Pendulum Damage after change, other stats not compensated

[WindDemon21]

Even before the changes to Axe, one thing that always made mace better was that it's version, crowd control, was bigger and hit 10 targets. Now with these changes, the power had it's damage reduced, but it's other stats were not compensated as a result. If it's still going to only hit 5 targets, and have it's damage reduced, it needs it's end cost, cast time, and base recharged reduced as well to match.

 

I understand it was made to be earlier, but that only denotes the "general" rule of powers usually having smaller damage, but ALSO lower recharge, cast times, and end costs as well. When this change went through however, the damage was nerfed on it, but those other stats were not properly compensated.

 

This needs fixed, either by lowering the cast time, end cost, and recharge time to match the powers new damage value, or by increasing it's target cap to 10 targets like it should have always been.

 

Edit: corrected a word on title.

Edited May 8, 2023 by WindDemon21

[Yomo Kimyata]

It's a Tier 5 power now.  You get it at level 8.  Frankly, it's still wildly overpowered there.

[WindDemon21]

1 hour ago, Yomo Kimyata said:

It's a Tier 5 power now.  You get it at level 8.  Frankly, it's still wildly overpowered there.

Yes i'm well aware, which the general way that works is powers HAVE less damage, but ALSO have less end costs ,rech, and animation times. This power however just lost it's damage, but still has the horrendous end cost and rech, and somewhat long cast time. Its DEFINITELY not overpowered at tier 5, those other stats just need normalized to "be" a now lower tier power, but they werent, it was just straight up nerfed.

[WindDemon21]

If it's going to be a "tier 5" power, then it shoudl also have "tier 5 end cost/rech/cast times. but it never was, it was just straight up nerfed without those being adjusted. For that damage now, it's 15ish end, and 15s rech, and 2s cast time, should be more like 11.5end, 12rech, and 1.6ish cast.

Edited January 6, 2023 by WindDemon21

[WindDemon21]

Or upped to 10 targets*

[WindDemon21]

But as is, it absolutely needs adjusted to higher target cap or lower end/rech/cast times.

[Spaghetti Betty]

I disagree, sorry. While I do agree that Pendulum on its own might look bad on paper, when you consider how it fits in Battle Axe as a whole, it's a pretty strong AoE. If you're comparing it to War Mace, then, IMO, increasing the target cap of Pendulum would make War Mace look even less attractive by comparison.

[WindDemon21]

1 minute ago, Spaghetti Betty said:

I disagree, sorry. While I do agree that Pendulum on its own might look bad on paper, when you consider how it fits in Battle Axe as a whole, it's a pretty strong AoE. If you're comparing it to War Mace, then, IMO, increasing the target cap of Pendulum would make War Mace look even less attractive by comparison.

I get that, which is why i'd be fine with it as 5 targets if they corrected its other stats. don't be fooled by it's "crunch" feeling to think that its doing more than it is. It's damage and target cap are fine, but then it's end cost/rech at the very least if not cast time too need to be adjusted to match it's new damage. It still woudln't be an accurate comparison aoe'wise anyway since mace gets shatter which is amazing in it's own right too.

 

I'm comparing it only, to itself though, for its new damage, it NEEDS to have it's end cost and cast times corrected for the power. Or look at it that I'm comparing it to EVERY power, that should have appropriate values for end cost and recharge for the amount of damage they do.

 

For example looking at other scrapper cones, look at other weapon sets for the best comparison:

 

Pendulum: 84.23 damage, 14.35 end, 15rech, 2cast

Broadsword: 76.95 damage, almost the same, 2cast, but 8.53 end and 8s cast, yeesh. literally almost half of pendulum on end/rech stats for almost the same damage.

Katana: 61.94 dam, 6.03s end, 6s rech, 1.17 cast, basicaly about the same only little more than 1/3ish

Mace: 100.72 damage, but ALSO 11.86 end, 12s rech, same cast, AND htis 10 targets. Even if it only hit 5 targets, it's still WAYYYYYYY freaking ahead of pendulum.

 

Its honestly insane that you DON'T see how bad pendulums other stats are for the new damage it does. This SERIOUSLY needs fixed.

