So, procs...

[Mezmera]

46 minutes ago, nihilii said:

A proc bomb has by nature low/no accuracy, low/no end reduction and low/no recharge.

 

Easily overcome by taking Hasten, building global recharge through your other powers and having great tohitt powers like tactics and aim/build up.   End reduction?  pfft who cares.  

 

Again proc bombs aren't difficult to do.   It's not some wizardry and not any more intuitive than building for other proper bonuses refraining from abusing the system too much.

Edited July 3, 2021 by Mezmera

[wjrasmussen]

8 hours ago, Outrider_01 said:

Ding! You got it, it basically ruins builds.  Might as well smash it down with IO set bonuses in the process, destroy all builds and reduce their effectiveness

 

I got 2 points of view when it comes to IO slotting, what someone slots doesn't do a damn thing to you or I personally nor should you or I care what they slot.  If it bothers you, either leave the group or solo.  I I don't see how someone who slots their Electric Blaster with an assianine amount of Tempest : End Drain, Entropic Chaos : Heal, Devastation : Hold, Energy Manipulator : Stun,  Power Transfer : Heal, and Performance : +End.  Is it optimal?  No.  Does it affect me?  Not really. 

This is basically it.  Why nerf here?  Meaning any change which reduces current output is a change.  Take care of IO, the 5 lotg limit can be made to one.  Etc.   I really don't like this idea at all.  There is so much OP in the game, why attack this?

[wjrasmussen]

7 hours ago, macskull said:

My vote: leave the proc system alone.

I love in agreement.

[nihilii]

39 minutes ago, Mezmera said:

 

Easily overcome by taking Hasten, building global recharge through your other powers and having great tohitt powers like tactics and aim/build up.   End reduction?  pfft who cares.  

 

Again proc bombs aren't difficult to do.   It's not some wizardry and not any more intuitive than building for other proper bonuses refraining from abusing the system too much.

I mean, I basically go at length to explain the relevance of opportunity cost and even show examples of practical consequences in the rest of my previous post you entirely ignored, haha.

 

I guess from tone alone I did know you likely had a massive chip on your shoulder regarding procs, but it seems more constructive to assume people are genuine than trolls. Either way it got me to reason and challenge my own thinking, so thanks for your input...

Edited July 3, 2021 by nihilii

[Mezmera]

14 minutes ago, nihilii said:

I mean, I basically debunked this in the rest of my previous post you entirely ignored, haha. I guess from tone alone I did know you likely had a massive chip on your shoulder regarding procs, but it seems more constructive to assume people are genuine than trolls. Either way it got me to reason and challenge my own thinking, so thanks for your input...

 

You detailed how to build a proper character with sets regardless of the proc bomb.  That's how to build something with IO's yeah cool.  You are the one debunking yourself.  

 

You're taking what someone already does to build a legitimate character then adding on a long recharge aoe power with some slots you're likely able to spare and calling that ground breaking?  

 

If they take away that broken amount of damage then I guess you'll have to figure a way to build a strong survivable character without exploiting powers that can wipe away swaths of targets in a single bound that aren't meant to do such.   Some are already ahead of the game in that regard, so who's the more intuitive ones?

 

 

 

 

Edited July 3, 2021 by Mezmera

[Parabola]

My take is that I enjoy both building for procs and more regular set based IO builds. I can certainly see the argument that certain powers are working too well with procs or are working in ways that weren't originally intended. I suspect that any dev action is more likely to focus on changes to individual powers rather than a sweeping change to the PPM system simply because of the impact of the latter.

 

One thing I would really like to see addressed is the debuff and mez procs that are currently not serious contenders for a slot that can take a damage proc. Several of these are so underpowered they are essentially traps for the unwary player and others are just of very limited value. Many just need values buffing but a couple could do with being changed entirely. Top of this list for me would be the procs that add a random chance for knockback, a couple of times I've wanted to 6 slot the Stupify set for the ranged defence but I haven't been able to because it would break the power to have that proc in it.

