Please revert the Rage change.

[Rimerat]

Would you say there's openness on that table for just removing the -Def penalty? Considering the end crash (and what risks that can bring), the damage penalty (which means foes get 10 secs to wail on you while you can't fight back), and that SS is disadvantaged in the late game with prominent resists to S/L; do you consider there being a case that could be argued for it, even if not ultimately successful?

 

I think straight up removing it would have to come with some other downside. The thing we want to avoid is it becoming a "just set it on auto and forget about it" power, as that runs counter to the intent of both the original design and Castle's redesign of it.

 

Even removing the damage penalty (due to the mentioned smashing resist issues) isn't out of the question if we can come up with some kind of alternative mechanic.

 

If the -Defense has to stay, it seems simplest to let it be resistable.

 

 

I firmly disagree with this. I would point to the suggestions I made in my post on page 5 instead, and the reasoning behind why a defense downgrade at all would be completely unacceptable. There's many other options. I don't think making Rage only viable for defense-focused sets that can easily overcap is a good idea.

[Paradox Fate]

Would you say there's openness on that table for just removing the -Def penalty? Considering the end crash (and what risks that can bring), the damage penalty (which means foes get 10 secs to wail on you while you can't fight back), and that SS is disadvantaged in the late game with prominent resists to S/L; do you consider there being a case that could be argued for it, even if not ultimately successful?

 

I think straight up removing it would have to come with some other downside. The thing we want to avoid is it becoming a "just set it on auto and forget about it" power, as that runs counter to the intent of both the original design and Castle's redesign of it.

 

Even removing the damage penalty (due to the mentioned smashing resist issues) isn't out of the question if we can come up with some kind of alternative mechanic.

 

If the -Defense has to stay, it seems simplest to let it be resistable.

 

 

I firmly disagree with this. I would point to the suggestions I made in my post on page 5 instead, and the reasoning behind why a defense downgrade at all would be completely unacceptable. There's many other options. I don't think making Rage only viable for defense-focused sets that can easily overcap is a good idea.

 

Then make it a regular 10 second build up. That will work across all AT's. Once SS is proliferated over to Scrappers, it needs to be done anyway.

[Vanden]

Would you say there's openness on that table for just removing the -Def penalty? Considering the end crash (and what risks that can bring), the damage penalty (which means foes get 10 secs to wail on you while you can't fight back), and that SS is disadvantaged in the late game with prominent resists to S/L; do you consider there being a case that could be argued for it, even if not ultimately successful?

 

I think straight up removing it would have to come with some other downside. The thing we want to avoid is it becoming a "just set it on auto and forget about it" power, as that runs counter to the intent of both the original design and Castle's redesign of it.

 

Even removing the damage penalty (due to the mentioned smashing resist issues) isn't out of the question if we can come up with some kind of alternative mechanic.

 

If the -Defense has to stay, it seems simplest to let it be resistable.

 

 

I firmly disagree with this. I would point to the suggestions I made in my post on page 5 instead, and the reasoning behind why a defense downgrade at all would be completely unacceptable. There's many other options. I don't think making Rage only viable for defense-focused sets that can easily overcap is a good idea.

 

It makes sense to me. The more reliant on Defense a set is, the more resistance to defense debuffs it has. It solves the issue of the defense crash being more punishing to some sets than others.

[Trickshooter]

Would you say there's openness on that table for just removing the -Def penalty? Considering the end crash (and what risks that can bring), the damage penalty (which means foes get 10 secs to wail on you while you can't fight back), and that SS is disadvantaged in the late game with prominent resists to S/L; do you consider there being a case that could be argued for it, even if not ultimately successful?

 

I think straight up removing it would have to come with some other downside. The thing we want to avoid is it becoming a "just set it on auto and forget about it" power, as that runs counter to the intent of both the original design and Castle's redesign of it.

 

Even removing the damage penalty (due to the mentioned smashing resist issues) isn't out of the question if we can come up with some kind of alternative mechanic.

 

If the -Defense has to stay, it seems simplest to let it be resistable.

 

 

I firmly disagree with this. I would point to the suggestions I made in my post on page 5 instead, and the reasoning behind why a defense downgrade at all would be completely unacceptable. There's many other options. I don't think making Rage only viable for defense-focused sets that can easily overcap is a good idea.

 

I think if it was -Str(Defense) at least, it wouldn't affect set bonuses (which I assume is where your Fiery Aura user is getting their +Defense from), as I believe they are flagged to ignore buffs and enhancements, but I would need to double-check. But the problem there I guess is that it would have no penalty for anyone without +Defense powers.

[Erratic1]

 

Then make it a regular 10 second build up. That will work across all AT's. Once SS is proliferated over to Scrappers, it needs to be done anyway.

 

What is the purpose and perk of Super Strength if it has Build Up just like every other melee attack set?

 

As for proliferation, not every set should be proliferated. There should be reasons to choose one AT over another. For that matter, it's not even thematic for scrappers to have super strength.

