It's time to recognize Domination is bad.

[Replacement]

I figure now is the time to post this, now that I'm on my last shred of willingness to fight with people who just "nope" anything that will improve this game.  I made this topic because I truly believe Dominators should be accessible to all player types.

 

If you like current Domination because it requires you to be "this tall to ride" in regards to knowing IOs well enough to Permadom, your opinion is not welcome here.

The goal is to see Domination become accessible without impacting the performance of people who already enjoy their Dominators.

 

Primary issue: The more optimized your Dominator build, the more homogeneous it is.

If you love your Dominator just the way it is, you're probably building it the same way as every other good Dominator build: Permadom.  How many powers are you using to make sure you have enough LotG mules?  How many set bonuses are you only caring about Global Recharge?  Just how much of your build is really your own? 

 

Sub-issue: too many clicks, forcing you to give up "cool" for "power"

The AT that cares most about global recharge also happens to already have the most Clicks.  This means if you want your Dominator to be good (with its ever-increasing global recharge), you will always prefer to optimize your routine to just a few clicks, with all other powers being largely-situational (and mostly just IO mules) where they aren't passive/toggles like that Maneuvers you grabbed just for the 7.5% extra Global Recharge.

 

In-line TL;DR: In case I'm not clear.  Dominator has to make powergame choices if it wants to compete at a level that many other ATs simply get to by Enhancing (Even crafted IOs).  

 

Next issue: Unbalanceable

Permadom is head-and-shoulders above "1 second shy of Permadom." This is a nightmare.  If you balance the class around the assumption of Permadom, anything shy of that is vastly underpowered.  If you balance towards no permadom, how can pemadom possibly be balanced?  So it becomes difficult to say with a straight face that it's safe to raise/lower rate of Domination bar filling, for example, since you have to perfectly capture how both "versions" of the AT perform.

 

Solutions

Lots!  There are many ways to fix this and I would support many of them.  Please be aware that I care more about recognition that this is a problem that needs fixed than any of the solutions I list below.

 

But here is the simplest: Dump Domination bar on ability activation instead of buff expiry.

• CON: current permadominators will need to ensure they are refilling their bar again before their bar is up (SEE BELOW**)
• PRO: Losing Domination will no longer completely remove your momentum.
• PRO: Jekyll and Hyde feeling is maintained.  
• PRO: Build requirements to be "good" are eased significantly.
• PRO: Power develops on a curve instead of a sudden spike at the end.

 

This doesn't fix all issues.  Optimal builds will still be optimal, so this isn't a huge sea change. It does, however, bridge the gap between these two types of players.

** This change also makes the class far easier to balance.  If this change were implemented, Development would also be able to tweak Domination bar fill-rate without severe repercussions. 

 

Other solutions? I think there are other solutions, and probably better ones, but most of them start to incur "cottage" costs.  An example would be turning Domination into a toggle that costs Domination per second instead of Stamina.  It'd be great to get to go nuts and make "tool for everything" builds with all of my clicks, but it would have a much higher impact on current builds.  

 

Appendix: Mechanics.

In case the reader isn't aware, the clutch detail of Domination is the bar emptying out when the buff expires.  If Domination is off of cooldown to be used again before that point, you simply Click it to push out how long until the bar wears off another 2 minutes.  This means if you are even 1 second short of permadom, you will need to work to fill your bar again, and thus be locked out of Domination for all the time required to refill.

Edited April 23, 2020 by Replacement

[Replacement]

Pre-emptive Responses:

 

"Other ATs have to sacrifice flavor for power too!"

Yes, but the difference isn't anywhere this significant.  A Scrapper can pick up Boggle or Touch of Fear, maybe waste a couple of pool picks on flavor, and still be extremely strong.  Contrast: Dominators basically have most of their power pools spoken for.  In turn, their hyper-low recharges on "normal" powers reduces them to only needing (or in the min/max world: WANTING) a tiny handful of their primary/secondary powers in their actual rotation.

 

"Oh yeah?  What about Petless Mastermind?"

