Fixing Melee Regeneration set

[Naraka]

Trying to quantify Regen's mitigation will get you a rough approximation but having controllable bursts, whether it's damage, control or buffs, can be gamed to exceed rough approximations...or fall below them.  Just like it's possible to completely waste your MoG if used at the wrong time, you can use it to mitigate a show-stopping burst or save it for another time by utilizing a plethora of other tools to allow your weaker tools to combine into sustain through tough situations.

 

It's one of the main fun things about the set: you're looking for your own synergies as situations change to maintain performance while leaving something in the tank to rotate while your other tools are coming off cooldown.

[kelika2]

Add (or even replace) a heal over time to Reconstruction (all)

Increase Regen on Fast Healing and Integ (all)

Add Recovery to Fast Healing (stalkers, even willpower)

 

A Heal over Time (nature, time set types) to regen is thematic and makes sense.  stacking a HoT with Regen might also be a technical fix to most of the complaining and might even be a unique change in a sense no other sets or servers are stacking HoTs with Regen

[Naraka]

To expand and more quantify my previous idea to give Regen some resistances, I think improving the cast/effect periods of the clicks so it's a bit more responsive would help a lot but also adding a new mechanic to the set built around stacking your clicks.  Sent would retain it's advantage of +Absorb, incentivizing playing that AT for the difference in Regen for those that want to try all flavors of the set.  My intent is to make you want to play more different ATs to get the full spectrum of a set OR pick the AT that has the flavor of a set you prefer.  Equity across the AT, in this case, is purely homogeny and only benefits those obsessive with the exact numbers, clear speeds, etc.

 

Fast Healing (Brute/Scrapper): Added onto its base effect, Regeneration activation powers activates Fast Healing's stacking effect that adds -regen res (12%) and -rech res (8%) for 90sec and stacks up to 5 times.

 

Fast Healing (Stalkers): Same as Brute/Scrapper (12% -regen res and 8% -rech res per stack) but also grants the user 5 Max END (passive) and every Regeneration activation powers grant back 8 END and adds -END res and -recovery res (15%) for 60sec and stacks up to 5 times. [In this case, Regen for Stalkers doesn't have +recovery options outside of MoG.  It only has this power that increases max END and an END rebate for every click you activate...also, it'll be the only AT for this set that gets -END res as well].  This power is slottable for END mod.

 

Quick Recovery (Brute/Scrapper):  Every Regeneration activation power grants -recovery res (18%) for 60sec and stacks up to 5 times.

 

Integration (Brute/Scrapper/Stalker): Add to this the stacking mechanism.  Every Regeneration activation power grants the user -movement res (12%) for 30sec and stacks up to 5 times.  Nothing major, mostly fluff.  Gives a slight boon in dire situations to escape when you're forced to activate a lot of your click regen powers.  Activating DP, Recon and IH puts you around 36% to give you the chance to reposition or flee.

 

Resilience (Brute/Scrapper/Stalker): I could see them increasing the Toxic res up to around 15-18% but it's not necessary.  Add to this the stacking mechanism.  Every Regeneration activation power grants the user Psi dmg resistance (!!! some complain that MoG doesn't have Psi res. I think having holes in a set isn't a bad thing but conditional holes are a decent alternative too.  This auto will add 6% psi res every stack), -ToHit res (10%) and -def res (12%) for 60sec.  This would make the resilience power a pretty big deal for the set, specifically for the -def res.  This power would be the only "stack mechanism" power that stacks up to 8 times but due to normal recharge times, it's unlikely to really stack that high for very long without outside sources of recharge.  

 

Revive (Brute/Scrapper/Stalker): Taking the idea of @Leo_G, giving this power a kind of "Burn out" mechanic is almost like a different flavor "tier 9" but not.  Having it used while alive recharging all your Regen cooldowns works in sync with the "stack mechanism" idea so if need be, a Regen character has the means of further escalating their sustain OR keep going when things have hit the fan and are still spinning.  If used while dead, having it recharge all your cooldowns means you get back up at max rather than considering to wait for Integration/DP or some other reactive power to recharge.  At worse, it could be skipped if you don't want a "Burn out" click but it still benefits someone who doesn't want just a self-rez.

