Is there really a massive proc nerf just around the corner?

[Azari]

I feel adamantly against this idea. It would totally cripple my favorite toon, my super strength tanker, who is embarassingly weak without procs. Also my mind/time controller, who also nearly completely relies on procs to do any damage at all.  I don’t get why people think procs are broken. We need more hard content not more nerfs. It would piss off too many people who have spent a lot of time and inf weighing the advantages and disadvantages of slotting another proc vs slotting a set bonus.

 

If procs are really nerfed to such an extent as these anti-proc goons I see in general chat seem to want then it would literally make Super Strength into bottom tier garbage. Please dont. The set is already misunderstood and claimed to suck enough as it is, don’t make it *actually* suck.  Also a major proc nerf would force hundreds of players to extensively re-design a good portion or all of their toons and I assure you some people would be pissed enough to leave the game entirely. At least more than 0 people.

 

instead of nerfing people, make Kallisti Wharf content, and develop a hazard zone version of Galaxy City with harder content. 

Edited April 11 by Azari

[Ghost]

One power always has to be the worst

 

 

just sayin

 

[mcdoogss]

Could you be bothered to just, like, link to some sort of details/patch notes/etc?  It might help manufacturing with your outrage

Edited April 11 by mcdoogss

[Azari]

4 minutes ago, Ghost said:

One power always has to be the worst

 

 

just sayin

 

That’s absurd. Especially since I’m talking about Super Strength. There’s no reason other than ansolute blunder why the most iconic powerset ever would be made to be the worst set….

[Major_Decoy]

Given how they approached Dual Pistols, making it so that Suppressive Fire was still proc friendly in normal fire mode but had a shorter recharge in any of the other ammunition settings, it seems like that would be a lot of work they could avoid if they were going to "massively nerf" procs.

[Cobalt Azurean]

Don't try and balance a horribly broken proc system because it affects you directly? Well, let's not make this about the sustained health of the game or something relevant.

[Azari]

20 minutes ago, Cobalt Azurean said:

Don't try and balance a horribly broken proc system because it affects you directly? Well, let's not make this about the sustained health of the game or something relevant.

I dont think it’s even that broken. I dont know anyone who actually has a proc based toon who says it’s broken. You always safrifice something to proc out powers. Toons with lots of procs have significantly fewer set bonuses.

[Lines]

Proc changes were on the dev's radar quite some time ago, but it's not come up recently.

[Scarlet Shocker]

I don't know how it's possible to get so upset about something so non-specific.

[Luminara]

[Crysis]

1 hour ago, Ghost said:

One power always has to be the worst

 

 

just sayin

 

/Regen has entered the chat…..

[MoonSheep]

1 minute ago, Crysis said:

/Regen has entered the chat…..

 

i’d still much rather play a /regen than any mastermind though

[KaizenSoze]

The problem at the moment is that the end game in particular is too easy. 

 

Procs are a symptom and part of the problem. They are symptom, because controls and a lot of support is not necessary in most high end content. Damage is the king, queen, and dictator for life. Proc'ing out powers became rampart, because they allow several low damage ATs to get around the damage cap. But also allow high damage AT to do even more damage for very little risk. Proc'ing has very little downside in the end game. Who cares about end reduction pieces when you have Ageless. Who cares about trying to grab set bonuses for durability when you can pop Barrier. The penalty for proc'ing out is negated by Incarnates.

 

In general the problem at the high end is that optimizing for damage, with or without procs, has very little risk. Fixing the issue with the end game is going to take nerfs, buffs, and mob changes.

[PeregrineFalcon]

1 hour ago, Azari said:

I feel adamantly against this idea. It would totally cripple my favorite toon, my super strength tanker, who is embarassingly weak without procs.

1) Tests have shown that Super Strength is not bottom tier when it comes to damage output.

2) The devs mentioned over 4 years ago that they were planning to look at procs. What happened that prompted this outrage all of a sudden? Are you in a closed beta test or something?

[tidge]

TL;DR: I certainly hope there are no swings of the nerf bat at %procs, damage or otherwise. My reasoning follows.

 

1) Using %procs (damage or otherwise) is a build choice. It is not something that automatically makes someone who doesn't use them a bad player.

 

Using %damage can improve performance, but it does it in a rather uneven way. Just like all the other build choices a player can make. The current use of %procs (including %damage) offers a wide variety of build options to a wide variety of player choices (in AT, in powers). Allowing players to slot %procs (including %damage) isn't destroying other players' fun... and if it is, please show me how.

 

2) %damage smooths out critter defeat times; critter defeats are nearly 100% tied to almost all of the rewards in the game.

 

I *know* it upsets some players that some DPS classes can finish something like a "+4x8 Trapdoor Test" 30 seconds faster than some other DPS class. This sort of argument  doesn't sway me, as for MOST content I don't want non-DPS ATs finishing missions with the same-size spawns taking an order of magnitude longer to complete.

