QOL Request: Allow for Universal Travel IO's to be Slotted into Prestige Sprints

[Auroxis]

 

No sorry, I don't think making me spend hours respeccing a bunch of characters just because of a PvP meta is a good idea. I don't think trivializing the benefits of KB protection on armor sets is a good idea. And I definitely don't think trivializing such a change by calling it a "quality of life request" is the way to go.

 

What in this change would trigger you to spend hours respec'ing your characters? Serious question.

 

I have slots chosen for KB protection, powers chosen partially because of KB protection. On multiple level 50 characters.

 

Respeccing takes time to choose the powers again, assign the slots again, and re-organize your whole trays.

 

I'd also have to go through my entire build library (I have about 50 build files) to make the appropriate changes of adding all the KB IO's, removing extra slots/powers and replacing existing IO's.

 

I'm not even going to deep into pointing out that you may in fact be more of an outlier than the median "PVPer" in this game. But let's just leave that aside.

 

How much KB protection are you slotting into those toons to begin with? What power choices would be different? Be specific. That broad response is too broad.  I'm not going to accuse you of being disingenuous, but don't be lazy.

 

All it takes is one slot/power difference to respec an entire build. Any melee character without inherent KB protection has to take a filler travel power or an extra slot for 8 points of KB protection. Don't accuse me of being lazy if you can't understand this simple concept.

[barrier]

 

No sorry, I don't think making me spend hours respeccing a bunch of characters just because of a PvP meta is a good idea. I don't think trivializing the benefits of KB protection on armor sets is a good idea. And I definitely don't think trivializing such a change by calling it a "quality of life request" is the way to go.

 

What in this change would trigger you to spend hours respec'ing your characters? Serious question.

 

I have slots chosen for KB protection, powers chosen partially because of KB protection. On multiple level 50 characters.

 

Respeccing takes time to choose the powers again, assign the slots again, and re-organize your whole trays.

 

I'd also have to go through my entire build library (I have about 50 build files) to make the appropriate changes of adding all the KB IO's, removing extra slots/powers and replacing existing IO's.

 

I'm not even going to deep into pointing out that you may in fact be more of an outlier than the median "PVPer" in this game. But let's just leave that aside.

 

How much KB protection are you slotting into those toons to begin with? What power choices would be different? Be specific. That broad response is too broad.  I'm not going to accuse you of being disingenuous, but don't be lazy.

 

All it takes is one slot/power difference to respec an entire build. Any melee character without inherent KB protection has to take a filler travel power or an extra slot for 8 points of KB protection. Don't accuse me of being lazy if you can't understand this simple concept.

 

That fact that you described a travel power as "filler" for kb protection makes my point. Doubly so when you term this a QOL change. Your whole argument right now boils down to "I don't like change". And given that you keep a 50+ build library, I'm pretty sure you're way more of an outlier than the median "PVPer" (though I won't even claim that the term "PVPer" is a thing given the fact that PVE is such a big part of this game).

[Auroxis]

That fact that you described a travel power as "filler" for kb protection makes my point. Doubly so when you term this a QOL change. Your whole argument right now boils down to "I don't like change". And given that you keep a 50+ build library, I'm pretty sure you're way more of an outlier than the median "PVPer" (though I won't even claim that the term "PVPer" is a thing given the fact that PVE is such a big part of this game).

 

Even if I was an insignificant outlier, it doesn't change the fact that KB protection will become irrelevant in this game, and you're removing complexity for PvE just for the sake of PvP. While calling it a QoL change.

 

You have issues with KB in PvP? Ask for a PvP-only change, and don't trivialize changes to core mechanics of the game as some minor QoL change.

[barrier]

That fact that you described a travel power as "filler" for kb protection makes my point. Doubly so when you term this a QOL change. Your whole argument right now boils down to "I don't like change". And given that you keep a 50+ build library, I'm pretty sure you're way more of an outlier than the median "PVPer" (though I won't even claim that the term "PVPer" is a thing given the fact that PVE is such a big part of this game).

 

Even if I was an insignificant outlier, it doesn't change the fact that KB protection will become irrelevant in this game, and you're removing complexity for PvE just for the sake of PvP. While calling it a QoL change.

