Monos King & Galaxy Brain's Mastermind Changes

[plainguy]

Lots of great stuff across the boards here. Just very good discussion and debated ideas going on. I hope the Devs are reading this stuff.

 

I agree with small changes as well as was mentioned by Redlynne. 

 

It seems as if the Original Developers just lost control and eventually just went with what felt right. 

I always thought there would be some formula that said 1 BASE point of damage equals  X amount of Endurance based on a certain amount of recharge.. Then everything extrapolated from there..  Cone damage added so much to endurance based on size. AOE damage added endurance based on size, Recharge, debuff cost added endurance cost, ETC.. ETC.. ETC.. 

Then add some modifier based on Arch Type. So a Blaster using a ranged type of attack would pay less Endurance wise then lets say a Mastermind for the same attack because they are the Blaster and that is their forte ( Duh).. 

 

The UNIQUE Control Ability of Masterminds on their pets is diminished when a VEAT Crab;

1. Has 6 pets on Perma or close to perma  ( 10 seconds above recharge)

2. 3 AOE attacks, 1 Cone, 1 single and 1 AOE hold.

3. Full positional defense cap

4. Resistance numbers  between 40% to 60% to all damage excluding Psi. 

5. A Self Heal

 

I don't want to sound foolish here, but if Masterminds are about having Pets then NO other Arch Types should have equal or more pets than them. 

Who cares if I can change all my pet stances from stay, goto, aggressive, ETC  if an Arachnos Solider Crab spec can have same amount of pets and still do more than a Mastermind WITHOUT THE PETS.

 

• Tier one pets need to be improved.
• Endurance needs to be fixed. 
• Pet upgrades should be inherit based on the Mastermind level and the pets should just come out upgraded. I know more at level 42 then I did level 12.  CRAB VEAT  gets 6 fully ready to go pets, why shouldn't I as a Mastermind get that.
• 2 less upgrades to worry about means 2 more attacks - At least now I am close to matching that CRAB VEAT.
• Revamp off Mastermind Attacks.
• The Heal for all Masterminds should be usable on everyone, including themselves.

 

Personally I think Masterminds need a full re-vamp.

1. All Masterminds given a Unique AURA based on the set that is picked.  This is AURA is basically how this Tactician thinks.  He is the Mastermind right.. He is the person on the team either via pets or teammate wise Orchestrating the team. Blaster Flank Left, Tank Take on the boss, Corruptor attack from the sky, Controller Hold back those mobs. Defenders support the Tank.
   • All Masterminds have a base Aura that is common among all Masterminds but then increases and becomes signature based on the set. 
2. Masterminds should have the option to take less number of pet BUT must be required to take at least one Tier of Pet. 
   • The Aura increases based on the number of Tiers NOT taken.  This is done to enhance the existing pets strengths and to shore up their weaknesses
   • This Aura is mainly for pets but maybe a portion is passed over to the rest of the team. 
   • Less pets means less work for the mastermind thus more time he has to exude his power and control over the existing pets.
   • This concept works well when working with the Tier 3 pet as one Super Pet concept several were interested in. Thus its a Super Hero/Villain and his side kick. EG Batman and Robbin.
   • This pet option is based on the build as there are 3 builds a Player can choose from that can only be changed at a trainer. Thus giving some control and preventing any sort of abuse on the system.
3. Less pets means more attacks, maybe even Signature attacks. You just gave up the option to pick up another Pet/Minion.
   • Why not give you something cool and interesting for giving up that option. 
4. Less pets mean the leveling scheme for the pets would have to change.  Example only taking the Tier one pets mean they would have to be bumped up level wise as well.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 12, 2020 by plainguy

[tidge]

Crabberminds are in a very different space than Masterminds. A few points about Crabberminds:

• Crabberminds don't have MM control of the pets, and cannot put them in Bodyguard mode.
• Crabbermind pets (not the Patron, which I haven't tested for this effect), don't go on a new timer when refilling the ranks, even when the recharge is faster than 4 minutes. That is, if you lose a T1 (Spiderling) or a T2 (Disruptor) and cast the resummon, the newly summoned pets will disappear with the originals.(*1)
• As a corollary, Crabbermind pets don't stick around like the T1, T2, T3 Mastermind pets. They also aren't upgradable; the Spiderlings only ever have 2 attacks.

 

If you want some lulz, read the archived thread about Arachnos Soldier VEAT where folks were complaining how they wanted Crabberminds to be more like Masterminds!

 

(*1) This is to say, Crabbermind pets can never really be "perma", the best you can do is summon them immediately after the 4 minute timer expires.

Edited May 12, 2020 by tidge
added footnote

[Redlynne]

1 hour ago, plainguy said:

The UNIQUE Control Ability of Masterminds on their pets is diminished when a VEAT Crab

 

I don't want to sound foolish here, but if Masterminds are about having Pets then NO other Arch Types should have equal or more pets than them. 

Who cares if I can change all my pet stances from stay, goto, aggressive, ETC  if an Arachnos Solider Crab spec can have same amount of pets and still do more than a Mastermind WITHOUT THE PETS.

I see your objections ... and honestly think they are misplaced.