 

Furthermore, this has a bit of synergy with the actual Burn Out as you could, effectively have your 4 main sustain clicks 4x available since your Revive click would be available 2x.  

 

[Koopak]

 @Galaxy Brain Holy cow, thanks for that massive breakdown. I may need to DM you once i have something cooked up so we can merge or compare notes. I really wanna build a couple of calculators that take a number of armor sets and calculate EHP and EHP/s for each of them with and without given enhancements. Also i curse you because i am AGAIN revising my regen scrap's build, this will be the 9th time since i started counting.

 

On 5/21/2021 at 5:55 PM, America's Angel said:

 

1) 

Given that MoG is a huge part of Regen's mitigation, any test that doesn't include MoG it is not accurately testing the mitigation of the set. If the test is not accurately judging the mitigation of the set, then its results don't have real-world application. (Koopak linked the formula for calculating MoG HPS , above. It's easy to factor it in.)

 

Also worth pointing out that MoG benefits you not just through the additional HPS from the defense and resistance, but also through the 15s breather it gives your healing cycle. (Each time you use it you're essentially cutting 15s off-of your heals' recharge times.)

 

2)

You can calculate real-world play via calculation, you only need three variables:

1. Length of fight per group
2. Rate of incoming DPS decrease during fight with the group
3. Length of time between fights

Length of fight (1) is easy to figure out, just work out your DPS vs the enemies HP and res. (Using War Mace as a baseline because Powerhouse has said that's the best balanced melee set.)  You've already calculated incoming DPS, so the rate of DPS decrease(2) would use that relative to the length of the fight, which you just calculated. Length of time between fights(3) can just be set to 5s. Easy.

 

So hypothetically speaking lets say you have 300DPS coming your way, you can kill your enemies in 30s, every 5s the incoming DPS drops by 100, and the rate at which you can move from one group to the next is 5s.

 

This would be how the incoming DPS varies during the fight:

 

1s-5 - 300 DPS

6s-10s - 300 DPS

11s-15s - 200 DPS

16s-20s - 200 DPS

21s-25s - 100 DPS

26s-30s -  100 DPS

31s-35s - 0 DPS

36s-40s - 300 DPS

41-45s - 300 DPS

46s-50s - 200 DPS

51s-55s - 200 DPS

56s-60s - 100 DPS

61s-65s -  100 DPS

66s-70s - 0 DPS

 

...suddenly that incoming 300 is ~175.

 

3) 

Considering that the dev team look at your results when making balance decisions, I'd like to do what I can to help make them as accurate as possible. I'm more of a tester/exploit hunter than a model maker.

I actually disagree with the importance of MoG in factoring this. I like to use it, but realistically its a power I only use in dire circumstances on a Scrapper, when Soloing +4x8 and things go wrong. Thats like 90% of the time I need it. Given Regen's mechanics, using it at other times is largely pointless since you wernt going to die anyways. Thats why I dont think T9s as a rule, need to be considered when discussing the set as a whole. The majority of them are just only applicable in niche situations.

 

 

13 hours ago, Naraka said:

Trying to quantify Regen's mitigation will get you a rough approximation but having controllable bursts, whether it's damage, control or buffs, can be gamed to exceed rough approximations...or fall below them.  Just like it's possible to completely waste your MoG if used at the wrong time, you can use it to mitigate a show-stopping burst or save it for another time by utilizing a plethora of other tools to allow your weaker tools to combine into sustain through tough situations.

 

It's one of the main fun things about the set: you're looking for your own synergies as situations change to maintain performance while leaving something in the tank to rotate while your other tools are coming off cooldown.

This is very true, but to be fair, trying to represent this skill element is, essentially, an impossibility. At best one could write a complex bit of calculation code like the WoW raiding communities SimCraft. I think most of us can agree that, when distributing these reactive powers over their entire duration, we should get somewhere close to the other power sets. Perhaps lower, to pay for the fact that your burst survival is so great, but the average should be in the neighborhood.

