Focused Feedback: Other Powers Changes

[Jacke]

3 hours ago, Vigilant Vergil said:

I think my experience from testing the power makes me lean closer to you suggestion of #1.  I can't provide any data myself, but I think the small radius causes the extra area to get wasted; since critters can attack in melee from 7 ft. out and surround the player on all sides when attacking, the area of the 6 ft. radius circle is likely to fail to encompass more than a few attackers.

I think you may have something there.

 

I was thinking the problem with ToF's AoE, the 6ft radius circle around the targetted mob, might be it getting partly cut off calculation-wise for targets where it was farther away that 7ft from the Dark Melee character.  But the same effect happens if the mobs themselves move, perhaps to close to 7ft, but definitely empty part of the AoE.  Assuming the primary target is at 7ft, over half of ToF's AoE could be emptied by mob movement.  In fact, ToF's effective AoE could be about 1/3 of its full size.

 

That means Touch of Fear's effective AoE becomes about 0.75 the size of Shadow Maul's AoE.  And I think it gets worse, because there are only a few mobs in the AoE's, so the numbers can easily round down a lot.  I remember actively positioning and using Shadow Maul and hitting mostly 2 to 3 mobs, sometimes 4.  That means in the same circumstances, ToF would hit 1 to 2 mobs, sometimes 3.

 

ToF is already about 2/3's Shadow Maul's DPA and DPE, with single hit damage about 0.8 that of Shadow Maul.  And hitting fewer mobs.

 

Thinking back on what people said about their testing experiences, I feel this effect would make the new ToF feel weak, but not quite as weak as what they experienced.  There may be more issues, perhaps case #2 in my previous post.

 

But in most mob density situations, a short-ranged melee circular AoE of about 6ft radius may have this problem, which means Street Justice's Spinning Strike and the new Touch of Fear.  The mobs need to be thoroughly packed before either power shows their full value.

[Sovera]

23 hours ago, Vanden said:

I get the impression that @Wavicle is right, it's just not meant to be a very strong power, and Dark Melee's strength is supposed to lie in its single-target damage and utility. It's just there so that the set actually has AoE potential to speak of.

But it isn't. though. Even if we take pylons loosely they still are a metric and no AT has ever brought DM to a competitive range. The 'strength lies in ST damage' seems to be a parroted term with no actual basis. What DM does have is a small heal and a different build up power that, ultimately, falls short since it imposes a tax on the set (can't be -too- good at base or Soul Drain will make the damage explode. But on any circumstance that does not have SD saturated then the set lags behind). It also has an endurance clickie.

 

So DM is not really something strong in ST but rather a set chockful of utility with a small heal, an endurance recovery power and a minor -ToHit debuff. All of these impose taxes.

 

If a set has a power rating of 100 then a % of it goes to ST, a % of it goes to AoE, then utility takes % (knockdowns, stuns, heals, etc). The more utility the set has the more % is shaved from ST and AoE to stay within the original 100.

 

Back in the day all of these might have been more useful, but today when people go around softcapped without much hassle the -ToHit does little, and, in my experience, the small heal DM has does little (what we would survive without the heal we still do, what we would not survive with the heal we still don't).

 

Just like other ATs and some sets DM is subtly obsolete.

 

 

Now, I have not tested DM in the PTS so I offer no feedback, but the crushing majority dislikes it and what they say about it sounds like it's just not fun. Which is important in a game.

 

I suggest if extra AoE is desired to look at Soul Drain instead. Shorten the recharge, shorten the buff time so the uptime remains the same. Up the damage. If it is up every 20 seconds it can serve as an opener that softens a spawn and then buffs the player to handle what is still alive.

[Gobbledigook]

12 hours ago, Vigilant Vergil said:

I may be in the minority here:  I really didn't like the proposed change to Dark Consumption as a mini-nuke the last time DM was being looked at, and I don't want it changed into an AoE attack to have in rotation.  I like Dark Consumption as is - a low damage/low endurance power I can use to refill my endurance when I need to.

 

I assume you mean the version of Touch of Fear on Test rather than my idea?  Otherwise that seems a bit harsh.  Admittedly, I was cribbing from an in-game power to make my suggestion, but my goal was not to make up a new power wholesale as much as to use an existing power as a mostly balanced foundation.

DC would still give endurance. It would be on a minute cooldown and not a 3 minute cooldown. Nuke and endurance gain with shorter cooldown.

 

No I meant the version we have on offer to test.

 

I was just offering some other ideas like yours, I am sure lots of you cou!d give some better ideas also. Just something less bland than this test version of ToF.