 

You have issues with KB in PvP? Ask for a PvP-only change, and don't trivialize changes to core mechanics of the game as some minor QoL change.

 

How are you still arguing that kb is relevant mechanic when literally everyone builds protrction into their characters?

[Auroxis]

That fact that you described a travel power as "filler" for kb protection makes my point. Doubly so when you term this a QOL change. Your whole argument right now boils down to "I don't like change". And given that you keep a 50+ build library, I'm pretty sure you're way more of an outlier than the median "PVPer" (though I won't even claim that the term "PVPer" is a thing given the fact that PVE is such a big part of this game).

 

Even if I was an insignificant outlier, it doesn't change the fact that KB protection will become irrelevant in this game, and you're removing complexity for PvE just for the sake of PvP. While calling it a QoL change.

 

You have issues with KB in PvP? Ask for a PvP-only change, and don't trivialize changes to core mechanics of the game as some minor QoL change.

 

How are you still arguing that kb is relevant mechanic when literally everyone builds protrction into their characters?

 

I'm done arguing since you clearly just ignored my previous statements.

[barrier]

That fact that you described a travel power as "filler" for kb protection makes my point. Doubly so when you term this a QOL change. Your whole argument right now boils down to "I don't like change". And given that you keep a 50+ build library, I'm pretty sure you're way more of an outlier than the median "PVPer" (though I won't even claim that the term "PVPer" is a thing given the fact that PVE is such a big part of this game).

 

Even if I was an insignificant outlier, it doesn't change the fact that KB protection will become irrelevant in this game, and you're removing complexity for PvE just for the sake of PvP. While calling it a QoL change.

 

You have issues with KB in PvP? Ask for a PvP-only change, and don't trivialize changes to core mechanics of the game as some minor QoL change.

 

How are you still arguing that kb is relevant mechanic when literally everyone builds protrction into their characters?

 

I'm done arguing since you clearly just ignored my previous statements.

 

Makes sense.. I mean, by your standards and taken to their maxima, we might as well just start deleting slots and remove the kb mechanic altogether... Because guess what: the game would then stay pretty much the same.

 

So why the suggestion above? Viability. I want to see fire armor and ninjitsu, and more soft control in high end pvp matches. I dont want to say "reroll" over and over to kids with the ninjitsu stalker/sentinel mains just because they are expected to waste slots on kb protection all while sacrificing performance. And the performance sacrifices are real. You don't see these sets in PVP for a reason. It's not a "trade-off", it's more of a tribute.

[Legree]

So why the suggestion above? Viability. I want to see fire armor and ninjitsu, and more soft control in high end pvp matches. I dont want to say "reroll" over and over to kids with the ninjitsu stalker/sentinel mains just because they are expected to waste slots on kb protection all while sacrificing performance. And the performance sacrifices are real. You don't see these sets in PVP for a reason.

 

Then whatever solution you propose make it PVP-only.  Not only not designed for PVE, but impossible to implement into PVE.

 

Past nerfs driven by (or perceived to be driven by) 'PVP balance' are rightly seen as a bad thing.  Power Creep driven by 'PVP balance' should be seen in the same way.

[barrier]

So why the suggestion above? Viability. I want to see fire armor and ninjitsu, and more soft control in high end pvp matches. I dont want to say "reroll" over and over to kids with the ninjitsu stalker/sentinel mains just because they are expected to waste slots on kb protection all while sacrificing performance. And the performance sacrifices are real. You don't see these sets in PVP for a reason.

 

Then whatever solution you propose make it PVP-only.  Not only not designed for PVE, but impossible to implement into PVE.

 

Past nerfs driven by (or perceived to be driven by 'PVP balance' are rightly seen as a bad thing.  Power Creep driven by 'PVP balance' should be seen in the same way.

 

But there's really no significant PVE effect. That's what I'm pointing out here. You basically get nothing you couldn't get from either a base buff, a break free or (functionally speaking) a single slot allotted to a kb io.

[BlueDragoon]

To be fair, what can even output this level of knockback, a Forcefield Defender? Can't think of much else.

