Overwhelming Overpower: A Controller Inherent Buff - Control AVs and GMs!

[ABlueThingy]

1 hour ago, Blackfeather said:

Initially, I also wondered whether or not the nature of status effects in CoH meant that they'd need an overhaul to help them be a bit less binary. However, I kind of came to the conclusion that such effort would probably be a lot of work, with the potential for a lot of unexpected side effects.

I agree,

1 hour ago, Blackfeather said:

 

To compete with the nature of magnitude, I figured that introducing a chance based element to how likely a status effect would be to work on different kinds of enemies - the Overpower mechanic, with its additional magnitude is essentially a stand-in for saving throw dice for enemies as it is...so by extending the levels of strength it can inflict, we essentially create a gradient: one based on chance.

 

Perhaps some mechanic to temporarily increase the likelihood of Overpower occurring might do some good, accompanying the tweaks I proposed in the original post, similar to how Scrappers have the Critical Strikes ATO to boost the chance of landing a critical (except inherent to the Controller rather than as something to slot).

 

 

 

Coming at this from a table top view... If it's a low random chance then there's a chance that the controller simply doesn't contribute to the fight or contribute very much.  Which is better than not being able to do ANYTHING but still not ideal.  IMO

 

So, against an AV there's a 4% chance per cast of OO! tripping.  That's a 1% chance in 25 casts.  How many casts does a Controller normally get per fight? 

 

I'm just spitballing so this will be simplified.  If we have a hypothetical 3 second recharge on our main ST Hold and we just spam that we're looking at about a minute (75 seconds) to reach 25 casts.

 

So roughly 1% chance per minute of fight against an AV? A five minute fight means about 5% chance using our above scenario

 

If the cool down is at base(8 seconds) it's 200 seconds(3.3 minutes) to get to 25 casts or a 1% chance of tripping OO!

 

So somewhere between roughly 1-3 minutes to have a 1% chance of tripping and making the controls worthwhile against an AV.  That doesn't include the opportunity cost of doing nothing but spamming control powers hoping it trips.  Realistically it would take even longer because you're also casting debuffs and attacks in between.  The more non-hold powers you mix in the lower the chance you land an OO! with a hold.  A mag 50 immobilize or fear is kinda meh.

 

I mostly just bring this up because control crits are not like dmg crits.  Scrappers deal damage no mater what and the crits are a nice bonus.  But a controller who doesn't get that OO! crit just... wasted a cast basically due to the binary effectiveness.  It would be like if brutes fighting AVs were always at 0% fury but at a 1% chance per minute to land as if they had max fury for a few seconds. I think that would feel bad.  Or that's my feelings on it anyhow

 

1 hour ago, Blackfeather said:

 

Maybe a scaling percentage chance to Overpower depending on how many status effects an enemy is currently inflicted with, even if they're not actually affected? E.g. 3% for a Hold, Immobilize, Sleep, leading to an additional 9% chance to Overpower.

 

 

Maybe instead of a % chance have a growing bonus mag?  Something more predictable that the Controller can... control.  Perhaps the Fibonacci sequence? 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55 and so on.   Every time you cast a ST control power you get buff that lasts a short time called Overwhelm that gives a +1mag to the next control power(ST or AoE).  If you cast another ST control you get another +1mag.  If you keep casting it follows the sequence going to a bonus 2, 3, 5, 8, etc. 

 

At the low levels it wouldn't mean much.  If you can cast two controls on a boss they're held either way.  Maybe this allows for some strategy? Cast the ST imob and use the Overwhelm buff on your hold for a guarantee Mag 4 hold on a boss without relying on chance.  More importantly it allows for rapidly escalating controls against the same target ensuring you can lock down EBs/AVs as long as you have fast and strong holds.

 

If you want to get really fancy you might make this an effect that sits on the NPC instead of a buff to you.  So the next controller to hit them with a control gets the mag boosted and knocks it up the sequence.  Two controllers could pound an AV down more easily.  Obviously you have to make it so only controllers trip it.

