Sleet

[Glacier Peak]

For all of you Corruptor Cold Domination powerset players out there and others who discussed this during alpha/beta (@macskull, @Vanden, @Draeth Darkstar, @America's Angel) I've got something to add about one (of the two) changes made to the Cold Domination powerset (Sleet and Heat Loss). I appreciate @Captain Powerhouse giving their explanation during testing, however, I think this change now prompts discussion post-implementation. For those not aware of the change, please see below for context.

 

Background on Sleet: This power was modified in to a real pseudopet, inheriting Archetype modifiers in the Issue 27, Page 7 release based on the explanation (see quote below) that non-primary powerset Archetypes (Corruptor, Controller, and Mastermind) were doing primary powerset values (Defender) inadvertently boosting it's performance beyond what was intended. Once the real pseudopet inherited the values of the Archetype, this would be considered balanced. During testing, there was a discussion of a scenario where a player had the ability to drop Sleet, then Heat Loss, Burnout, then Sleet Heat Loss again to stack more than 60% -resistance on a mob which persisted for 45 seconds (now 30 seconds post-patch) (though that was not considered an exploit, instead working as intended). There were also comparisons during discussion of other targeted area of effect powers like Tar Patch. I added those last two sentences for context if the reader was not aware. Lastly, I want to point out that Sleet does not Scourge. If I missed anything or incorrectly identified the wrong values, please let me know.

 

Quote

Cold Domination

This powerset has been using incorrect values for non-Defender archetypes on two key powers, inadvertently boosting its performance beyond what was intended.

• Sleet
  • Turned into a real pseudopet, inheriting AT modifiers.
    • Controller/Corruptor: -Res lowered from -30% to -22.5%, -Defense lowered from -30% to -24%, pet effect set to ignore stacking (multiple pets continue to stack).
    • Mastermind/Dominator: -Res lowered from -30% to -22.5%, -Defense lowered from -30% to -18%, pet effect set to ignore stacking (multiple pets continue to stack)

 

Realizing this is the way it is now and asking why a change was made is irrelevant, I wanted to look back at the power to see what exactly were the values for this Cold Domination powerset power Sleet, a staple when it was released, (then subsequently proliferated). For context, below are the Issues aligned with the aforementioned action:

 

Cold Domination Powerset History:

Issue 6: Cold Domination was first added when City of Villains launched to Corruptors only as a Secondary Powerset. Corruptor Sleet had been doing -30% Defense and -30% Resistance on target since Issue 6.

 

Issue 12: Cold Domination Primary Powerset was proliferated to Defenders. Defender Sleet had been doing -30% Defense and -30% Resistance on target since Issue 12.

 

Issue 16: Cold Domination Secondary Powerset was proliferated to Controllers. Controller Sleet had been doing -30% Defense and -30% Resistance on target since Issue 16.

 

Issue 18: Epic Pool Power (Sleet) was added to Ice Mastery (formerly Cold Mastery) for Dominators. Dominator Sleet had been doing -30% Defense and -30% Resistance on target since Issue 18.

 

Issue 25: Cold Domination Secondary Powerset was proliferated to Masterminds. Mastermind Sleet had been doing -30% Defense and -30% Resistance on target since Issue 25.

 

Edit: Stacking Effects: (thanks to @macskull for the clarity!) "The previous behavior was the debuff was set to “replace,” so every tick of damage that hit would refresh the debuff for an additional 30 seconds (which realistically resulted in a 45-second debuff). It is now set to ignore new applications, so it will never last for more than 30 seconds after the first tick of damage. Multiple applications of the power from the same caster still stack because different pseudopets are considered different “casters.”"

 

Freezing Rain tangent:  This next part is a bit speculation since I don't have access to original power data, but Sleet was likely a port of the Freezing Rain power from Defender Storm Summoning, which at the time I believe was doing -30% Defense and -35% Resistance. Freezing Rain itself was also available on Controllers, so in Issue 4 the developers increased the duration of the power for both, but also increased the slow debuff for Defender to distinguish it between controllers. Beyond that it remained the same until Issue 27, Page 7.

 

Edit: Further Tangent on Freezing Rain (thanks to @Uun insight on this thread!): "Freezing Rain was scaled for defenders and controllers. While controller secondary values were supposed to be 75% of defender values, Freezing Rain was designed with 35% -res on defenders and 30% -res on controllers (85.7% of defender value). When Cold was created for corruptors in I6, Sleet was a direct port of the controller version of Freezing Rain. When Cold was proliferated to defenders in I12, the corruptor version of Sleet was copied (they didn't even match the slightly higher values for defender Freezing Rain. This imbalance wasn't addressed until p7. In the case of Freezing Rain, the defender version was increased to 40% -res and the other ATs were left at 30%. In the case of Sleet, the defender version was left at 30% -res and the other ATs were reduced to 22.5%. Per Captain Powerhouse, this was an intentional buff to Storm Summoning."