 

 

2 hours ago, Naraka said:

To expand and more quantify my previous idea to give Regen some resistances, I think improving the cast/effect periods of the clicks so it's a bit more responsive would help a lot but also adding a new mechanic to the set built around stacking your clicks.  Sent would retain it's advantage of +Absorb, incentivizing playing that AT for the difference in Regen for those that want to try all flavors of the set.  My intent is to make you want to play more different ATs to get the full spectrum of a set OR pick the AT that has the flavor of a set you prefer.  Equity across the AT, in this case, is purely homogeny and only benefits those obsessive with the exact numbers, clear speeds, etc.

 

Fast Healing (Brute/Scrapper): Added onto its base effect, Regeneration activation powers activates Fast Healing's stacking effect that adds -regen res (12%) and -rech res (8%) for 90sec and stacks up to 5 times.

 

Fast Healing (Stalkers): Same as Brute/Scrapper (12% -regen res and 8% -rech res per stack) but also grants the user 5 Max END (passive) and every Regeneration activation powers grant back 8 END and adds -END res and -recovery res (15%) for 60sec and stacks up to 5 times. [In this case, Regen for Stalkers doesn't have +recovery options outside of MoG.  It only has this power that increases max END and an END rebate for every click you activate...also, it'll be the only AT for this set that gets -END res as well].  This power is slottable for END mod.

 

Quick Recovery (Brute/Scrapper):  Every Regeneration activation power grants -recovery res (18%) for 60sec and stacks up to 5 times.

 

Integration (Brute/Scrapper/Stalker): Add to this the stacking mechanism.  Every Regeneration activation power grants the user -movement res (12%) for 30sec and stacks up to 5 times.  Nothing major, mostly fluff.  Gives a slight boon in dire situations to escape when you're forced to activate a lot of your click regen powers.  Activating DP, Recon and IH puts you around 36% to give you the chance to reposition or flee.

 

Resilience (Brute/Scrapper/Stalker): I could see them increasing the Toxic res up to around 15-18% but it's not necessary.  Add to this the stacking mechanism.  Every Regeneration activation power grants the user Psi dmg resistance (!!! some complain that MoG doesn't have Psi res. I think having holes in a set isn't a bad thing but conditional holes are a decent alternative too.  This auto will add 6% psi res every stack), -ToHit res (10%) and -def res (12%) for 60sec.  This would make the resilience power a pretty big deal for the set, specifically for the -def res.  This power would be the only "stack mechanism" power that stacks up to 8 times but due to normal recharge times, it's unlikely to really stack that high for very long without outside sources of recharge.  

 

Revive (Brute/Scrapper/Stalker): Taking the idea of @Leo_G, giving this power a kind of "Burn out" mechanic is almost like a different flavor "tier 9" but not.  Having it used while alive recharging all your Regen cooldowns works in sync with the "stack mechanism" idea so if need be, a Regen character has the means of further escalating their sustain OR keep going when things have hit the fan and are still spinning.  If used while dead, having it recharge all your cooldowns means you get back up at max rather than considering to wait for Integration/DP or some other reactive power to recharge.  At worse, it could be skipped if you don't want a "Burn out" click but it still benefits someone who doesn't want just a self-rez.

 

Furthermore, this has a bit of synergy with the actual Burn Out as you could, effectively have your 4 main sustain clicks 4x available since your Revive click would be available 2x.  

 

I actually really like this basic idea, though not necessarily the numbers or specific buffs. I'd love the idea of a "combo" driven armor set.

[Galaxy Brain]

Re: Calculating active mitigation tools / burst survival tools

 

Given that these are incredibly variable options that give literal bursts of protection, it is very hard if not implausible to calculate their effects especially when they regard interrupting enemy attack queues/etc. This accounts for both CC attacks + killing the enemies as well as things like MoG, they are just so variable in application that it is hard to actually quantify them in any meaningful calculation.

 

Looking at MoG for example, it has a 240s base cooldown. Lets be generous and say a fight lasts 2 minutes (120s) each at x8. At base, or even at 100% normal recharge this power would really only be used once, and add a flat 15s of survival time given that basically anything outside a mob of extreme psychic attackers will not touch you. At maximum recharge (240/5 = 48s) you could use this three times, increasing survival by 45s. 