 

 

 

[Blackfeather]

31 minutes ago, ABlueThingy said:

Coming at this from a table top view... If it's a low random chance then there's a chance that the controller simply doesn't contribute to the fight or contribute very much.  Which is better than not being able to do ANYTHING but still not ideal.  IMO

 

So, against an AV there's a 4% chance per cast of OO! tripping.  That's a 1% chance in 25 casts.

I did end up editing my original post to adjust some numbers a while back - these are how they look right now:

Additional Magnitude	Chance per Overpower	Chance per Power Usage	Floating Text
+1 = affect a Boss	50%	10% = 10 in 100 uses	Overpower
+4 = affect an Elite Boss	25%	5% = 5 in 100 uses	Overpower!
+54 = affect an Archvillain	20%	4% = 4 in 100 uses	Overpower!!
+100 = affect a Giant Monster	5%	1% = 1 in 100 uses	Overpower!!!

So the revised probabilities now have AVs rolling a "nat 1" to be affected by a one shot status effect power (20% chance for Overpower, 25% chance for it being an additional mag 54 or higher). A 5% chance in other words.

31 minutes ago, ABlueThingy said:

So, against an AV there's a 4% chance per cast of OO! tripping.  That's a 1% chance in 25 casts.  How many casts does a Controller normally get per fight? 

 

I'm just spitballing so this will be simplified.  If we have a hypothetical 3 second recharge on our main ST Hold and we just spam that we're looking at about a minute (75 seconds) to reach 25 casts.

 

So roughly 1% chance per minute of fight against an AV? A five minute fight means about 5% chance using our above scenario

 

If the cool down is at base(8 seconds) it's 200 seconds(3.3 minutes) to get to 25 casts or a 1% chance of tripping OO!

A nice point of comparison I like to make is to look at how an AV cycles between their purple triangles: 50 seconds up and 25 seconds down. Using the revised numbers in my original post, here's the likelihood that at least one Overpower!! or higher will trigger in those 50 seconds, given a 5 second hold (including cast time and a fairly optimised recharge).

 

A Controller in 50 seconds would have 10 separate chances to potentially overpower an AV in a single hit, each one being a 1 in 20 chance. Therefore, to look at the possible outcomes where this doesn't occur, we do this:

 

19^10 / 20^10 = 59.87%

 

In other words, there's a 40.13% chance that at least one Overpower!! will occur during those 50 seconds - not bad!

 

For comparison's sake, let's look at how these numbers look in those previous numbers ( 1 in 25 chance )...

 

24^10 / 25^10 = 66.48%

 

This results in a 33.52% chance that, given 10 uses of the power in those 50 seconds, at least one of them will be enough to lock down an AV. Hope this clears the math up a little! It's much more likely than you might be visualising it...I definitely got caught up with some math issues myself here.

Edited September 16, 2020 by Blackfeather

[ABlueThingy]

10 minutes ago, Blackfeather said:

-snip-

math is not my strong suit, nor reading comprehension I guess *cough*

 

I would say I'm unsure if making it more frequent is a good idea or not.  The reason they added the PTOD in the first place was controllers trivialized AVs.  A % chance to lock down an AV kinda means "A chance to end the fight entirely."  The POTD was their answer to the binary nature.  You can only lock them down SOMETIMES.

 

fwiw I'm not trying to be contrarian or anything.  Just poking at the idea so it can be the best idea it can be

[Blackfeather]

44 minutes ago, ABlueThingy said:

Maybe instead of a % chance have a growing bonus mag?  Something more predictable that the Controller can... control.  Perhaps the Fibonacci sequence? 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55 and so on.   Every time you cast a ST control power you get buff that lasts a short time called Overwhelm that gives a +1mag to the next control power(ST or AoE).  If you cast another ST control you get another +1mag.  If you keep casting it follows the sequence going to a bonus 2, 3, 5, 8, etc. 

 

At the low levels it wouldn't mean much.  If you can cast two controls on a boss they're held either way.  Maybe this allows for some strategy? Cast the ST imob and use the Overwhelm buff on your hold for a guarantee Mag 4 hold on a boss without relying on chance.  More importantly it allows for rapidly escalating controls against the same target ensuring you can lock down EBs/AVs as long as you have fast and strong holds.

