Focused Feedback: Power Changes (Release Candidates)

[Mezmera]

26 minutes ago, SwitchFade said:

30% resist in a vacuum is poor mitogation. For example, a tank with 30% resist would be very delicate. The nature of resist demonstrates that resist becomes effective over 60%. In fact, the difference between 60 and 70% is a huge decrease in damage taken, where the difference in 30-40% is meager.

 

Due to this, 30% from RoP is only good if it can put you over 60% total, and that's the real issue. A squishy, in most cases, will not have a base 30-40% to start and any build that did get that would sacrifice too much in other areas, such as defense, offense, etc, generally.

 

Additionally, certain combinations of sets which could get 40% base resist, then add 30% RoP resist.... AND 90-100% uptime with RoP and one other power for status protection.... Very overtuned.

 

Yes a tank running 30% resist alone would not be a tank I'd trust.  Although a tank usually takes 3-4 powers to equate the resistance you can gain in just RoP, outside of their t9.  No resistance vs resisting half of the damage you're allowed to in all types is quite the difference.  Throw in things like tough and the epic resists and we're talking a real sturdy squishy not including what resist and hp bonuses you can attain.  

Edited March 30, 2021 by Mezmera

[Decaying Rose]

16 hours ago, esotericist said:

 

it was already 2.03s for all three summons.

 

edit: like, i'm all for buffing mercs whenever reasonable, but this is actually not a place where mercs are worse off than the other MM primaries.

 

I just went and checked and you're right.  My bad.  The animation just feels way too long to me, but actually isn't.

[twozerofoxtrot]

54 minutes ago, SwitchFade said:

30% resist in a vacuum is poor mitogation. For example, a tank with 30% resist would be very delicate.

 

Counterargument: in reality, there is no such vacuum. 

 

People optimizing builds have set bonuses, Tough, and sometimes Epic/Patron armors. It should be reasonable to assume that players who are well educated enough to make a decision on the value of incorporating Rune into their build for survivability have to some degree increased their resistances somewhere from 10-30% from the aforementioned sources.

 

My specific example: I have only one character with Rune, a Rad/Rad defender. When I pop Rune, I generally do it for the resists because I am taking a lot of damage, and this puts me at or near caps across the board.

 

 

Caveat to the above: I don't care what happens with the rune changes. I don't keep my character in harms way long enough for a difference of 30 seconds of uptime to matter. I understand I may be in the minority on how I play with Rune.

[WindDemon21]

On 3/28/2021 at 4:29 PM, Number Six said:

 

The current code is quite different than the original code. There are a lot of things that are possible now that didn't used to be.

Sooo... Gravity Sink location knockdown field with pulling to the center of it instead of dimension shift!??!!?? 🙂

[ScarySai]

Just now, WindDemon21 said:

Sooo... Gravity Sink location knockdown field with pulling to the center of it instead of dimension shift!??!!?? 🙂

Don't touch muh d-shift 😠

[WindDemon21]

Just now, ScarySai said:

Don't touch muh d-shift 😠

*touches with Gravity Sink* 😛 Seriously though, or maybe... get rid of crush for GS, seriously though I've been wishing for this power since I played Gravity back in issue 1, and it makes an annoying amount of sense for the set.

[ScarySai]

Just now, WindDemon21 said:

*touches with Gravity Sink* 😛 Seriously though, or maybe... get rid of crush for GS, seriously though I've been wishing for this power since I played Gravity back in issue 1, and it makes an annoying amount of sense for the set.

I have always wanted a vortex power, but singy having it Is good enough for me. Especially if this build gets a few tweaks.

 

Wormhole makes relocation trivial.

[DreadShinobi]

4 hours ago, SwitchFade said:

Sorry @Lex Talion but the core design of the game is that squishies do not get perma status protection. I fact, there's a balance point beyond which a power with status protection uptime would necessitate a nerf to their sizable compensatory powers.