 

Yes, Crab Soldiers can approach the Quantity of Pets that a Mastermind can ride herd on ... but the QUALITY of the Pets a Crab Soldier can summon is pretty craptacular compared to Masterminds.  Crab Soldier Pets are pretty much the textbook picture of Cannon Fodder.

 

Also, Crab Soldier Pets are pretty darn suicidal in their behavior, because they are permanently in Aggressive Stance ... meaning they are cats you're trying to ride herd on.  They are "badly behaved" compared to how much command and control Masterminds have over their Pets.

 

Sure, if you're just looking at a spreadsheet that's only calculating damage in a vacuum for you, Crab Soldier might LOOK better ... but it isn't ACTUALLY better in actual gameplay compared to how a Mastermind both plays and strategizes.

[plainguy]

24 minutes ago, tidge said:

Crabberminds are in a very different space than Masterminds. A few points about Crabberminds:

• Crabberminds don't have MM control of the pets, and cannot put them in Bodyguard mode.
• Crabbermind pets (not the Patron, which I haven't tested for this effect), don't go on a new timer when refilling the ranks, even when the recharge is faster than 4 minutes. That is, if you lose a T1 (Spiderling) or a T2 (Disruptor) and cast the resummon, the newly summoned pets will disappear with the originals.(*1)
• As a corollary, Crabbermind pets don't stick around like the T1, T2, T3 Mastermind pets. They also aren't upgradable; the Spiderlings only ever have 2 attacks.

 

If you want some lulz, read the archived thread about Arachnos Soldier VEAT where folks were complaining how they wanted Crabberminds to be more like Masterminds!

 

(*1) This is to say, Crabbermind pets can never really be "perma", the best you can do is summon them immediately after the 4 minute timer expires.

You are correct they are replaced if resummoned.

As I mentioned Having 5 attacks - 3 aoe, 1 cone, 1 single, 1 aoe hold 

Being fully defense capped and not needing Pets to survive ( depending on your mastermind build, EG My robot traps can survive without the pets if needed. ) sort of beats out bodyguard mode and/or having more finite controls over a pet.  Only recently have the pet controls actually been changed to have some better value then they did when the game was live those years ago.   

Perma in the sense the Recharge equals or exceeds the duration. 

I completely concede that a bad pull could wipe out the pets within the first 10 seconds.  

But then again a "Crabbermind" does not need his pets in the first place. A mastermind again pretty much does, again based on the build. 

 

 

If I can pick up the aggro before the pet summon the pets will last a few fights. Which pretty much is the process. You start the fight, get aggro, Drop the pets, clear the mobs, Move to the next set. Loose a few pets, recharge is almost up, resummon new pets, move to next fight, resummon next set of pets, ETC.. ETC..  

Of course they cannot be upgraded but then again I don't need to waste a power upgraded them either. The 5 attacks I get makes up for the upgrade.  Your assumption would have to be that all or most masterminds pick almost all their primary attacks. Which as you know they clearly don't.  A simple review of the builds listed on the masterminds forums clearly shows that.. 

Further Endurance wise you couldn't even run those 3 attacks on a steady basis anyways.  Yet again having 8 or 9 petless masterminds I am speaking from place of facts. 

 

If  we are just going to look at a small corner of masterminds build and not the overall work then yes, you are correct.  But if you look at the totality there is a Arch Type that comes pretty close to mimicking Masterminds and has better overall numbers HP wise, Attack, endurance cost, better chance of getting defense and resistance caps when compared to Masterminds.  The ability to have some finite control over pets becomes lack luster.

 

 

[plainguy]

15 minutes ago, Redlynne said:

I see your objections ... and honestly think they are misplaced.

 

Yes, Crab Soldiers can approach the Quantity of Pets that a Mastermind can ride herd on ... but the QUALITY of the Pets a Crab Soldier can summon is pretty craptacular compared to Masterminds.  Crab Soldier Pets are pretty much the textbook picture of Cannon Fodder.

 

Also, Crab Soldier Pets are pretty darn suicidal in their behavior, because they are permanently in Aggressive Stance ... meaning they are cats you're trying to ride herd on.  They are "badly behaved" compared to how much command and control Masterminds have over their Pets.

 

Sure, if you're just looking at a spreadsheet that's only calculating damage in a vacuum for you, Crab Soldier might LOOK better ... but it isn't ACTUALLY better in actual gameplay compared to how a Mastermind both plays and strategizes.

I disagree on your last statement.

 

A Crab solider can play on without the pets. A mastermind can't.  Again based on build. 

Again very easily tested. 

Make a petless mastermind no IOs  and make Crab Solider with a build based around pets but no IOs and just use the attacks.  Lets see who last the longest against a group of mobs. Again based on my experience with Petless masterminds I know the mastermind will loose. You would run out of endurance after 4 or 5 attacks. 

 

Further if you pull mobs "strategically" with a Crab Solider you can get decent life out of your pets to have one set up in a cycle of re-summoning. 

Its not like your pets run ahead of you.

 

But again you can do it without the pets. 

Its not like I am running 3/8 on my Crab and then suddenly stop waiting for pets to recharge because of a bad pet wipe for example.  As if I cannot continue on. 