 

If you want to get really fancy you might make this an effect that sits on the NPC instead of a buff to you.  So the next controller to hit them with a control gets the mag boosted and knocks it up the sequence.  Two controllers could pound an AV down more easily.  Obviously you have to make it so only controllers trip it.

Basically, the idea of "+Chance to Overpower" is something that a Controller can predict: just not with absolute certainty. Instead of a 'certain' Magnitude gain from consecutive powers, I wanted to merely increase the chance that an Overpower (and therefore in this system, an Overpower that can affect AVs say) - I figure that this way, we avoid the problem of status effects being binary in nature: you balance the guarantee of high magnitude powers with the uncertainty of obtaining them.

 

In other words, I kind of see mechanics that make a Controller's status effect powers more certain and more powerful at the same time to be...well. A little bit too much like a Dominator's Domination mechanic, hahah.

 

Per my original post, I intended for the change in this mechanic to make Controller's less reliable at locking things down compared to Dominators (perma dom lock's beastly!), but potentially far more potent (insta-Hold, etc.) - solo, I envision it like the difference between these two scenarios:

• A Dominator, with their constantly powerful status effect powers, will eventually lock down an AV
• A Controller, with their variably powerful status effects, may lock down an AV, either earlier or later than a Dominator

It's meant to be a change from how things currently are, where a single Controller isn't really able to do much against powerful foes, since alone, they can't really stack high enough magnitudes to do anything with their powers.

5 minutes ago, ABlueThingy said:

math is not my strong suit, nor reading comprehension I guess *cough*

 

I would say I'm unsure if making it more frequent is a good idea or not.  The reason they added the PTOD in the first place was controllers trivialized AVs.  A % chance to lock down an AV kinda means "A chance to end the fight entirely."  The POTD was their answer to the binary nature.  You can only lock them down SOMETIMES.

 

fwiw I'm not trying to be contrarian or anything.  Just poking at the idea so it can be the best idea it can be

No worries! Numbers are not my strong suit either. I have to give props to @HelenCarnate for pointing out my math gaffes.

 

I definitely don't want to supplant what the Purple Triangles already does for status effects - I just want to allow Controllers to let their powers be used on their own terms, or at least, have a chance of doing so. By tying that to the Overpower mechanic that's already in place, I figure that provides them with some level of, well, control in trying to shift these odds in their favour - for example, slotting for recharge to help roll the dice more often.

 

Similarly, that's why I suggested the stacking chance of Overpower occurring on enemies with separate status effects (I figure an extra 5% per effect would be pretty neat) inflicted on them (even if they aren't affected) - this provides a further incentive to slotting for a status effect's duration: prolonging these extra 'stacks', and therefore, the likelihood of Overpower occurring.

 

I did want to strike a balance between "will hardly happen" and "may happen to often" - I'll definitely leave it to people more versed in math than I am to say whether or not the numbers I've put forth strike that balance, hahah.

[Blackfeather]

20 hours ago, MTeague said:

As much as I loooooove Controllers, I sort of get the bind the devs are in with them. 

 

If we're too good it's City of Statues, and every big ticket encounter is trivialized.

But as it stands now, as you say, the Controller is largely unable to reliable Control the most dangerous foes who you probably need controlled the most. 

 

And it's... dicey... if you're a solo Mind/ controller when you get to anything with purple triangles.

Yea, you can defeat the AV.... maybe.... with mass amounts of Reds, Purples, and by propping up a Shivan with your secondary.  

 

More likely than not you just have to team. And that's not necessarily the worst of all possible answers.  Teaming shouldn't be completely anathema. 

But I can't say I don't get jealous of some of my other alts when I'm dealing with Envoy of Shadow, etc.

 

Handling the binary nature of status effects within the current system was one of the main goals of this suggestion. I don't want a Controller to trivialise very strong enemies, but on the other hand, it feels wrong that just because they're unable to stack enough magnitude, their control powers become accessories to the rest of their arsenal.