 

Further, even without any status protection powers, tactically handling and overcoming status is part of the reward of squashing with a squishy. If you're of the mind that facerolling is what a squishy should do, always, I would suggest that is tactically unsound.

This has never been a "core game design" It may have played out like that, but mez being something that only affects certain ATs while others ignore game mechanics completely is rather silly. Break Frees should not be an inspiration tax for certain ATs. It is incredibly easy to play any melee AT and bring 20 red insps because you don't need anything else. I like RoP because it means I can start a TF with 1-2 break free insps instead of 4-5 and carry more purples or reds. I still have to consider mez protection even with RoP at its current values, it is not a free pass or immunity like melee ATs enjoy. One instance I particularly enjoy is the final AV fight in the ITF because if you kill all the nictus quickly they CAN stun you through melee AT standard protection, and I do feel there should be more of that in the game, where a tanker may need to have a break free on hand to deal with stacked mezzes. Break free insps drop for everyone, no where is it stated as a footnote: defenders/corrs/blasters/pb/ws/etc only. As I stated in a previous post mez should act more like defense debuffs and cascading defense failure and sadly it does not and such an overhaul would be a massive endeavor. Nerfing rune of protection duration points to how mez protection is so geared to all or nothing. "Squishy" archetypes do often have a number of tools to avoid being mezzed, but when that one slips through it can not only be a death sentence but is also 100% dps loss. RoP being an optional tool to avoid that situation is fair, and certainly moreso when you have archetypes that have 100% immunity to such situations. 90s uptime still provides a large downtime where avoiding mez must still be considered.

 

There is also a large balancing point gap where this game is always stated to be balanced around SOs, but this change is clearly not. RoP uptime/downtime is extremely wide without a full endgame IO'd build that focuses heavily on reaching over 100% global recharge from set bonuses, and then you're still left with 60s downtime even reaching upwards of 130% global recharge from set bonuses. 

 

If RoP is left untouched, with a 90s duration, I would never ever pick it up for any leveling character using SOs. That says alot. It is only a consideration on a min/maxed endgame build and you still pay a price for devoting your pool power selections towards it.

 

I would rather see the mez magnitude of RoP be reduced to mag 3 or 6 than have the duration reduced and that is something that hasn't been brought up before. It doesn't need to be mag 10 mez protection, but protection against 1 or 2 holds would be plenty for most content. 

[SwitchFade]

14 minutes ago, DreadShinobi said:

This has never been a "core game design" It may have played out like that, but mez being something that only affects certain ATs while others ignore game mechanics completely is rather silly. Break Frees should not be an inspiration tax for certain ATs. It is incredibly easy to play any melee AT and bring 20 red insps because you don't need anything else. I like RoP because it means I can start a TF with 1-2 break free insps instead of 4-5 and carry more purples or reds. I still have to consider mez protection even with RoP at its current values, it is not a free pass or immunity like melee ATs enjoy. One instance I particularly enjoy is the final AV fight in the ITF because if you kill all the nictus quickly they CAN stun you through melee AT standard protection, and I do feel there should be more of that in the game, where a tanker may need to have a break free on hand to deal with stacked mezzes. Break free insps drop for everyone, no where is it stated as a footnote: defenders/corrs/blasters/pb/ws/etc only. As I stated in a previous post mez should act more like defense debuffs and cascading defense failure and sadly it does not and such an overhaul would be a massive endeavor. Nerfing rune of protection duration points to how mez protection is so geared to all or nothing. "Squishy" archetypes do often have a number of tools to avoid being mezzed, but when that one slips through it can not only be a death sentence but is also 100% dps loss. RoP being an optional tool to avoid that situation is fair, and certainly moreso when you have archetypes that have 100% immunity to such situations. 90s uptime still provides a large downtime where avoiding mez must still be considered.