[Naraka]

1 hour ago, Parabola said:

 

One thing I would really like to see addressed is the debuff and mez procs that are currently not serious contenders for a slot that can take a damage proc. Several of these are so underpowered they are essentially traps for the unwary player and others are just of very limited value. Many just need values buffing but a couple could do with being changed entirely. Top of this list for me would be the procs that add a random chance for knockback, a couple of times I've wanted to 6 slot the Stupify set for the ranged defence but I haven't been able to because it would break the power to have that proc in it.

 

But the devs haven't expressed any kind of concern about those thus it's a non-topic that cannot be discussed by the players.

 

It's weird, that logic.  I don't think having a particular dev's attention ever stops players suggesting to look at sub-par aspects of the game.

 

[Marbing]

Because some AT's have better build flexibility than others, procs on those AT's are easy to abuse and make entire other AT's irrelevant. Damage procs especially need to be reduced in effectiveness nearly across the board. There are entire powersets that benefit far more than had to be intended. 

 

That being said, there has to be a happy medium (like the devs always say) that can be reached here. Buff some procs, nerf others, etc.  Balance out their effectiveness and reduce the ability to completely abuse them. 

I have an Elec/TA controller that I have proc'd out to insanity and still have soft capped defenses. It isn't hard to do. And also, it doesn't promote build diversity because honestly why would I want to do massively less damage? To gain what, exactly? If I already have soft capped defenses and perma hasten what exactly am I going to do with those other slots that is going to be better for my toon than making Jolting Chain and Acid Arrow proc bombs that do massive freaking damage (for a controller). The answer: nothing really. Here I am an abuser of the system, calling out the system for being abusable. I don't want Jolting Chain and Acid Arrow to become irrelevant, that's not what I am saying at all, but a change to the system needs to be made to find that happy medium. And I think THAT would promote true build diversity.
 

Edited July 3, 2021 by th0ughtGun

[arcane]

8 hours ago, Mezmera said:

 

Easily overcome by taking Hasten, building global recharge through your other powers and having great tohitt powers like tactics and aim/build up.   End reduction?  pfft who cares.  

 

Again proc bombs aren't difficult to do.   It's not some wizardry and not any more intuitive than building for other proper bonuses refraining from abusing the system too much.

It gets a lot harder when you use so many procs that you are using very few sets. Building global recharge through other powers? Only if you have few enough proc bombs. It’s actually a very delicate balance if you take it far enough. Yeah sure anyone can load up a couple powers.
 

When I think of my real proc monster characters, I definitely mean at least ~25 damage procs throughout the build, say 3-5 -res procs, AND all of your necessary procs from heal/def/res/endmod sets. You don’t seem to be describing the same thing. Most of my characters like that have very very little room for sets and have to move things around a lot to make it work.

Edited July 3, 2021 by arcane

[Naraka]

13 minutes ago, arcane said:

It gets a lot harder when you use so many procs that you are using very few sets. Building global recharge through other powers? Only if you have few enough proc bombs. It’s actually a very delicate balance if you take it far enough. Yeah sure anyone can load up a couple powers.
 

When I think of my real proc monster characters, I definitely mean at least ~25 damage procs throughout the build, say 3-5 -res procs, AND all of your necessary procs from heal/def/res/endmod sets. You don’t seem to be describing the same thing. Most of my characters like that have very very little room for sets and have to move things around a lot to make it work.

 

What are we arguing here? It's not like a specially built character is difficult to use or challenging to plan here.  Most meta-type builds aim to utilize as tight a chain of attacks with as few powers as possible and running on easily saturated buffs and/or always-running effects.  Little-to-no downtime with minimal variance of play and conditions that, once built out, don't provide much meaningful opposition to adapt to.

 

And with other outsourced buffs for recovery, rech and accuracy outside of inspirations, it's doubtful even a badly built proc-monster can't be compensated for to play well.  I suppose one could brag about not using SG buffs and/or P2W/temp powers but those are, frankly, no different than using incarnate powers or filling out a character with the same meta-build goals of softcapped def and high recharge with only an arbitrary stop-gate on certain effects.

