Change Confront and Assassin's Strike into a distance-closing attack

[battlewraith]

1 hour ago, Greycat said:

 

Currently:

 

I can stand at range and taunt. I do not end up in the middle of a mob as a result, aggroing the lot of them.

 

OP's suggestion:

 

Taunt, wind up teleported (or whatever) there in the middle of a mob I don't want to be in the middle of.

 

Yes, that is *objectively worse.* Saying "it doesn't affect anybody's build" is a flat out lie and you should be (but I can tell won't be) ashamed, as to get *original, useful* functionality back would require respeccing, dropping that power and going into a power pool - if they can fit that into their build.

 

Yes, that's "objectively different." So would making Confront into a power that turns your character into a flowerpot for five minutes. Frankly, the second would be more useful, as it would at least be amusing during RP. "Different" is not "better" or even "more interesting."

Also, no.

 

 

I already commented on the "it doesn't affect anybody's build" statement. The exchange happened on page 9.  YOU said that your way "affected nobody's current build."  I replied to that statement by saying "it (ie your way) affected nobody's current build. The (proposed) change was aimed at potential builds.  In other words, builds that might be possible if you didn't have your way. I didn't lie about anything  and have nothing to be ashamed of. Perhaps you should slow down and actually read what has been written. 

[Rudra]

The change can be aimed at potential builds all you like. It would still affect current builds if implemented.

[battlewraith]

1 hour ago, Rudra said:

Having a gap closer, you target a mob and use the now taunting combat teleport, will not give you any travel benefits. It will send you to the target. So, yes, I ignored it as being a contrived defense.

 

Edit: It is an attack set power. Using Confront as the basis. That is a ST mob ability. Not like Shield Charge, Savage Leap, or the other 2 that are AoE attacks you target a location with.

 

Edit again: As a reminder, in your post, you were the one that said you wanted a power pool slot freed up.

 

So you make a couple assumptions which is typical of the "against" crowd. You assume that this hypothetical power works a certain way when that hasn't been established. Since you're relentlessly dismissive  of the idea, you immediately wave away aesthetic concerns as a contrived defense. Apparently it's not worth something just looking or being cool.

 

I made all kinds of comments about possibilities. Taken as a whole, or even reasonably in context they don't fit with your lie.

[Rudra]

If your thought process is not folding combat teleport into confront, the by all means. Actually tell us what you are thinking. I can't speak for anyone else, but I am not psychic. I can only use the information available to me. So please. What is your idea for Confront?

[battlewraith]

[ZeeHero]

On 5/11/2022 at 5:57 PM, TheZag said:

The only gap closer i use is between my fist and the enemies face.

And without the right mobility options, your fist will very often never be close enough to the enemy's face when you want it to be.

 

No one has provided even a remotely decent argument for how it would hurt anyone to have a gap closer or heck just make jump attack need only 1 power in jumping to take or something.

 

It's really not rocket science and it isn't going to ruin anyone's fun to improve the fun of many others. Unless of course your idea of fun is others not having fun.

 

You can laugh and vote me down til you're blue in the face but the ones who look silly are the ones who still cannot provide a rational argument to support their point while nearly every game's design other than this one will support my position.

 

Quote

If your thought process is not folding combat teleport into confront, the by all means. Actually tell us what you are thinking. I can't speak for anyone else, but I am not psychic. I can only use the information available to me. So please. What is your idea for Confront?

I don't care if you replace confront or just make things like leap attack need less investment in a pool. either or. We need more universal gap closer options, there is no reason to oppose that. No one has to take your precious taunt. People here just enjoy bullying those who they disagree with, that has been clear forever. hillarious since none of them has produced a relevant argument as to why gap closers = bad.

 

Also I don't know if the code will allow a change like this but has anyone considered if it's possible to allow for a choice between 2 powers in certain power pools at certain levels? So you could keep your confront or replace it with a more useful gap closer.

Edited May 13, 2022 by ZeeHero

[macskull]

I am confused by the existence of this topic, as Scrapper/Brute/Tanker taunt/confront powers all come with -75% range which essentially forces your target(s) into melee range. Stalkers? Eh, whatever, that AT is probably the least in need of buffs and they have the ability to invisibly delete mobs anyways.

[Rudra]

@ZeeHero, do you just bother to read the responses that let you keep going? It has already been said that the addition of more pool power sets that include more gap closers is fine. Your complaint has been noted and actually supported. The part not accepted by the bulk of the posters in this thread is mutating Confront, which is used by multiple players in this thread as it currently works, into something that does not provide the core function of Confront.