Again as I mentioned in another response. If you are looking at a small corner of the mastermind build then yes on a pet per pet comparison. But this thread isn't just about pets.. It many other parts of the mastermind as well.  When we add up all those parts the Crabbermind  with everything else it can do makes the unique pet control ability of masterminds seem somewhat weak at least in my eyes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Monos King]

45 minutes ago, plainguy said:

But again you can do it without the pets. 

Its not like I am running 3/8 on my Crab and then suddenly stop waiting for pets to recharge because of a bad pet wipe for example.  As if I cannot continue on. 

Again as I mentioned in another response. If you are looking at a small corner of the mastermind build then yes on a pet per pet comparison. But this thread isn't just about pets.. It many other parts of the mastermind as well.  When we add up all those parts the Crabbermind  with everything else it can do makes the unique pet control ability of masterminds seem somewhat weak at least in my eyes.

The Crabbermind plays very different to a mastermind, and I think they would be a cool format for a different AT or a new wave of mastermind primaries, an opinion I share with your MM revamp ideas which I'm definitely a fan of. But crabbermind are very different, have different strengths and weaknesses, and while pets are up, are most certainly not tankier than even current masterminds.

 

1. They don't have body guard mode (far far far FAR squisher)
2. They don't have an assortment of debuffs and buffs from the pets
3. The pets are not self sufficient
4. The pets are not permanent without enormous recharge
5. The pets are not easily resummonable
6. The pets suffer the same level difference issue as mastermind pets
7. The pets are not controllable
8. The pets recieve no supremacy
9. The pets cannot be buffed or protected by a secondary devoted to it.

These are totally fine because arachnos soldiers are wholly self sufficient and have pets as an added cool factor that can play for great performance, but they are not at all more potent of a pet set than masterminds. The pets die way faster than even mastermind pets under pressure, which is hilarious considering each of the spider pets have health maybe two hp shy of a masterminds strongest pet; even the spiderlings. But that is okay because as you noted, the crabber is totally powerful on its own. But it is a very different set, that just happens to have a lot of pets. Illusion/dark and dark/elec trolls are another example of a pseudo MM, but they are completely incomparable.  Also:

1 hour ago, plainguy said:

A mastermind again pretty much does, again based on the build. 

Nah, every MM needs their pets 100% period no exceptions. You could consider than an issue on it's own, but it is through and through a pet AT.

 

Crabs might be able to do more things than masterminds, but so can every AT. Only a hyper built super MM can contend with the other ATs, and then only in a few limited scenarios exclusive to a few very potent primary/secondary combinations. That's kind of what we're all up in arms about. It has little to do with the crabs being better with pets and everything to do with the MM issues we're trying to get fixed now. But as far as actually being a pet set, not a chance is a crab better. And an absolutely elite MM will do things like farm and AV kill superior to an elite crabbermind, due to its tankiness with the right set.

Edited May 12, 2020 by Monos King

[tidge]

I want to add that (IMHO) Crabberminds are a niche build. I have one as one of my Soldier VEATs. Building a 4-minute pet-summoning Crabbermind is very different than building any other AT with a pet; the closest another AT with no 'pets' in a primary/secondary could get would be a completely non-pet toon trying to keep a Patron pet up every 4-minutes. Many compromises go into a Crabbermind build:

• VEAT only have access to the Patron pools. Of course this is where the even-level pet comes from, but a Crabbermind (high recharge, extra slots) with Bonfire would be crazy good on many maps.
• I believe the earliest levels to get the summons are 35 (Spiderlings), 38 (Disruptors) and 47 (Patron). Getting a Patron pet requires two other Patron pool choices. General consensus is that in any given Patron pool only one of those two powers will be useful as an actual power, as opposed to a potential for IO set bonuses. YMMV.
• Pre-Incarnate, It is difficult (and requires power/slot compromises) to boost the survivability of the Crab pets. IIRC a Crabbermind is limited to the secondary Leadership powers, and power pools Leadership and Concealment for actual Defense buffs. Pet heals are only going to come from Medicine... I don't think you can even drag Inspirations onto these pets.
• The pursuit of enough Global Recharge to get below the 4-minute time for T2 and T3 is a full-build commitment. Mental Training and Hasten are a must. 5/6-slot bonuses for Global recharge are required. Even though the Crab pets can take IO sets from the non 'recharge intensive' pet category, in practice to  get the (Global) recharge each pet needs 4-slots of Expedient Reinforcement, leaving at best 6 slots for any of the 'aura' IO pieces.

The last bullet point is something of a sore-spot for me, because the heavy investment in slots for powers at level 35+ (27 on my Crabbermind) results in a toon that isn't nearly as durable as my no-pet Bane who has only 18 slots use in the level 35+ powers, and neither a Patron pool nor Hasten. I'm not against investing many slots in high level powers in principle, but at least on my Crabbermind build I feel like those slots are coming at a cost to the rest of the build.

[plainguy]

13 hours ago, tidge said:

 

The last bullet point is something of a sore-spot for me, because the heavy investment in slots for powers at level 35+ (27 on my Crabbermind) results in a toon that isn't nearly as durable as my no-pet Bane who has only 18 slots use in the level 35+ powers, and neither a Patron pool nor Hasten. I'm not against investing many slots in high level powers in principle, but at least on my Crabbermind build I feel like those slots are coming at a cost to the rest of the build.