 

 

[Psyonico]

Battle Axe as a set got a buff in page 5, yet you're complaining that one power isn't good enough.  You need to look at the set as a whole and not just compare individual powers.

 

That being said, I am not an expert on Battle Axe, so I really can't say one way or the other if the set is balanced.

[WindDemon21]

1 hour ago, Psyonico said:

Battle Axe as a set got a buff in page 5, yet you're complaining that one power isn't good enough.  You need to look at the set as a whole and not just compare individual powers.

 

That being said, I am not an expert on Battle Axe, so I really can't say one way or the other if the set is balanced.

I am looking at it as a whole, this is regarding the aoe in the set, I love the pull in on axe cyclone, but fact is the shave off its cast time was combatted by increasing it's recharge time as well.

 

I'll grant the larger radius on it now (though think it's still only on the pull in not damage itself would need to test that, but even so), but pendulum is still the 5 targets. So per target, it actually did take a dive on it's aoe damage with the pendulum nerf, and it's single target was already before considered very slow which is why the ST powers got the buffs.

 

So those considered and the set overall, it's fine having pendulum be a "weaker" aoe, ie less of a big hitter tier 9 you'd expect, and i'm fine with that, but it's end costs and recharge times should be matched to compensate is all that I'm saying, and evidence of standard power damage/end/rech ratios with nearly every other power in the game, back it up as well (of course there are exceptions that still need fixed, but the apalling part is this was recently changed and went live like this AFTER being looked at). At it's damage (and target cap), it's end and rech costs are way too high.

 

I did have an axe scrapper 50+ here and on live, and it was never tough to get them into the cone of pre-page 5 pendulum, and its damage was bigger which was nice, but even then it felt like for the set that it should have been the 10 targets. Again I'm fine with it remaining the 5, but per damage it does not as well, the end/rech at least need to be lowered.

 

Looking at those examples I listed earlier:

 

Pend compared to slice: Pends end should be 9.34, and rech should be 8.76s

 

pend vs steel (equally bumping up values as if it had 2s cast for comparison): 1.05.88dam/10.31end/10.26rech): pends end should be 8.20, and rech should be 8.16s

 

pend vs mace, honestly so tough because its already way ahead of pendulum now even if it only hit 5 targets, hitting 10 it's literally like 4 times better, plus it's knockdown is guaranteed vs pendulum's which only has a chance to kd. but you see where this is headed.

 

Pendulums endurance and recharge times are WAY too high for it's new/current damage it does, averaging between bs/kat at least that it's end cost should be about 8.75ish end, and recharge should be about 8.5s, which is almost HALF of what it's endurance and recharge times currently are. Granting cyclon'es pull in (which was the justification for it being the 7ft taoe instead of cone cause it wraps them around you, which would work against a cone),and the slight area increase, (due to this, though at still the 5 cap it was never tough to get 5 in it's previous cone), I could see more like 10end and 10s recharge would seem like an averaged middle ground the power should be on, but certainly not almost 15 end and 15s recharge. This needs fixed asap.

Edited January 7, 2023 by WindDemon21

[nihilii]

I think the Pendulum stats make sense if we treat it as a TAoE, which it is now, rather than a cone.

Subjective: I'm OK "paying" that end/rech tax for the convenience of AoE over cone.

 

NewAxe can chain Cleave -> Pendulum -> Whirlwind for massive AOE damage and reliable KD at no effort. Axe is fairly light on end what with Cleave essentially being used like a ST attack that hits multiples for free.

Battle Axe has excellent flow as a result.

 

-

edit: perhaps a closer comparison would be to Spinning Strike from Street Justice, another TAoE.
+ 96 damage (vs 84)

- 6' radius (vs 7')

- 16s rech (vs 15s)

- 15.184 end (vs 14.352 end)
+ 10 targets max (vs 5 targets max)

~ can be boosted slightly further with combo levels (IMHO a negative, because in practice you'd rather save those combo levels for Crushing Uppercut...)

= 50% chance to KD

It feels relatively similar like this.

I could see a case being made for bumping Pendulum to 10 targets max. Hypothetical higher performance that is in practice leveled by Axe already chaining AoEs. That is, the amount of time you're going to have 6+ targets in range of your 7' TAoE might not be so significant in real gameplay.