[arcane]

1 hour ago, Naraka said:

 

What are we arguing here? It's not like a specially built character is difficult to use or challenging to plan here.  Most meta-type builds aim to utilize as tight a chain of attacks with as few powers as possible and running on easily saturated buffs and/or always-running effects.  Little-to-no downtime with minimal variance of play and conditions that, once built out, don't provide much meaningful opposition to adapt to.

 

And with other outsourced buffs for recovery, rech and accuracy outside of inspirations, it's doubtful even a badly built proc-monster can't be compensated for to play well.  I suppose one could brag about not using SG buffs and/or P2W/temp powers but those are, frankly, no different than using incarnate powers or filling out a character with the same meta-build goals of softcapped def and high recharge with only an arbitrary stop-gate on certain effects.

He was saying proc bombers getting acc/end/rech was no big deal, and I was rebutting that that depends on the extent of the proc bombing. Nothing more.

[Mezmera]

21 minutes ago, arcane said:

He was saying proc bombers getting acc/end/rech was no big deal, and I was rebutting that that depends on the extent of the proc bombing. Nothing more.

 

It's not really a big deal.  If you're already aware of exploitable proc bombs then you should already be aware of how to build a character to accentuate that exploit.  There's already a lot of regular powers that help with acc/end/rech without even diving into how easy it is to attain global recharge and accuracy bonuses.  

[America's Angel]

One interesting thing about procs is that they actively help in balancing melee PvP sets relative to each other. Thanks to procs, a whole range of powersets are viable in 1v1 melee PvP that otherwise wouldn't be. Add in pool attacks like Cross Punch and epic attacks like char, the epic snipes, laser beam eyes, fossilize, gloom, etc all being really proccable, and suddenly the existence of procs lets experienced builders turn what most consider sub-tier combos, into tournament winning ones.

 

Don't get me wrong, a claws brute or an EM scrapper is still going to clean up based on their primaries being the best, but hugely proccable primaries/pools/epics do help in narrowing the gap between those powerful top sets, and the various runner up sets.

 

Remove procs/globally nerf procs damage/nerf procs fire rate, and you will be actively harming this balance.

Fortunately, as I mentioned here,  it seems the devs are mostly concerned with how procs play with AoEs.  In melee PvP, this would pretty much only negatively impact Cross Punch. And this would be an easy nerf to fix - you'd just raise its internal recharge high enough to give it a proc rate of 47%. (As it currently has on live.)

[Naraka]

53 minutes ago, America's Angel said:

 

Remove procs/globally nerf procs damage/nerf procs fire rate, and you will be actively harming this balance.

 

 

It really depends what changes are made.  And even if it actively harms this balance, it, just like any balance change, will simply create a new balance.

 

As for the proc'able pool attacks in PvP, it probably does no favors to build diversity since likely certain ATs will always pick up a snipe pool and/or the more proc'able ranged attack and everyone will grab a hold to load out with procs.

[America's Angel]

3 hours ago, Naraka said:

It really depends what changes are made.  And even if it actively harms this balance, it, just like any balance change, will simply create a new balance.

 

As for the proc'able pool attacks in PvP, it probably does no favors to build diversity since likely certain ATs will always pick up a snipe pool and/or the more proc'able ranged attack and everyone will grab a hold to load out with procs.

 

One of the ways procs help balance melee ATs in PvP is by allowing players to "patch up" weaknesses in their primaries. For example...

• Your primary doesn't have a place you can slot the Achilles -res proc? No worries - take Laser Beam Eyes in your epic, or Weaken Resolve in your power pool, and slot it there.
• Your primary doesn't have a cone/aoe with a good procrate for the FOTG -res proc? No worries - take Cross Punch and put it in there.
• Your primary doesn't have a heal in it like dark melee and rad melee? No worries. Take Char or another epic hold and put the superior entomb proc in there.

By allowing the above, Procs can make B-tier sets competitive with A-tier sets.

 

Also, each option comes with a tradeoff - if you go with laser beam eyes you're doing more -res, but you're missing out on the snipe. Char does a lot of damage, and it also opens up Melt Armour, but the recharge of Char is longer than the snipes, so it comes with more building woes where you have to figure out how to change your attack chain to fit it in without losing too much DPS. And yes the snipes are good, but you're missing out on a -res proc, so you have to go with Weaken Resolve, which limits your pool options...