I have 2 builds. One is 10 seconds off on the high recharge pets and the other build is on point.

 

The overall point is the most important thing masterminds need is their pets and its the most difficult thing to set up during a fight. 

Fill in your excuse for the pet wipe here, but once occurred to regroup is a pain in the backside. You summon your Tier one pets and they instantly drop. You summon the Tier two pets and one dies off. You summon your Tier 3 and your scrambling to keep it alive while you cast your upgrades hoping it doesn't die off.  Then your waiting for the recharge on your Tier two to be back up and you don't even bother with the Tier one until after the fight because its just not worth the endurance cost. 

 

Attack wise as was discussed, let me speak as the resident SME ( subject Matter Expert ) on Petless mastermind and say a mastermind cannot sustain any form of constant attack chain like other Arch Types with their attacks.  You just can't endurance wise..  So even if they decided to reduce the endurance cost on pet summoning and raised the level on tier one pets.. A mastermind still could not effectively attack along side their pets because you just can't due to the inflated price we pay for powers when compared to other Arch Types.

 

Personally I would like for the standard Mastermind build to be the same with some quality of life improvements, but also the option to have less pets and still be viable. 

 

What I would like right now

• Endurance to be reduced across the board for Masterminds. This would give the Mastermind the real option to be able to use attacks along side their pets
• Remove the pet upgrades and make them level inherit.  This gives the Mastermind either 2 one slotted powers If they like the current build they have OR a respec to pick up 2 more attacks and slot them accordingly.  Thus reworking their build. 
• Increase the Tier one pet level at least by 1 atm.

 

In the background

• Remove the power from the pets and make the pets more of  DPS vehicle for masterminds. Having Perma pets that stay until killed is already a great advantage for a pet and a player.
• Rework the bodyguard concept
• Give the masterminds the bonuses the pets give instead in the form of a Unique aura for each Mastermind Type which increase as he levels.  Pets get a big portion of the Aura and maybe a small percentage trickles down to teammates. This gives the PLAYER a value NOT his pet.. The player still have VALUE to the team even when his pets are gone.
  • Examples
    • Thug enforcer doesn't give out Maneuvers the mastermind does inherently in his aura. Thug picks up Maneuvers again from the Leadership pool and has double Maneuvers. 
    • Robot Protector bot doesn't give you a defense bubble, the mastermind aura just gives you extra defenses.  Remove the heal from Protector bots and give him a target immune healing drone. 
    • Demon mastermind gives out a resistance buff.
• The Mastermind must have at least one Pet but is not required to pick up any other pets. In replacement the Mastermind receives a unique signature power for forgoing a pet.  As the pets are picked up at certain levels these Unique signature powers would also be powerful based on the pet Tier they have given up. The power might even fall in line with the concept of the pet Tier. Again as an example The Tier 2 is usually a buffing type of pet. So forgoing the Tier 2 pet for a Unique Signature might be a buff or some sort of attack that buffs.  

This concept will help the debate over the concern of making the attack improvements that would be considered a must have powers, because you are forgoing a pet for a must have power.  Do I want a pet that might give me more constant dps that I don't have to worry about that much ? Or do I want that new cool power that I might use less in a attack chain cost me endurance each use but benefits me or the team in another way.

 

 

 

Edited May 13, 2020 by plainguy

[Naraka]

Something else I thought of while reading some of the posts:

 

I hear a lot of requests to reduce END costs and what not and it made me think of the changes to Tankers during Beta that was repealed, i.e. the +10 MaxEND (or was it +20?).  Thinking about patterns and such, who has the highest HP modifier?  Tankers.  Who has the lowest HP modifier?

 

Wouldn't it make sense for the AT with the lowest HP to have the highest base END?  And having the highest END isn't really going to enable them to outpace other ATs since they generally aren't needing to monitor their END consumption to stay upright (they just need to have some pets around).  I suggest this because it actually synergizes with both END redux slotting and +recovery.

[Redlynne]

17 minutes ago, plainguy said:

The overall point is the most important thing masterminds need is their pets and its the most difficult thing to set up during a fight.

Controllers and Dominators need their mez.

Scrappers and Stalkers need their crits.

Brutes need their fury.

Masterminds need their pets.

 

I'm not seeing the problem here.  A purpose build Pet Archetype needs their pets.  It's almost as if that was the point and the plan.

20 minutes ago, plainguy said:

Fill in your excuse for the pet wipe here, but once occurred to regroup is a pain in the backside. You summon your Tier one pets and they instantly drop. You summon the Tier two pets and one dies off. You summon your Tier 3 and your scrambling to keep it alive while you cast your upgrades hoping it doesn't die off.  Then your waiting for the recharge on your Tier two to be back up and you don't even bother with the Tier one until after the fight because its just not worth the endurance cost.

Ever heard of retreating?

He who fights and runs away lives to resummon (and upgrade and equip their) pets further away (and all that jazz) ...

 

Seriously.

If you're complaining that you can't resummon your pets on the fly in the middle of combat and have them live ... THAT'S ON YOU for being a lousy tactician as a Mastermind and picking a bad time AND a bad place to try and do your resummoning.  If your pets "fold" on you, the smart play is to ...