I could also see a case for saying everything is fine, no buff needed.

Edited January 7, 2023 by nihilii

[WindDemon21]

2 hours ago, nihilii said:

I think the Pendulum stats make sense if we treat it as a TAoE, which it is now, rather than a cone.

Subjective: I'm OK "paying" that end/rech tax for the convenience of AoE over cone.

 

NewAxe can chain Cleave -> Pendulum -> Whirlwind for massive AOE damage and reliable KD at no effort. Axe is fairly light on end what with Cleave essentially being used like a ST attack that hits multiples for free.

Battle Axe has excellent flow as a result.

 

-

edit: perhaps a closer comparison would be to Spinning Strike from Street Justice, another TAoE.
+ 96 damage (vs 84)

- 6' radius (vs 7')

- 16s rech (vs 15s)

- 15.184 end (vs 14.352 end)
+ 10 targets max (vs 5 targets max)

~ can be boosted slightly further with combo levels (IMHO a negative, because in practice you'd rather save those combo levels for Crushing Uppercut...)

= 50% chance to KD

It feels relatively similar like this.

I could see a case being made for bumping Pendulum to 10 targets max. Hypothetical higher performance that is in practice leveled by Axe already chaining AoEs. That is, the amount of time you're going to have 6+ targets in range of your 7' TAoE might not be so significant in real gameplay.

I could also see a case for saying everything is fine, no buff needed.

"As an aoe" it should hit 10 targets. It's still a "cone" in it's 5 targets sense, the only reason it was changed because the cyclone pull in would otherwise be counterproductive for it.

 

But as it is at 5 targets which I'm fine with probably happier if:, it INSANELY needs its end cost and recharge time lowered. If you don't see that then you don't understand how power damage vs end/rech works in this game.

 

If it is concluded, that say over bs/kat cones, that since it is a *SLIGHT* bit easier to hit targets from its previous cone, and that it has kd instead of -defense (which also means Achilles proc would be slottable), then instead of the average 8.5end/rech that it SHOULD have, that it would instead be say 10.5ish to each, I can acknowledge that. But to say it's fine as is is just asinine and clearly shows you don't understand power stats.

 

Edit: to be clear, having that end/rech at 10.5ish instead of 8.5ish WOULD be the appropriate tax for its new taoe and kd, but 15ish on each is WAYYYYY too high for a 5 target cap with its current damage.

 

I'm convinced anyone saying otherwise is just being wowed by its animation and sound, but not actually realizing the numbers, because the numbers are CLEARLY out of balance as is.

Edited January 7, 2023 by WindDemon21

[nihilii]

I'm saying I can see the case for bumping it to 10! Yours is a strange answer to more or less call me an idiot for basically agreeing with your point, only with less emphasis.

[WindDemon21]

9 minutes ago, nihilii said:

I'm saying I can see the case for bumping it to 10! Yours is a strange answer to more or less call me an idiot for basically agreeing with your point, only with less emphasis.

Sorry, it was more about it being left like that from test (honesty i think it HAS to be something they overlooked and not intended, its so grossly unbalanced in a bad way now), and others who might say that, it did kinda sound like you were XD. Getting frustrated too by constant new things the devs are changing but not doing right numberwise, but also mostly getting frustrated that it's making yet another toon i'll have to shelved most likely until it gets fixed, SOOO many lately ughh :(.

 

Talking in game with people about it too they see that, but will try to bring up it's "utility" but thing is, at 5 targets, it's only a 50% chance to kd (really think for this case it should be 100%), but compared to say bs/kat in this scenario, that's only 2.5 enemies. So compared to those which do -defense and can house the achilles proc, it's more or less different, maybe a llittle better depending what you want, but not 15 end/rech different, where that 10.5 instead of "straight end/rech PER damage 8.5" makes more sense.

[WindDemon21]

And yeah the case is definitely there to have it's cap bumped to 10, though it would be nicer for aoe, but I'd concur it's nice at the 5 targets for when the mob gets smaller, it just needs the endurance and recharge values to be lowered to their proper values for it's new damage.