 

Do you see? There is no clear-cut favorite. Procs make all of these options viable, but with drawbacks. This diversity of options that procs provides is an example of good game balance.

 

If procs were removed/nerfed, you would just take the snipe, as the other options would be worthless/do much less damage. A clear #1 option like this would be an example of bad game balance.

Edited July 4, 2021 by America's Angel

[Naraka]

3 hours ago, America's Angel said:

 

Do you see? There is no clear-cut favorite. Procs make all of these options viable, but with drawbacks. This diversity of options that procs provides is an example of good game balance.

 

If procs were removed/nerfed, you would just take the snipe, as the other options would be worthless/do much less damage. A clear #1 option like this would be an example of bad game balance.

 

I wouldn't say it's "good game balance", mostly a patchwork.  To say the balance is good would mean it would rank among the best of MMO PvP balance and I'm remise to believe CoX approaches that.

 

And like I said, it would depend on what kind of change you put in.  If any of the suggestions I mentioned were put it, it's not removing procs or nerfing them, just repurposing some to fulfill a different goal to be used in different powers.   So you might take the snipe but also try to pair it with a faster ranged attack to help benefit from the shifted use of some procs or Laserbeam eyes might utilize either damage procs without focusing on recharge or focus on the debuff procs that don't care about recharge.  It's difficult to argue a hypothetical solution here since there is no concrete plan to compare to the current but no concrete plan will materialize because no one is willing to hypothesize about hypotheticals because they are so bent out of shape about change we have no idea if a better or more diverse situation exists.

[Gobbledigook]

A major proc rework would just create a massive headache of respeccing all my characters.  That does not sound like fun to me and that is why i am in this game...to have fun.

 

If i can damage cap an attack with 3 slots then i am going to fill the rest with procs, unless i need that set bonus. There are endless ways to build a character. Filling any weakness with set bonuses or procs. If you choose to not use procs then that is your choice, they are available to everyone and can greatly enhance a character just like set bonuses.

 

Actually maybe set bonuses need looking at lol. There seems to be way more ways of getting S/L and Fire/Cold resistances than Energy/NE resists benefitting some builds more than others. Haha

 

There may be a few procs that need a buff/nerf though. There may also be a few powers that can abuse procs a little too much that may need looking at. But the majority are fine.

Edited July 4, 2021 by Gobbledegook

[JayboH]

On 7/2/2021 at 8:25 PM, macskull said:

My vote: leave the proc system alone.

Why

[America's Angel]

9 hours ago, Naraka said:

 

I wouldn't say it's "good game balance", mostly a patchwork.  To say the balance is good would mean it would rank among the best of MMO PvP balance and I'm remise to believe CoX approaches that.

 

And like I said, it would depend on what kind of change you put in.  If any of the suggestions I mentioned were put it, it's not removing procs or nerfing them, just repurposing some to fulfill a different goal to be used in different powers.   So you might take the snipe but also try to pair it with a faster ranged attack to help benefit from the shifted use of some procs or Laserbeam eyes might utilize either damage procs without focusing on recharge or focus on the debuff procs that don't care about recharge.  It's difficult to argue a hypothetical solution here since there is no concrete plan to compare to the current but no concrete plan will materialize because no one is willing to hypothesize about hypotheticals because they are so bent out of shape about change we have no idea if a better or more diverse situation exists.

 

PvPers have a vested interest in the game being balanced. We're constantly asking for nerfs/buffs to all sorts of different things in order to achieve this.

 

A while back we looked in depth at alternatives to the current proc system wrt ST damage procs. Our reason for doing so wasn't because procs are broken, or in need of "fixing", but because we wanted to double-check that the current system was the best option available. After a lot of number crunching and analysis, we found that most of the alternatives offered to the current system (including the options in your original post) were inferior to the current system, in terms of game balance.