 

Thinking on this a smidge more as I write, I happen to have data on 0/8x clear times for a given mission we can extrapolate (at least for a scrapper):

 

 

 

These are the avg clear times of my standardized 10-mob mission map runs that include bosses and an Elite boss at 0/8x. In testing, I know for a fact that to get through the mission there is just about exactly 60s of travel time (without travel powers), so we can subtract that from all these averages / the total average and then divide by 10:

 

 

The average is about ~50s, though we could go to ~60s or ~45s too. Lets say 60s as that is a bit more nice a number to say 1 minute, plus it could relate to higher difficulties / random stuff that may push a fight a bit longer.

 

So, given that we can say an average encounter is 60s long, we can infer that something like MoG will be available at the start and end of a fight.... but only if you legit use it right away and then again the moment it is recharged. Realistically, you will not be recharge capped so MoG is only gonna be online once in this fight. Assuming you use it only for the alpha may have much different implications than if you use it for when poo hits the fan, though either way it is gonna give you 15s (25% of the fight to be fair!) worth of basically invulnerability. The issue of uptime creeps in though as you go fight to fight depending on the mission where bigger maps with some travel between spawns favor things like MoG where more constant fighting will not.

 

Now, lets say that the above averages per fight are correct as well. If you have to survive for 60s, and all but KM (lol) can beat the fight in under 60s, where does that leave us? Do we assume we 100% of the time do the correct sequence of actions 100% perfectly per mob? What if that key War Mace attack didnt proc Knockdown or Stun (or just straight up missed), what if the mob makeup was a bit different and that Arachnos spawn had more Toxic damage than usual (good for Regen but not so much other sets)? Do we say that every ~2 seconds there is a +X second bonus to survival depending on the set where CC / Self defense tools could come into play? Like with the breakdown of Regen above, it *could* be averaged out but then it gets downright ludicrous to think about with not only recharge brackets but entire attack chains and the like. It'd be a fool's errand outside of the few sets that have guaranteed tools like Parry, Pendulum, or Total Focus, etc, that you could in theory work into a calc where every time it's up you use it and it'd work outside of missing. But back to the main point about surviving vs beating the 60s benchmark, if all armors can survive 60s.... then what are we looking at?

 

We cannot reasonably calculate every map and the travel time in relation to powers recharging for each fight (esp with variable travel methods), on top of the variable powers in attacks sets that can provide added mitigation. Our next best bet is to isolate our variables with the assumption of:

 

If X armor set can perform at a certain level vs incoming damage by itself, then adding Y extra mitigation through attacks and whatnot would of course make it better. 

 

If Regen really benefits from pairing with battle Axe to keep foes bouncing on their butts... then yeah, Willpower and Invulnerability would too.

 

UNIQUE to Regen among most sets though is that it's mitigation COMPETES with your attack mitigation tools. If you can normally get +X mitigation in a fight by using an attack power, or +Y from using reconstruction, you may suddenly have to make a quick choice where other armor sets can just benefit from the +X on top of their baselines.

 

This is where I feel getting the average data through a fight lasting X seconds, AND/OR seeing how long they could last in X scenario to score the set is valuable. In my earlier notes showing time to defeat if you just took it on the chin is where things get super interesting. If an armor set lets say can naturally last 70s vs an enemy mob on average compared to Regen lasting 55s on average, you could say adding in MoG will even the odds but that is an extra power they have to use + this assumes you already use all the clicks regen has during the fight... while the other armor set didn't have to click and instead got to use attack powers which can close the gap with either defeats or added mitigations. This then goes back to the point of going fight to fight.. which over time would be relative to if you just stood there infinitely getting punched/zapped/flashbacks of math tests or whatever psychic damage does to you. 