 

Summary:

Your request for more gap closers is fine with everyone.

 

(Edit: Just not turning Confront or AS into one.)

Edited May 14, 2022 by Rudra

[ZeeHero]

9 minutes ago, Rudra said:

@ZeeHero, do you just bother to read the responses that let you keep going? It has already been said that the addition of more pool power sets that include more gap closers is fine. Your complaint has been noted and actually supported. The part not accepted by the bulk of the posters in this thread is mutating Confront, which is used by multiple players in this thread as it currently works, into something that does not provide the core function of Confront.

 

Summary:

Your request for more gap closers is fine with everyone.

Then why have certain people who shall not be named in their evilness, ridicule me when all I ever supported was more gap closers by any means that works best? I may agree that the OP's suggestion is a big improvement but I'm not against alternatives. the only thing that really matters is more gap closers for all. people can just continue to ignore confront if sme people love it so much.

[Naraka]

1 hour ago, ZeeHero said:

And without the right mobility options, your fist will very often never be close enough to the enemy's face when you want it to be.

 

 

 

Sometimes, it's a good thing we all don't get everything we want.

[Rudra]

The opposition is strictly in regards to mutating Confront and AS into something else. When you made the comment you just wanted more gap closers that were not teleport, there were other posters that agreed with you. Finish the origin pool sets and have gap closers in them was one such comment. Making new pool sets that have a different type of gap closer was another. I can't speak for anything else.

[Naraka]

1 hour ago, ZeeHero said:

 

No one has provided even a remotely decent argument for how it would hurt anyone to have a gap closer or heck just make jump attack need only 1 power in jumping to take or something.

 

 

Power creep.

 

That hurts everyone. You may not feel the hurt now but you will start feeling it a few months or so down the line. When the barrenness starts to spiral or your interest starts to wane. The worst part is, you won't even realize you took part in why the situation turned out that way. You'll probably look at other aspects of what went wrong and attempt to absolve spoiling the game over time rather than just admit, maybe leaving some aspects the same might have lead to a better outcome.

 

Damage over time is tricky, you know.

 

The other aspect I pointed out before wasn't even addressed so don't go saying no good points were made.

 

I'm not against gap closers for melee, but that could be left to a whole new melee set as it's gimmick. Melee do not need more gimmicks, or is full mez protection and some debuff resistance not handy enough? Your gap closer is not being affected my immobilize.

 

1 hour ago, ZeeHero said:

 

 

I don't care if you replace confront or just make things like leap attack need less investment in a pool. either or. We need more universal gap closer options, there is no reason to oppose that. No one has to take your precious taunt. People here just enjoy bullying those who they disagree with, that has been clear forever. hillarious since none of them has produced a relevant argument as to why gap closers = bad.

 

Also I don't know if the code will allow a change like this but has anyone considered if it's possible to allow for a choice between 2 powers in certain power pools at certain levels? So you could keep your confront or replace it with a more useful gap closer.

 

You have not made a good argument for lessening the requirements for Spring attack. At best, it might have opened discussion for making it recharge faster.

 

You DO have enough pools and power picks to take it. And if you dare utter "Leadership" or mutter about Hasten or Weave, you've lost. You can take them and the leaping pool... Just because you can't take them all with no accountability means nothing. Do you want to lose inherent Fitness to get easier pool picks? I doubt you do. Or maybe pushing travel powers back to level 14+? You have it so good and the way you show your gratitude is to demand more lol

 

Edited May 14, 2022 by Naraka

[Rudra]

The problem with reducing Spring Attack's tier and requirements is that it is treated as the tier 9 attacks of the same style. An alternate version that does not include an attack that only sends the character to the selected target a la Combat Teleport is feasible. It would just need to be created. Or a non-teleport animation for Combat Teleport that was a dash or a jump could work too.

Edited May 14, 2022 by Rudra
Edited to add "only".

[TheZag]

4 hours ago, ZeeHero said:

And without the right mobility options, your fist will very often never be close enough to the enemy's face when you want it to be.

 

I guess since my joke was quoted,  ill leave a 'real' response.  I play melee all the time and sprint is more than fast enough to move between groups.  I also take mystic flight but rarely use the teleport for combat purposes because sprint is fast enough.  In PvE,  a gap closing ability to save less than a quarter of a second is totally pointless.  If we were talking pvp then the ability for a melee character to close a gap is a must.  But also if you are bringing a PvE build into pvp and expect to be effective then expect to be disappointed.