 

So the balance I chose was to lean into the chance based nature of their already existing Overpower mechanic, giving it a chance to increase the magnitude of powers by more than just 1...enough to instantly control an AV/EB/GM on some occasions - bridging the gap between 'always' and 'never' locked down. Or at least, that was the intent.

 

What do you think of those current numbers in the original post? I definitely went through some revisions of them - hopefully you like it!

[MTeague]

1 hour ago, Blackfeather said:

What do you think of those current numbers in the original post? I definitely went through some revisions of them - hopefully you like it!

I am sufficiently bad at statistics / probability calculations that I'm withholding judgement.

I don't feel that I'll be able to really grasp it until I did it out and played it. 

 

But I do wonder the result will just be too unpredictable / unreliable to trust.   After all, if the AV can 3-shot my Controller... and the Envoy of Shadow certainly did take me down that fast, first several attempts....then 4 out of 100 uses feels... like most of the time, I'll be taking the Hospital Express, and I'd never actually SEE an Overwhelming Overpower.  Thats' kind of why I was suggesting some kind of "Sluggish" debuff, ... I'd suggested -Recharge, but -Damage might work too... that could allow for *some* reliable degree of mitigation without neutering the Big Bad completely.

[aethereal]

I kinda wish that AV resistance to status effects was more based on shortening the duration than being flat-out protected from it.  It feels like being able to hold an AV for 2 seconds every 12 or so wouldn't be out-of-control powerful.  Maybe with then a 2 second period afterward of mag 1000 protection so multiple controllers couldn't statue an AV by working together.  But too big a change for the game as-is.

[Blackfeather]

5 hours ago, MTeague said:

I am sufficiently bad at statistics / probability calculations that I'm withholding judgement.

I don't feel that I'll be able to really grasp it until I did it out and played it. 

 

But I do wonder the result will just be too unpredictable / unreliable to trust.   After all, if the AV can 3-shot my Controller... and the Envoy of Shadow certainly did take me down that fast, first several attempts....then 4 out of 100 uses feels... like most of the time, I'll be taking the Hospital Express, and I'd never actually SEE an Overwhelming Overpower.  Thats' kind of why I was suggesting some kind of "Sluggish" debuff, ... I'd suggested -Recharge, but -Damage might work too... that could allow for *some* reliable degree of mitigation without neutering the Big Bad completely.

5 out of 100 actually! So 1 in 20. And striking that balance is definitely important - do you think the other idea that was brought up, about a +Chance to Overpower might help in that regard to assist in its reliability, while still providing that element of chance that prevents a guarantee that tougher enemies will be controlled?

 

I still haven't hashed out exactly how that increase in chance might look like - a few ideas have been tossed about:

• Stacking percentage based on how many status effects on an enemy are applied
• Stacking percentage based on how many recent control powers have been used
• Stacking percentage based on previous controls that weren't an Overpower (came up with that one just now)

[Blackfeather]

3 minutes ago, aethereal said:

I kinda wish that AV resistance to status effects was more based on shortening the duration than being flat-out protected from it.  It feels like being able to hold an AV for 2 seconds every 12 or so wouldn't be out-of-control powerful.  Maybe with then a 2 second period afterward of mag 1000 protection so multiple controllers couldn't statue an AV by working together.  But too big a change for the game as-is.

To my knowledge, the Purple Patch does mean that the duration of status effects is shortened against higher level enemies, of which enemies with higher status effect protection levels such as AVs and GMs, tend to be. With many of them about 4 levels higher for the most part, that does half the duration of controls at least.

[aethereal]

10 minutes ago, Blackfeather said:

To my knowledge, the Purple Patch does mean that the duration of status effects is shortened against higher level enemies, of which enemies with higher status effect protection levels such as AVs and GMs, tend to be. With many of them about 4 levels higher for the most part, that does half the duration of controls at least.

Yeah, I was thinking something where it's more pronounced than that, but also without the high bar of mag resist to get over from the start.  So you could hold an AV with just your normal T2 hold, but just for a very short period of time.  Could potentially use it strategically to give someone a chance to fire off a heal or whatever.  But, again, we aren't going to scrap mag resists as the primary defense against mezzes at this stage in the game.