...Is actively going against the class design.  In the pursuit of player expression, a player should still choose the Archetype that most closely adheres to their vision. 

 

I don't like your use of words like "Optimized" or telling me what's required to be "Good"

Cool, just don't project your opinions on me.  This thread is about objectively bad game design.  And that affects people with open hostility towards optimization more.  You, theoretical poster, are the person who benefits most from addressing these issues.

 

My goal is for players who are even worse than me (a low bar, indeed) to not feel like an entire AT is locked to them for not having the ability or interest in system mastery. 

My goal is for players to be able to choose the powers they like without the AT punishing them for it.

[Vanden]

No, no I don't think this is a good idea.

 

8 minutes ago, Replacement said:

In-line TL;DR: In case I'm not clear.  Dominator has to make powergame choices if it wants to compete at a level that many other ATs simply get to by Enhancing (Even crafted IOs).  

Absurd. A permadom outperforms any character with basic enhancing by a wide margin.

 

9 minutes ago, Replacement said:

• PRO: Jekyll and Hyde feeling is maintained.  

People don't like that aspect of Dominators, how is maintaining that a pro?

 

10 minutes ago, Replacement said:

Primary issue: The more optimized your Dominator build, the more homogeneous it is.

If you love your Dominator just the way it is, you're probably building it the same way as every other good Dominator build: Permadom.  How many powers are you using to make sure you have enough LotG mules?  How many set bonuses are you only caring about Global Recharge?  Just how much of your build is really your own? 

How is that different from building for the defense softcap?

 

11 minutes ago, Replacement said:

Sub-issue: too many clicks, forcing you to give up "cool" for "power"

The AT that cares most about global recharge also happens to already have the most Clicks.  This means if you want your Dominator to be good (with its ever-increasing global recharge), you will always prefer to optimize your routine to just a few clicks, with all other powers being largely-situational (and mostly just IO mules) where they aren't passive/toggles like that Maneuvers you grabbed just for the 7.5% extra Global Recharge.

This section just doesn't make sense. The only click a permadom needs is Domination, and they probably have Hasten, too. That's two clicks. Two is too many?

[MTeague]

Well, do be aware that many players ARE strongly opinionated, and you're probably going to get those opinions whether or not you welcome them.

 

I'm willing to talk turkey, because I have seen people who really don't want to muck about with sets struggle to figure out how viable a Dominator can be for them.  And I've generally said, "Look... you can play a Dominator.... and while it is up, your Domination will be just as strong as mine.... but there's no sugar coating it, it's a night-and-day performance difference when it's up vs down, and you'll have to deal with that."   

 

And I didn't really like that, because, the subtext of my message felt like I was saying "Don't bother".

And well, it felt like saying that because i partially WAS saying that.

 

But it's also true there's a Night-And-Day difference between a Scrapper who's kitted out to the nine's with set bonuses and one with only SO's.  Or a blaster with a long list of set bonuses and one with only SO's.  Or a Brute with the set bonuses and a brute without.   Anyone who's expecting to solo steamroll +4/x8 without fully buildling for it is deluding themselves. 

 

ALL of that said.  I think the idea of allowing the bar to build rebuilt while the buff is still active is a decent approach.  A high +Recharge build would find that much easier than not, so an existing Permadom *probably* wouldn't find this too bad ** See Below though **

 

Admittedly, I say this in part because my Dom is a Villian, and I have the Villian alignment power as an "oh crap, fill my bar now" backup, and I can still use that to start off any given mission with.  If I were blueside, I might be more hesitant to think about it. 

 

 ** It might require adjustments to how fast the bar fills though. I have no fear that I could fill the bar to max before it runs out when soloing.  but in a team when lots of other players are melting spawns, it could get dicer. I don't think you're aiming for a change that would effective discourage Dom's from teaming AT ALL, but the abilty to recharge the bar on teams would need to be evaluated.

[Replacement]

23 minutes ago, Vanden said:

No, no I don't think this is a good idea.

 

Absurd. A permadom outperforms any character with basic enhancing by a wide margin.

 

People don't like that aspect of Dominators, how is maintaining that a pro?