 

 

TL;DR :

Yes, active mitigation / burst mitigation matters. However, it is incredibly hard to account for the different permutations of those when compared to the more static "take it on the chin" metric that most all armor sets (hell even inspirations) can be measured against. If we can measure the more static variables, we can get a guestimate of where the "floor" is that we add the dynamic ones onto.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Zeraphia]

I really dislike the heavy gatekeeping on this topic. Regen is clearly the most underperforming armor set. I've said it. It needs a buff. Everyone has their own opinions and ideas, but statistically if we were to run an actual side-by-side comparison of it versus other armor sets, it would lose in the majority of mitigation battles, because of its strict lack thereof. 

 

Regen is an excellent PvP powerset (although Bio is debatably better), it is a terrible PvE powerset especially with how the game works now in large spikes of damage that tend to be what kills most people. Again, this is going to vary based on whether you're someone who does content mostly at 50 vs early levels where regen probably feels better, but late-game this set is just statistically inferior to its competitors in almost every way. 

 

Please give regeneration a serious no-nonsense buff. Also, just because you are attached/emotionally tied to a powerset that you love the theme of, and are willing to IO it to the gills, and claim it's "fine and no buffs needed!" is not helping the discussion. 

Edited May 25, 2021 by Zeraphia

[archgemini24]

On 5/24/2021 at 6:22 PM, Galaxy Brain said:

UNIQUE to Regen among most sets though is that it's mitigation COMPETES with your attack mitigation tools. If you can normally get +X mitigation in a fight by using an attack power, or +Y from using reconstruction, you may suddenly have to make a quick choice where other armor sets can just benefit from the +X on top of their baselines.

 

This is the part that sticks with me the most about Regen, and not just on the "back-end" where a player uses said clicks. There is also more attention on the "front-end" that has to be paid to that Green bar to help make the best use of the clicks, whereas other mitigation sets either have one click to manage (Dark Regen, Dull Pain, Healing* Flames) or said click acts as an attack (Burn, Shield Charge), further reducing overall risk.

 

I am also going to bring up a power that is probably beneath most of the people reading this, but does Rest also deserve a mention, especially since it is a now a zero-recharge power rather than the 10-minute, then 3-minute cooldown it used to have? Only asking because with that power always available, sets that do not have to manage clicks/cooldowns have a power that can effectively "erase" the damage inflicted between spawns, so their mitigation only has to hold up for one mob at a time, whereas if Regen got caught with a problematic spawn, their powers may not be available for the next.

Edited September 30, 2022 by archgemini24
Healing Flames is the Fire Armor heal.

[Naraka]

18 minutes ago, Zeraphia said:

Please give regeneration a serious no-nonsense buff. Also, just because you are attached/emotionally tied to a powerset that you love the theme of, and are willing to IO it to the gills, and claim it's "fine and no buffs needed!" is not helping the discussion. 

 

This is not an objective argument.  It's mostly provocation.

 

You're mostly arguing from a meta-game high-end min/max perspective as I'd argue a SR Scrapper/Brute/Stalker without outside sources to cap your defense has fewer options to mitigate damage.  In the higher echelons of content, where buffs and IOs exists, Regen is going to come out on top sans the DPS loss from clicking its powers.

 

I'd also point out, you're pretty bias when it comes to power creep.  How about I argue that melee armor needs a nerf because it's becoming more and more obvious that the curve has shot upwards out of control.  Melees hardly even expect to go down (maybe once per door at most) while wading through the highest of threat content which is pretty ridiculous, moreso when it's constantly advocated that such ATs need even MORE.  They want more power while spending less.  They want every power to be top notch with multiple utility.  They want more choices while having those choices be more flexible.  Tier 9 armors with crashes?! Remove them.  Replace them with MORE!

 

It's hard to gatekeep when the gate is shattered on the ground in pieces lol

[Zeraphia]

22 minutes ago, Naraka said:

 

This is not an objective argument.  It's mostly provocation.

 

You're mostly arguing from a meta-game high-end min/max perspective as I'd argue a SR Scrapper/Brute/Stalker without outside sources to cap your defense has fewer options to mitigate damage.  In the higher echelons of content, where buffs and IOs exists, Regen is going to come out on top sans the DPS loss from clicking its powers.