... and I shouldn't have to point out something as basic as that to you @plainguy.

 

That's kind of like not standing in Caltrops while trying to use an Interrupt power.  It kind of goes without saying.

Trying to summon replacement pets AND upgrade them AND buff them in the middle of active combat in which other pets have already fallen (due to taking too much damage) is kind of the poster child for Wrong Time+Wrong Place to try and do that.

 

Just retreat if that happens, preferably before all of your pets faceplant (so they can fight a rearguard for you), and if necessary leave them to die while your Mastermind gets away.  Once you have achieved the necessary measure of safety to be able to (optionally dismiss before you) resummon, upgrade and equip your replacement pets (and if you dismiss you'll have "fresh ones" that don't need to be healed) then you'll be ready to advance back into the fight with fresh troops pets and have another go at it.  Remember ... the pets are disposable, if it comes to that ... your Mastermind is not.  YOU can survive without them, but they cannot survive without YOU.

 

Knowing when to retreat and when to re-engage are fundamental bits of Mastermind strategery.

If you haven't learned this skill yet, nor developed the situational awareness to know what to do when (and where), that's on YOU as the Player.

42 minutes ago, plainguy said:

What I would like right now

I'm amazed you didn't ask for a talking pony bearing wendsleydale cheese from the moon as part of your expectations ...

[tidge]

37 minutes ago, plainguy said:

Attack wise as was discussed, let me speak as the resident SME ( subject Matter Expert ) on Petless mastermind and say a mastermind cannot sustain any form of constant attack chain like other Arch Types with their attacks.  You just can't endurance wise..  So even if they decided to reduce the endurance cost on pet summoning and raised the level on tier one pets.. A mastermind still could not effectively attack along side their pets because you just can't due to the inflated price we pay for powers when compared to other Arch Types.

I'm with you on the crazy Endurance cost for MM primaries, but I don't understand your point? It sounds like you expect the Pet AT to also be a DPS AT...but without Pets? If this is a Whip thing, just say so and I'll understand. Have you tried playing a Controller that takes only pet powers and goes into combat with only the Fighting Pool and Air Superiority? If not, I'm dying to know how the Control sets can be improved for that style of play! Point me at the SME, resident or not!

 

I have a lvl 50 Bots/Traps MM with 3 attacks (2 rifle, 1 mace). I have those attacks slotted for Knockdown and -Res to support my Bot attacks. I have no expectation that I could reslot those attacks and then go challenge +0/x8 content without pets. Now I do pause from my "attack chain" (such as it is) to leverage my secondary: Acid Mortar, Caltrops, Poison Trap. I'm not under any illusion that it is my toon individually dealing the damage (even if it is 'bots!) but my oddball slotting of the attacks does make a difference, as observed in even-level AE farm times.

[plainguy]

  1 hour ago, plainguy said:

What I would like right now

I'm amazed you didn't ask for a talking pony bearing wendsleydale cheese from the moon as part of your expectations ...

 

What I would like right now

• Endurance to be reduced across the board for Masterminds. This would give the Mastermind the real option to be able to use attacks along side their pets
• Remove the pet upgrades and make them level inherit.  This gives the Mastermind either 2 one slotted powers If they like the current build they have OR a respec to pick up 2 more attacks and slot them accordingly.  Thus reworking their build. 
• Increase the Tier one pet level at least by 1 atm.

You know what I would like right now doesn't mean today or tomorrow. You are taking it too literal.

But beyond that I am pretty much agreeing with what other players have said for these last four pages. I won't go back and quote them because its not needed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Hopestar]

7 hours ago, Redlynne said:

If you're complaining that you can't resummon your pets on the fly in the middle of combat and have them live ... THAT'S ON YOU for being a lousy tactician as a Mastermind and picking a bad time AND a bad place to try and do your resummoning.\

But what if you're the sole "defender" in a PUG type party and the party goes on without you after you retreat? Do you: A) summon to keep up your pets or B) do you keep going and try to keep the party alive? You definitely don't have time to type "Wait I need to resummon my pets" and chances are even if you do, they won't wait. This is the situation we as a Defender-alternative have to deal with thanks to our secondary powersets. I understand that it isn't an ideal party, but this is a common situation when your pets decide to chase an enemy they shouldn't have while you're unable to command them because you're using a combination of 2-3 second cast time powers to support your team.

If you went with A, then after you waited instead of following the party and successfully resummoned all your pets, now you lack the endurance to save your team and they might have wiped.

If you go with B, you can still function as part of the team, just without DPS to support it.

Endurance costs are a big problem for MMs and something that should be top priority on fixing.

[tidge]

43 minutes ago, Hopestar said:

But what if you're the sole "defender" in a PUG type party and the party goes on without you after you retreat? Do you: A) summon to keep up your pets or B) do you keep going and try to keep the party alive? You definitely don't have time to type "Wait I need to resummon my pets" and chances are even if you do, they won't wait. This is the situation we as a Defender-alternative have to deal with thanks to our secondary powersets. I understand that it isn't an ideal party, but this is a common situation when your pets decide to chase an enemy they shouldn't have while you're unable to command them because you're using a combination of 2-3 second cast time powers to support your team.