Edited November 20, 2020 by Gobbledegook

[Gobbledigook]

5 hours ago, Sovera said:

But it isn't. though. Even if we take pylons loosely they still are a metric and no AT has ever brought DM to a competitive range. The 'strength lies in ST damage' seems to be a parroted term with no actual basis. What DM does have is a small heal and a different build up power that, ultimately, falls short since it imposes a tax on the set (can't be -too- good at base or Soul Drain will make the damage explode. But on any circumstance that does not have SD saturated then the set lags behind). It also has an endurance clickie.

 

So DM is not really something strong in ST but rather a set chockful of utility with a small heal, an endurance recovery power and a minor -ToHit debuff. All of these impose taxes.

 

If a set has a power rating of 100 then a % of it goes to ST, a % of it goes to AoE, then utility takes % (knockdowns, stuns, heals, etc). The more utility the set has the more % is shaved from ST and AoE to stay within the original 100.

 

Back in the day all of these might have been more useful, but today when people go around softcapped without much hassle the -ToHit does little, and, in my experience, the small heal DM has does little (what we would survive without the heal we still do, what we would not survive with the heal we still don't).

 

Just like other ATs and some sets DM is subtly obsolete.

 

 

Now, I have not tested DM in the PTS so I offer no feedback, but the crushing majority dislikes it and what they say about it sounds like it's just not fun. Which is important in a game.

 

I suggest if extra AoE is desired to look at Soul Drain instead. Shorten the recharge, shorten the buff time so the uptime remains the same. Up the damage. If it is up every 20 seconds it can serve as an opener that softens a spawn and then buffs the player to handle what is still alive.

I agree.

 

War Mace for example is one of the highest single target damage sets, yet has very good AoE also, whilst offering good soft crowd control in stuns and knockdowns. I would take a knockdown over a small to hit debuff any day. It offers more survival and can take a FF proc.

 

Dark Melee has a less resisted damage type which is nice and soul drain which makes the set, which is weaker on single targets. But it is not a top single target damage set or AoE. Siphon life's damage or DPA is neutered by having a small heal attached. Smite and Midnight Grasp are it's 2 best single target powers. Some do like the heal in Siphon Life including Stalkers,and are resistant to losing it, yet they are willing to lose the heal in Energy Melee to get more damage on a set that really does not need it lol.

 

I also think dark melee needs a bigger review to all of it's powers and bringing up to date. I do not think a throw away weak AoE is doing anything good for the set at all.

 

No main power in a set should be throw away in my opinion anyway. I view the epics as a way to fill out weaknesses etc. For example controllers have some extra damage attacks and armours in their epics to flesh out their builds, which they lack. Why is DM to have a throw away power when other sets do not?. A long cooldown epic AoE does not replace main set AoE, it just enhances it, if needed.

 

ToF could have been another good single target damage power and either soul drain or dark consumption or a hybrid of the pair, created into a good AoE power.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 20, 2020 by Gobbledegook

[archgemini24]

1 minute ago, Gobbledegook said:

No main power in a set should be throw away in my opinion anyway. I view the epics as a way to fill out weaknesses etc. For example controllers have some extra damage attacks and armours in their epics to flesh out their builds, which they lack. Why is DM to have a throw away power when other sets do not?. A long cooldown epic AoE does not replace main set AoE, it just enhances it if needed.

This is the part that gets me about the ToF changes: that it has been adjusted with the intention that it is to be thrown out later for powers not even in the set. Has any other power in the game been looked at with this philosophy in mind?

 

Also, can we consider getting Soul Drain moved up. Waiting until 26 (28 for Tanks) for the sets Build-Up power makes the design decisions around ToF even more wonky, because if ToF is designed for low-level AoE and Dark Melee is going to start being balanced more around a saturated Soul Drain (or at least having it available), it doesn't make a lot of sense for Soul Drain to come so late.

[Coyote]

11 hours ago, Vigilant Vergil said:

I think my experience from testing the power makes me lean closer to you suggestion of #1.  I can't provide any data myself, but I think the small radius causes the extra area to get wasted; since critters can attack in melee from 7 ft. out and surround the player on all sides when attacking, the area of the 6 ft. radius circle is likely to fail to encompass more than a few attackers.

 

While you're considering this, let me put in some possible clarifications... with the caveat that I have not tested these myself. But I have seen posts from posters who generally know what they're talking about, giving two important details:

1: Mobiles take up a set space, depending on the model, but usually a 3' circle (I'm not sure about the height... if it's a cylinder then how tall it is, etc... so let's stick to ground area).

2: A mobile only has to touch, not be wholly within, an AoE in order to be affected.