 

How is that different from building for the defense softcap?

 

This section just doesn't make sense. The only click a permadom needs is Domination, and they probably have Hasten, too. That's two clicks. Two is too many?

Your responses... confuse me.  

• If Permadom outperforms *any* character, you are still agreeing with me on everything but where the benchmark should be.  You should still want this stark binary eliminated.
• The Jekyll/Hyde thing is about maintaining current playstyle expectations.  The suggested change** would allow those players to still have that while reducing the pressure on players who do not.
• Defense softcap affects everyone.  Honestly, I am really struggling with you, here.  Anyway, that's basically this:

  23 minutes ago, Replacement said:

  Other ATs have to sacrifice flavor for power too!"

  Yes, but the difference isn't anywhere this significant.  A Scrapper can pick up Boggle or Touch of Fear, maybe waste a couple of pool picks on flavor, and still be extremely strong.  Contrast: Dominators basically have most of their power pools spoken for.  In turn, their hyper-low recharges on "normal" powers reduces them to only needing (or in the min/max world: WANTING) a tiny handful of their primary/secondary powers in their actual rotation.

• By "Click" I meant literally every power you click - you seem to think I'm talking about Duration clicks.  I mean Cinders and Smite and Ice Slick and Mental Blast, etc.  Literally, "all the buttons I have to keep clicking on."

Seriously.  None of this is relevant to the fact that Domination is a binary needs destroyed.

 

**My suggestion was also just a suggestion.  It should be clear it was not the point of my OP.  I'll go ahead and edit in some verbiage here, but I want people to focus on the Subject line of this thread.

Edited April 15, 2020 by Replacement

[KelvinKole]

All other reasons aside, I think it's important to remember that the game is supposed to be balanced around SOs, and a Dom under those circumstances can't influence the recharge of Domination in even remotely the same way. Most should agree, that an SO Dom is not very good; they have too many powers to juggle, with virtually no inherent defenses, and can't reliably lock anything down out of Domination. 

 

The suggested change seems to make sense to me. An active Dominator should be able to refill their bar before the buff expires. Rate adjustments may need to be made, but the concept is a fine one. 

[Replacement]

6 minutes ago, MTeague said:

Well, do be aware that many players ARE strongly opinionated, and you're probably going to get those opinions whether or not you welcome them.

 

I'm willing to talk turkey, because I have seen people who really don't want to muck about with sets struggle to figure out how viable a Dominator can be for them.  And I've generally said, "Look... you can play a Dominator.... and while it is up, your Domination will be just as strong as mine.... but there's no sugar coating it, it's a night-and-day performance difference when it's up vs down, and you'll have to deal with that."   

 

And I didn't really like that, because, the subtext of my message felt like I was saying "Don't bother".

And well, it felt like saying that because i partially WAS saying that.

 

But it's also true there's a Night-And-Day difference between a Scrapper who's kitted out to the nine's with set bonuses and one with only SO's.  Or a blaster with a long list of set bonuses and one with only SO's.  Or a Brute with the set bonuses and a brute without.   Anyone who's expecting to solo steamroll +4/x8 without fully buildling for it is deluding themselves. 

 

ALL of that said.  I think the idea of allowing the bar to build rebuilt while the buff is still active is a decent approach.  A high +Recharge build would find that much easier than not, so an existing Permadom *probably* wouldn't find this too bad ** See Below though **

 

Admittedly, I say this in part because my Dom is a Villian, and I have the Villian alignment power as an "oh crap, fill my bar now" backup, and I can still use that to start off any given mission with.  If I were blueside, I might be more hesitant to think about it. 

 

 ** It might require adjustments to how fast the bar fills though. I have no fear that I could fill the bar to max before it runs out when soloing.  but in a team when lots of other players are melting spawns, it could get dicer. I don't think you're aiming for a change that would effective discourage Dom's from teaming AT ALL, but the abilty to recharge the bar on teams would need to be evaluated.

You will notice that if such a change happened, we would actually be able to have discussions about adjusting the rate at which Domination fills.  With the current status quo, I don't think that's even on the table. 