[WindDemon21]

It should be noted too for those who didn't know and are going by experiences on tankers, that this power especially will seem skewed on tankers with a 10 target cap instead of 5. Where this also occurs with normal aoe's and cones, with this power's taoe nature, that mean not only is it getting more that suck behind you from cyclone, but obviously the 10 target cap is going to skew people to think its an "aoe" and not still basically a "cone" for all intents and purposes. While that should still mean that it should still have a lower end/rech values on the tanker as well, it makes it not seem as noticeable by feeling like a full aoe.

 

Absolutely this still needs fixed to have the end/rech stats corrected to about the 10.5 for both (or as mentioned earlier 8.5 if looking purely at its damage value compared to other like-powers/cones), with that extra 2end/seconds being the tax for the knockdown and set synergy. But ABSOLUTELY this power needs those fixed.

 

And honestly like kat/bs's they get -defense, so as far as "tax" for a 50% only knockdown ie 2.5 enemies (which really, for 5 targets it should just be 100% knockdown at this rate) :/, I wouldn't think it even needs that by comparison TBH, while cyclones pull-in is very nice, it's actual damage is still nothing to gawk at (though faster cast, rech was also extended to 18s so compensation was already made for it), which is where this type of set needs the better stats on the other "cone" via pendulum to help it on that front, but certainly not at the 15ish end and rech values, that's where that 2end/second tax comes in off of the 8.5s that it should be per damage.

[TheZag]

Part of the power did get nerfed while the corresponding stats for endurance and recharge remained the same during its move to an earlier tier.  But its not a bug,  they did all of this on purpose to make the reworked set balanced.  You keep saying 'needs fixed' like its a bug and compare it to every power thats slightly better on an individual basis. 

 

In reality its a 'want buffed' suggestion and a better course would be to compare the set as a whole against itself.  Does it provide acceptable damage and endurance consumption over 2 hours of teaming or farming?  If everyone is saying its pretty good except for that 1 power then its doing better than most sets that have 2 or more skippable ones.  Just because its not the most powerful AoE in City of AoE isnt enough reason for a buff.

 

[WindDemon21]

1 hour ago, TheZag said:

Part of the power did get nerfed while the corresponding stats for endurance and recharge remained the same during its move to an earlier tier.  But its not a bug,  they did all of this on purpose to make the reworked set balanced.  You keep saying 'needs fixed' like its a bug and compare it to every power thats slightly better on an individual basis. 

 

In reality its a 'want buffed' suggestion and a better course would be to compare the set as a whole against itself.  Does it provide acceptable damage and endurance consumption over 2 hours of teaming or farming?  If everyone is saying its pretty good except for that 1 power then its doing better than most sets that have 2 or more skippable ones.  Just because its not the most powerful AoE in City of AoE isnt enough reason for a buff.

 

I never said it was a bug, I said it was an oversight, or just plain wrong decision. I understand what you're trying to say but your missing the entire point. That is ALL taken into consideration, but the power is still nowhere near justified with everything considered at this end/rech values.

 

As mentioned, when a power is an earlier tier like that, yes, it makes sense having the damage lowered, but ONLY if it's endurance and recharge values are lowered with it as well.

 

The power did NOT need a straight nerf by far. This wasn't (or SHOULDN'T)  have been meant as a nerf, but rather a lower tier rework, which should have justly then meant it would have it's end and rech values lowered as well.

 

"In reality" it's a wasnt adjusted properly "suggestion" to which the numbers CLEARLY speak for themselves. It's insanely baffling you don't see that, without trying to be rude, you're just plain wrong, thus power needs fixed.

 

Since you havent been paying attention or arent grasping it, that tax was already considered at about 10.5 for end/rech, where it should actually be at 8.5 for both. Anything more than that is gravely underwhelming the power for what it should be, especially at an insane 15end/rech that it is now. It's appalling and honestly almost insulting that it's values are at that.

[TheZag]

Im not for or against the suggestion.  But you are trying to convince the person that moved the power to a lower tier on purpose and changed its damage on purpose and changed how it targets on purpose,  who also plays the game and knows that powers have endurance costs and recharge times,  that they somehow forgot to change endurance costs and recharge times on accident during a powerset revamp.

 

People arent perfect and things can get missed but the more likely situation is it was on purpose.  You can keep saying it needs fixed but if the person that made the changes doesnt consider it broken then you likely wont get very far.  I could be 100% wrong and im also a guy that hasnt had any suggestions implemented so my help may be the exact opposite.  You do you though,  i just dont think the needs fixed argument will be a successful one.

