Homogenation - Should all powersets be the same numbers wise?

[High_Beam]

For me the answer is simple and doesn't require explanation or extrapolation.

 

No.

 

Variety is the spice of life.

[Arcadio]

2 hours ago, Neiska said:

Personally, I would prefer if DPS wasn't the only metric that seems to be considered when balancing things which seems to be the case. In a game with so many ATs, Powersets, Combat mechanics, Playstyles, Enemies, Mission Type, Difficulty Level, etc etc etc, DPS is only one small piece of the pie and a great many other things seem overlooked or neglected entirely. When was the last time say, +RES buffs among powersets were balanced? +DEF Buffs among powersets? So on and so forth.

 

Do you mean by players or devs? Because they just rebalanced 4 armour sets, and according to several frequent posters the all the new sets 'underperform' dps wise.

[MTeague]

4 hours ago, shortguy on indom said:

HOMOGENATION OF ENEMIES = YES, PROBABLY.

 

Honestly, I still hold out "never gonna happen but maybe" hope for an Opt In system where you can flag certain of your redside alts to be a "nemesis" of a blueside character, and vice versa, and then in some kind of specialized tip mission, have an end fight against that alt of yours.  But, that alt would have full access to all of their set bonues, have full access to all of the incarnate powers (if both lvl 50+), etc.  Every single power that your character has, that NPC copy could use against you in mission, without exception. 

 

(or if you only had bluesiders, then some kind of "rival" flag for your alts vs your other character)

Edited Thursday at 04:17 AM by MTeague

[Paradox Fate]

I wouldn't mind it on same powersets/powers but different AT's. 

Example: 

Poison Trap from Poison is 1.0/1.188 sec cast/arcanatime

Trip Mine from Arsenal Assault is 1.93/2.112 sec

 

But both on those on the Traps powerset are 2.77/2.904 and 5.0(!)/5.148 sec.

 

[Neiska]

7 hours ago, Arcadio said:

 

Do you mean by players or devs? Because they just rebalanced 4 armour sets, and according to several frequent posters the all the new sets 'underperform' dps wise.

 

What I meant was balancing the armor sets across different ATs. I mean most DPS take DEF sets since they have lower res caps for example. A scrapper or stalker can take Shield for example and be dang near as good as a Tanker, while doing much more DPS. I mean, if Tankers shouldn't be able to do meaningful damage, then DPS shouldn't be so durable, right? What's good for one, is good for the other, right?  I mean, if a squishy can just zoom into a full spawn on +4/8 without fear and just nuke them all down with zero caution, I would argue they are too durable. The glass cannons in this game are not glass cannon at all, whatsoever. If a tanker has 50% of the damage they do, then they should have 50% of the durability? (Just an example for context, not meant to be a literal comparison.)

 

For all the rebalancing over the years focused pretty much entirely around DPS, not once did they go "maybe the squishes aren't squishy enough." If you can do a hardmode with nothing but corruptors, etc, I would argue that might need rebalancing more than say, oh, I dunno, Plant Control? I mean, if you want to get right down to it, people can go full hog DPS as much as they like and just take turns popping barrier and clear 90% of the harder content anyway. Tankers and Brutes not even needed at all. There are tools like Rune of Protection, Barrier, etc to make squishies just as tough as tankers, but there isn't much those tankers can do to boost their damage. Even if their powerset has a buildup, that lasts for a few moments while the defensive stuff lasts quite awhile. Long enough you can juggle them with small windows of squishy-ness.

 

I am all for "play your way" and "everything should be viable." But from where I sit they definitely are playing favorites. 

[Arcadio]

8 hours ago, Neiska said:

For all the rebalancing over the years focused pretty much entirely around DPS, not once did they go "maybe the squishes aren't squishy enough." 

I disagree. A while ago they did a balance pass on all attacks to make them have one elemental and one positional tag, which meant that building only s/l defense to 45 was't going to guard against 99% of enemies. There was so much push back specifically because people felt like their squishies are getting more squishy.