 

There is also a large balancing point gap where this game is always stated to be balanced around SOs, but this change is clearly not. RoP uptime/downtime is extremely wide without a full endgame IO'd build that focuses heavily on reaching over 100% global recharge from set bonuses, and then you're still left with 60s downtime even reaching upwards of 130% global recharge from set bonuses. 

 

If RoP is left untouched, with a 90s duration, I would never ever pick it up for any leveling character using SOs. That says alot. It is only a consideration on a min/maxed endgame build and you still pay a price for devoting your pool power selections towards it.

 

I would rather see the mez magnitude of RoP be reduced to mag 3 or 6 than have the duration reduced and that is something that hasn't been brought up before. It doesn't need to be mag 10 mez protection, but protection against 1 or 2 holds would be plenty for most content. 

It's always been a core game design that squishies do not get status protection wholesale, having other factors as compensation.

[GM Impervium]

Hey all;

Just a reminder to keep discussions/debates to a minimum, please!

[Decaying Rose]

I took my Grav/Dark troller to Test to try out the new singularity.  I like that Grav now has access to a "pull things closer" mechanic.  It works well.  I don't like that it's attached to an non-command-able pet.  It should really be a location drop power of some kind, or attached to some other power, as others have suggested here.

 

Not sure Crushing Field would be a good fit, as that it would make it quite an overpowered AoE immob.  I'm 50/50 on attaching the effect to Dimension Shift.  It would make DimShift quite a bit more powerful in that it could do an even better job of halting nasty things, but I think it would also make the power even more reviled than it is.

 

Attaching it to Wormhole would be interesting--have it land on the selected exit point.  Things spit out by the Wormhole would then be pulled in to the exit point.  This could potentially free up a slot often used for a KB converter.

 

Attaching it to Lift could fulfill Gravity's "gotta be weird" design--Lift a guy, do damage, the effect lingers and pulls things in.  Would probably have to move Lift higher in the power selection, though.  Maybe cut the duration of the attraction down a bunch, dunno.

 

 

 

[DreadShinobi]

1 hour ago, GM Impervium said:

Hey all;

Just a reminder to keep discussions/debates to a minimum, please!

So is RoP off the table? Are we beating a dead horse here? There has been zero developer response on how they feel about feedback given or any additional insight on why this direction on pool power balance was taken. I think many of us, regardless of our personal stances, were just hoping for more communication between developer and playerbase. Especially for a change that could be setting precedent for future changes and balance decisions. We are stuck making assumptions on developer motives because of a lack of clarity on their thought process with this one.

 

I think most will agree that the strength of this game is the passion that comes from the community and how much we care about this game. Developers keeping open communication and acting as a team with the playerbase would certainly support showing that this matters.

Edited March 30, 2021 by DreadShinobi

[Coyotedancer]

I suspect minds were already made up on the Rune situation before it ever showed up in a patch note... The lack of any sort of commentary makes me think we might as well have been talking to a pile of rocks. 

[DreadShinobi]

3 minutes ago, Coyotedancer said:

I suspect minds were already made up on the Rune situation before it ever showed up in a patch note... The lack of any sort of commentary makes me think we might as well have been talking to a pile of rocks. 

Then honestly the change to RoP should have been separated from the rest of the patch notes, had it stated as non negotiable and thread locked. If that is the stance that is fine, but the lack of communication and clarity still stands out.

[zenblack]

Since no one has made any compelling argument there isn't a reason to change it.

[DeepSky]

1 hour ago, zenblack said:

Since no one has made any compelling argument there isn't a reason to change it.

I agree, it should stay at 90 seconds instead of being changed, since there are no compelling arguments for it.

[Mezmera]

4 hours ago, DreadShinobi said:

Then honestly the change to RoP should have been separated from the rest of the patch notes, had it stated as non negotiable and thread locked. If that is the stance that is fine, but the lack of communication and clarity still stands out.

 

Going back a page I noticed one of my comments was gone.  Totally civil comment but it indicated that this change to RoP was as you're saying non-negotiable.  Kind of an insidious move to remove my comment about that as it pertained to feedback belonging in this thread and it was pretty succinct.  This is a bad precedent to set for future nerfs to powers just because.