 

We get 3 builds,  use them.  Get u a pve build with speed, leadership, leaping, fighting.  Another pve build with speed, leadership, leaping and fighting but actually take spring leap.  And finally make another pve build because i dont think you plan on a pvp build based on what ive read so far and take speed,  leadership, leaping and fighting and then come to the forum and ask for confront to be changed into a gap closer because we dont have access to enough pool powers....oh wait.

[PeregrineFalcon]

Ok, here we go!

 

4 hours ago, ZeeHero said:

And without the right mobility options, your fist will very often never be close enough to the enemy's face when you want it to be.

Sprint + Swift + Follow is very fast. Like over 40 MPH if properly slotted. I've never had a problem using that to close with my next victim.

 

 

4 hours ago, ZeeHero said:

No one has provided even a remotely decent argument for how it would hurt anyone to have a gap closer or heck just make jump attack need only 1 power in jumping to take or something.

Gap Closers are already in the game. Changing Confront into a Gap Closer would only 'hurt' people in that the time the devs spend making that change is time that they can't spend adding things to the game that are not currently in the game. So no, it wouldn't 'hurt' anyone, but there is a down side to it.

 

 

4 hours ago, ZeeHero said:

It's really not rocket science and it isn't going to ruin anyone's fun to improve the fun of many others. Unless of course your idea of fun is others not having fun.

What about not having a Gap Closer in a Scrapper power set is preventing you from having fun?

 

 

4 hours ago, ZeeHero said:

You can laugh and vote me down til you're blue in the face but the ones who look silly are the ones who still cannot provide a rational argument to support their point while nearly every game's design other than this one will support my position.

Multiple rational arguments have been provided in this thread explaining why people are against this. They basically boil down to:

1. I use confront and removing it would force me to respec.
2. There's no reason for the devs to spend the time necessary to do this when these powers already exist in game.

These are both rational arguments that have been made in this thread explaining why people are against this. The only people who look silly are the ones who can't see that these rational arguments have been made.

 

 

4 hours ago, ZeeHero said:

I don't care if you replace confront or just make things like leap attack need less investment in a pool. either or. We need more universal gap closer options, there is no reason to oppose that. No one has to take your precious taunt. People here just enjoy bullying those who they disagree with, that has been clear forever. hillarious since none of them has produced a relevant argument as to why gap closers = bad.

Now this I agree with. And I'll even go out on a limb and say that others will agree with this as well.

 

While Combat Teleport and Super Speed, both of which can be considered Gap Closers, do not require investment in additional powers, Spring Attack does. I would definitely support additional Gap Closers that do not require investment in multiple powers for those characters who are not porters or speedsters. Perhaps as alternate animations for Combat Teleport.

 

 

4 hours ago, ZeeHero said:

Also I don't know if the code will allow a change like this but has anyone considered if it's possible to allow for a choice between 2 powers in certain power pools at certain levels? So you could keep your confront or replace it with a more useful gap closer.

Yes, it is possible. The Sentinel version of Super Reflexes has the option to take one of two different mez protection powers. The Homecoming developers have said that this has created some problems -I don't remember the details- and they would never do this again.

[battlewraith]

12 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

These are both rational arguments that have been made in this thread explaining why people are against this. The only people who look silly are the ones who can't see that these rational arguments have been made.

 

"Hello I'd like to make a suggestion!"

"Suggestions are down the hall. This is argumentation."

"But it says suggestions on the door."

"No it doesn't."

"Yes it does."

"No it doesn't."

"Yes it does!"

"Are you suggesting I can't read?"

"Why yes....yes I am. Because it clearly says suggestions on the door."

"I already told you once-- suggestions are down the hall."

 

[arcane]

33 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

 

"Hello I'd like to make a suggestion!"

"Suggestions are down the hall. This is argumentation."

"But it says suggestions on the door."

"No it doesn't."

"Yes it does."

"No it doesn't."

"Yes it does!"

"Are you suggesting I can't read?"

"Why yes....yes I am. Because it clearly says suggestions on the door."

"I already told you once-- suggestions are down the hall."

 

People are allowed and even encouraged (“feedback”) to disagree with suggestions. If you’re one of those anti-disagreement types, expect lots of disappointment from life. Constant affirmation isn’t a thing in the real world.