 

Now, assuming the radius is correct, a 3' diameter mobile who is the target of ToF "eats up" 1.5' of the power's radius with its own radius. So, the radius extends 4.5' outside in all directions. However, this radius only has to touch another mobile, not encompass it. So, if you have 5 mobs in front of you, all packed together side to side, and you target the centermost mob, you should be able to hit all 5 mobs since the innermost mobs on each side eat up 3', the center mob eats 1.5', and that still leaves 1.5' of radius left over to touch the outside mobs on each side. Assuming they're "packed", in other words, with no space in between their cylinders.

 

So it seems that it should be able to affect a good amount of mobs in a packed situation. If it's not, then perhaps mobs have an "effective radius" larger than 3', perhaps by the AI trying to keep some distance between each other to make maneuvering easier.

[Jacke]

38 minutes ago, Coyote said:

So it seems that it should be able to affect a good amount of mobs in a packed situation. If it's not, then perhaps mobs have an "effective radius" larger than 3', perhaps by the AI trying to keep some distance between each other to make maneuvering easier.

Interesting thoughts, @Coyote.  I think the AI in City isn't that complex, so that mobs' maneuvering and packing is more an emergent phenomenon than designed per se.

[ForeverLaxx]

1 hour ago, Coyote said:

A mobile only has to touch, not be wholly within, an AoE in order to be affected.

This only seems true when fighting vaguely human-sized enemies. You can see how messed up hit boxes become as foes get larger and the Drowning in Blood Trial, fighting the two giant Shivans at the end, really make it obvious. Melee players are clustered all underneath a "central" target point, which often has the appearance of you hitting nothing (as the monster's legs are on either side of you). Creeping up to said legs in order to hit them doesn't actually put you in melee range of the enemy despite the fact that its legs keep stepping on your character model. It really makes controlling its facing a problem since you can't really see much without zooming way out.

 

What I suspect could be the problem for these small AoE effects so rarely hitting more than 2 enemies is that the hit box for a mob is just a bit smaller than the geometry collision of the model itself. There used to be a time when enemy mobs had zero collision with each other and could stack in the same spot. When that was changed to make dumpster farming less efficient, I'm going to bet the mob's hitboxes weren't adjusted to that same collision radius.

[Wavicle]

I suggest you revert the Dark Melee changes (Again) and try again next time (again).

[Kanil]

6 hours ago, Sovera said:

But it isn't. though. Even if we take pylons loosely they still are a metric and no AT has ever brought DM to a competitive range. The 'strength lies in ST damage' seems to be a parroted term with no actual basis. What DM does have is a small heal and a different build up power that, ultimately, falls short since it imposes a tax on the set (can't be -too- good at base or Soul Drain will make the damage explode. But on any circumstance that does not have SD saturated then the set lags behind). It also has an endurance clickie.

 

So DM is not really something strong in ST but rather a set chockful of utility with a small heal, an endurance recovery power and a minor -ToHit debuff. All of these impose taxes.

 

there's an aspect to how people have a legacy view on a powerset that ends up havin some weird definition on how it functions so where dm is defined as "good at st" actually means "the only good attacks on it were st" rather than it bein good at an objective level or st focused as a design goal

 

you can see similar thought processes for stuff like "km is good at st" or "staff is good at aoe" - it's not that they are necessarily good at it from an objective level, it's that the only noteworthy powers are of those varieties. 

 

 

[Gobbledigook]

1 hour ago, Kanil said:

 

there's an aspect to how people have a legacy view on a powerset that ends up havin some weird definition on how it functions so where dm is defined as "good at st" actually means "the only good attacks on it were st" rather than it bein good at an objective level or st focused as a design goal

 

you can see similar thought processes for stuff like "km is good at st" or "staff is good at aoe" - it's not that they are necessarily good at it from an objective level, it's that the only noteworthy powers are of those varieties. 

 

 

Yes i mentioned Staff in another thread. It's singe target damage is pretty bad but people justify it by saying it has good AoE. It does have ok Aoe but nothing special, not enough to warrant such low single target anyway. Not having a build up does not help.

 

Compare War Mace again to Staff. Better single target damage and does it really have less AoE? NO!

Edited November 20, 2020 by Gobbledegook

[Sovera]

17 minutes ago, Gobbledegook said:

Yes i mentioned Staff in another thread. It's singe target damage is pretty bad but people justify it by saying it has good AoE. It does have ok Aoe but nothing special, not enough to warrant such low single target anyway. Not having a build up does not help.

 

Compare War Mace again to Staff. Better single target damage and does it really have less AoE? NO!