 

I'd also point out, you're pretty bias when it comes to power creep.  How about I argue that melee armor needs a nerf because it's becoming more and more obvious that the curve has shot upwards out of control.  Melees hardly even expect to go down (maybe once per door at most) while wading through the highest of threat content which is pretty ridiculous, moreso when it's constantly advocated that such ATs need even MORE.  They want more power while spending less.  They want every power to be top notch with multiple utility.  They want more choices while having those choices be more flexible.  Tier 9 armors with crashes?! Remove them.  Replace them with MORE!

 

It's hard to gatekeep when the gate is shattered on the ground in pieces lol

The question "does regen need a buff/no change?" (as it relates to the topic at hand) is something that is by default an opinion. An opinion is a belief that you hold, and in this case, an evaluation of a set's performance is always by default an opinion unless you are not recommending changes but instead simply stating numbers without analysis.

 

Provocation was not used in the post, it was stating the fallacy that if you minmax a character to the highest degrees, the character will perform decently and thus not need any buffs (which I find to be bad examples), and that is from the high-end meta perspective not the other parts of the game which was what I was actually talking about, the players who are not going to use incarnates like T4 barrier, and lots of defense inspirations to "force" it to be serviceable. 

 

I just find this a bit ironic that in the same post you've said that I'm arguing "from a meta game high-end min/max perspective" as you say within the next sentence "in the higher echelons of content, where buffs and IOs exists, Regen is going to come out on top." And I'm going to say, sure, if you're talking about teams that have buffed you, that are not always a reliable source of mitigation, where you probably don't even need the mitigation to begin with that Regen would provide, sure it absolutely does! But this a circlejerk conversation because that's what a team provides you, not what the set does by itself, and it goes in circles getting us nowhere. What I am referring to are the mid and later levels where Regen starts to fall off as other powers get their heavier resistances and defenses, and mitigate a lot more damage, this isn't necessarily at level 50. 

 

Also, quite frankly, this is pretty exaggerated, currently there are no T9's that are crashless, and there is still difficult content if you seek it. Has the powerscale moved a bit since the "good old days?" Sure. Has it gone off the rails? No not really outside of judgements. If you truly feel like this, don't play at level 50? Or don't play content with incarnates on?

Edited May 25, 2021 by Zeraphia

[Naraka]

2 minutes ago, Zeraphia said:

The question "does regen need a buff/no change?" (as it relates to the topic at hand) is something that is by default an opinion. An opinion is a belief that you hold, and in this case, an evaluation of a set's performance is always by default an opinion unless you are not recommending changes but instead simply stating numbers without analysis.

 

Considering you were using your conclusions to state statistically the set needs a buff, walking back your argument to just an opinion is acceptable.

 

4 minutes ago, Zeraphia said:

Provocation was not used in the post, it was stating the fallacy that if you minmax a character to the highest degrees, the character will perform decently and thus not need any buffs (which I find to be bad examples), and that is from the high-end meta perspective not the other parts of the game which was what I was actually talking about, the players who are not going to use incarnates like T4 barrier, and lots of defense inspirations to "force" it to be serviceable. 

 

If you don't want your points to be labeled as provocation, I'd be weary on using terms like "gatekeeping" or allude to nostalgia or reduce others' opinions and conclusions to merely being emotional.

 

7 minutes ago, Zeraphia said:

I just find this a bit ironic that in the same post you've said that I'm arguing "from a meta game high-end min/max perspective" as you say within the next sentence "in the higher echelons of content, where buffs and IOs exists, Regen is going to come out on top." And I'm going to say, sure, if you're talking about teams that have buffed you, that are not always a reliable source of mitigation, where you probably don't even need the mitigation to begin with that Regen would provide, sure it absolutely does! But this a circlejerk conversation because that's what a team provides you, not what the set does by itself, and it goes in circles getting us nowhere. 

 

Also, quite frankly, this is pretty exaggerated, currently there are no T9's that are crashless, and there is still difficult content if you seek it. Has the powerscale moved a bit since the "good old days" sure. Has it gone off the rails? No not really outside of judgements. If you truly feel like this, don't play at level 50? Or don't play content with incarnates on?