Edited March 30, 2021 by Mezmera

[Jimmy]

30 minutes ago, Mezmera said:

Going back a page I noticed one of my comments was gone.  Totally civil comment but it indicated that this change to RoP was as you're saying non-negotiable.  Kind of an insidious move to remove my comment about that as it pertained to feedback belonging in this thread and it was pretty succinct.  This is a bad precedent to set for future nerfs to powers just because.

A lot of personal attacks have been posted (and hidden) recently and innocent posts definitely have been caught in the crossfire. From what I can tell your last post in this thread isn't hidden (I did go through and unhide a few this morning which were mistakenly hidden, though, so you may have missed it).

 

We aren't just hiding people disagreeing with this change - just read through the thread and you'll see that 🙂

 

5 hours ago, DreadShinobi said:

So is RoP off the table? Are we beating a dead horse here? There has been zero developer response on how they feel about feedback given or any additional insight on why this direction on pool power balance was taken. I think many of us, regardless of our personal stances, were just hoping for more communication between developer and playerbase. Especially for a change that could be setting precedent for future changes and balance decisions. We are stuck making assumptions on developer motives because of a lack of clarity on their thought process with this one.

 

I think most will agree that the strength of this game is the passion that comes from the community and how much we care about this game. Developers keeping open communication and acting as a team with the playerbase would certainly support showing that this matters.

New feedback is not beating the dead horse; we are reading and absorbing all the feedback. Back-and-forth bickering with thinly veiled insults isn't doing anything but clogging up the thread and preventing new opinions from being heard (I'm not accusing you of this - just a general observation regarding posters on both sides of the argument). That is beating a dead horse, and it's a real sink on our time to moderate it, which is why innocent posts keep getting caught up in it.

 

However, just because we are reading the feedback, it doesn't mean we are going to be compelled by it. I agree our communication on this change could've been better - we'll work on improving that going forwards.

[RageusQuitus2]

8 hours ago, DreadShinobi said:

RoP uptime/downtime is extremely wide without a full endgame IO'd build that focuses heavily on reaching over 100% global recharge from set bonuses, and then you're still left with 60s downtime even reaching upwards of 130% global recharge from set bonuses. 

 

If RoP is left untouched, with a 90s duration, I would never ever pick it up for any leveling character using SOs. That says alot. It is only a consideration on a min/maxed endgame build and you still pay a price for devoting your pool power selections towards it.

 

I would rather see the mez magnitude of RoP be reduced to mag 3 or 6 than have the duration reduced and that is something that hasn't been brought up before. It doesn't need to be mag 10 mez protection, but protection against 1 or 2 holds would be plenty for most content. 

This is very well spoken.  I hope it doesnt get lost in crossfire.  Good defense of current rop, good idea for backup plan if it must be nerfed.

 

And lastly why again is it being nerfed.  I see some players arguing.  But no developer input.

[SuperPlyx]

6 hours ago, Decaying Rose said:

I took my Grav/Dark troller to Test to try out the new singularity.  I like that Grav now has access to a "pull things closer" mechanic.  It works well.  I don't like that it's attached to an non-command-able pet.  It should really be a location drop power of some kind, or attached to some other power, as others have suggested here.

 

Not sure Crushing Field would be a good fit, as that it would make it quite an overpowered AoE immob.  I'm 50/50 on attaching the effect to Dimension Shift.  It would make DimShift quite a bit more powerful in that it could do an even better job of halting nasty things, but I think it would also make the power even more reviled than it is.

 

Attaching it to Wormhole would be interesting--have it land on the selected exit point.  Things spit out by the Wormhole would then be pulled in to the exit point.  This could potentially free up a slot often used for a KB converter.