 

* Force Bolt - mag 54, need mag 49 or so protection

* Gale - mag 41, need mag 35 or so protection (interesting note: Gale works funny and will sometimes apply two packets of knockback, which means it'll cut through KB protection on just about any non-squishy)

* Power Push (Defender/Dominator version) - mag 46, need 41

* Power Push (Blaster/Corruptor version) - mag 35, need 31

* Lift/Levitate - mag 35, need 31

 

(I literally have that on a saved note because everyone asks the same question).

 

Thing is those powers belong to pretty weak and vulnerable ATs and builds. I don't think I have been KB'd once in all my time in RV. Is this mostly a concern for team arena matches? Can't you just come to an agreement with the other team, i.e. no knockback builds? People already say things like no TK.

 

I think it's fine because you'd need to build specifically for a "knockback build" by taking these powers, and you gimp yourself in other ways by taking them.

[barrier]

 

 

Thing is those powers belong to pretty weak and vulnerable ATs and builds. I don't think I have been KB'd once in all my time in RV. Is this mostly a concern for team arena matches? Can't you just come to an agreement with the other team, i.e. no knockback builds? People already say things like no TK.

 

I think it's fine because you'd need to build specifically for a "knockback build" by taking these powers, and you gimp yourself in other ways by taking them.

 

 

So much wrong in this post.

 

So much wrong.

 

I spent the first month of the game being up power-pushing people around RV on an energy/emp corr and watching them die before they hit the ground. I don't bring it out that much anymore because most people have enough kb protection to resist a power push.

 

Those are not "vulnerable/weak ATs". That generalization is just plain... wrong. They are disruption slots in a team.

 

Also, asking for a player-based rule-set in the arena is just admitting that there is a flaw in the game's design.

[justicebeliever]

 

Then whatever solution you propose make it PVP-only.  Not only not designed for PVE, but impossible to implement into PVE.

 

Past nerfs driven by (or perceived to be driven by 'PVP balance' are rightly seen as a bad thing.  Power Creep driven by 'PVP balance' should be seen in the same way.

 

But there's really no significant PVE effect. That's what I'm pointing out here. You basically get nothing you couldn't get from either a base buff, a break free or (functionally speaking) a single slot allotted to a kb io.

 

It feels disingenuous when you say there won’t be a PvE effect but won’t support it being PvP only. 

 

One could argue that they would have to slot differently between a PvE and PvP build, but that’s what muliple builds are for

[BlueDragoon]

 

 

Thing is those powers belong to pretty weak and vulnerable ATs and builds. I don't think I have been KB'd once in all my time in RV. Is this mostly a concern for team arena matches? Can't you just come to an agreement with the other team, i.e. no knockback builds? People already say things like no TK.

 

I think it's fine because you'd need to build specifically for a "knockback build" by taking these powers, and you gimp yourself in other ways by taking them.

 

 

So much wrong in this post.

 

So much wrong.

 

I spent the first month of the game being up power-pushing people around RV on an energy/emp corr and watching them die before they hit the ground. I don't bring it out that much anymore because most people have enough kb protection to resist a power push.

 

Those are not "vulnerable/weak ATs". That generalization is just plain... wrong. They are disruption slots in a team.

 

Also, asking for a player-based rule-set in the arena is just admitting that there is a flaw in the game's design.

 

Yeah so I doubt you were killing Ice/Plant blasters and such on it. You said it yourself, it's a +1. You KB'd someone into next week while someone else bursted. But there's other ways to lock someone down and have a DPS burst them. You can go the sapper route for example, or just use domination holds. I don't see why kb is especially a problem.

[barrier]

 

 

Thing is those powers belong to pretty weak and vulnerable ATs and builds. I don't think I have been KB'd once in all my time in RV. Is this mostly a concern for team arena matches? Can't you just come to an agreement with the other team, i.e. no knockback builds? People already say things like no TK.

 

I think it's fine because you'd need to build specifically for a "knockback build" by taking these powers, and you gimp yourself in other ways by taking them.

 

 

So much wrong in this post.

 

So much wrong.

 

I spent the first month of the game being up power-pushing people around RV on an energy/emp corr and watching them die before they hit the ground. I don't bring it out that much anymore because most people have enough kb protection to resist a power push.