 

I also disagree that a blaster with a billion dollar build and barrier should fold over in moderately difficult content. Squishies definietly have to play more strategically (i.e. playing around barrier cd) to do the more difficult content, and I feel like they should be able to. A well built tanker can wade into pretty much any challenge, adapt, and still survive. A blaster isn't doing that.

 

Also as someone with many defense soft capped characters, I can tell you for sure that isn't NEARLY enough to feel immortal in even regular +4/x8 radio missions very often. And building more layers is very difficult to do without sacrificing significant damage in the form of +recharge. Even under barrier a squishy can die pretty easily since they have a cap of 75% resistance, and lower HP. I know you said you didn't mean literally but considering both a tanker and blaster under barrier, that's 90% vs 75% resistance. The blaster is taking 2.5x more damage AND has less than half the ammount of HP. And on top of that, tankers can also just have a blaster nuke in the form of judgement.

There's a reason majority of farmers and builds that solo the most difficult TF's deathless are brutes or tankers. That extra survivability is more than meaningful, it's crucial.

[Seed22]

On 6/9/2025 at 7:08 PM, baster said:

Hell, No, but if you want to see this game die faster then a new born gazela on savanna then keep pushing for homogenation to appease all you pvp min maxies 

Why is PvP blamed? What the fuck do you people think this game has for a PvP pop? Can yall not understand this game is an insignificant fleck of an atom in the MMO landscape and has no PvP pop to speak of, let alone be loud enough to make demands. 

 

 

Nor would they advocate for Homogenization as that effectively solves PvP in the worst way possible by making it a boring grey blob?

 

If anything, blame the HC powers devs. They have their own design goal and are stubborn as fuck and won't change even if faced with sound evidence to consider outside of small gives here and there. 

 

Or blame the players who refuse to learn how the game works and cry about this or that being OP when they just fucking suck. They whine enough and devs homogenize things to make them look less bad, except it fails because they STILL refuse to learn how the game works. Ending with the game being a boring grey glop instead of a varied and fun superhero MMO.

[Seed22]

Homogenization is bad for the long term health of a game(eugh, hate sounding like a arm chair dev but alas). If EVERYTHING is the same, why tf would I make any more than 1 50? If im not(and im not) an RPer looks wont carry me enough to make a new toon. Especially if I know it's effectively the same as my first 50. 

 

Homogenization of enemies is even worse tbh. I'd get bored, and certain groups would be horrid for early levels and then become nothing burgers for the rest of the game. The natural sense of progression would be all out of order and just miserable

[Neiska]

2 hours ago, Arcadio said:

I disagree.

 

You are entitled to your opinion.

 

2 hours ago, Arcadio said:

 

A while ago they did a balance pass on all attacks to make them have one elemental and one positional tag, which meant that building only s/l defense to 45 was't going to guard against 99% of enemies. There was so much push back specifically because people felt like their squishies are getting more squishy.

 

Getting 45 DEF isn't the catch all be all. That isn't even the most mathematically beneficial according to my napkin math. The most immediate and most effective form of defense is flying. Why? Simply because most enemies don't have full ranged attack chains, most only have 1 or 2 attacks. So that means right out the gate you are facing up to 1/2 to 3/4th less attacks against most enemies, before any dice is even rolled. But lets play hypothetical how I rip apart +4 stuff solo on my corruptor -

 

Oh no. I'm in a fight. I better start flying. (Immediately face far fewer attacks.)

Oh no I'm under attack. (Power Boost + Farsight, I'm now over defense cap)

Oh no, my DEF buff is wearing off. (Pop Chrono Shift)

Oh no, I am under CC. (Pop RoP)

Oh no, I am getting debuffed. (Pop Ageless)

 

This isn't even popping a single inspiration. Or any P2W. Or any accolades. I am essentially immortal or at least extremely tough against most enemies, comparatively as tough as my tanker would be. The tanker is far more durable overall, but that is in a sense moot since the corruptor is as tough as required. So if I am comparatively tough "enough" but I do far far more damage, then where's this outcry for "tankers do too much damage" vs "squishy aren't squishy" originating from?