 

3) If the %damage part of the game is seen as unbalanced, surely it is not more unbalanced than critters only having a 5% chance to even hit players (the "softcap") or the significant number of ways that players can achieve enormous +Recharge bonuses. See also the ability to completely bring Endurance management under control.

 

I like both %damage, significant +Recharge, and even if I don't actively pursue "softcap" numbers... I think the game is more fun with these as they are.

[Lunar Ronin]

2 minutes ago, KaizenSoze said:

The penalty for proc'ing out is negated by Incarnates.

 

Not just by Incarnates, but by continually keeping a hundred or more large or super inspirations in your in-game e-mail, and munch on them like candy.

[Crysis]

11 minutes ago, MoonSheep said:

 

i’d still much rather play a /regen than any mastermind though

dunno, I’ve many MM’s who are more effective than /Regen scrappers and I’ve many of those also.

[Azari]

4 minutes ago, Lunar Ronin said:

 

Not just by Incarnates, but by continually keeping a hundred or more large or super inspirations in your in-game e-mail, and munch on them like candy.

That costs a lot of inf lol I’d rather sell em.

[KaizenSoze]

6 minutes ago, Lunar Ronin said:

 

Not just by Incarnates, but by continually keeping a hundred or more large or super inspirations in your in-game e-mail, and munch on them like candy.

It doesn't help. Though I don't think it is as much of the problem as it appears. Players have to remember they have them. Incarnates on the other hand completely remove entire classes of problems like endurance and durability.

[KaizenSoze]

14 minutes ago, tidge said:

TL;DR: I certainly hope there are no swings of the nerf bat at %procs, damage or otherwise. My reasoning follows.

 

1) Using %procs (damage or otherwise) is a build choice. It is not something that automatically makes someone who doesn't use them a bad player.

 

Using %damage can improve performance, but it does it in a rather uneven way. Just like all the other build choices a player can make. The current use of %procs (including %damage) offers a wide variety of build options to a wide variety of player choices (in AT, in powers). Allowing players to slot %procs (including %damage) isn't destroying other players' fun... and if it is, please show me how.

 

2) %damage smooths out critter defeat times; critter defeats are nearly 100% tied to almost all of the rewards in the game.

 

I *know* it upsets some players that some DPS classes can finish something like a "+4x8 Trapdoor Test" 30 seconds faster than some other DPS class. This sort of argument  doesn't sway me, as for MOST content I don't want non-DPS ATs finishing missions with the same-size spawns taking an order of magnitude longer to complete.

 

3) If the %damage part of the game is seen as unbalanced, surely it is not more unbalanced than critters only having a 5% chance to even hit players (the "softcap") or the significant number of ways that players can achieve enormous +Recharge bonuses. See also the ability to completely bring Endurance management under control.

 

I like both %damage, significant +Recharge, and even if I don't actively pursue "softcap" numbers... I think the game is more fun with these as they are.

My guess is that proc behavior in AOE will get "adjusted". Getting constant proc'ing Force Feedback: Recharge recharge is a bit busted.

 

I made a Trick Arrow/Dual Pistol Defender. The amount of damage the AOEs can do is crazy.

 

I don't have a problem with damage ATs doing high damage. I do think that the lack of risk is a problem. As you said, part of the issue is the ease of soft capping. Which is why we are starting to see more -defense  and/or toHit buffs every time the dev re-vamp mobs.

 

There are many aspects to why the end game isn't very hard. Some part of the problem is how procs work.

[Glacier Peak]

57 minutes ago, Luminara said:

[Yomo Kimyata]

I heard they were going to replace all procs with rikti monkeys.

[Luminara]

8 minutes ago, Yomo Kimyata said:

I heard they were going to replace all procs with rikti monkeys.

 

Proctological Monkey set confirmed for Issue 28!

[Haijinx]

3 hours ago, Azari said:

I feel adamantly against this idea. It would totally cripple my favorite toon

 

This argument probably sounded better in your head. 

[WumpusRat]

I think part of the "problem" with procs is that when they first came out, there weren't all that many damage procs. There were a bunch of different types. Immob procs, stun procs, damage procs, etc.

But since almost nobody bothers to actually USE the non-damage procs (other than the occasional use of Lockdown +2 mag or some knockdown procs), the procs that have been added have mostly been damage procs. And with more and more options to stack bonus %dmg onto powers, and the oddball way that the "proc per minute" thing functions (I put a proc into my enforcers on one of my thug MMs to test it, and the freaking thing went off 18 times in one minute), people found out they could just stack scads of global recharge and go wild with procmonkey builds. Seeing people argue that "the ideal" slotting for an attack power is like 2 hami's and 4 procs is kind of ridiculous, imo.

 

I have a few characters have use procs. Mostly my trollers, to turn one power into a potential "thump" rather than grinding stuff down. But I can do it without procs, too. Just takes a few seconds longer.

I think if they were going to "balance" procs they should just have them set for like "can only go off once every X" or something. That way procs are a nice bonus, but you don't RELY on them to do damage.