 

The only option that was an improvement, was what I mentioned in an earlier post:

  

On 7/2/2021 at 9:03 PM, America's Angel said:

[...]In the case of damage procs - they would go from doing (for example) 90% chance of 71.75 damage to doing 100% chance of doing 64.575 damage. (It would be the amount of damage they do that varies, rather than the % chance to fire.)

 

This would balance better because you would be doing the same amount of damage every time. (Rather than 71.75 damage 90% of the time, and 0 damage 10% of the time.) The more we reduce luck, the better the game balances.

 

(Tangent - this is also why PvPers want the chance to hit cap raising from 95% to 100%.)

[...]

44 minutes ago, America's Angel said:

The more we reduce luck, the better the game balances.

 

(Tangent - this is also why PvPers want the chance to hit cap raising from 95% to 100%.)

 

I think there may be some competing definitions of balance here. 

 

Games of chance are not inherently unbalanced. Take cards, for example. There are card games where the house always has an advantage (ie the game is unbalanced), and card games wherein the house does not have an advantage over the players. 

 

In PVP, losing a match because your proc didn't fire isn't unbalanced. It just sucks. 

 

Procs, in there current form, can be said to unbalance the meta because they allow many defender builds to outdamage corruptor builds. 

 

Just as your earlier post called for a definition of "the problem," we might need to also define "the goal."

[aethereal]

24 minutes ago, Vooded said:

Just as your earlier post called for a definition of "the problem," we might need to also define "the goal."

 

I think this is on-point.  Let me throw out some things that I've seen people talk about.  These aren't all my own views, just trying to synthesize what I've seen in this and other threads.

 

Goal 1:  Reduce the dominance of "Proc Builds"

 

Some people feel that the most powerful builds in the games are ones in which many or most of the powers most commonly used are slotted very heavily for procs (4-6 slots devoted to procs, necessarily mainly-but-not-exclusively damage procs, but also heavily featuring -res procs and maybe Force Feedback).  This strikes people as undesirable.

 

Analysis:  I think people should be a little more crisp in their definition of why this is a problem.  If someone wants to slot heavily for damage at the expense of set bonuses, why is that a bad thing?  I think one element of the critique is simply that it's overtuned, that the differential between a proc build and a non-proc build is too much.  But I think another element of the critique is more aesthetic, like it's just not really "right" to have a build stuffed with damage procs at the expense of all else.  Like maybe it's a reversion to the pre-ED days of 1 acc, 5 damage slotting?  It's one-note and tired?  There may also be an element of feeling like it's exclusionary.

 

Solutions:  People should contemplate whether all they want is for the damage amount of damage procs to be reduced by about 10%.  That would certainly make proc builds considerably less attractive.

 

Goal 2:  Specifically avoid turning non-damage powers into damage powers

 

People like @arcane have been explicit about this.  They feel like they don't like the ability to turn for example DNA Siphon, or various low or non-damage holds, into powerful damage powers because they're on long recharge timers and can slot a ton of different damage procs.  Whether or not this is part and parcel of an overall "proc build," some people may feel this is a problem even if there's only one power in the build that's heavily procced.

 

Analysis:  Again, a bit more clarity into why this is a problem is in order.  Is there a sense that a power has a "purpose," and you shouldn't be able to change the power's "purpose" with slotting?  Or perhaps it's more that they feel like it puts the spotlight on powers that are intended to be situational, and don't like how central certain epic/ancillary/patron powers can end up being (though is that it?  Do people who hold this view not care if people slot out Suppressive Fire, a primary power pick, in the way they might slot out an epic hold?)

 

Solutions:  You could imagine point solutions here.  DNA Siphon doesn't really need to do damage, its damage is completely negligible.  If it couldn't take PBAoE Damage sets, it couldn't realistically be turned into a proc bomb.  But the holds, it kinda depends on how much we care about the absurd number of damage procs in hold sets.  Those seem to be explicitly created to allow Controllers/Doms to turn their hold powers into damage powers?  I think?