 

[WindDemon21]

27 minutes ago, TheZag said:

Im not for or against the suggestion.  But you are trying to convince the person that moved the power to a lower tier on purpose and changed its damage on purpose and changed how it targets on purpose,  who also plays the game and knows that powers have endurance costs and recharge times,  that they somehow forgot to change endurance costs and recharge times on accident during a powerset revamp.

 

People arent perfect and things can get missed but the more likely situation is it was on purpose.  You can keep saying it needs fixed but if the person that made the changes doesnt consider it broken then you likely wont get very far.  I could be 100% wrong and im also a guy that hasnt had any suggestions implemented so my help may be the exact opposite.  You do you though,  i just dont think the needs fixed argument will be a successful one.

 

If you have to think of it this way, the "needs fixed" essentially is that same argument. If this WAS intentional, it was just a plain wrong assessment. The end/rech values are literally almost DOUBLE what they should be compared to like-powers. No secondary effect in the game on any melee attack is worth that amount of a use-tax. (and certainly not compared to mace which let's face it has always been its co-partner regarding effectiveness, which smashing damage also makes mace more-often better alone vs lethal)

 

I'm not saying I don't understand "A" tax in a situation like this, I'm just stating that 14.35 end and 15s rech is FAR too much of a tax for the power's new damage and tier placement. If whoever intentionally left these as is for this thinks that's appropriate, then it might be time to replace that person with someone who understands powers and sets better, because these are far from appropriate values for the power, looking at the entire axe revamp as whole (even worse looking at the power on its own).

[Rudra]

On 1/7/2023 at 9:47 AM, WindDemon21 said:

"As an aoe" it should hit 10 targets.

According to CoD, Pendulum is a melee TAoE power with up to 5 targets. (Edit: 10 for tankers. The rest of the statement is all Tanker data because I didn't see any other Brute TAoEs that weren't Taunt.)

Taunt is a ranged TAoE with a max of 5 targets.

Touch of Fear is a melee TAoE with a max of (some script) targets.

Fault is a close TAoE with a listed max of 0 targets for some reason....

Spinning Strike is a melee TAoE that also has a script number of targets rather than a locked number.

 

So AoE =/= 10+ targets.

 

(Edit again: Though IMO, the difference in Pendulum between Brutes and Tankers just further illustrates Tankers being favored over Brutes by the devs.)

Edited January 12, 2023 by Rudra

[WindDemon21]

27 minutes ago, Rudra said:

According to CoD, Pendulum is a melee TAoE power with up to 5 targets. (Edit: 10 for tankers. The rest of the statement is all Tanker data because I didn't see any other Brute TAoEs that weren't Taunt.)

Taunt is a ranged TAoE with a max of 5 targets.

Touch of Fear is a melee TAoE with a max of (some script) targets.

Fault is a close TAoE with a listed max of 0 targets for some reason....

Spinning Strike is a melee TAoE that also has a script number of targets rather than a locked number.

 

So AoE =/= 10+ targets.

 

(Edit again: Though IMO, the difference in Pendulum between Brutes and Tankers just further illustrates Tankers being favored over Brutes by the devs.)

I didn't now the right term, that's why i put it in quotes, obv it's an aoe, even cones are an "aoe" by definition. But aoe in this context referring to 10+ targets. As a 5 target power, it is essentially a "cone" the only reason it's a "taoe" is to so the cyclone pull in wouldn't be detrimental to it and NOT work with it. For all intents and purposes this power still needs to be thought of as a cone power given the 5 target limit etc.

[Rudra]

6 minutes ago, WindDemon21 said:

I didn't now the right term, that's why i put it in quotes, obv it's an aoe, even cones are an "aoe" by definition. But aoe in this context referring to 10+ targets. As a 5 target power, it is essentially a "cone" the only reason it's a "taoe" is to so the cyclone pull in wouldn't be detrimental to it and NOT work with it. For all intents and purposes this power still needs to be thought of as a cone power given the 5 target limit etc.

https://cod.uberguy.net/html/power.html?power=brute_melee.battle_axe.pendulum&at=brute

https://cod.uberguy.net/html/power.html?power=brute_melee.battle_axe.taunt&at=brute

 

It is a radius effect. Not a cone. You cannot declare something to effectively be a cone just because you think it doesn't hit enough targets. Taunt has a wider radius and still only hits 5 targets. Up to 70 feet away. Are you going to call that a cone because it only hits 5 targets too? Make your case for improving Pendulum, but deciding to call it a cone because you think AoE of any sort other than a cone hits 10+ targets is hurting your argument.