 

I had actually considered that it might require something similar to the "Villain" power to refill the bar in dire situations for other alignments, but I really think adjustments to the fill rate (probably including a modifier for team size) is the better place to start. 

 

The thing about comparing Dom:Permadom to SO:IO is simply one of vastness.  Brutes go from Scrapper survival to full Tanker levels, and that is nothing compared to Dom->Permadom.  Even Kheldians require less work - and they're intentionally designed for "Veteran" players!

 

So what about more radical changes, like Domination As A Toggle?  Would that make you walk away from your Dominators?  Build more?  

14 minutes ago, KelvinKole said:

All other reasons aside, I think it's important to remember that the game is supposed to be balanced around SOs, and a Dom under those circumstances can't influence the recharge of Domination in even remotely the same way. Most should agree, that an SO Dom is not very good; they have too many powers to juggle, with virtually no inherent defenses, and can't reliably lock anything down out of Domination. 

 

The suggested change seems to make sense to me. An active Dominator should be able to refill their bar before the buff expires. Rate adjustments may need to be made, but the concept is a fine one. 

Thank you, that's a really good way to put it.  I think this does a better job of describing my "basic enhancing" issue that @Vanden took issue with.

[Vanden]

15 minutes ago, Replacement said:

If Permadom outperforms *any* character, you are still agreeing with me on everything but where the benchmark should be.  You should still want this stark binary eliminated.

A permadom is a heavily IOed character. Any character IOed to the nines will outperform any character with only basic enhancing.

 

16 minutes ago, Replacement said:

Defense softcap affects everyone.  Honestly, I am really struggling with you, here.

Anyone who builds for defense softcap is grabbing a lot of the same powers and IOs as anyone else doing the same. You talk about Dominators building for permadom making similar choices to each other like it's something you only see on Dominators, when it's really a phenomenon you see across all builds and ATs.

 

22 minutes ago, KelvinKole said:

Most should agree, that an SO Dom is not very good; they have too many powers to juggle, with virtually no inherent defenses, and can't reliably lock anything down out of Domination.

How much of this isn't also true of Controllers? Outside of a handful of Buff sets, they also have no defenses and their controls are exactly the same as Dominators with the exception of an unreliable chance of +1 mez magnitude.

[Nanolathe]

Opinions aside (I think introducing Global Recharge to the game was a mistake, including hasten as it currently operates), I would prefer to see the AT re-balanced to the point where Domination feels like an incredible boost, but outside of it the Dominator is still fully capable of doing its job - Lockdown first, DPS second.

 

I'd like to see more uses of "timed toggle" style powers that, in this case would let the player decide when they want/need a boost, and when they don't. It would need an increase to the Dominator's base capability, but it would then allow the Domination power really, really shine. And since you would never be able to perma a timed toggle the scale of recharge bonus becomes one of small incremental advantage, rather than a "you either have it or you don't".

 

But these opinions will probably never be acted on because of the attachment players have to their character or play style being taken away from them. It would upset people... and it only might make other people happier.

[Replacement]

@Vanden Do you believe Permadom as it stands is perfect and healthy? 

(clarity edit: I mean that it exists and is unachievable without severe IOing, see below)

 

Do you think it is fine that one AT has such a huge binary in its performance, totally cut off from all but people who have mastered the system?

 

Do you think it is fine that in addition to the soft-cap struggles everyone else has, Dominators must also give up all their power and IO choices in pursuit of Global Recharge?

Edited April 15, 2020 by Replacement

[ShardWarrior]

58 minutes ago, Replacement said:

I figure now is the time to post this, now that I'm on my last shred of willingness to fight with people who just "nope" anything that will improve this game. 

The idea of what is or is not an "improvement" is going to vary greatly among the players.  Personally, I have not built any of my Dominators to be Permadoms and quite frankly I think they perform just fine as is. 

[Replacement]

Just now, ShardWarrior said:

The idea of what is or is not an "improvement" is going to vary greatly among the players.  Personally, I have not built any of my Dominators to be Permadoms and quite frankly I think they perform just fine as is. 