 

Note the similar values at the time of City of Villains launch until the Issue 27, Page 7 update. How do others feel about the change post-implementation? Good or bad, happy to discuss.

Edited March 11 by Glacier Peak

[Apotheosis]

As someone who pretty much exclusively plays a /Cold corruptor. This change feels awful. Losing 7.5% -resist off Sleet may not sound like a lot to some, but it's frustratingly noticeable.

I can understand an argument for wanting Defenders to be more compelling as an Archetype. I can understand that Buffs/Debuffs being their primary, translates to them having stronger buffs and debuffs. And in nerfing the set on virtually everyone else who can use it, it makes Defenders more appealing on that one axis.

 

However. Making every other AT with Cold Domination, worse at what they do, to make Defenders more appealing/more in line with expectations/design, feels bad. Genuinely, I would've preferred them simply buffing Cold Domination on Defenders, by a similar amount to what they reduced from other ATs, instead. It wouldn't fix the disparity of ATs at high end game level or grossly increase the number of Defenders, vs. other ATs with Cold Dom in teams; but it also wouldn't generate the negativity of feeling weakened, so others can feel more useful.

[Uun]

I've been expecting this change for several years (since they applied the same fix to Tar Patch). I've known that the AT scaling for both Freezing Rain and Sleet was incorrect since back on live As unhappy as people are about the change, I view this as a bug fix, not a nerf. Cold corruptors, controllers and masterminds enjoyed an overpowered version of Sleet for years, but had no reason to think that it wouldn't be fixed eventually. The values for Sleet now match other AoE -res powers (i.e., Tar Patch, Enervating Field, Melt Armor, Slowed Response).

[Apotheosis]

The solution didn't need to be reductive though. Those AT's could've kept the values they've grown accustomed to, and simply had Cold for Defender's values be increased above them.

Making one thing weaker, to make another stand out has worse optics/feels worse, in virtually every game that applies that logic, vs. buffing something else to be more competitive. Keep the difference in percentages, but adjust the knob for defender values, rather than every other AT. 

 

But I see this as a game design decision in a string of decisions to gradually lower player power, in measured increments while reworking content/factions to be more difficult and challenge players, because we've grown too powerful. In that vein, reductive approaches to powerset designs make sense.

 

 

[Glacier Peak]

20 minutes ago, Uun said:

I've been expecting this change for several years (since they applied the same fix to Tar Patch). I've known that the AT scaling for both Freezing Rain and Sleet was incorrect since back on live As unhappy as people are about the change, I view this as a bug fix, not a nerf. Cold corruptors, controllers and masterminds enjoyed an overpowered version of Sleet for years, but had no reason to think that it wouldn't be fixed eventually. The values for Sleet now match other AoE -res powers (i.e., Tar Patch, Enervating Field, Melt Armor, Slowed Response).

I appreciate your input and I see this as a bug fix as well. However, I'll point out that in my post at the top that those "overpowered " versions of Sleet you mentioned didn't apply to the Corruptor version, as it has been the same value since Issue 6, which persisted for nearly twenty years before a change was deemed necessary. 

[Glacier Peak]

10 minutes ago, Apotheosis said:

The solution didn't need to be reductive though. Those AT's could've kept the values they've grown accustomed to, and simply had Cold for Defender's values be increased above them.

Making one thing weaker, to make another stand out has worse optics/feels worse, in virtually every game that applies that logic, vs. buffing something else to be more competitive. Keep the difference in percentages, but adjust the knob for defender values, rather than every other AT. 

 

But I see this as a game design decision in a string of decisions to gradually lower player power, in measured increments while reworking content/factions to be more difficult and challenge players, because we've grown too powerful. In that vein, reductive approaches to powerset designs make sense.

This is interesting to me because looking back at the patch notes for the legacy days, there were various passes across many powers that were eventually proliferated across other Archetypes. If a stat was reduced in some way, there was another stat that compensated for the change to ensure parity to the Archetypes. I could not find an outright change to Sleet in any patch note since Issue 6. I may be speculating, but I believe this change was brought up because of the change to Tar Patch previously and because someone pointed out that the values were all the same across all Archetypes with Sleet. Why the devs chose not to find a way to ensure parity and instead make an across-multiple Archetypes change was not explained during testing (though it was requested).