 

MMs have control of their pets. If the MM invites chaos, then on occasion chaos will accept the invitation.

 

If a party forges ahead without me, I wouldn't feel obligated to chase after them if I'm not ready... unless I'm the Tanker (but Tankers should always be ready, #skippableT9). If a PUG is overextending, it is on them. No PUG members should expect a Mastermind to be acting as a "defender", except for the MMs pets. In the limited scenario you describe, I resummon the henchmen, put them on bodyguard and upgrade/buff them. If the PUG can handle the chaos that a MMs henchmen bring despite the henchmen getting wiped, there may be some evidence that the PUG doesn't need the MM to chase after them.

 

In the case where the MM is acting as the Tank, the henchmen should not be on offense, as it is Bodygaurd mode that is allow the MM to Tank.

[Redlynne]

3 hours ago, Hopestar said:

If you went with A, then after you waited instead of following the party and successfully resummoned all your pets, now you lack the endurance to save your team and they might have wiped.

Then that's on the rest of the PUG for biting off more than they could chew without you.  If you have to fall back to resummon and they lack the situational awareness to notice that AND they "need" you to support them while they forge forward (without you) ... that's their fault for not paying attention (and just assuming you will be there as their buff bot).

3 hours ago, Hopestar said:

If you go with B, you can still function as part of the team, just without DPS to support it.

If your DPS isn't "needed" for the team to continue advancing, then you can simply summon+upgrade/equip when possible/convenient as opposed to needing to do it immediately.  In which case the DPS from your pets is helpful as opposed to necessary for the team.

 

 

 

The entire premise of your question however is flawed, because there's an entire continuum of possibilities (you've provided only 2) and it's a judgement call on the part of the Player to figure out what they need to do when (and why) depending upon the situation and circumstances and group dynamics.  So the answers are ... fluid ... rather than cut and dried, and it requires the Player to both recognize/know and adapt to the situation at hand.

[Naraka]

6 hours ago, Hopestar said:

But what if you're the sole "defender" in a PUG type party and the party goes on without you after you retreat? Do you: A) summon to keep up your pets or B) do you keep going and try to keep the party alive? 

Firstly, a basic rule of combat aid is to not put yourself in the same situation as your casualty while trying to save them.  In the context of this game, you have to assess your own survival just like everyone else with perhaps the exception of the tank who is more or less putting part of their trust in the efficacy of their team...but a tank understands their job is to faceplant before those they are protecting, not the other way around.

 

If you're unable to summon your pets mid combat for some reason, you then assess if you currently need all your pets and to what capacity.  Maybe just summoning them is enough for the current situation and you can upgrade them when things die down, or maybe you aren't in danger at all so you can just focus on the powers that are of the most aid to the situation.

 

But ultimately, if you and your pets are having trouble surviving and the team's survival hinges on your support, then it's the tanks job to make sure you *don't* die.  If that isn't happening then *you* escape and come back to pick up the pieces (preferably with your pets in tow).

 

If a PUG is marching forward without you and those that fell, then the likely situation you are in is as follows:

 

YOU ARE BEING CARRIED!

 

If you're in a team that you're being carried by, you need to take into consideration that likely your contributions are minimal and your best bet is to make sure you don't hinder the others' efforts.  Falling back to keep yourself upright would be considered "not being a hinderance".

 

The rest of your hypothetical really doesn't make all that much sense to me.  If people are struggling, then they aren't pressing the movement forward through the mission so you won't be left behind.  If people are pressing the movement forward in the mission, then likely your support is only supplementary and not critical.  If your support is critical then *you* control the pace of forward movement.  If people are dying and struggling, you certainly *DO* have time to tell the team you need to resummon and to slow down.  If they don't slow down but don't die then that is your window to restock your pets thus the hypothetical dichotomous situation really isn't as clutch as you're making it out as.

[gameboy1234]

Just popping in and I've only skimmed the first post, but I played a mastermind on live to 50 and well beyond, I see some good ideas and bad ideas.

 

The primary reason masterminds kind of suck at high level (esp. 50+) imo is movement.  You can't keep the little buggers up with you and they tend to get lost at the drop of a hat.  Everyone else keeps their powers with them wherever they go and most higher level content involves a lot of fast movement.  Hence you're just inherently nerfed from the beginning just by reason of having your powers require functioning pathing AI and not having the same movement powers as you do.  I don't know what to do about this other than to glue the minions onto your back somehow.

 

The other thing is something I've learned from Overwatch.  The Overwatch team at Blizzard seems overly concerned with "the meta," and making all characters equally viable at all levels of play.  And I don't think that's a good idea.  All characters and all ATs don't have to be equally viable at all levels.  If masterminds are just inherently not great at high levels, that might be OK.  If we can fix masterminds, and actually fix them, then fine go for it.  But I'm also suspicious of charts and graphs and data and statistics which all seem to ignore fundamental gameplay issues, and I think that mentality leads to making gross changed to classes that fundamentally change them, and still don't fix the actual problem.  And that just leads to people who play those classes to feel they are being jerked around for no reason.

 

So for MMs I feel there is a fundamental issue with their powers not being directly attached to the player that just isn't fixable.  That has to be considered carefully.

