Its hard to talk about Vigilence.

[kelika2]

5 hours ago, TheZag said:

Jranger was a person on the original game forums that would post long explanations for why he was against something.  After his posts went largely ignored he started to just reply 'no' instead of a long explanation.  

 

Eventually the original devs said you arent allowed to just reply 'no' so people started using /jranger in place of no.  It was used widely enough that they made another rule that you cant use /jranger.

So its like saying "first post"?

[PeregrineFalcon]

7 hours ago, kelika2 said:

So its like saying "first post"?

If "first post" = "NO!" then yes, it's exactly like that.  🙄

[kelika2]

8 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

If "first post" = "NO!" then yes, it's exactly like that.  🙄

From seeing it to many times I think people post it just to post it, like a ritual or something of that tier.  Like trying to get first post.

Seeing how others had actual arguments to go along with their no, is jranger really any different than "first post"?

[arcane]

12 minutes ago, kelika2 said:

From seeing it to many times I think people post it just to post it, like a ritual or something of that tier.  Like trying to get first post.

Seeing how others had actual arguments to go along with their no, is jranger really any different than "first post"?

It means no and everyone who types it means no

[kelika2]

3 hours ago, arcane said:

It means no and everyone who types it means no

Now it just sounds like a forced meme

[Doomguide2005]

51 minutes ago, kelika2 said:

Now it just sounds like a forced meme

     More like a meme specific to this game and its forums.  Nobody is forcing any one to use it anymore than "in before a Red Name".  

 

     Myself I just think the idea runs contrary to the intent behind the damage buff which was to boost defender damage when solo or on small teams and not as a all the time boost to their damage output.   I do think the Vigilance needs a tweak or 10.  But I'm at a loss to say how specifically partly because defenders are very potent in teams (i.e. how do you do something for an AT so utterly dominant in large groups that helps solo without making groups even more ridiculous) and also very a very functionally diverse AT with equally diverse playstyles.

     If Vigilance is applied as suggested then why are we talking about an inherent vs an increase in the AT's damage mods etc., etc.?

[kelika2]

46 minutes ago, Doomguide2005 said:

 Nobody is forcing any one to use it anymore than "in before a Red Name". 

I dont wanna go through 2 years of suggestions but it might be in every thread

Thats pretty forced

[macskull]

Defenders are fine, Vigilance is fine, Corruptors are fine, Scourge is fine.

 

TL;DR: /jranger

[Greycat]

On 10/17/2021 at 11:13 AM, TheZag said:

 

Jranger was a person on the original game forums that would post long explanations for why he was against something.  After his posts went largely ignored he started to just reply 'no' instead of a long explanation.  

 

Eventually the original devs said you arent allowed to just reply 'no' so people started using /jranger in place of no.  It was used widely enough that they made another rule that you cant use /jranger.

 

Um.

 

Actually, /jranger was created more to poke at the user you mentioned, jranger, because of his "no" posts.  I can say this with confidence since I'm the person who started poking at him with it. It was *meant* to be lighthearted, a joke, a "you're being rather silly with your no-ing."

 

It morphed into what you mentioned, yes. But you missed the middle bit and original intent.

[TheZag]

Im late to the jranger game and i had to fill in some of the info gaps with what i assumed to be true.  I did get a chance to look at the old forums though and there was a rule put in place that said dont just reply no or jranger.  I appreciate the more complete info too,  thanks.

[SeraphimKensai]

I was thinking again about Vigilance, and didn't want to post a new suggestion about it when this one is only a few months old...

 

But, what if we got Vigilance wrong from the start. What if Vigilance caused defenders to have a chance to roll a critical heal, buff, or debuff similar to how a scrapper gets critical damage? Defenders are so vigilant to their cause that whether through sheer will, luck, desperation, or divine/diabolical intervention occasionally their buffs, debuffs, heals, etc. will proc an extra 20% modifier to boost that effect being used.

 

The scaling bonus damage based on team size can stay, but this would give defenders a little extra flourish to help them cement their place as the best buffer/debuffer in the game.

 

Is 20% too much, too little, just right, or am I being completely outlandish with this idea?