Edited March 11 by Glacier Peak

[Glacier Peak]

Thus far, I'm seeing that for the sake of balance, powers for Archetypes should be tied to the inherent values of said Archetypes. I think this is correct and I would hope this continues for future power development. I'm also reading that how a power behaved over two decades has no bearing on how a change should be made, in this very specific case of Sleet. Perhaps a less reductive approach could have achieved a similar desired balance - for example, on Corruptors - allow Sleet to Scourge enemies.

[Apotheosis]

3 minutes ago, Glacier Peak said:

Thus far, I'm seeing that for the sake of balance, powers for Archetypes should be tied to the inherent values of said Archetypes. I think this is correct and I would hope this continues for future power development. I'm also reading that how a power behaved over two decades has no bearing on how a change should be made, in this very specific case of Sleet. Perhaps a less reductive approach could have achieved a similar desired balance - for example, on Corruptors - allow Sleet to Scourge enemies.

I'd be inclined to agree with all of this. 

Especially allowing Sleet to Scourge enemies, for Corruptors.

[arcane]

I can’t find it in myself to feel an ounce of sympathy for anyone upset by this change. You’ve been abusing the strongest powerset in the game and they saw fit to make a very slight downward tweak (a bug fix). What a shock.

Edited March 11 by arcane

[eiynp]

change is barely noticeable, really; it doesn't change the use case for sleet and while intellectually I know the value is lower, in practice you still get the fun of 'drop sleet on mobs, see bigger damage numbers'

 

and I think it's probably good that there's more reason to think about which AT you're picking

[Glacier Peak]

Like @arcane pointed out, this is a slight downward tweak overall. Looking at Sleet in game (see below), I noticed that it can still stack multiple times on the target (Rikti Pylon). Can anyone clarify what is meant by "pet effect set to ignore stacking?" I thought Sleet was made in to a true pseudopet.

 

 

Spoiler

 

Edited March 11 by Glacier Peak

[Glacier Peak]

3 minutes ago, eiynp said:

change is barely noticeable, really; it doesn't change the use case for sleet and while intellectually I know the value is lower, in practice you still get the fun of 'drop sleet on mobs, see bigger damage numbers'

 

and I think it's probably good that there's more reason to think about which AT you're picking

Thank you for your post - I also agree the change is barely noticeable in my experiences, especially when added to the context of a full rotation of Cold Domination powers to a mob or GM/AV. 

[Glacier Peak]

Adding additional context for the lay person: Sleet used to apply it's debuffs on every tick on target in the area, which meant that it could apply the debuff over and over to the same target to extend its duration past the actual pseudopet. With the Page 7 change, it now applies once per target in the area.

[macskull]

There seems to be some misunderstanding in this thread about exactly how Sleet works, specifically with the way it stacks (or doesn’t stack). The previous behavior was the debuff was set to “replace,” so every tick of damage that hit would refresh the debuff for an additional 30 seconds (which realistically resulted in a 45-second debuff). It is now set to ignore new applications, so it will never last for more than 30 seconds after the first tick of damage. Multiple applications of the power from the same caster still stack because different pseudopets are considered different “casters.”

 

The change in stacking rules is, to me, a far more impactful change than reducing the -res. Reducing the -def on non-Defenders really only hurts lower level characters and Masterminds (who are the ones who need the -def the most, go figure). The change on the stacking rules means that not only is the debuff duration 1/3 shorter than it used to be, but the amount of time you can overlap debuffs with different applications is now much shorter.

 

My point of contention with the way the change was handled is that we were essentially told “actually, Sleet was just copied from Defender Freezing Rain and has been wrong since 2005” when pointing out the power was originally on Corruptors so should have been adjusted upwards on Defenders instead of downward on every other AT. Because there’s zero way to prove that is either true or false, we are unable to argue with that justification (but, like… why would the devs have copied a power from one AT to another in a different powerset, take the time to change the name and icon of the power, but not change the debuff scaling?). The stacking change, though? That was definitely not a bug, and the fact that Freezing Rain wasn’t changed and also got its -res boosted for Defenders rubs me the wrong way, especially since you can’t seriously argue that Storm needed the help.

Edited March 11 by macskull

[Apotheosis]

44 minutes ago, arcane said:

I can’t find it in myself to feel an ounce of sympathy for anyone upset by this change. You’ve been abusing the strongest powerset in the game and they saw fit to make a very slight downward tweak (a bug fix). What a shock.

I can't speak to other forum posts or discussions, but at least here; I don't think anyone has voiced wanting sympathy for their frustrations. Of which, they are entitled entirely to be frustrated.