 

Attaching it to Lift could fulfill Gravity's "gotta be weird" design--Lift a guy, do damage, the effect lingers and pulls things in.  Would probably have to move Lift higher in the power selection, though.  Maybe cut the duration of the attraction down a bunch, dunno.

 

Yeah after playing with it a bit. This new mechanic really means you want to be able to place it somehow to make full use of it. As listed above lot of ideas on how best to do that. But if nothing else giving it a very fast cooldown would at least allow you to resummon from mob to mob.

[Blackfeather]

1 hour ago, SuperPlyx said:

Yeah after playing with it a bit. This new mechanic really means you want to be able to place it somehow to make full use of it. As listed above lot of ideas on how best to do that. But if nothing else giving it a very fast cooldown would at least allow you to resummon from mob to mob.

 

I've been using Teleport Target for easy repositioning myself.

[EnjoyTheJourney]

If there's going to be feedback about the rationale behind turning RoP into a particularly unpopular pick, here are a few questions that seem pertinent:

 

1. Why 60 seconds instead of 90 seconds for RoP? 

2. Is fostering build diversity an objective borne in mind when calibrating powers? 

3. What role are power pools intended to play in fostering build diversity, if that is seen as a priority? How will that be reflected in power calibration choices, going forward?

 

As a way of mitigating the "T9 replacement concern", if it is a concern, give resists to RoP on a sliding scale, somewhat similar to SR but with a lower ceiling on the overall boost. Give the maximum allowed resistance boost to characters that have very low resists (ie: highest resist boost for resistances of 0). The closer a specific character resist is to 90%, the less resistances they gain. Make the resistance boost fall off quite hard when resistances approach 75%, for example. This helps to minimize the value of RoP to resistance based melee types that may otherwise have taken a T9 in their armor powerset (probably not because most armor T9s are just plain bad, but just in case its a concern). RoP would no longer have the potential to give melee types a 90 second crashless godmode.

Edited March 30, 2021 by EnjoyTheJourney

[Keleko]

On 3/28/2021 at 5:05 PM, macskull said:

I'm not entirely sure I follow your argument: you're saying a team that's trying to group up mobs is going to get pissed off by a power that groups up mobs? It seems to me the correct response to this situation by any melee character who wasn't running around with their pants on their head would be to simply... go to the Singularity and let the mobs come to them.

I'm playing a ranged Grav/Storm controller.  I don't get into melee range.  So the Singularity is going to be back away from the group, and it is going to be pulling mobs from the group toward it.  Then they will get knocked flying (I don't have KB-KD slotted, no room for it).  So this makes Singularity more difficult to work with in a team setting with this pull towards it power.

 

Also, I can't direct and control Singularity, so it's gonna do what it's gonna do.  If it causes problems for the team, they're going to want me to dismiss it.  I don't like being told I can't use my powers, particularly the capstone power of my primary set.  There are times when it makes sense to dismiss it, but not just because it pulls apart a group by existing.

Edited March 30, 2021 by Keleko

[Haijinx]

12 hours ago, SwitchFade said:

30% resist in a vacuum is poor mitogation. For example, a tank with 30% resist would be very delicate. The nature of resist demonstrates that resist becomes effective over 60%. In fact, the difference between 60 and 70% is a huge decrease in damage taken, where the difference in 30-40% is meager.

 

Due to this, 30% from RoP is only good if it can put you over 60% total, and that's the real issue. A squishy, in most cases, will not have a base 30-40% to start and any build that did get that would sacrifice too much in other areas, such as defense, offense, etc, generally.

 

Additionally, certain combinations of sets which could get 40% base resist, then add 30% RoP resist.... AND 90-100% uptime with RoP and one other power for status protection.... Very overtuned.

Its pretty easy to get to 35ish S/L resistance though using just tough and set bonuses 

[ScarySai]

@Keleko

 

Wormhole on top of singy, failing that, resummon.

 

This change has made my grav/storm much more effective. Any team that complains about it when KD IOs are in use is nuts and should be ignored.