[Blackfeather]

6 minutes ago, aethereal said:

Yeah, I was thinking something where it's more pronounced than that, but also without the high bar of mag resist to get over from the start.  So you could hold an AV with just your normal T2 hold, but just for a very short period of time.  Could potentially use it strategically to give someone a chance to fire off a heal or whatever.  But, again, we aren't going to scrap mag resists as the primary defense against mezzes at this stage in the game.

It's definitely an interesting thought! Though I do wonder how a similar system would be scaled up to Giant Monsters, say.

[Blackfeather]

Oh! Should probably ping @Vanden about this as well - I proposed an addition to Overwhelming Overpower in the original post that goes something like this: similar to how Stalkers are able to build levels of 'crits', having a similar +Chance to Overpower might be useful for increasing the likelihood of an Overpower!! strong enough to handle a sufficiently strong enemy.

 

Per the original post, here are a few ideas for 'stacks' (I'm thinking 5% right now):

• Stacking percentage based on how many status effects on an enemy are applied (even if they aren't affecting them)
  • E.g. Controller attempts to Hold + Sleep + Confuse an AV, chance to Overpower is now 20% + (5% + 5% + 5%) = 35% chance
• Stacking percentage based on how many recent control powers have been used (time pending)
• Stacking percentage based on previous controls that weren't an Overpower (increase chance if it hasn't happened lately)
  • E.g. Controller's previous two controls were regular ones, chance to Overpower is now 20% + (5% + 5%) = 30% chance

With the 25% chance of each Overpower being a +54 or higher magnitude, this might be a pretty interesting way of increasing the likelihood of making it go off without making it a guarantee - trying to avoid that to prevent the whole City of Statues situation that MTeague brought up a while back. What do you think?

[Blackfeather]

On 9/16/2020 at 6:32 AM, Outrider_01 said:

Controllers have 2 jobs, control and a support set

 

Dominators have 2 jobs, control and DPS.

 

Group wise, controllers are stronger with the buffs and debuffs...why hold an AV to beat it down when you can still beat it down with debuffs and debuffs?  Sure, triangles exist...but once they are down that HP bar grinds down fast in a group.  Dominators don't bring much more than a controller, DPS is spread out among the group and a dominator is just better at holding things while the rest of the group blitzes the AV down with controller buffs/debuffs.

I've got...feelings about this.

 

Like I've said in my original post, it kind of feels like control powers become something of an accessory to the rest of a Controller's arsenal - they're really only 'allowed' to work due to AVs 'letting' them via the purple triangles, not to mention GMs, which don't even have that cycling immunity, to my knowledge.

 

The way I see it:

• Buff/debuff powers work, but are limited to some degree
• Attack powers work, but deal less damage
• Armour powers work, and provide survivability
• But Control powers flat out don't except for a few scenarios, usually when in a team focused on it

 

So finding a way to let these status effect powers to work better as the sole Controller (Dominators have a consistently high magnitude, so I figure locking down AVs/GMs isn't really an issue for them) on the team without it being 100% up all the time was one of the main goals of Overwhelming Overpower - multiple Controllers at once tip the binary to the opposite side and guarantee lockdown.

 

Hope this makes sense!

Edited September 17, 2020 by Blackfeather

[Zeraphia]

This is a simple statement but this is something I've never gotten:

 

Dominators are considered a 10 on the "control" scale on screen.

Controllers are considered a 10 on the "control" scale on screen.

 

Dominators can get double magnitudes and control durations via their inherent and better accuracy as well with domination. Controllers only have... longer base durations? I don't really see how they can both be on the same 10/10 scale when one AT is just far superior to the other numerically and empirically. IMO, there needs to be some buffs like these proposed to aid Controllers to getting near that 10/10 control level as advertised. 

[Blackfeather]

3 hours ago, Zeraphia said:

This is a simple statement but this is something I've never gotten:

 

Dominators are considered a 10 on the "control" scale on screen.

Controllers are considered a 10 on the "control" scale on screen.