 

I'm glad you see my intentional point as ironic which was why I pointed to the overall game balance (teamed content and exaggerated min/max soloing) is out of whack.  But sure, that set over there gets an statistical effective-HP advantage of y% more therefore...no.  If you can provocatively dismiss someone's argument as being emotional, trying to balance by statistics and spreadsheets specifically could be seen as vain and dismissed just as readily if people still play and enjoy their Regen characters.

 

Would it be interesting if Regen got a buff or some extra utility?  Sure.  Does it need it?  No.  No it doesn't.  And this is coming from someone who posted a 6+ paragraph post near the top of THIS page about ways to add/improve the set.

 

And I said tier 9s WITH crashes, not crashless.  And I already don't play lvl 45+ because the game becomes a bore (I only have a select few that build up their incarnate powers because its within their character concept).  I already do bring myself down to make the game more interesting but appreciate the advice.  Now what suggestion are you going to make to make my game even easier?

[Zeraphia]

8 minutes ago, Naraka said:

 

Considering you were using your conclusions to state statistically the set needs a buff, walking back your argument to just an opinion is acceptable.

 

 

If you don't want your points to be labeled as provocation, I'd be weary on using terms like "gatekeeping" or allude to nostalgia or reduce others' opinions and conclusions to merely being emotional.

 

 

I'm glad you see my intentional point as ironic which was why I pointed to the overall game balance (teamed content and exaggerated min/max soloing) is out of whack.  But sure, that set over there gets an statistical effective-HP advantage of y% more therefore...no.  If you can provocatively dismiss someone's argument as being emotional, trying to balance by statistics and spreadsheets specifically could be seen as vain and dismissed just as readily if people still play and enjoy their Regen characters.

 

Would it be interesting if Regen got a buff or some extra utility?  Sure.  Does it need it?  No.  No it doesn't.  And this is coming from someone who posted a 6+ paragraph post near the top of THIS page about ways to add/improve the set.

 

And I said tier 9s WITH crashes, not crashless.  And I already don't play lvl 45+ because the game becomes a bore (I only have a select few that build up their incarnate powers because its within their character concept).  I already do bring myself down to make the game more interesting but appreciate the advice.  Now what suggestion are you going to make to make my game even easier?

Respectfully, I'm going to respond to you as kindly as I can, but it is one thing to attack a person's ideas, it is a very different thing to attack them as people, which your posts frequently cross over into doing. I did not provoke anyone by name, or intentionally call anyone out, I said why I disagreed with what some people are doing (and not by name), I also did not use those words. Further, I did not use nearly as pointed language as this. This topic routinely comes up in threads, and there is a reason for it. By a large amount of people, Regeneration is seen as underperforming, these threads do not appear in anywhere near the same frequency as Radiation Armor, Invulnerability, Dark Armor, or even Fiery Aura for a reason.

 

There is indeed a damage mitigation calculator to test the effective rate at which a set or character "mitigates" or heals the damage per second, and can survive. Without team party buffs, Regeneration is typically in most scenarios at the bottom of this calculator for its mitigation, and this was found a long time ago (I can't remember the exact link to the calculator, but it exists and I'm sure someone will link it). There is a lot of variance in how you IO a character, so some can be attributed to that but not all, and honestly as much as you can IO a character, you may find yourself sacrificing so much recharge and damage that it's not even potentially worth it to roll Regen instead of a set that provides a lot more bang-for-your-buck in many cases. 

 

End note: "Tier 9 armors with crashes?! Remove them.  Replace them with MORE!" which implies as I said, crashless T9's, unless you meant add more crashes to a power, but this was left kind of vague, add more what? Add more resistance? Add more crashes? 

[macskull]

1 minute ago, Zeraphia said:

End note: "Tier 9 armors with crashes?! Remove them.  Replace them with MORE!" which implies as I said, crashless T9's, unless you meant add more crashes to a power, but this was left kind of vague, add more what? Add more resistance? Add more crashes? 

I think they were saying "players want to get rid of the T9s with crashes and replace them with something better," but they were simultaneously bashing players' desires to have powers that aren't auto-skips.