[Rimerat]

Yeah I don't know. To be clear I'm 100% for Rage no longer being a 'set it and forget it' power. I just don't think a defense hit is a good idea. No matter what armor set you're talking about, it would be a massive hit. In regards to some armor sets, it would make the skill borderline unusable at all when doing high-end content.

 

If rage can't be how it used to be, I'd suggest disabling 'rage stackng' altogether and just converting it more into a standard build-up. It's a boring solution, but a solution nonetheless.

 

Alternatively, just nerf it hard. Reduce the damage/to-hit, reduce the duration and cooldown so the crash happens more frequently, increase the endurance cost to activate.

 

You could also change the defense debuff to a recovery/regeneration debuff.

 

Just please don't implement a solution that leans Super Strength heavily toward being used with specific armor sets, and leaves other sets hanging. Every Primary should be viable with every Secondary.

[Solvernia]

use your insps lads

[MalphiteMeIRL]

 

EDIT: Also a little off topic, but I wonder if Castle's vision of SS is what inspired the brute's fury mechanic.

 

History time!

 

So after issue 4/5ish, there was much debate on the tank forum as to why take a tank instead of a scrapper. Jack Emmert (Statesman), became heavily involved in the discussion and began to work with us to develop a mechanic to make tanks more comic booky. The mechanic that the entire tank forum and Statesman developed you ask? We called it Fury and it revolved around tanks doing more damage as they got hit because they knew they needed to put the enemy down fast. World of Carboard and all that. And then Jack, bless his heart, promised that the mechanic was going to be implemented and given to tankers.

 

Fast forward to COV beta, and the post from Jack that said, hey, brutes got an awesome new mechanic called Fury, you're gonna love it, go play it.

 

And there was salt for every tanker, forever and ever.

 

edit:ocd and spelling :/

 

That's really cool! I was not super active on boards way back so this is all new to me. Ty for the history lesson. :D

 

Would it be possible to make Rage an auto power, and make it a mini-fury?

 

Each SS attack you activate builds Rage. You can stack rage up to 8 times for 10% damage a stack. Stacks last X time before decaying

 

This replaces the crash penalty with a time penalty, which is sort of the same: the player has no rage for a time

 

I like that idea, far more elegant than what I proposed.

 

 

 

[Rimerat]

use your insps lads

I know you're trolling hard but I wanted to address the 'use insps' topic since some people legitimately feel that's a solution.

 

Try doing a speed ITF with rage running. Even if you use the ability conservatively, you won't get enough purps all the time to mitigate the crash every time it happens.

 

Source: I've done tried it.

 

Why not just use it less? Well, that's kind of why this topic got made. Not being able to use your abilities is not fun.

 

 

[Solvernia]

Try doing a speed ITF with rage running. Even if you use the ability conservatively, you won't get enough purps all the time to mitigate the crash every time it happens.

 

[Rimerat]

Right, right. By picking Super Strength, people are only allowed to carry a full tray of t2 purples any time they want to do challenging content.

 

Seems fair.

 

Looks like I've been intellectually checkmated.

[Paradox Fate]

 

Then make it a regular 10 second build up. That will work across all AT's. Once SS is proliferated over to Scrappers, it needs to be done anyway.

 

What is the purpose and perk of Super Strength if it has Build Up just like every other melee attack set?

 

Because, maybe, it should be handled like any other melee attack set?

Pretty sure any other set would love to have a perma build-up running, while they just sit with their 10 second one.

[Vanden]

Then make it a regular 10 second build up. That will work across all AT's. Once SS is proliferated over to Scrappers, it needs to be done anyway.

 

What is the purpose and perk of Super Strength if it has Build Up just like every other melee attack set?

 

Because, maybe, it should be handled like any other melee attack set?

Pretty sure any other set would love to have a perma build-up running, while they just sit with their 10 second one.

It sounds to me like you're not a Super Strength player frustrated by the drawbacks of Rage, but a player of any set besides Super Strength that's jealous of the advantages of Rage. This thread is not for you.

[Rylas]

Says the guy with an Energy Melee avatar.

 

Not that showcasing one set in your avatar means anything...

 

But he would be correct. Your suggestion completely ignores the fact that all of SS is balanced with Rage in mind. And that without it SS would suffer terribly in the end-game due to Smashing damage being so frequently resisted.

[shadowrex]

Gonna throw this in instead of a separate topic. Can we get a "Minimal FX" for super strength while we're at it? I wanna be strong without my arms glowing.

[Trickshooter]

It sounds to me like you're not a Super Strength player frustrated by the drawbacks of Rage, but a player of any set besides Super Strength that's jealous of the advantages of Rage. This thread is not for you.

 

Says the guy with an Energy Melee avatar.

 

It's not EM, it's Vanden's old suggestion for improving the appearance of SS!

[Vindicator]

Gonna throw this in instead of a separate topic. Can we get a "Minimal FX" for super strength while we're at it? I wanna be strong without my arms glowing.

 

/suppressclosefxdist 99

[Paradox Fate]

Says the guy with an Energy Melee avatar.

 

Not that showcasing one set in your avatar means anything...