 

2 hours ago, Arcadio said:

I also disagree that a blaster with a billion dollar build and barrier should fold over in moderately difficult content. Squishies definietly have to play more strategically (i.e. playing around barrier cd) to do the more difficult content, and I feel like they should be able to. A well built tanker can wade into pretty much any challenge, adapt, and still survive. A blaster isn't doing that.

 

First off, a biillion dollar build no way entitles you to clear anything on any AT. Secondly, I would argue playing around a single powers cooldown is hardly "strategic" anymore than rock-paper-scissors is. And any AT can be built "tough enough" for even the most difficult solo activities. Either combining buffs with debuffs, p2w, incarnates, etc etc. But not every AT can be built to do enough dps for any solo activity. At least unless you want to go afk for an hour with a power on autocast.

 

2 hours ago, Arcadio said:

Also as someone with many defense soft capped characters, I can tell you for sure that isn't NEARLY enough to feel immortal in even regular +4/x8 radio missions very often. And building more layers is very difficult to do without sacrificing significant damage in the form of +recharge. Even under barrier a squishy can die pretty easily since they have a cap of 75% resistance, and lower HP. I know you said you didn't mean literally but considering both a tanker and blaster under barrier, that's 90% vs 75% resistance. The blaster is taking 2.5x more damage AND has less than half the ammount of HP. And on top of that, tankers can also just have a blaster nuke in the form of judgement.

 

 

See above comment. It takes more than DEF softcap, but what's escaping you is my point that hitting DEF softcap, and fairly good resistances without having to use other tools/cooldowns shouldn't even be an option on full hog DPS ATs. 

 

In a sense, you are aurging that -

Its totally 100% okay for DPS ATs can boost their survivability.

But if Tankers/Brutes/survive builds want to boost their damage, that requires an immediate nerf.

 

2 hours ago, Arcadio said:

There's a reason majority of farmers and builds that solo the most difficult TF's deathless are brutes or tankers. That extra survivability is more than meaningful, it's crucial.

 

No, Brutes are simply the fastest. Tankers are simply the easiest, as well as the cheapest. But you can farm with nearly any AT, I have done it with SoA, Warshade, even triple boxed MMs that could clear maps in 3 minutes. (That has since been nerfed.) Even farmed with Widows and Controllers. It also matters if you are talking active farming vs afk farming. If you are AFK farming, than survivability is crucial, since you are only using one autocast attack AoE power. If you are actively playing, that isn't as make-or-break, since you can use other powers as well. 

 

And I would argue that it's a moot point, since now we are talking about balancing Tanker/Brute DPS in all activities (groups, solo, hardmode, chill radio teams, etc) only because of what some single builds can do? Well, if that's the argument then lets nerf fly and -fly protection and Farsight/Power Boost right now since those are so strong defensively. RoP as well. Lets make Incarnate cooldowns longer or have a debuff built in so teams can't juggle them for constant coverage. (AKA a "not affected by incarnate buff" timer when it wears off.) I mean I have a whole list of things that should be immediately nerfed if we are going to stomp entire ATs because of what some builds are capable of under some situations. But call it a hunch that nobody wants to have that kind of conversation.

 

Again, you are entitled to your opinion and I respect that. But I doubt we are going to agree on this. And from my chair it sure seems like some are allowed to "have their cake and eat it too" while others are constantly changed/tweaked/nerfed, and I am not convinced it's not for any kind of biased reason.

Edited Thursday at 07:22 PM by Neiska

[Scarlet Shocker]

One of the issues I have with this question is what is meant by homogeneity?

 

Powersets could be almost exactly the same across the board but that isn't really the case and often sets have a few unique characteristics, and not just in signature powers.