[arcane]

15 hours ago, ZeeHero said:

Then why have certain people who shall not be named in their evilness, ridicule me when all I ever supported was more gap closers by any means that works best? I may agree that the OP's suggestion is a big improvement but I'm not against alternatives. the only thing that really matters is more gap closers for all. people can just continue to ignore confront if sme people love it so much.

No one in this thread is against gap closers.

[Naraka]

38 minutes ago, arcane said:

No one in this thread is against gap closers.

I'm not against gap closers, per say. This notion of "add more gap closers to more pools" is just unneeded extravagance. There are plenty of gap closing options as is. Adding more is just bloat.

 

Just because pool A, C, D and F have a gap closer, apparently every pool or more pools need them? Why? Eventually, we're going to see people looking at pools B, E and G saying those pools have toggle defense so every pool should get that too.

 

The beauty of the system is, if you prioritize certain types of powers on your characters, your characters are going to look cookie cutter. But there are plenty of other options. You're not wrong for making cookie cutter builds but you are wrong for expecting sets and pools to be as cookie cutter as your builds and call that variety.

[Rudra]

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

 

"Hello I'd like to make a suggestion!"

"Suggestions are down the hall. This is argumentation."

"But it says suggestions on the door."

"No it doesn't."

"Yes it does."

"No it doesn't."

"Yes it does!"

"Are you suggesting I can't read?"

"Why yes....yes I am. Because it clearly says suggestions on the door."

"I already told you once-- suggestions are down the hall."

 

"Hello, I'd like to make a suggestion."

"I don't think that is a good suggestion."

"I like the suggestion, think it is a benefit, and needs to be implemented anyway."

"I still disagree, here are my reasons for it, and would rather it was not."

"You're bullying me."

"No, I'm just disagreeing with you."

 

 

And round and round we go.

[battlewraith]

4 hours ago, arcane said:

People are allowed and even encouraged (“feedback”) to disagree with suggestions. If you’re one of those anti-disagreement types, expect lots of disappointment from life. Constant affirmation isn’t a thing in the real world.

 

That probably made a lot more sense when there was a full scale development team updating the game. Under the current state of affairs, I have no expectation that this idea is going to be implemented. Even if everyone in this thread thought this idea was amazing, I don't think it would happen. That's true of the vast majority of suggestions that are going to be made here.

 

Coming here to make a suggestion suggests to me a certain level of investment in the game. My real world concern is that people coming here and getting exposed to various degrees of derision will sour them on the community and further deteriorate the playerbase. In debates that are of no consequence anyway. That's the only practical consequence I see coming out of this. Do I expect people to read this comment and curb their desire to argue, pontificate and moralize? Absolutely not lol. It's just a thought.

 

edit:typos

Edited May 14, 2022 by battlewraith

[Bill Z Bubba]

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

Coming here to make a suggestion suggests to me a certain level of investment in the game. My real world concern is that people coming here and getting exposed to various degrees of derision will sour them on the community and further deteriorate the playerbase. In debates that are of no consequence anyway.

 

I don't believe you.

 

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

That's the only practical consequence I see coming out of this. Do I expect people to read this comment and curb their desire to argue, ponitificare and moralize? Absolutely not lol.

 

And that is specifically why I don't believe you.

 

[battlewraith]

1 hour ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

I don't believe you.

 

 

And that is specifically why I don't believe you.

 

 

The majority of the people here are against and don't want any of the changes proposed considered. So you think that I'm popping in here to troll them in order to--help them undermine this discussion? After spending a considerable amount of time working to defend what I thought was interesting about the proposal. I think you're smarter than that.

[PeregrineFalcon]

2 hours ago, battlewraith said:

My real world concern is that people coming here and getting exposed to various degrees of derision will sour them on the community and further deteriorate the playerbase.

There has been no derision here. There has just been people disagreeing with you. I'm not going to apologize if you're not used to people disagreeing with you.

 

And then there's been you calling people liars. And another poster claiming "no rational arguments", even though rational arguments have been the literal basis of the disagreements in this thread.

 

Your posts in this thread, and those of the people who agree with you, have been full of little other than emotional pleas and counter-factual information. You're either refusing to argue in good faith, or you honestly lack the wherewithal to discern the difference between disagreement and derision. Please understand that your "No, you!" style of refusing to understand logical arguments isn't going to enable you to win anything, it's only going to convince people to stop talking to you. Both online and IRL.

 

I know that you're going to see this post as an attack on you, but it's not. It's actually my attempt to offer good advice. Peace.

[InvaderStych]

Never mind, lol.

 

PF said it more constructively.

Edited May 14, 2022 by InvaderStych