 

On the OP's specific suggestions, I think the best one probably is suggestions around the inherent level losses.  What felt good at levels 1-15 (as a game designer) with the MM slowly increasing in power and gaining more minions, and those minions becoming slightly less powerful as more of them were acquired, didn't scale up to levels past 30 or 40 or so.  The rest of the game just doesn't support it.  IO Sets buff the player, not the MM (pet sets not withstanding, they're only a so-so fix imo) and the epic power pools are the same, geared towards individual players and not the "group" that is the MM.  I'm not sure what to do about this because it's a fundamental design issue for the MM AT.  One option might be to summon fewer but more powerful minions with no level loss, thus keeping overall power about the same.  But that leaves out the problems (imo) with slotting and with epic pools, and I don't think it's a great fix either.

 

So I'm back to being skeptical that MMs can or should be fixed.  If MMs cannot be fixed, I think we should not make large scale changes that affect their gameplay, as that just feels bad to those already playing them.  Some actual fixes would be great, but I think I'd keep them smaller and less impactful, and just understand that the inherent problems in MMs might not be truly fixable.

 

[Twintania]

2 hours ago, gameboy1234 said:

The other thing is something I've learned from Overwatch.  The Overwatch team at Blizzard seems overly concerned with "the meta," and making all characters equally viable at all levels of play.  And I don't think that's a good idea.  All characters and all ATs don't have to be equally viable at all levels.  If masterminds are just inherently not great at high levels, that might be OK. 

I'm sorry, but what nonsense is this? In what world would having all characters (In your Overwatch comment) or all ATs (for CoH specifically) be equally viable at all levels of play be a bad thing? How is it a bad thing? Being good or bad at different tasks is one thing, but saying "MMs are just inherently not great at high levels" and saying that is okay is just, to be blunt, stupid. Absolutely stupid.

 

2 hours ago, gameboy1234 said:

So I'm back to being skeptical that MMs can or should be fixed.  If MMs cannot be fixed, I think we should not make large scale changes that affect their gameplay, as that just feels bad to those already playing them.  Some actual fixes would be great, but I think I'd keep them smaller and less impactful, and just understand that the inherent problems in MMs might not be truly fixable.

So...Because MMs are bad, they shouldn't be fixed?

[Galaxy Brain]

The caveat I will say about this is that compared to other characters, MMs are punished much more severely in trouble scenarios. 

 

Lets say a tank bites a bit more than they can chew, they can just pop a few inspirations and truck on with little time lost. A blaster faceplants, they can wakie and be in fighting shape almost immediately. An MM seeing it's pets in danger has to go through a lot more effort to keep them *all* alive, and if they retreat they have a much longer set-up time than another AT in a similar situation who usually just has to back off and use Rest / Insps. The MM has to back off, use insps/rest, AND resummon AND reupgrade. The fact that even upon an optimal retreat you have to spend so much time getting back to normal is something that can be a bummer at times.

 

---

 

Also, I did some digging on the Primary attacks to see where they stand... and well, two sets stand out when you look at what their total output it similar to how we did the pets:

 

	Total Damage	Total Time	DPA	DPS	AoE DPS	Total End	EPS
BEASTS	124.48	4.84	25.72	21.03	33.16	31.98	6.61
DEMONS	141.89	5.13	27.66	19.51	33.91	35.1	6.84
MERCS	110.73	4.34	25.51	16.25	27.53	36.14	8.33
NECRO	134.58	4.03	33.39	20.65	6.27	27.82	6.9
NINJAS	78.92	3.17	24.90	21.49	34.41	21.58	6.81
ROBOTS	108.28	5.61	19.30	15.64	27.53	36.14	6.44
THUGS	95.12	4.23	22.49	19.95	30.20	34.06	8.05

 

Both Beasts and Demons deal respectable total damage compared to the rest of the pack, with great AoE damage output relative to other MM powers. Necro comes close to their total, but has no AoE output. Both Beasts and Demons also get hefty mechanical advantage for using their attacks through debuffs and special mechanics that support the pets.

 

Further breakdowns can be seen below:

 

 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tiChYOEukHcOkoSCy7_odOd29scoa2eAbewnjZMoiFA/edit?usp=sharing

[Redlynne]

11 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Both Beasts and Demons deal respectable total damage compared to the rest of the pack

They're the "newest" primaries and the devs very deliberately sidestepped the pitfalls they fell into with the other powersets in which the personal attacks have little to no synergy with the rest of their primary powerset.

[Galaxy Brain]

38 minutes ago, Redlynne said:

They're the "newest" primaries and the devs very deliberately sidestepped the pitfalls they fell into with the other powersets in which the personal attacks have little to no synergy with the rest of their primary powerset.

What stood out a lot though was this  (The Red is with the proposed 30% boosts from Aggro Stance):

 

In yellow are the AoEs... why are the Cones on the new sets WAY harder hitting?