Annnnnnd my suggestion wouldn't impact you at all, while improving the game for many others so... you wouldn't have any reason to shoot it down.

[MTeague]

11 minutes ago, Replacement said:

@Vanden Do you believe Permadom as it stands is perfect and healthy? 

 

Do you think it is fine that one AT has such a huge binary in its performance, totally cut off from all but people who have mastered the system?

 

Do you think it is fine that in addition to the soft-cap struggles everyone else has, Dominators must also give up all their power and IO choices in pursuit of Global Recharge?

Even though the question was not aimed at me, I'll offer my $0.02 anyway.

 

Yes, I think permadom as it stands is right in line with the rest of the game as it stands now.  When Blasters can softcap all their defenses and have no end struggles and just melt everything at virtually no risk to themselves, yes, I think Permadom is not an out-of-bounds level of power to be obtainable.  Both require MASSIVE slotting of IO sets to achieve, so i see no qualitative difference between a) and b).  I understand that you do see such a difference. I do not. 

 

I also don't accept that a Dominator must give up all power and IO choices.  I actually had NO IDEA what to to with my lvl 47 power selection or my lvl 49 power selection. I have every power I wanted.  If I could have declined those power choices entirely in favor of 3 additional slots, I'd have done it in a heartbeat.   At no point did I feel "forced" to choose anything. 

 

Now, is my Dom softcapped?  No.  Her defenses are about 27% melee and 29% ranged.  But given how fast she locks things down, it's really not an issue.  I don't have to dodge many attacks for very long. And since I'm Plant / Psi, with both a six-slotted Tree of Life (a "fun" power but skipped by many) and Drain Psyche, I have no trouble keeping her at full health / mana as she goes about merrily destroying away.

 

I am willing to talk about how could Dominators be made more fun for those who only use SO's.

But I do not think Permadom is any more "broken" or "unhealthy for the game" than I think it is to allow blasters or defenders or corruptors to be softcapped for all defenses.  

 

It's all part and parcel of the SAME power creep from the SAME source.  Set Bonuses. 

Edited April 15, 2020 by MTeague
grammar correction

[Nanolathe]

Just now, Replacement said:

Do you think it is fine that in addition to the soft-cap struggles everyone else has, Dominators must also give up all their power and IO choices in pursuit of Global Recharge?

Sorry to hijack the question directed at someone else, but, the way I see it is in exactly the same vein as Enhancement Diversification. You're saying that the game would be better if people we not just allowed to diversify their build (which they can do if they want to underperform) but rather force people to diversify their build... and essentially be forced to "underperform" compared to how they are now.

 

Would this be healthier for the game?.. That's the crux of the problem. Opinions on that issue.

Personally? Hell yes it would be healthier for the game I play, as I value anything promotes player choice and levels the playing field whilst allowing the player to decide their specialisation.

 

Players can diversify their IO sets now, that is a choice they can make, it's just that anything less than Permadom is running at less than optimal at the highest level of play. You don't have the choice of playing a Dom at a high level, unless you have Permadom.

[KelvinKole]

24 minutes ago, Vanden said:

How much of this isn't also true of Controllers? Outside of a handful of Buff sets, they also have no defenses and their controls are exactly the same as Dominators with the exception of an unreliable chance of +1 mez magnitude.

I didn't attempt to draw any comparisons. Most of it applies to Controllers too, who could also use a buff but that's discussion for another thread. Controllers actually get access to debuffs, buffs, and heals though and are therfore typically more stable. They kill slowly, but very safely. 

[Replacement]

4 minutes ago, MTeague said:

Yes, I think permadom as it stands is right in line with the rest of the game as it stands now.  When Blasters can softcap all their defenses and have no end struggles and just melt everything at virtually no risk to themselves, yes, I think Permadom is not an out-of-bounds level of power to be obtainable.  Both require MASSIVE slotting of IO sets to achieve, so i see no qualitative difference between a) and b).  I understand that you do see such a difference. I do not. 

<SNIP>

Misunderstanding: I am not asking if Permadom is too powerful in its own right.  