 

Goal 3:  Improve AT balance

 

Very specifically, I think a lot of people feel like the only advantage Corruptors have over Defenders is damage, and that Defenders can entirely close that gap with procs, leaving Corruptors without a role.  Similarly, I think, though perhaps somewhat less well-foundedly, people worry that Tankers have entirely overtaken Brutes.  And then more holistically, I think some people are concerned that a change to procs, if it does not change CoH's current "balance meta" might result in (further?) dominance of Scrappers/Blasters over lower-damage ATs.  That is, that the current system allows a role for non-damage ATs and that nerfs to procs may push everyone further to Scraps/Blasts.

 

Analysis:  I think it's true that Corruptors have a rough time of it right now.  The concerns about Brutes seem overblown.  This seems like a place where procs have a very marginal position in the overall problem and I doubt that this is a place where we can make big changes with any reasonable change to procs.  I think that people who are claiming that the current proc mechanics help AT balance need to make their case clearly: are they saying that without procs, most non-Blaster/Scrapper ATs are fundamentally bad?  Presumably the overwhelming majority of players aren't creating proc-heavy builds, and that will be true of any reasonable change to the proc system.  Procs are a bad patch to AT balance, I think, unless you can make the case that the AT balance problem is only an issue at like the tip-top of the game, people trying for Masters-of badges of hard TFs and such.

 

Solutions:  No idea, I don't really buy this as a problem.

 

Goal 4:  Blunt the Meta/Reward more Builds

 

(Note: this is my goal, so I may present it more sympathetically)

 

Procs currently have mechanics that are much less legible and much more complicated than almost any other mechanic in the game (maybe with the exception of some "strength to" relationships).  They are unfriendly to anyone who isn't heavily invested in reading about game mechanics and discussing builds offline.  This makes the game less newbie-friendly.  Current proc mechanics are also very attached to "building global recharge" and "concentrating on four or so powers that can be used once per 5-10 seconds with lots of global recharge," in a way that reinforces previously dominant character build strategies.

 

Analysis:  It is certainly true that procs are not the only reason to read about game mechanics, get invested in builds, build global recharge, or focus on 15-20 second recharge powers, and reasonable changes to the proc system will make at most marginal headway in improving these problems.  That said, I think it's also the case that procs are genuinely the worst offenders in this category. 

 

Solutions:  @nihilii's proposal to have proc rate not be affected by local recharge would make headway here.  Having in-game "real numbers" that calculated proc rates for you would help.  I think there are clearly some bigger changes that we could make that would make proc rate less dependent on knowing the minutia of internal details about powers (so for example we could establish power "schedules" or modifiers to proc rates that are explicit -- and yes, short-recharge and area effect powers could have ones that make procs less likely to fire, but it'd be like damage, where if you happen to know the design principles, you know that damage and recharge are related, but the game clearly tells you what the damage is, rather than expecting you to calculate it yourself based on recharge).

 

Goal 5:  Preserve Advanced Build Options

 

@nihilii has been forcefully pointing out that he likes making the tradeoff between additional damage and set bonuses.  In the past, we've definitely seen other people make similar comments: that the proc system creates productive tension between build goals, and this makes for more stimulating, interesting build options.

 

Analysis:  Note that to some extent this goal stands in tension with goal 4, as one way to make builds more complex is to make an ever-more-baroque chain of unique effects for any given power to proc.  But they aren't entirely incompatible -- you can certainly still have procs be valuable and stand in tension to set bonuses while also making them more legible.

 

Solutions:  Not adopting solutions of "only allow fewer procs per power/per build" is the main solution here.  Also not nerfing procs into the ground.

 

Goal 6:  Avoid randomness/Avoid Low Proc Rates

 

@America's Angel advocates for removing elements of randomness from the system in order to make PvP more deterministic.  I think there is also a broad sense that low proc rates in general aren't productive, even if they have on some level a high rate of return.

 

Analysis:  @America's Angel should be realistic about the possibility of removing randomness from the game, which I think is a very minority position.  But there's a difference between removing randomness altogether and avoiding very low/spiky rates of proc firing, where everything is just a crap-shoot of "nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing, whee I got lucky and got a huge reward!"

 

Solutions:  Moving from a PPM doctrine of purely varying proc rate, and starting to vary scalar effects, would I think be pretty valuable.  Making a proc not have a 10% chance to activate for 70 damage, but have a 50% chance to activate for 14 damage, seems like it would be a win on fast-recharging powers.