 

Those are not "vulnerable/weak ATs". That generalization is just plain... wrong. They are disruption slots in a team.

 

Also, asking for a player-based rule-set in the arena is just admitting that there is a flaw in the game's design.

 

Yeah so I doubt you were killing Ice/Plant blasters and such on it. You said it yourself, it's a +1. You KB'd someone into next week while someone else bursted. But there's other ways to lock someone down and have a DPS burst them. You can go the sapper route for example, or just use domination holds. I don't see why kb is especially a problem.

 

If you think that KB'ing and insta-kills mid-kb animation lock are acceptable game mechanics, I don't know how to speak with you.

[BlueDragoon]

 

 

Thing is those powers belong to pretty weak and vulnerable ATs and builds. I don't think I have been KB'd once in all my time in RV. Is this mostly a concern for team arena matches? Can't you just come to an agreement with the other team, i.e. no knockback builds? People already say things like no TK.

 

I think it's fine because you'd need to build specifically for a "knockback build" by taking these powers, and you gimp yourself in other ways by taking them.

 

 

So much wrong in this post.

 

So much wrong.

 

I spent the first month of the game being up power-pushing people around RV on an energy/emp corr and watching them die before they hit the ground. I don't bring it out that much anymore because most people have enough kb protection to resist a power push.

 

Those are not "vulnerable/weak ATs". That generalization is just plain... wrong. They are disruption slots in a team.

 

Also, asking for a player-based rule-set in the arena is just admitting that there is a flaw in the game's design.

 

Yeah so I doubt you were killing Ice/Plant blasters and such on it. You said it yourself, it's a +1. You KB'd someone into next week while someone else bursted. But there's other ways to lock someone down and have a DPS burst them. You can go the sapper route for example, or just use domination holds. I don't see why kb is especially a problem.

 

If you think that KB'ing and insta-kills mid-kb animation lock are acceptable game mechanics, I don't know how to speak with you.

 

Of course not, but what about being held for 10 seconds and unable to do anything, is that gamebreaking? And is the solution to these problems erradicating knockback entirely? Why not ask for a rework on how the mez itself works, and mez in general? As that's the real issue with the games balance.

[Coyote]

I don't know how people can be so deep in the PvP mindset that they can miss how opening up 20 KB protection to every character is going to make major shockwaves in PvE. It would basically eliminate KB on players as an element of the game.  If building for KB protection is so essential to the PvP experience that letting us get so much with no sacrifices qualifies as a QoL improvement, why not do what I suggested on the first page and put KB protection into the PvP resists that every AT gets?

 

Major shockwaves in PvE?

I would say, very VERY minor shockwaves. More like ripples, actually.

I mean, between Hover (viable in PvE), Acro, and just the 1-2 BotZ IOs that you could slot already, you could already make any squishy immune to 99% of the KB in PvE.

So... how is 1% of the KB in PvE really a "major shockwave"? Maybe a major tiny ripple.

[Solvernia]

what about being held for 10 seconds and unable to do anything, is that gamebreaking?

 

No.

 

[BlueDragoon]

what about being held for 10 seconds and unable to do anything, is that gamebreaking?

 

No.

 

 

BF doesn't do anything in PvP. You can pop 4+ breakfrees whilst being held like that and it won't do anything.

[barrier]

what about being held for 10 seconds and unable to do anything, is that gamebreaking?

 

No.

 

 

BF doesn't do anything in PvP. You can pop 4+ breakfrees whilst being held like that and it won't do anything.

 

And unless you're an OP Warshade, there are no 10 second mez's in PVP. Revise and resubmit.

[barrier]

 

 

Of course not, but what about being held for 10 seconds and unable to do anything, is that gamebreaking? And is the solution to these problems erradicating knockback entirely? Why not ask for a rework on how the mez itself works, and mez in general? As that's the real issue with the games balance.

 

Because that is a major ask. And this is not. Come the FFFFF on.

[Vanden]

So why the suggestion above? Viability. I want to see fire armor and ninjitsu, and more soft control in high end pvp matches. I dont want to say "reroll" over and over to kids with the ninjitsu stalker/sentinel mains just because they are expected to waste slots on kb protection all while sacrificing performance. And the performance sacrifices are real. You don't see these sets in PVP for a reason.