 

I am saying: do you think it's fine and healthy that some players can be permadom, and others are not?

 

Do you think it's fine for the AT to have most of its strength locked to such a degree?

 

It is obvious I do not think this is good.  It is horrible, in fact.

 

Either

a) You think Permadom is overpowered.  You should support my proposal to remove the binary.

OR

b) you think Permadom is just fine.  This means non-permadom is an abyss of poor performance.  You should thus support my proposal to remove the binary so we can begin to bridge the gap.

 

Anyone who thinks there exists an option between this, like "Dominators are fine regardless" is just not looking at the data.  They are not seeing the vast difference that no other AT must suffer through.

 

("You" is not necessarily MTeague, to be clear.)

[Yomo Kimyata]

1 hour ago, Replacement said:

I figure now is the time to post this, now that I'm on my last shred of willingness to fight with people who just "nope" anything that will improve this game.  I made this topic because I truly believe Dominators should be accessible to all player types.

 

 

I was all warmed up and ready for a "nope" until I actually read your post and realized it was calling for a nerf.  Yeah, I'm good with that.  I'm not super familiar with dominators but I have a few in their mid-30s that are easily soloing +2/x3 content and I expect to up that to +4 shortly.  Currently I only use domination for boss and AV fights, so perma-dom seems excessive and "easy mode" to me.

 

But, in general, I will support most nerfs to this game.  Anything to add more of a challenge.

[MTeague]

I may just have to agree to disagree with you. 

 

I really don't see the question any different from "Some blasters can softcap all defenses by slotting careful with IO's.  Other blasters cannot because they only use SO's.  And therfore they die a lot more and they're glass cannons compared to tricked-out Blasters". 

 

Because really what makes the tricked out blaster so powerful there is NOT DYING.  Being able to charge heedlessly ahead of the team or in a different direction from the team and not care.  That is only achieveable via massive expenditures of IO's, just like Permadom. 

 

So I do not feel that I can call one into question without the other.

[Obitus]

20 minutes ago, MTeague said:

Yes, I think permadom as it stands is right in line with the rest of the game as it stands now.  When Blasters can softcap all their defenses

Just a quibble, but Blasters generally soft-cap to one position (Ranged) or two types (Smash/Lethal).  You'll occasionally see someone soft-cap to Energy too (requires Scorpion Shield), but Ranged versus Smash/Lethal is the stereotypical dilemma. 

 

Soft-capping to Ranged is generally safer, but it A) requires more IO set bonuses, because you can't lean on your Patron/Epic armor, B) more-or-less requires you to eschew potent melee-range abilities.  On the upside, the Ranged DEF approach also allows you to layer the DEF with some resistance from a Patron/Epic shield.  Neither approach to Blaster defense won't see you frequently get killed, either due to cascade failure (DEF debuffs), or just good old fashioned burst damage from a uncovered position/type.

 

I basically agree with your position in this thread, but the notion that Blasters can turn themselves into defensive juggernauts passes so often without objection that I felt compelled to respond.  IO'd Blasters can be quite survivable, but even in the best case their defenses are far from comprehensive.

 

By the way, and possibly to your point, it is entirely possible for a Dominator to achieve perma-Dom and soft-cap in a similar fashion to Blasters (one type, or two positions).

Edited April 15, 2020 by Obitus

[Replacement]

9 minutes ago, Nanolathe said:

Sorry to hijack the question directed at someone else, but, the way I see it is in exactly the same vein as Enhancement Diversification. You're saying that the game would be better if people we not just allowed to diversify their build (which they can do if they want to underperform) but rather force people to diversify their build... and essentially be forced to "underperform" compared to how they are now.

 

Would this be healthier for the game?.. That's the crux of the problem. Opinions on that issue.

Personally? Hell yes it would be healthier for the game I play, as I value anything promotes player choice and levels the playing field whilst allowing the player to decide their specialisation.

 

Players can diversify their IO sets now, that is a choice they can make, it's just that anything less than Permadom is running at less than optimal at the highest level of play. You don't have the choice of playing a Dom at a high level, unless you have Permadom.