 

Goal 7:  Avoid certainty/Avoid High Proc Rates

 

In direct contradiction to goal 6 is the sense that allowing a 90% proc rate removes in some sense the concept that these are procs, and that part of the trade off on accepting procs should be accepting randomness rather than near-certainty.  We have an assertion that @Captain Powerhouse thinks this is important.

 

Analysis: I think people should be clear that this stands in pretty direct opposition to the revealed preferences of pretty much everyone.  The entire build community has rallied around building for the highest proc rates possible.  I think we also deserve some clarity on whether this considered a problem only for damage procs, or whether it will have (much more significant) impacts on things like the Scrapper chance-for-+50%-crit rate ATO, the Stalker chance-to-hide ATO, the Gaussian's chance-for-build-up proc, etc.

 

Solutions:  Despite being the opposite of goal 6, you can use the same solution, varying the scalar of the proc effect rather than purely the rate.  Instead of a 90% chance for 70 damage, you can have a 75% chance for 84 damage.

[SmalltalkJava]

I see a lot of assumptions that procs are broken, and they all are based on framing the argument and just versions of "I don't like it".   Proc builds give up things to gain things.  Just like other builds.   The truth is that procs in their current iteration do not break the game and bring nothing negative in regards to gameplay.  Mechanically, It doesn't make it any less fun for a person.  There is no mechanic or DPS gate in the game that forces a player to use procs based on some DPS threshold.  People aren't being shut out of content because they don't use procs. They are purely 100% optional much like any other IO bonus.   I have some toons that use procs a lot, i have some builds that use them a little, and some that don't use them at all.   I wouldn't want to limit the freedom that I have experienced based on someone not liking procs.   

 

So what if a power can take 5 procs,  So what if a power can be slotted with no damage enhancement and just procs.   Big whoop.  It has no negative impact on the game at all.  None.  

[Marbing]

14 minutes ago, SmalltalkJava said:

I see a lot of assumptions that procs are broken, and they all are based on framing the argument and just versions of "I don't like it".   Proc builds give up things to gain things.  Just like other builds.   The truth is that procs in their current iteration do not break the game and bring nothing negative in regards to gameplay.  Mechanically, It doesn't make it any less fun for a person.  There is no mechanic or DPS gate in the game that forces a player to use procs based on some DPS threshold.  People aren't being shut out of content because they don't use procs. They are purely 100% optional much like any other IO bonus.   I have some toons that use procs a lot, i have some builds that use them a little, and some that don't use them at all.   I wouldn't want to limit the freedom that I have experienced based on someone not liking procs.   

 

So what if a power can take 5 procs,  So what if a power can be slotted with no damage enhancement and just procs.   Big whoop.  It has no negative impact on the game at all.  None.  

False. Read my comment above on what problems they DO cause. There needs to be a happy medium. I am not calling for a massive nerf, just some balance. As are many others here.

[Clave Dark 5]

On 7/2/2021 at 9:44 PM, America's Angel said:

It's mostly just your typical forum hysteria. One thing I've learnt over the years is that forum consensus rarely reflects what's in game.

 

Now, with that said... (etc.)

Thanks for that, but I was asking how often such abuse really happens or "creates a problem." 

 

A game as complex is going to have outliers on both extremes: Burn with procs, and I dunno, say Mastermind Mercenaries.  If the game can tolerate seriously under performance in one area, giving with the other hand some over performance is also tolerable.

 

And I still don't know how often this is happening anyway, and therefore somehow breaking the game.

[arcane]

To clarify, I certainly don’t “dislike” that Radiation Therapy is a quick-cast nuke or that Ice Arrow with 6 procs is as good an attack as any or that my Plant dom is more or less as fast at farming as a /Fire brute due in part to Creeper procs... big numbers are fun 😉. I’m just dubious as to whether or not that’s working as intended within the devs’ balance paradigm and think it’s a likely big part of the conversation if procs are a problem. 

 

But otherwise yeah thanks for the great post @aethereal 🙂

Edited July 4, 2021 by arcane