 

Then whatever solution you propose make it PVP-only.  Not only not designed for PVE, but impossible to implement into PVE.

 

Past nerfs driven by (or perceived to be driven by 'PVP balance' are rightly seen as a bad thing.  Power Creep driven by 'PVP balance' should be seen in the same way.

 

But there's really no significant PVE effect. That's what I'm pointing out here. You basically get nothing you couldn't get from either a base buff, a break free or (functionally speaking) a single slot allotted to a kb io.

 

People keep telling you that you're wrong, but you just have your head stuck in the sand, repeating that there'd be no effect. There's no arguing with you, is there? I even came up with a solution that gives you everything you want with no repercussions in PvE, and you won't even acknowledge it.

 

People slot for KB protection in PvE, but these slots come at a cost. Your solution completely removes that cost. That is power creep, plain and simple.

[Epsilon Assassin]

People keep telling you that you're wrong, but you just have your head stuck in the sand, repeating that there'd be no effect. There's no arguing with you, is there? I even came up with a solution that gives you everything you want with no repercussions in PvE, and you won't even acknowledge it.

 

People slot for KB protection in PvE, but these slots come at a cost. Your solution completely removes that cost. That is power creep, plain and simple.

 

One; he has acknowledged just about everything in the thread. Yes, perhaps more abrasively then is necessary, but Barrier is inherently an abrasive person.

 

Two; You are ignoring almost every point and post saying you're wrong, and explaining why you are. So in a sense, you're projecting. Quite a bit actually.

 

 

 

But, let's get to the meat of it, and lay this out in the simplest terms possible.

 

The "Costs" of this change in PvE:

 

Knockback IOs is handled in PvE builds in, mainly, three ways;

 

One Knockback IO in their travel power of choice. This change would allow them to slot a Micro into this travel power instead, increasing the rate that they move (Meaningless in PvE content for the most part), and giving them around .2 end/second in combat, if they choose to run their combat powers in combat. This is the case that applies to around 99.8% of PvE'rs

 

Acrobatics. Most people running Acrobatics are running it for the Hold Protection. This change has zero impact on these cases.

 

People running 2 KB IOs to avoid specific knockback powers in specific TFs or on specific farms. In this case it would save one entire slot out of an entire build in the worst case scenario.

 

So for about 99.8% of players, this would mean a colossal buff of .2 end/sec cheaper for a travel power running in combat. For about 99% of the remaining .2%, it would mean no change. For the rest of the people, likely of which could be counted on two hands, it would mean an entire extra slot.

 

 

No one has ever said that there wasn't a cost to these changes in PvE. What has been said is that these costs are minimal, have no large scale effects or costs and that it would improve the game more then it would hurt them. All you have said is referenced, vaguely with no real point, argument or attempt at two way discourse, that everyone is ignoring the "Costs" and projecting your issues onto others.

 

I won't defend Barrier and say he has made all of these points in a tacit and civilized manner. He hasn't. However, at the same time, he is not wrong. That is important. This is very similar to Stamina being made an inherent. In fact, Stamina becoming inherent was far more impactful thAn this. Yet it happened anyways, because the benefits outweighed the negatives. The same in this case.

 

Yes. It is power creep. No, power creep is not a blank check buzzword like you use it. It is not inherently bad, nor good. This change does remove cost. However that cost is near-non-existent and negligible in almost every/all cases.

[Vanden]

People keep telling you that you're wrong, but you just have your head stuck in the sand, repeating that there'd be no effect. There's no arguing with you, is there? I even came up with a solution that gives you everything you want with no repercussions in PvE, and you won't even acknowledge it.

 

People slot for KB protection in PvE, but these slots come at a cost. Your solution completely removes that cost. That is power creep, plain and simple.

 

One; he has acknowledged just about everything in the thread. Yes, perhaps more abrasively then is necessary, but Barrier is inherently an abrasive person.

 

Two; You are ignoring almost every point and post saying you're wrong, and explaining why you are. So in a sense, you're projecting. Quite a bit actually.

 

 

 

But, let's get to the meat of it, and lay this out in the simplest terms possible.