War Mace is an outlier though. It was nipping at TW's heels back when TW was the most OP of sets. Just like TW it breaks the mold by having strong ST, strong AoE, plus useful utility (so... many.. KD/KUs...). It is hard for other sets to compete other than WM having pretty damn meh skins and thematically not being very fun (furthermore without good skins allowing to diversify. WTB mace version of the Vanguard skins all light saber... Er... light mace. WITH SPIKES!)

[aethereal]

I don't have a strong answer to this, but comparing everything to War Mace (which may be the best melee set with TW nerfed) isn't productive.

 

However, does Staff have better AoE than Claws?  Savage?  Spines?

[Hew]

For what its worth, despite seeing variations in viability depending on context, I still strongly feel it is a well worked out balance. As others have said, not every set has to have all things all the time. You get a heal (that you can slot +end in), you get soul drain, you get -tohit all over. All told, it (as a whole) is definitely more solid.

 

Some things people miss out on, and I definitely did, is fast stacking -tohit thanks to 2 aoes. Early and early-mid game, this is amazing. It really boosts survival.

[Kanil]

1 hour ago, aethereal said:

I don't have a strong answer to this, but comparing everything to War Mace (which may be the best melee set with TW nerfed) isn't productive.

 

However, does Staff have better AoE than Claws?  Savage?  Spines?

 

"outlier" as a reason for not comparing is weird to me because beyond the very top and bottom what else are you comparing against to have a proper scale/ref for the overall power level of a set? there isn't actually a "baseline" to work from so the only things left are data (of which the top is the most abundant) and "legacy knowledge/biases" which i feel like im always fighting against because of how backwards it can feel at times

 

anyways, re:staff aoe honestly a better question would be "how many powersets have worse AOE than it" than better, haha. guarded spin and eye of the storm are pretty mediocre to bad overall for the combined reason of having mediocre dpa and kinda whatever slotting options. 

the only sets i can actually think of where you could argue that it has worse aoe are KM and street justice. and arguably dark melee, with the caveat that dm has soul drain to skew things all kinds of weird. as previously mentioned, staff actually has the same awkward problem in lacking BU but in the opposite direction- it's even weaker than its competition due to a lack of BU and gaussians. 

 

there are other factors too ie eye of the storms anim time cutting into BU+gaussians time messing with aoe dmg on the stalker variant (and crit strikes flexibility) but yeah

Edited November 20, 2020 by Kanil

[Gobbledigook]

2 hours ago, Sovera said:

War Mace is an outlier though. It was nipping at TW's heels back when TW was the most OP of sets. Just like TW it breaks the mold by having strong ST, strong AoE, plus useful utility (so... many.. KD/KUs...). It is hard for other sets to compete other than WM having pretty damn meh skins and thematically not being very fun (furthermore without good skins allowing to diversify. WTB mace version of the Vanguard skins all light saber... Er... light mace. WITH SPIKES!)

Katana then. Good single target and AoE with a defence buff. Rad melee, not short on AoE and the single target is pretty decent. Savage melee good AoE and single target.  All as good AoE and better single target than staff.

 

I don't even want to mention SS or the new EM lol.

 

All the sets should be given a quick balance pass in my opinion.

Edited November 20, 2020 by Gobbledegook

[Jacke]

2 hours ago, aethereal said:

However, does Staff have better AoE than Claws?  Savage?  Spines?

 

Some AoE thoughts.  But I think my Dark Melee thoughts below are more important.

 

I have not tried Staff, but @Kanil has weighed in on it.  But I have tried Katana and Broad Sword.   @Linea once referred to Broad Sword, Katana, and Staff powersets as interchangeable, but I think he was referring to them all having a +Def power that helped in softcap builds and otherwise similar.  But there are similarities.

Years ago, I did a spreadsheet to compare the numbers of Katana and Broad Sword at the time.  I think these judgements still hold.

Katana is better for DPA and DPE than Broadsword, which is better for alpha striking.  For taking only one of the T1 and T2 attacks, Katana take the faster lower damage Gambler's Cut, while Broad sword goes with the slower higher damage Hack, as each is the better DPA and DPE attack.

Katana and Broad Sword both have two melee AoE's, one ~130° arc (or so it was years ago), one a PBAoE.  I'd say they have reasonable AoE..  DPA and DPE good enough that hitting one target isn't that much worse than the ST attacks and hitting 2 targets is very good, with Katana marginally better.

Back to Staff.  @Kanil's experience of being meh jives with what I've heard, harder to master and feels underwhelming.  Having a resource to manage means a build may be pushed to have both T1 and T2 attacks.  Then with 3 AoEs, it can be harder to skip powers to fit in more Pool and Epic powers.