All good.  About this particularly, I'm a bit confused on the wording in your first paragraph but I think my response is: 

there will always be a benefit to building certain 'meta' ways, but no other AT must suffer as big a gap in performance as Dominator.  And that's not fair to Dominator.

 

As for game health... I literally am incapable of seeing a downside to adjusting Domination outside of player pride.  Much like the Fast-snipe changes - we got rid of a mechanic that was opaque and exclusionary.   The only people sad were the people who enjoyed it because they liked the reward of flexing their game knowledge.  

 

I actually do think Controllers could receive some love, btw.  But Support is powerful, and a lot of Domination's power is really just "overcoming my lack of Support" with stuff like mez protection.  They do not have this crazy grand canyon of performance they need to cross over.

[Replacement]

1 hour ago, MTeague said:

I may just have to agree to disagree with you. 

 

I really don't see the question any different from "Some blasters can softcap all defenses by slotting careful with IO's.  Other blasters cannot because they only use SO's.  And therfore they die a lot more and they're glass cannons compared to tricked-out Blasters". 

 

Because really what makes the tricked out blaster so powerful there is NOT DYING.  Being able to charge heedlessly ahead of the team or in a different direction from the team and not care.  That is only achieveable via massive expenditures of IO's, just like Permadom. 

 

So I do not feel that I can call one into question without the other.

That's fine.  I'm liking your opinion a lot, here.  But before I sign off on the "agree to disagree" I want to make sure I'm clear on my position because I'm not sold you do disagree with it entirely:

 

A blaster who isn't soft-capped is still damn fun.  Still very effective, feels like they are doing their job.

A blaster at 44% Ranged defense is not half as strong at survival and output as a blaster at 45% defense.

 

A dominator is an imitation of a perma-dominator.

A dominator 1 second short of perma-domination is half as effective as a perma-dominator.  Because of the rest of their kit, this includes offense and defense.

 

We are free to disagree on the details, but this is the crux of my entire argument.  This is a bad binary.

Edited April 15, 2020 by Replacement

[Nanolathe]

11 minutes ago, Replacement said:

All good.  About this particularly, I'm a bit confused on the wording in your first paragraph but I think my response is: 

there will always be a benefit to building certain 'meta' ways, but no other AT must suffer as big a gap in performance as Dominator.  And that's not fair to Dominator.

I won't pretend I'm knowledgeable enough about the game to either confirm or deny that claim. It's probably hyperbole... but I don't know enough about the exact variables to make a judgement call on that. (build cost, power selection, IO set selection and its influence on the two former points)

Maybe you're right. It's not my horse race though, since I don't actively play Dominators. What I care about is IO set bonuses warping the meta for everything. 

 

I wish sets came with bonuses -and- downsides, beyond just the opportunity cost of a different set. I like to think of specialisation and generalisation as two ends of a spectrum... but the set bonuses for some IOs, for certain ATs seem to imply the former, while actually being a gateway to the latter. Total solo capability. Increase survival time and decrease time to kill.

Edited April 15, 2020 by Nanolathe

[Outrider_01]

1 hour ago, Replacement said:

I made this topic because I truly believe Dominators should be accessible to all player types.

 

They are, at selection.

1 hour ago, Replacement said:

If you love your Dominator just the way it is, you're probably building it the same way as every other good Dominator build: Permadom.

Itsn't required, thats a choice.

1 hour ago, Replacement said:

Dominator has to make powergame choices if it wants to compete at a level that many other ATs simply get to

Any AT does that, but it isn't required.

1 hour ago, Replacement said:

If you balance the class around the assumption of Permadom,

Yeah, like you are.  Again, no one has to build around it.  It isn't a requirement, its a choice.

1 hour ago, Replacement said:

There are many ways to fix this and I would support many of them. 

Of course you would, you start off with a lot.

1 hour ago, Replacement said:

My goal is for players who are even worse than me (a low bar, indeed) to not feel like an entire AT is locked to them for not having the ability or interest in system mastery. 

My goal is for players to be able to choose the powers they like without the AT punishing them for it.