[Naraka]

4 minutes ago, Zeraphia said:

Respectfully, I'm going to respond to you as kindly as I can, but it is one thing to attack a person's ideas, it is a very different thing to attack them as people, which your posts frequently cross over into doing. I did not provoke anyone by name, or intentionally call anyone out, I said why I disagreed with what some people are doing (and not by name), I also did not use those words. Further, I did not use nearly as pointed language as this. This topic routinely comes up in threads, and there is a reason for it. By a large amount of people, Regeneration is seen as underperforming, these threads do not appear in anywhere near the same frequency as Radiation Armor, Invulnerability, Dark Armor, or even Fiery Aura for a reason.

 

 

Telling you you're provoking a response is hardly attacking anyone.  If you aren't stating posters in this thread are "gatekeeping" or assume people defending the set are "emotionally attached" to it, you probably didn't need to bring it up.  It's fine, provoking responses isn't inherently bad.  I do it all the time.  But you seem to be defensive about it.

 

If you're attempting to be respectful and non-confrontational, I was giving you advice.

 

And I realize people assume it's an underperforming set.  I'm aware of that and even advocate for giving the set unique utility.  But I don't think it needs higher baseline performance because IOs already cover it.  And with such a heightened control over the things you solo, it's not hard to manage with a non-IO'ed build....I've done it.  But me soloing normal +2/x4 and above isn't an argument to keep a set underperforming.  It's an argument to keep the game from being constantly thrust to higher and higher heights needlessly because it doesn't do quite as well as set x/y/z under m/n situations.  It's unnecessary and purely fluff.

 

14 minutes ago, Zeraphia said:

There is indeed a damage mitigation calculator to test the effective rate at which a set or character "mitigates" or heals the damage per second, and can survive. Without team party buffs, Regeneration is typically in most scenarios at the bottom of this calculator for its mitigation, and this was found a long time ago (I can't remember the exact link to the calculator, but it exists and I'm sure someone will link it). There is a lot of variance in how you IO a character, so some can be attributed to that but not all, and honestly as much as you can IO a character, you may find yourself sacrificing so much recharge and damage that it's not even potentially worth it to roll Regen instead of a set that provides a lot more bang-for-your-buck in many cases. 

 

I didn't expound on this before but I feel that different buffs have different potential factors.  If I were to coin a term for the variable, I'd call it "boon potential".  Boon potential being a variety of factors that take into account the abundance of, stacking potency, caps and usability of different effects.  Things like defense buffs have good stacking potency and its easy of use help make it a stickler for nearly all avenues of mitigation....but it's over-abundance makes each point of defense have less "boon potential" along with it's capped effect of only flooring an enemy's chance to hit to 5% before levels.  Resistance fairs quite a bit higher since its abundance is still spread among 8 difference damage types (defense has more but they do not stack).  Boon potential of heals changes by level (being very useful in the early/mid-game, lessening toward the end-game) but there is always a use if you ever take damage and moreso if you, the player, have control over WHEN you receive that heal.  Basically, a powerful heal at your finger tips has more potential than a heal at the control of a teammate.

 

The main reason I even go over that train of thought is partially to do with the whole cost-benefit argument of using IOs to build up a character.  To say it's not potentially worth it to roll out an IO'ed regen is ignoring how easy it is to achieve effective mitigation with them while exaggerating the sacrifice required.  It's mostly a meta decision to roll a Regen or not.  You will get an effective character either way and to assume you can't or to a lesser extent sounds like we need to rebalance  IOs then.

 

25 minutes ago, macskull said:

I think they were saying "players want to get rid of the T9s with crashes and replace them with something better," but they were simultaneously bashing players' desires to have powers that aren't auto-skips.

 

Yup, there it is. 

 

It was also an intentionally exaggerated provocative statement.  Not specifically calling out people who want to "fix" armor Tier 9s, but if we did remove their crash or reduce their effects to increase their uptime or exchange the over-buff to instead fill in holes of their respective sets, then the sets that perform "better" than Regen now will be even MORE better.