Haven't played much of Claws, little of Spines, and nothing of Savage Melee.  Claws is supposed to be great AoE at medium End cost, while Spines is great(er?!?) AoE at high End cost.

 

Dark Melee, that I know.  The -ToHit helps.  Great to have the +Heal in a good attack and the powerful +Dam and +End AoE powers.  As for how good at ST, I'd have to compare exact numbers, but I think it's at least reasonable to good.  Shadow Maul is awesome and I think due to how the mobs move, the target cap nerfs don't really touch it that much.

 

But I worry about the changes to Touch of Fear.  Back in 2006, The_Gamemaster's guide said it allowed Dark Melee at low levels with some slotting to shut down Bosses with two applications and keep them weak until defeated.  I think that it's received a bit of nerfing, but with enough fear and recharge from IOs it can still be stacked well.  And if Dark Armor's Cloak of Fear is used, a Dark/Dark Scrapper, Brute, or Tanker can do a good Fear build (and would be better if Cloak of Fear was given some love).  Fear Builds are still usable even in fast team play.  Fear Protection is still rarer than Stun Protection among mobs, so it's stronger than stacking stuns.

 

But the changes to Touch of Fear have turned it into a poorer Fear Power.  Slower to cast.  For slotting, now needs not just acc enh, end red, rech red, and fear enh, but also damage.  Siphon Life has the same challenges with healing and damage, but there exists Accurate Healing IOs to help.  Will there be Accurate Fear IO sets?

 

Not sure the changes to ToF are worth it.  So it's either enhanced as a damage AoE that seems to be underwhelming.  Or focus on a Fear build and just get the damage as a bonus.  And hope the extra aggro that little damage causes isn't much of a drawback.

Edited November 20, 2020 by Jacke

[CrudeVileTerror]

I think @Jacke has summed up my feelings regarding the Touch of Fear changes fairly well.

Thanks for that, Jacke!

 

Although, an idea crops up . . . 

I was -going- to say "it's starting to look like Dark Melee is cursed!" as a bit of a joke about the efforts to buff its damage.

If the Devs are willing to revert the Touch of Fear changes, and put the set back on the burner again for a little more time to cook, I think the magic word can be:

Cursed!

 

I know.  I know.

New game mechanics are unpopular and fly in the face of The Cottage.

But if -any- Set should be cursing targets, wouldn't it be Dark Melee?

 

Just spitballing (again, assuming the Devs are willing to revert Dark Melee again for additional time to explore alternatives), but . . . 

Leave Touch of Fear as-is for Single-Target Fear, but grant it an AoE "Curse" Effect which will flag enemies around the Fear'd target.  Cursed Targets have a standard fare To-Hit Debuff applied to them.

If the player then uses another Dark Melee AoE (Shadow Maul, Dark Consumption, Soul Drain), then all Cursed targets lose the Cursed status (and associated To-Hit Debuff) and take additional Damage (bringing up the total DPA/DPS to roughly the same place you're currently looking for).

This way we can preserve the use of Touch of Fear as a strong mitigation tool for the players who use it right now, while offering the -option- to players who want to score more Damage.

 

Alternatively, we can get really creative, and have the Cursed targets do all kinds of other things.

[Jacke]

How about this for an AoE buff.   I know, RC1, but....

 

Keep the Shadow Maul changes.  Revert the Touch of Fear changes.

 

And buff P2W (and even temp) Sands of Mu in place of changing ToF.  Make it have the same AoE and target cap as Shadow Maul does now.

 

Right now on my Dark Melee toons, I do an AoE chain of Shadow Maul - Sands of Mu - Shadow Maul - gap for everything else.

 

Sands of Mu has the older narrower arc that Shadow Maul used to have.  It's much harder to align to get more mobs in the AoE.  But from learning to keep aligning before attacking with Shadow Maul, I've transferred that to Sands of Mu and I do hit more than 1 mob most of the time.

 

Buffing Sands of Mu does benefit all toons.  But I don't think it's an overwhelming out-of-control buff.

 

And that would ease the delay in dealing with Dark Melee more thoroughly.

[Jimmy]

As the patch is nearing completion, we are no longer seeking feedback on this topic.

 

The latest patch notes can be found in the Beta Patch Notes forum.

 

If you encounter any bugs during this last phase of testing, please report them in the Beta Bug Reports forum.

 

Once the patch is live, feel free to post feedback in the Suggestions & Feedback forum. and bug reports in the Bug Reports forum.

 

Thank you!