[Monos King]

Some things I wanted to elaborate

1. We aren't trying to buff MMs to make up for intentional shortcomings of the set, like the fact that summoning pets in combat is hard. That's the point, it's a byproduct of MM structure. The issue there is how frequently it needs to be done because pets have no survivability. We want to make MMs viable. 
2. @gameboy1234 You are correct on one thing for sure; the nature of MMs yields that they will never be too good in certain situations as compared to the other ATs. I think I know what you're saying, but the changes here are focused on making them go from "almost universally useless" to "good in more instances". Attempting to make them viable in everything will not happen without huge scale changes, this is true, but at the very least these threads are not aimed at something like that. The individual threads in particular focus on making those lacking sets do as advertised/expected. We want to ensure they are not worthless compared to the strong MM sets, not compared to other ATs. 
3. We are using strong MM primaries as reference for individual changes, and the general MM intended strengths as reference for global changes. This means for something like necro we look at what it's supposed to be good at, why it is not as viable as something like thugs, and make changes to maintain its specialty and to make it worthwhile. For global changes, we look at what MMs need to function (not what they are bad at) and add features to them to improve those functions in a way that might improve their weaknesses. The shortcomings of the set will remain the shortcomings, but if something that MMs are supposed to be good at, like summoning and manipulating pets as a source of contribution, is jeopardized by their immediate deaths, then that's an issue. We see why that happens, and try to improve that element accordingly.

Essentially it's never "oh man MMs suck at this lets fix that", rather it's "aren't MMs supposed go be good at/aren't they supposed to benefit from <blank>" and then fix what is lacking from that side of things. The only exception to that process is MM slotting and enhancement issues because EVERY AT is supposed to have the option to slot in a way that is optimal to their preferences and not inherently limited, which MMs do not recieve as they must make a mandatory sacrifice in order to fulfill the basic function of living pets (6 aura slot tax), with precious few exceptions.

Edited May 14, 2020 by Monos King
Clarity

[Redlynne]

4 hours ago, Galaxy Brain said:

why are the Cones on the new sets WAY harder hitting?

Because they weren't being ported over from already existing power sets that needed to be run through the Intentional Gimp Code For Masterminds™ by Cryptic Studios (back in Issue 6).

 

But you're right, the newer sets give every appearance of having AoE attacks that do approximately DOUBLE the damage of the AoEs of the previous legacy powersets.  If you do a more expansive analysis (all the sets, not just 3) you ought to see some trendline factors that could hint and probable cause for the discrepancies.  I'm thinking that it was probably just Cryptic overcompensating (because, Pets).

[Galaxy Brain]

Another thing to look at, is the % that the MM provides to the total output (estimated) alongside the pets. These values assume our changes in the OP, without Aggro Mode / Slotting. 

 

 

The Pet Damage / DPS columns were gathered from what is posted in the OP. These are the damage totals in 1 rotation of powers per pet added up, and the combined DPS of the pets added up. The "Special" Pet damage ones include factors like -Res, Criticals, or bonus pets. These values include the changes presented in the OP + Linked threads (like the +1 lvl shift and so on), and assume an even level target.

 

Likewise, the MM column is the combined damage of their 3 attacks in 1 rotation, and their total DPS if they were to simply rotate through their powers.

 

The Total Damage/DPS just combines the Pet and MM values, and the MM % column is the % that the MM contributes to overall damage based on these criteria. 

 

	Pet DMG	MM Damage	Total Damage	MM %
BEASTS	756.67	124.48	881.15	14.13%
DEMONS	783.57	141.89	925.46	15.33%
MERCS	806.42	110.73	917.15	12.07%
NECRO	954.87	134.58	1089.45	12.35%
NINJAS	1139.45	78.92	1218.37	6.48%
ROBOTS	661.58	108.28	769.86	14.06%
THUGS	903.98	95.12	999.10	9.52%
	Special Pet DMG	MM Damage	Total Damage	MM %
BEASTS	998.80	124.48	1123.28	11.08%
DEMONS	1314.03	141.89	1455.92	9.75%
MERCS	945.18	110.73	1055.91	10.49%
NECRO	1251.21	134.58	1385.79	9.71%
NINJAS	1508.83	78.92	1587.75	4.97%
ROBOTS	822.62	108.28	930.90	11.63%
THUGS	1024.84	95.12	1119.96	8.49%
	Pet DPS	MM DPS	Total DPS	MM %
BEASTS	112.39	21.03	133.43	15.76%
DEMONS	107.86	19.51	127.37	15.32%
MERCS	75.72	16.25	91.97	17.67%
NECRO	111.11	20.65	131.75	15.67%
NINJAS	178.94	21.49	200.43	10.72%
ROBOTS	61.17	15.64	76.81	20.36%
THUGS	104.35	19.95	124.29	16.05%
	Special Pet DPS	MM DPS	Total DPS	MM %
BEASTS	172.87	21.03	193.90	10.85%
DEMONS	180.87	19.51	200.38	9.74%
MERCS	90.04	16.25	106.29	15.29%
NECRO	148.92	20.65	169.56	12.18%
NINJAS	191.25	21.49	212.74	10.10%
ROBOTS	79.47	15.64	95.11	16.44%
THUGS	168.93	19.95	188.88	10.56%

Edited May 15, 2020 by Galaxy Brain

[Redlynne]

Needs more labels for clarity of info context(s).

What am I looking at and what is changing in your table data to produce the outcomes that you're enumerating?  Not clear at all unless you already know the answer(s).