 

But he would be correct. Your suggestion completely ignores the fact that all of SS is balanced with Rage in mind. And that without it SS would suffer terribly in the end-game due to Smashing damage being so frequently resisted.

 

That's also the 'problem' of Titan Weapons, Street Justice, Martial Arts and Staff Fighting. Don't single out SS because of that.

[Erratic1]

 

Then make it a regular 10 second build up. That will work across all AT's. Once SS is proliferated over to Scrappers, it needs to be done anyway.

 

What is the purpose and perk of Super Strength if it has Build Up just like every other melee attack set?

 

Because, maybe, it should be handled like any other melee attack set?

Pretty sure any other set would love to have a perma build-up running, while they just sit with their 10 second one.

 

Every other set does something no other set does. Why should Super Strength not get it's own special thing?

 

You dodged the question with your, "I'm sure any other set..." reply. How about answering the question?

[Vanden]

 

It sounds to me like you're not a Super Strength player frustrated by the drawbacks of Rage, but a player of any set besides Super Strength that's jealous of the advantages of Rage. This thread is not for you.

 

Says the guy with an Energy Melee avatar.

 

It's not EM, it's Vanden's old suggestion for improving the appearance of SS!

 

Again, irony.  Telling someone "this thread is not for you" while showcasing Whirling Hands could be perceived as rather hypocritical.

 

I'm sorry, am I supposed to change the avatar I've been using for 14 years of CoH when I'm posting in a thread about Super Strength?

[Erratic1]

As for proliferation, not every set should be proliferated.

 

This is one that should.  I'll explain further below.

 

For that matter, it's not even thematic for scrappers to have super strength.

 

See my earlier post in this thread about existing comic book characters that are super strong.  Yes they do exist, and no they're not "Tankers" or "Brutes".  If you're still not convinced, we can talk about how Scrappers somehow have Titan Weapons.

 

Now I've been playing Super Strength for years, and I've seen 3 camps -

 

Camp 1 - INV/SS Tankers: They don't care much about the defense debuff as much as others because they have a resistance-based primary.  They also don't care about the damage debuff very much because they're tanks.

 

Camp 2 - SS/FA Brutes: Mostly farmers.  Enough said.

 

Camp 3 - Super Strength fans that want to feel super strong and punch things instead of using weapons or elemental powers.  This is why we need powerset proliferation of Super Strength for Scrappers.  Replace Rage with Build Up and be done with it.

 

Comic book scrappers include such characters as Wolverine, Daredevil, Wildcat, Timberwolf, etc. Many are stronger than average, some stronger than human, but I have a hard time thinking of any that are in the juggling boulders, lifting tanks category. They are exceptionally strong, not super strong.

[Solvernia]

Again, irony.  Telling someone "this thread is not for you" while showcasing Whirling Hands could be perceived as rather hypocritical.

 

I think you're past the point of making a rational argument mate

 

but let's keep going and see what happens

[Paradox Fate]

 

Every other set does something no other set does. Why should Super Strength not get it's own special thing?

 

You dodged the question with your, "I'm sure any other set..." reply. How about answering the question?

 

SS has good amount of crowd control along with being a relative easy to go by set. It's simple and the animations/feedback feel good and impactful.

[Solvernia]

Tell me about it.  I can't believe how obtuse some people can be.  I feel like I'm speaking to a brick wall sometimes.

 

Again, irony.  Telling someone "this thread is not for you" while showcasing Whirling Hands could be perceived as rather hypocritical.

[Rylas]

Okay, we're letting this thread devolve (I'm guilty of this too) instead of taking a good opportunity to provide ideas. Especially when it's been expressed that:

4. Rebalancing Rage is absolutely on the table if we get some good ideas to keep it as an interesting, distinctive power for Super Strength.

 

I'm compiling a list of suggestions that have been tossed out there so we can at least make this a bit more organized. We all have some thoughts on this, and certainly some strong feelings, but we don't have to be like herding cats without Taunt and a corner. If I've missed a suggestion that's been made in this thread, please add it on to the list.

 

• Replace -Def with self damage

• 160% damage boost for 2 minutes with just the damage crash. But a 7-8 minute cooldown

• Change the -Def penalty to -Def AND -Res

• Reduce the +damage and/or +tohit of Rage.

• Reduce the duration AND cooldown so that the -damage crash happens somewhat more frequently.

• Increase the endurance crash/initial cost.

• Prevent Rage from stacking altogether.

• Allow Unrelenting in Presence to *passively* mitigate the crash.

• let -Def be resistable

• Rage as auto power, each SS attack you activate builds Rage up to 8 times for 10% damage (and 2.5% ToHit) a stack (bolded is my addition, hope you don't mind Joe_Zard)

 

Let's maybe stop digging at each other and first get a list with plenty of options. If we could avoid ad hominem reactions and tackle the merits of actual suggestions, that'd be great. It might help if we could agree on some basics. Such as: sets are balanced around SOs. Having some common starting points might help keep this a productive effort. It's just a thought, but how derailed we're getting isn't helpful.

 

[edited for clarity]