 

Dominators can get double magnitudes and control durations via their inherent and better accuracy as well with domination. Controllers only have... longer base durations? I don't really see how they can both be on the same 10/10 scale when one AT is just far superior to the other numerically and empirically. IMO, there needs to be some buffs like these proposed to aid Controllers to getting near that 10/10 control level as advertised. 

Controllers do get Overpower, which to be fair with it, does mean that they can sometimes lock down bosses with a single use of their power, along with better handle enemies with slightly higher levels of protection (e.g. Vahzilok Abominations vs. Immobilises) thanks to the additional Mag 1 it provides.

 

Extending it to be powerful enough to affect AVs/GMs, albeit at a reduced rate was me trying to find a way to let Controllers do the things that Dominators can in a way, but differently - potentially more potent, but less reliable.

[Blackfeather]

Come to think of it, I should probably ping @oedipus_tex - from what I've seen, you've got a lot of experience with both Controllers and Dominators as well, so getting your point of view about this proposed suggestion for Controllers would be great!

[Blackfeather]

On 9/17/2020 at 4:00 AM, MTeague said:

But I do wonder the result will just be too unpredictable / unreliable to trust.   After all, if the AV can 3-shot my Controller... and the Envoy of Shadow certainly did take me down that fast, first several attempts....then 4 out of 100 uses feels... like most of the time, I'll be taking the Hospital Express, and I'd never actually SEE an Overwhelming Overpower.

On another note, I just remembered a relevant comic pertaining to this. 🤣

[oedipus_tex]

There are some interesting ideas here.

 

I'll be honest, I'm not a fan of how City of Heroes handles AV fights in general, so any minor modifications to that system are hard for me to rate. Ideally I'd like to jettison the whole thing and start over. What should be a dramatic and memorable confrontation often is just a click fest against a bag of HP, and minor modifications to that system are unlikely to change that.

 

The kind of game I wish CoX looked to for inspiration both for AV fights and level design is "beat em ups" like Streets of Rage or the old Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles arcade game. In those games, boss encounters are meaningful. It's partly an aesthetics thing. Boss attacks "connect" with the target and get an audience reaction, and there's a real tangible sense who is taking damage at a given moment, because attacks interrupt each other. That just doesn't happen in CoX. 

 

The hard part, of course, is translating a dynamic fighter into an MMO. How mezz should play into that I'm not sure. 

[Blackfeather]

7 hours ago, oedipus_tex said:

There are some interesting ideas here.

 

I'll be honest, I'm not a fan of how City of Heroes handles AV fights in general, so any minor modifications to that system are hard for me to rate. Ideally I'd like to jettison the whole thing and start over. What should be a dramatic and memorable confrontation often is just a click fest against a bag of HP, and minor modifications to that system are unlikely to change that.

 

The kind of game I wish CoX looked to for inspiration both for AV fights and level design is "beat em ups" like Streets of Rage or the old Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles arcade game. In those games, boss encounters are meaningful. It's partly an aesthetics thing. Boss attacks "connect" with the target and get an audience reaction, and there's a real tangible sense who is taking damage at a given moment, because attacks interrupt each other. That just doesn't happen in CoX. 

 

The hard part, of course, is translating a dynamic fighter into an MMO. How mezz should play into that I'm not sure. 

Interesting - thanks for posting your perspective! Most of my views of CoH are filtered through the lens of a "tabletop game translated to an MMO" myself - Controllers for me feel a lot like playing a D&D Wizard with a heavy focus on battlefield control, buffing and debuffing.

 

In such games, I've seen the Big Bad Evil Guy of a campaign taken down or at least temporarily disabled by an unlucky saving throw; sometimes players get in a lucky strike, and other times...well, not so much. It's one of the reasons why I went the route I did, with a chance based system of overpowering an enemy; for stronger ones, a lower chance is generally the norm, as opposed to being flat out immune, or 'allowing' to be locked down a la the Purple Triangles (another was the fact that it's basically an extension of an existing system - I generally prefer changes that are less disruptive or 'build' on the current).

 

While it's not a one to one comparison, I do think it fits: for instance, all our attacks are rolls of the dice behind the scenes, after all - there's no worry about having to aim one's hits as they're abstracted away. 'Skill' at playing comes at a different 'top-down' level from my perspective, akin to, well, characters on a tabletop: when to use powers, who to target them at, what'll be most effective at the moment, etc.