Uh, lets see.  Player choice, player's playstyle.  Thats theirs, yours is yours.  There is no way you are being punished by an AT (which makes no sense what so ever), if you want Permadon or not.

 

It is yours, by your effort to achieve a build.  You give up for one thing, you get what you want while lacking something else.  You don't want it?  Don't build for it?  How is that a problem exactly, that is player choice.  Not your assumption opinion of a secondary benefit of IO set bonuses, powers/inherents are designed without them in mind.  Its the player who figures out how to achieve the impossible

49 minutes ago, Replacement said:

nnnnnnd my suggestion wouldn't impact you at all, while improving the game for many others so... you wouldn't have any reason to shoot it down.

Annnnnnd your suggestion will impact someone else, who would shut it down.

34 minutes ago, Replacement said:

I am saying: do you think it's fine and healthy that some players can be permadom, and others are not?

 

Do you think it's fine for the AT to have most of its strength locked to such a degree?

 

It is obvious I do not think this is good.  It is horrible, in fact.

Permadon?  Whats this.....

 

Oh, my bad.  Built a theoritcal Mids builds that made Dark/Ice have 41%-ish soft cap across the bored; less Psi/Toxic.  8/9 Primary, 4 secondary with your standand FOTM power pools for defense.  Stack a P2W 5% buff, I got SR like defense (sorta).  Domination is 64 second recharge, with Incarnate.  I have no idea if thats Perma, probably not but it will be back up fast and I gave up the option for defense.  That was my choice, no I am not punishing myself because I went a different route.  Also gonna redo this build one day, see if defense is achieveable in a different way and get PermaDom.

34 minutes ago, Replacement said:

Anyone who thinks there exists an option between this, like "Dominators are fine regardless" is just not looking at the data.  They are not seeing the vast difference that no other AT must suffer through.

Did you look at the data you are pushing?  Seems biased, as you are assuming Perma Domination is forced a point of view.  That point of view is popular, doesn't mean its the only one.  Its up to the player.  Farm Brutes; many different build picks of primary/secondary yet not everyone picks Spines/Fire or Rad/Fire.... no different than building for Perma Domination, it is player choice.  Is it a FoTM and popular build type that is vastly superior?  That is up to the person building it.

 

Perma Domination or Not, you come off as if its "Broken" some players can achieve it while others cannot?  Are they trying or are you assuming that Perma Dom is the only way?  If you find its a problem because people can't achieve it, why not just nerf the f*ck out of it using the Issue 4 method.........5 minute recharge, 60 sec duration, unenhancable recharge from global effects.  Done, now its a burst for the moment power.  Now you use your noggin on when to apply it instead of it being running 24/7 with a quick jump start, you can't achieve something and feel left out when everyone gets left out.

 

I am not exactly against the idea, I just think your premise is one sided.  Not everyone sees it the same way, feels the need to build a specific way, and it is your choice on how you build.  Not up to the same performance?  Who cares, its all in the head.

 

Edited April 15, 2020 by Outrider_01

[Replacement]

@Outrider_01 I hope you had fun with that. 

 

Simple question for you:

Is it a good design decision that if you are 1 second short of permadom, you are at least half as strong as a Dominator with permadom?

 

I do not give a shit about how much you are trying to cast me as unlikeable and flawed.  Tell me how that is a good design decision.  Tell me how it makes it an appealing AT for casual players who have no idea what they're in for.

 

EDIT: @Yomo Kimyata I would like to have your vote, but it's not much of a nerf.  My "easiest" suggestion would be an invisible nerf to current high-end builds (it would nerf them during travel time and party downtime and that's really it), while buffing builds that fall short of perma.

 

 

Edited April 15, 2020 by Replacement

[SeraphimKensai]

Personally as someone over the years who has had 6 Permadoms, 3 here on Everlasting I wouldn't change the Domination aspect.

 

Though I do agree there are a lot of useless click powers. Perhaps changing a power in all the secondaries in the breath of blaster sustains is surely more useful than adjusting Domination. As they are now, Drain Psyche by itself sets /psi apart from any other dominator secondary by leaps and bounds.