'Abusing' implies malicious choice/intent. Utilizing is more appropriate.

And the crux of this conversation was more how they addressed the bug fix, and the reductive approach there within. They could've increased the Cold numbers on Defenders, rather than reducing the Cold numbers on Corruptors/other ATs. Or as the poster suggested; they could've given Sleet the ability to Scourge, while simultaneously lowering it's numbers.

There isn't much of a debate as if to the bug should've been addressed, but more as to the way in which it was handled. 

Edited March 11 by Apotheosis

[Glacier Peak]

2 minutes ago, macskull said:

There seems to be some misunderstanding in this thread about exactly how Sleet works, specifically with the way it stacks (or doesn’t stack). The previous behavior was the debuff was set to “replace,” so every tick of damage that hit would refresh the debuff for an additional 30 seconds (which realistically resulted in a 45-second debuff). It is now set to ignore new applications, so it will never last for more than 30 seconds after the first tick of damage. Multiple applications of the power from the same caster still stack because different pseudopets are considered different “casters.”

 

The change in stacking rules is, to me, a far more impactful change than reducing the -res. Reducing the -def on non-Defenders really only hurts lower level characters and Masterminds (who are the ones who need the -def the most, go figure). The change on the stacking rules means that not only is the debuff duration 1/3 shorter than it used to be, but the amount of time you can overlap debuffs with different applications is now much shorter.

 

My point of contention with the way the change was handled is that we were essentially told “actually, Sleet was just copied from Defender Freezing Rain and has been wrong since 2005” when pointing out the power was originally on Corruptors so should have been adjusted upwards on Defenders instead of downward on every other AT. Because there’s zero way to prove that is either true or false, we are unable to argue with that justification. The stacking change, though? That was definitely not a bug, and the fact that Freezing Rain wasn’t changed and also got its -res boosted for Defenders rubs me the wrong way, especially since you can’t seriously argue that Storm needed the help.

I'll count myself as one of those who were confused on what the stacking meant. Thank you for enlightening me and the rest of the thread. In your second paragraph, I pointed to as much in my original thread - regardless of the reason, the change was made. 

 

I'm still seeing a consensus that this change did not make a substantive negative impact on the performance of the power (for Corruptors specifically, though mac mentioned it hit Mastermind's harder).

[macskull]

Just now, Apotheosis said:

There isn't much of a debate as if to the bug should've been addressed, but more as to the way in which is was handled. 

The debate, from my perspective, is whether there was an actual “bug” in the first place, and it ended up being handled with a “trust me, this is how it is supposed to work.”

[Uun]

39 minutes ago, Glacier Peak said:

I appreciate your input and I see this as a bug fix as well. However, I'll point out that in my post at the top that those "overpowered " versions of Sleet you mentioned didn't apply to the Corruptor version, as it has been the same value since Issue 6, which persisted for nearly twenty years before a change was deemed necessary. 

You are correct that Sleet for corruptors was never changed. The issue predates I6 (and may actually date back to launch) and relates to how Freezing Rain was scaled for defenders and controllers. While controller secondary values were supposed to be 75% of defender values, Freezing Rain was designed with 35% -res on defenders and 30% -res on controllers (85.7% of defender value). When Cold was created for corruptors in I6, Sleet was a direct port of the controller version of Freezing Rain. When Cold was proliferated to defenders in I12, the corruptor version of Sleet was copied (they didn't even match the slightly higher values for defender Freezing Rain. 

 

This imbalance wasn't addressed until p7. In the case of Freezing Rain, the defender version was increased to 40% -res and the other ATs were left at 30%. In the case of Sleet, the defender version was left at 30% -res and the other ATs were reduced to 22.5%. Per Captain Powerhouse, this was an intentional buff to Storm Summoning.

 

 

[Glacier Peak]

1 minute ago, Uun said:

You are correct that Sleet for corruptors was never changed. The issue predates I6 (and may actually date back to launch) and relates to how Freezing Rain was scaled for defenders and controllers. While controller secondary values were supposed to be 75% of defender values, Freezing Rain was designed with 35% -res on defenders and 30% -res on controllers (85.7% of defender value). When Cold was created for corruptors in I6, Sleet was a direct port of the controller version of Freezing Rain. When Cold was proliferated to defenders in I12, the corruptor version of Sleet was copied (they didn't even match the slightly higher values for defender Freezing Rain. 

 

This imbalance wasn't addressed until p7. In the case of Freezing Rain, the defender version was increased to 40% -res and the other ATs were left at 30%. In the case of Sleet, the defender version was left at 30% -res and the other ATs were reduced to 22.5%. Per Captain Powerhouse, this was an intentional buff to Storm Summoning.