 

Similarly, while the BBEG themselves might be formidable, I tend to see action economy as the main challenge to manage: one AV alone isn't too much of a challenge, but when they're backed up with others...well. I'll point over to the Penelope Yin Task Force and its killer ambushes when not managed properly.

 

I see Overwhelming Overpower as providing a little more of that chance factor for Controllers, rather than feeling just a 'certainty' of not locking stronger enemies down alone. In other words, actually allowing for that 'when', 'who' and 'what' for the Controller's primary powerset when facing AVs/GMs - a Corruptor can still use both their primaries and secondaries and feel that they're contributing with most of their arsenal for instance.

 

Of course, that doesn't mean that there aren't MMOs that provide more of that dynamism out there. I'm just not sure if CoH is quite the game for it, at least, not without a major extensive overhaul to a lot of the systems currently in place.

Edited September 19, 2020 by Blackfeather

[Blackfeather]

I also noticed you talking about the binary mez system from this thread, @Bill Z Bubba. I'd definitely be interested in hearing your thoughts on how Overwhelming Overpower might help in regards to making this system a little less rigid, if it helps at all? Any improvements/changes you might have in mind?

[Bill Z Bubba]

6 hours ago, Blackfeather said:

I also noticed you talking about the binary mez system from this thread, @Bill Z Bubba. I'd definitely be interested in hearing your thoughts on how Overwhelming Overpower might help in regards to making this system a little less rigid, if it helps at all? Any improvements/changes you might have in mind?

To be honest, I was completely looking at it from the incoming mez side of things rather than outgoing, where it's "have mez protection or be screwed." I only have 3 mezzers, 1 controller and 2 doms. I honestly love playing all three but only on teams. While I can solo them, I've found them to be more work than they're worth when attempting max diff.

 

I'm not knowledgeable enough on the mezzing side of things to offer much but I do absolutely agree, just based on reading what others have written on the topic and my own experiences so far, that mezzers, controllers moreso than permadoms, need something to pull them up a bit.

[Blackfeather]

1 hour ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

To be honest, I was completely looking at it from the incoming mez side of things rather than outgoing, where it's "have mez protection or be screwed." I only have 3 mezzers, 1 controller and 2 doms. I honestly love playing all three but only on teams. While I can solo them, I've found them to be more work than they're worth when attempting max diff.

 

I'm not knowledgeable enough on the mezzing side of things to offer much but I do absolutely agree, just based on reading what others have written on the topic and my own experiences so far, that mezzers, controllers moreso than permadoms, need something to pull them up a bit.

Oh! My apologies for making that mistake - it's true that crowd control can be a bit annoying for archetypes without built in protection. Controllers do at least have Psionic Mastery's Indomitable Will to help even things out, and proactive powers that can disable the enemy first; can't be locked down if you do it beforehand and all that.

 

It's definitely a bit of a balancing act in my opinion; part of the fun for me in CoH is being able to target any problem enemy mobs beforehand. However, this can become a little bit difficult in larger groups, along with a myriad of other factors such as resistances to actually being controlled in the first place, etc. I imagine level/mob design goes a long way to help with that.

 

Anyhow, glad to hear that changes of this nature for Controllers are potentially desired at least!

[Blackfeather]

I should probably ping @SeraphimKensai about this suggestion as well - I recall you talking about changing AoE Holds a little while back, so I imagine you've got a fair grasp on how Controllers/Dominators currently function. As such, if you've any stance on this sort of thing - improvements, critiques, etc. - I'd be glad to hear about them!

[Blackfeather]

Same with @BitCook as well - hello there! Saw you talking about crowd control powers in this thread. My proposal attempts to help even out the balance for the lockdown powers of Controllers somewhat. I'd be glad to know what you think about them: any feedback, improvements, critiques, etc. would be much welcome!

[Blackfeather]

...speaking of which. More Controller talk in this thread by @skoryy that I noticed - any thoughts you might have on the proposal here?