[Ghost]

On 10/17/2021 at 10:34 AM, kelika2 said:

Can you explain what this is?

It’s spam

 

[MTeague]

4 hours ago, SeraphimKensai said:

I was thinking again about Vigilance, and didn't want to post a new suggestion about it when this one is only a few months old...

 

But, what if we got Vigilance wrong from the start. What if Vigilance caused defenders to have a chance to roll a critical heal, buff, or debuff similar to how a scrapper gets critical damage? Defenders are so vigilant to their cause that whether through sheer will, luck, desperation, or divine/diabolical intervention occasionally their buffs, debuffs, heals, etc. will proc an extra 20% modifier to boost that effect being used.

 

The scaling bonus damage based on team size can stay, but this would give defenders a little extra flourish to help them cement their place as the best buffer/debuffer in the game.

 

Is 20% too much, too little, just right, or am I being completely outlandish with this idea?

 

I respectfully dislike / disagree with this plan, too

My rationale: 

1. Defenders are already factually the best buffers/debuffers in the game. Flourish is not required to make this so. 
2. Their buffs/debuffs are already Crazy Strong. Letting them proc a 20% even stronger buff / debuff would make them even more overpowering vs Corruptors.
3. You'd also have to figure out when that extra 20% buff/debuff/heal kicks in for things like Toggles.  Dispersion Bubble?  Snow Storm?  Radiation Infection?
4. I have trouble getting past your use of the phrase "scaling bonus damage based on team size".  Defender damage levels in teams, is in fact, intentional. Vigilance as it eixsts now, gave them a flat 30% damage boost to help them solo. Damage is not nerfed when you join a team. It is boosted when you solo. I never saw any opinions from the Devs saying that defenders needed the ability to contribute more damage while teamed. Nor do I personally feel this is true. (And yes, I have several defenders). 
5. Is Vigilance the most amazing Inherent? No. Not by long shots. I rarely even notice when endurance discounts happen. Honestly the "meh" factor is right up there with Opportunity. But part of that is I don't think the devs felt that Defenders particularly needed anything more. 

All of that said, you have every right to argue for your desired changes, and who knows? Maybe the HC devs will agree with you and not the naysayers. 

[SeraphimKensai]

36 minutes ago, MTeague said:

 

I respectfully dislike / disagree with this plan, too

My rationale: 

1. Defenders are already factually the best buffers/debuffers in the game. Flourish is not required to make this so. 
2. Their buffs/debuffs are already Crazy Strong. Letting them proc a 20% even stronger buff / debuff would make them even more overpowering vs Corruptors.
3. You'd also have to figure out when that extra 20% buff/debuff/heal kicks in for things like Toggles.  Dispersion Bubble?  Snow Storm?  Radiation Infection?
4. I have trouble getting past your use of the phrase "scaling bonus damage based on team size".  Defender damage levels in teams, is in fact, intentional. Vigilance as it eixsts now, gave them a flat 30% damage boost to help them solo. Damage is not nerfed when you join a team. It is boosted when you solo. I never saw any opinions from the Devs saying that defenders needed the ability to contribute more damage while teamed. Nor do I personally feel this is true. (And yes, I have several defenders). 
5. Is Vigilance the most amazing Inherent? No. Not by long shots. I rarely even notice when endurance discounts happen. Honestly the "meh" factor is right up there with Opportunity. But part of that is I don't think the devs felt that Defenders particularly needed anything more. 

All of that said, you have every right to argue for your desired changes, and who knows? Maybe the HC devs will agree with you and not the naysayers. 

What would you change about Vigilance if you had a free pass at it?

 

And like I said I wasn't sure about 20% that was more or less a placeholder with the idea of making the inherent more active of a sorts .

[MTeague]

Solo, I don't think I'd change anything. The flat 30% boost is quite nice. Not required to get the job done, but nice. 

 

Teaming.... Vigilance to me says your're watchful over your teammates, ready to act.