 

 

This is the kind of insight I was lacking on the Freezing Rain connection! Thank you for sharing. 

[Draeth Darkstar]

3 hours ago, Glacier Peak said:

Cold Domination Powerset History:

Issue 6: Cold Domination was first added when City of Villains launched to Corruptors only as a Secondary Powerset. Corruptor Sleet had been doing -30% Defense and -30% Resistance on target since Issue 6.

 

Issue 12: Cold Domination Primary Powerset was proliferated to Defenders. Defender Sleet had been doing -30% Defense and -30% Resistance on target since Issue 12.

 

Issue 16: Cold Domination Secondary Powerset was proliferated to Controllers. Controller Sleet had been doing -30% Defense and -30% Resistance on target since Issue 16.

 

Issue 18: Epic Pool Power (Sleet) was added to Ice Mastery (formerly Cold Mastery) for Dominators. Dominator Sleet had been doing -30% Defense and -30% Resistance on target since Issue 18.

 

Issue 25: Cold Domination Secondary Powerset was proliferated to Masterminds. Mastermind Sleet had been doing -30% Defense and -30% Resistance on target since Issue 25.

 

Freezing Rain tangent:  This next part is a bit speculation since I don't have access to original power data, but Sleet was likely a port of the Freezing Rain power from Defender Storm Summoning, which at the time I believe was doing -30% Defense and -35% Resistance. Freezing Rain itself was also available on Controllers, so in Issue 4 the developers increased the duration of the power for both, but also increased the slow debuff for Defender to distinguish it between controllers. Beyond that it remained the same until Issue 27, Page 7.

 

Note the similar values at the time of City of Villains launch until the Issue 27, Page 7 update. How do others feel about the change post-implementation? Good or bad, happy to discuss.

As I've said in a couple different places, I really dislike this change. What I learned post-implementation about it has done nothing to change that.

 

Captain Powerhouse (all respect, boss) was under the impression that the original Paragon Studios devs refused to proliferate Cold Domination because the scaling was wrong, and that it was only proliferated by fans during the "Issue 25" era.

 

As you've correctly identified above... that is not what happened.

 

Edit:

 

Since we're also apparently now arguing about Cold Dom OP, etc., I would have much preferred a nerf to the Burnout interaction that would have taken out the most abusive use of Cold Dom rather than cutting down the baseline performance of the set that has a much more harmful affect on normal gameplay than the edge cases that Cold is actually an outlier in.

Edited March 11 by Draeth Darkstar

[arcane]

12 minutes ago, Apotheosis said:

And the crux of this conversation was more how they addressed the bug fix, and the reductive approach there within. They could've increased the Cold numbers on Defenders, rather than reducing the Cold numbers on Corruptors/other ATs. Or as the poster suggested; they could've given Sleet the ability to Scourge, while simultaneously lowering it's numbers.

Yes, they could have slightly buffed the Defender version of the most powerful set in the game instead of slightly nerfing the Corruptor version. Which would have been a terrible idea. Imagine buffing Cold at this point in the game’s history…

[Lunar Ronin]

I, for one, welcome the new Storm Summoning meta.

 

(Note: There is no Storm Summoning meta.)

[Glacier Peak]

14 minutes ago, arcane said:

Yes, they could have slightly buffed the Defender version of the most powerful set in the game instead of slightly nerfing the Corruptor version. Which would have been a terrible idea. Imagine buffing Cold at this point in the game’s history…

I don't see anyone discounting the point about the place of Cold Domination amongst the highest performing sets in the game. There is disagreement that the powerset has not been substantively negatively impacted by the change, with posters indicating both that it was and was not noticeable in their experience.

 

Edit: I am specifically referring to Cold Domination for Corruptors in the above sentence.

Edited March 11 by Glacier Peak

[Glacier Peak]

Just now, Lunar Ronin said:

I, for one, welcome the new Storm Summoning meta.

 

(Note: There is no Storm Summoning meta.)

The winds of change have begun to below - another poster mentioned the improvements to Defender Storm Summoning (or was is Storm Blast?)

[Apotheosis]

7 minutes ago, arcane said:

Yes, they could have slightly buffed the Defender version of the most powerful set in the game instead of slightly nerfing the Corruptor version. Which would have been a terrible idea. Imagine buffing Cold at this point in the game’s history…

Buffing Sleet, by itself, by 7-10% for Defenders, is not the same thing as buffing the entirety of a Powerset. And to imply otherwise is disingenuous. 

It may be an idea you disagree with. But it's your opinion that it's a bad idea. Not a fact.