 

(Edit: Though I do grant cone attacks are built the same.)

Edited January 12, 2023 by Rudra

[WindDemon21]

11 minutes ago, Rudra said:

https://cod.uberguy.net/html/power.html?power=brute_melee.battle_axe.pendulum&at=brute

https://cod.uberguy.net/html/power.html?power=brute_melee.battle_axe.taunt&at=brute

 

It is a radius effect. Not a cone. You cannot declare something to effectively be a cone just because you think it doesn't hit enough targets. Taunt has a wider radius and still only hits 5 targets. Up to 70 feet away. Are you going to call that a cone because it only hits 5 targets too? Make your case for improving Pendulum, but deciding to call it a cone because you think AoE of any sort other than a cone hits 10+ targets is hurting your argument.

That basically IS what is considered in that though. You can't just claim it's an "aoe" in regard, but not account for it's 5 target cap. Technically the sentinel heal/regen power in dark armor is an "aoe" at 30ft radius, even though it only hits 1 target. You're talking semantics, and the wrong one at that. It should be considered as it's cone in these regards i've mentioned. If you want to consider it an "aoe" then you also have to account for it's 5 target cap. Which MANY times, per damage value, I've mentioned, the end/rech values are still not in line with the power and are way too high.

 

It's like you're trying to argue something that just isn't there and I'm explaining it. You're arguing a semantic, that doesn't apply basically. Basically, there are two descriptions of "aoe" in this scenario. One meaning it's round, and another, that I keep quoting cause I'm not sure of another proper name for it, meaning that it should hit the capped targets for it's appropriate values, which on melee scrap/brutes, is 10 targets in this situation.

 

Given it hits 5, even though, yes by semantics, it's an "aoe", but it's not a "TRUE aoe" by what I'm saying. I'm sorry i dont know of another term to describe what i mean when i quote aoe, but you should be able to understand what I mean. Maybe "full" aoe would be a better terminology, given the 5 target cap though, even though yes *technically* as a circle it's an aoe, it's STATS need to be CONSIDERED as a cone.

 

So i guess there, "true aoe" or "full aoe" would be the term I'm meaning by this, but again, call it aoe if you wish, the issue is, at 5 targets, its new damage needs the end/rech values to be lowered to compensate, and yes, as also mentioned, this is GIVEN the rest of the set updates. Values per damage, would be 8.5ish end/rech, values adjusted for set synergy/radius, 10.5ish would be fair (certainly not 15 is the point of this thread).

 

Edit: reading that last sentence of yours too, I'm not CALLING it a cone, again, stop with the semantics. I'm saying it should be TREATED like a cone statwise.

Edited January 12, 2023 by WindDemon21

[Rudra]

I'm telling you what CoD says. And I place more stock in that than your claim. All I'm saying is call it what it currently is classified as and make your pitch from there.

 

Pendulum as used on Brutes has a 5 target cap compared to the Tanker's 10 target cap with otherwise identical stats. Brutes get Pendulum as a tier 5 power as opposed to a tier 6 power for Tankers. That does not justify the loss of target cap between the two ATs. Please either increase the target cap to 10, reduce the endurance cost, or improve the recharge to compensate. Thank you.

 

That is what I am trying to portray to you. The fact it is the same power as the Tanker's except set to figure its base damage with the Brute's Fury in mind is why the damage is lower IMO. The fact that it is the same power with different target caps at only a single tier difference is a problem in my book. Especially since other shared powers are not differentiated in this way. How you choose to classify the power (cone, TAoE, PBAoE) doesn't matter for the discussion at all. (Edit: So insisting on calling it something other than what it is classified as detracts from your argument.)

Edited January 12, 2023 by Rudra
Edited correct form to from.