 

• If Global Recharge wasn't as stupidly OP as it already is with IO's, I'd consider that. 
• If the buffs weren't already so strong, I'd consider something like having the defender BE a low-grade Leadership toggle. Maybe +1.5% defense all, +3% res all to all teammates within range.  Small yea, but mass defenders together and it could grow large.  Except, a cluster of defenders are already crazy good. 
• I guess I'd probably go with some +Perception Range. Something that's nice, make stealthed enemies a bit less annoying, and still mindful of the theme of being watchful.

[InvaderStych]

On 10/18/2021 at 12:42 PM, kelika2 said:

Thats pretty forced

 

What is your definition of the word "Forced?"

 

The phrase is common because it is part of the game community's collective history.  There's no more force involved than there is when someone makes reference to "Strong and Pretty" or "Gone to the Americans."

 

All three are part of the collective past associated with The Cities, no one is forcing it into anything nor are they forced to use it.

 

At this point though it's pretty much @PeregrineFalcon's bailiwick these days, so we all just let them get on with it for us. 😉

 

Also, just to remain on topic:

 

Thank you, but no to this suggestion.

[arcane]

On 10/18/2021 at 2:42 PM, kelika2 said:

it might be in every thread

Thats pretty forced

Doubtful; there are some good suggestions and this meme is logically only for bad suggestions 

[arcane]

1 hour ago, InvaderStych said:

At this point though it's pretty much @PeregrineFalcon's bailiwick these days, so we all just let them get on with it for us. 😉

 

I would support him receiving some sort of tax deduction or credit for his community service.

[kelika2]

as the OP am i legally bound to keep up to a thread i made 5 months ago?

[arcane]

18 minutes ago, kelika2 said:

as the OP am i legally bound to keep up to a thread i made 5 months ago?

No. I don’t even allow myself to receive notifications. You don’t owe us anything and vice versa.

[Marbing]

As many people have said. No.

 

Vigilance needs a rework, yes. But, I think the damage buff should be removed ENTIRELY. If you want a Defender that does more damage then make a Corruptor. The damage buff they get solo is completely asinine (and Defenders are one of my favorite ATs). The other buff (endurance reduction) in Vigilance is nearly useless and does need to be made more useful, though. Edit: Could be as simple as a scaling endurance discount per member on the team period. Independent of their health, and maybe even a small one outside of a team.

 

 

Edit: Just now realizing that I am posting on an old thread. My bad.

Edited February 8, 2022 by th0ughtGun

[kelika2]

33 minutes ago, th0ughtGun said:

If you want a Defender that does more damage then make a Corruptor.

At first, I did not want to do this but then I remembered how many of my old characters from live were remade from Scrappers to Brutes/stalkers when Homecoming hit

Then I remembered how many of my old trollers are now Doms

Then I remembered how many of my old x into y

So I remade my kin/sonic into a sonic/kin, emp/water into water/emp, thermal/fire into fire/thermal, etc and so on.

 

Blaster is the last remaining hero AT worth a fuck.

 

[arcane]

3 minutes ago, kelika2 said:

Blaster is the last remaining hero AT worth a fuck.

Goodness gracious what an egregiously wrong statement.

[kelika2]

1 hour ago, arcane said:

Goodness gracious what an egregiously wrong statement.

I think you know that I know what word im talking about, but I dont know its meaning

 

Therefore, what you said was wrong

[MTeague]

6 hours ago, kelika2 said:

At first, I did not want to do this but then I remembered how many of my old characters from live were remade from Scrappers to Brutes/stalkers when Homecoming hit

Then I remembered how many of my old trollers are now Doms

Then I remembered how many of my old x into y

So I remade my kin/sonic into a sonic/kin, emp/water into water/emp, thermal/fire into fire/thermal, etc and so on.

 

Blaster is the last remaining hero AT worth a fuck.

 

 

What this says to me, is you are very focused on killspeed, and your ability to directly contribute to that by big damage numbers. 

And hey, that's cool.  Control powers don't need to be appreciated by everyone. Defensive buffs and team-reinforcement is not everyone's cup of tea. 

 

I do think Defenders are simply not an AT that you personally will be happy with. 

That does not, by itself, mean that the entire AT is due a rework.  It just means you will be happier rolling a Corruptor.