 

The "Costs" of this change in PvE:

 

Knockback IOs are used in PvE builds in, mainly, three ways;

 

One Knockback IO in their travel power of choice. This change would allow them to slot a Micro into this travel power instead, increasing the rate that they move (Meaningless in PvE content for the most part), and giving them around .2 end/second in combat, if they choose to run their combat powers in combat. This is the case that applies to around 99.8% of PvE'rs

 

Acrobatics. Most people running Acrobatics are running it for the Hold Protection. This change has zero impact on these cases.

 

People running 2 KB IOs to avoid specific knockback powers in specific TFs or on specific farms. In this case it would save one entire slot out of an entire build in the worst case scenario.

 

 

 

No one has ever said that there wasn't a cost to these changes in PvE. What has been said is that these costs are minimal, have no large scale effects or costs and that it would improve the game more then it would hurt them. All you have said is referenced, vaguely with no real point, argument or attempt at two way discourse, that everyone is ignoring the "Costs" and projecting your issues onto others.

 

I won't defend Barrier and say he has made all of these points in a tacit and civilized manner. He hasn't. However, at the same time, he is not wrong. That is important. This is very similar to Stamina being made an inherent. In fact, Stamina becoming inherent was far more impactful then this. Yet it happened anyways, because the benefits outweighed the negatives. The same in this case.

 

Yes. It is power creep. No, power creep is not a blank check buzzword like you use it. It is not inherently bad, nor good. This change does remove cost. However that cost is near-non-existent and negligible in almost every/all cases.

90% of my respecs these days are to move a single slot. I know what a big difference a single slot can make; getting as many as three extra slots in a build would be a major change. The cost is simply NOT negligible.

 

And no one, not a single person in favor of this change, has addressed the idea of putting KB protection in PvP Resist Bonus. Even though it does the exact same thing they're asking for with no PvE downsides.

[Epsilon Assassin]

90% of my respecs these days are to move a single slot. I know what a big difference a single slot can make

 

So do I, however the caveat is that maybe two dozen, probably less people, would have to respec even a single slot for this change.

 

getting as many as three extra slots in a build would be a major change.

 

It would be, but most people wouldn't be getting even a single slot out of this change. Let alone 3.

 

 

 

And no one, not a single person in favor of this change, has addressed the idea of putting KB protection in PvP Resist Bonus.

 

Then let me;

 

It's a worse idea. It is more work then this proposition, for less effect.

 

Even though it does the exact same thing they're asking for with no PvE downsides.

 

Except, as we've covered, there is next to if not no PvE downsides to this suggestion, and your suggestion is more work.

[Vanden]

90% of my respecs these days are to move a single slot. I know what a big difference a single slot can make

 

So do I, however the caveat is that maybe two dozen, probably less people, would have to respec even a single slot for this change.

 

getting as many as three extra slots in a build would be a major change.

 

It would be, but most people wouldn't be getting even a single slot out of this change. Let alone 3.

 

So I guess you've looked at every single person's build, to be able to make a declaration like this?

 

 

And no one, not a single person in favor of this change, has addressed the idea of putting KB protection in PvP Resist Bonus.

 

Then let me;

 

It's a worse idea. It is more work then this proposition, for less effect.

 

Even though it does the exact same thing they're asking for with no PvE downsides.

 

Except, as we've covered, there is next to if not no PvE downsides to this suggestion, and your suggestion is more work.

 

Except, as we've covered, there's absolutely PvE downsides to this suggestion, and if it's more work to avoid these downsides, so be it.

[Epsilon Assassin]

 

So I guess you've looked at every single person's build, to be able to make a declaration like this?

 

You made the declaration of kind first. You can't demand evidence of me for refuting points you made under the same presumptions.

 

Except, as we've covered, there's absolutely PvE downsides to this suggestion, and if it's more work to avoid these downsides, so be it.

 

You've yet to list a single major PvE implication of this issue that I haven't specifically outlined.

 

 

Are you just here to troll the thread, or actually discuss something. So far all you've done is vaguely reference costs that you are unable or unwilling to outline, then troll people attempting to figure out exactly what you mean. If I may, please contribute to the conversation or refrain from trolling it at the very least.