of the utility too) 

 

Making power choices/ usage to try to burn END isn't actually a thing. No one tries to burn resources before regaining them because it's not been done.

[ScarySai]

3 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

Making power choices/ usage to try to burn END isn't actually a thing.

For good reason.

[Leogunner]

2 minutes ago, nicoliy said:

I think with the damage brought down a bit it should be fine. It makes solo play a bit smoother, but not just a two button slaughter fest. As you level, or if you have an end heavy build, then you can save it as a utility power at the expense of the damage it would have topped off. To me the damage should be ok, but not a nuke. I appreciate your opinion, I just don't personally agree with the idea.

Like I said, my suggestion would be more in line with reducing the standard damage to be in line with the direction the devs are moving toward now but giving the bonuses (reg +DMG, crit and all) tied to a situation less capable to control (low END). It's aiming to shift those bonuses rather than outright remove them. 

[Leogunner]

2 minutes ago, ScarySai said:

For good reason.

What reasons? 

[ScarySai]

7 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

What reasons? 

Getting your recovery buffed would nerf your damage, it's unreliable, it's impractical, it creates a dependence on consumption restoring enough end to last, and would make a legacy set unneccesarily clunky, all because you disagree with an existing, formerly skippable ability being brought up.

 

If you want to propose some weird endurance-based set, there's another thread for that, but you're not going to transform Dark Melee into that set, so what you are proposing isn't really feedback to these changes so much as a complete tangent that misses the entire point.

Edited February 28, 2020 by ScarySai

[KelvinKole]

12 hours ago, Captain Powerhouse said:

To clarify: the change is going to be specific to Dark Consumption and nothing else. Right now, Soul Drain X10 foes (potentially with BU proc) followed by DC at full endurance is just too much damage at the start of a fight, especially on Scrappers that have a 25% higher  DMG Buff modifiers.

 

Every bit of +DMG will still increase damage, but it will work as a curve.

 

The alternative is to significantly lower the damage of Dark Consumption for everyone just to prevent high end scrapper builds (And some brute/tanks too) from getting out of hand. 
 

I prefer to try control the max damage than to try to control the base 3SO damage.

I like the direction,  but am weary of the approach. I don't like the idea of special rules being built into a power for the sake of one or two outlying conditions. Some of the formulas in this game are complicated enough without having to introduce a curve. Does lightning rod have this rule? If not, I'd say adjust the base damage to make it more in line with what people know and understand. 

[Doc_Scorpion]

3 hours ago, Grandfeatherex said:

this change again just furthers making tanks farm equipment,  for low lvs and at +0/x0 tanks are going to suffer with longer cooldown on shadow maul since you aren't fighting enough mobs to need the increased area.

 

57 minutes ago, Myrmidon said:

Have you actually played with it or is this just more theory? I have played with it and it wasn’t bad in the Atlas Park range, which has plenty of 3-5 mob sizes if you follow the actual content instead of just AE/DFB Palooza. 

I've tested it in the King's Row and Steel Canyon ranges and I agree with Myrmidon.  It's useful in instances (even at default difficulty) and street sweeping, in both cases you encounter groups large enough to make effective use of the increased arc.  (Not that there's anything wrong with treating an AoE power as a ST power!  Regardless of AT/powerset, that's not exactly uncommon down in the lower levels.)  I kinda agree with Grandfeatherx that current the cooldown is a bit of a problem, but not nearly enough for this degree of HWFO.  I expect the coming reduction (from 14 seconds to 11) will effectively erase my concerns in that respect.

[flip]

Gotta say I am not at all happy to hear that Dark Consumption is going to benefit less from +dam. That is entirely counter-intuitive to the way DM plays. I would rather have the bonus damage from endurance reduced or removed entirely rather than having DC not benefit from Dark Melee's defining feature.

[ScarySai]

6 minutes ago, KelvinKole said:

I like the direction,  but am weary of the approach. I don't like the idea of special rules being built into a power for the sake of one or two outlying conditions. Some of the formulas in this game are complicated enough without having to introduce a curve. Does lightning rod have this rule? If not, I'd say adjust the base damage to make it more in line with what people know and understand. 

My problem is how vague the statement is there, I'd really like some added detail regarding that formula so some proper math could be done ahead of time, in lieu of being able to test it.

 

If the +damage isn't DR'd too much at around what just maxed out soul drain can do, then whatever.

 

If it's balanced in such a way that just a full drain without anything like assault or AAO supporting it isn't worth it, that's a problem.

 

Edit: Also, I don't know how to add a quote to a post after already submitting on these boards, but @flip shares my problem with the idea, Dark Melee is centered around those saturated damage buffs, that's the set's gimmick.  I would prefer it's base damage be weakened if it means that fully saturated mires really reward the player's use of consumption, but again - I need to see what the plan is before I can suggest anything.

Edited February 28, 2020 by ScarySai

[Leogunner]

15 minutes ago, ScarySai said:

Getting your recovery buffed would nerf your damage, it's unreliable, it's impractical, it creates a dependence on consumption restoring enough end to last, and would make a legacy set unneccesarily clunky, all because you disagree with an existing, formerly skippable ability being brought up.

And the focus of the changes now are to bring the damage down because having access to the reliable and near max powered version is too strong. 

 

You don't explain how it's impractical and I have no idea how you'd come to the conclusion that it creates a dependence in the context of your other arguments. 

 

You're also under the assumption I'm disagreeing? I'm just suggesting a different approach. I suggested the approach even before they started posting about reducing the power's yield and, and now I'm suggesting it as an alternative to outright limit the power from working with the other aspects of the AT's inherent and soul drain. 

Edited February 28, 2020 by Leogunner