 

Personally I think variety is good and I don't mind playing a set considered to "under perform" if it's interesting and fun. If it engages the user. In this context, "under perform" usually means it doesn't do as much damage as another power.

 

I think one of the truly unique things about this game is that similar power sets actually have very different looks and feels and that's one of its strengths.

 

Often I have found that somewhat unlikely pairings make great combos - and there's a tonne of fun to be had experimenting.

[PyroBeetle]

1 hour ago, Neiska said:

And from my chair it sure seems like some are allowed to "have their cake and eat it too" while others are constantly changed/tweaked/nerfed, and I am not convinced it's not for any kind of biased reason.

 This is life on the bleeding edge. If you are going to play only the toons that people who min/max to get the absolute most out of your play time (in the terms of whatever is currently being used to measure success) then you are going to constantly face the threat of a balancing action.

 

Blasters are playing too risk free, let's nerf RoP and enemy damage flags

 

Tanks are doing too much damage, let's nerf that.

 

Axe was tuned to be a little too good, again nerf

 

Farming is putting to much influence into the economy, let's nerf the double influence for freezing up

 

Balancing has touched every aspect of the game to some extent or another, but it doesn't mean that sets have to be homogenous. It does mean that if you play a set that stays FotM for too long you do run the risk of things being balanced at your expense.

[Neiska]

35 minutes ago, PyroBeetle said:

 This is life on the bleeding edge. If you are going to play only the toons that people who min/max to get the absolute most out of your play time (in the terms of whatever is currently being used to measure success) then you are going to constantly face the threat of a balancing action.

 

Blasters are playing too risk free, let's nerf RoP and enemy damage flags

 

Tanks are doing too much damage, let's nerf that.

 

Axe was tuned to be a little too good, again nerf

 

Farming is putting to much influence into the economy, let's nerf the double influence for freezing up

 

Balancing has touched every aspect of the game to some extent or another, but it doesn't mean that sets have to be homogenous. It does mean that if you play a set that stays FotM for too long you do run the risk of things being balanced at your expense.

 

I don't play the meta, but I do try to get the most out of what powersets I choose. But some of them I make just because I enjoy them. Rarely do I copy other peoples builds, mostly I look at them for ideas or inspiration, and then put my own spin on things. I am more concerned with enjoyment, something that flows well (not END starved), and is consistent. 

 

Nerfing dps durability? Totally fine with that.

Tanker damage nerf? Would be fine with it, if tankers got something else in return. We didn't. 

Axe nerf? Duno. Never tried it.

Farming? Ironically, it's not the farmers who are the absurdly wealthy folks - its the people who A. Play their 50s for a long time because there is very LITTLE upkeep in this game to speak of. So once your 50 is done, you incur virtually zero cost, and anything you get is a net gain. And people who B. Play stock market simulator on the AH. The richest people I know are like, level 10. They don't do missions. They hang out in their chosen spots and play the market. Thats their main draw to the game. Not my thing mind you, but for some that's their thrill.

 

Sure, balancing touches every aspect. Bbbuuttt... it certainly seems at one section of the game... ...and hardly ever others. Some ATs/Powers have yet to get touched, at all. And others are all over the place. And I don't believe for a moment that everyone would agree such things are "balanced." If you ask me, they focus on what's popular, or the best. If somethings the best, its automatically presumed to be over-tuned and needs nerfing. While the stuff at the bottom has been at the bottom for awhile now, and at this point I kinda doubt its gonna change anytime soon.

[Clave Dark 5]

I'd definitively say "no" on this, but it would nice to see extreme min/maxers stop (inaccurately) saying "Carp Melee is the best choice, all the rest are [dog droppings]."  

 

ETA for clarity, posting in the morning is a bad idea.

Edited Friday at 03:23 AM by Clave Dark 5

[Psyonico]

12 minutes ago, Clave Dark 5 said:

I'd definitively say "no" on this, but it would nice to see extreme min/maxers stop (inaccurately) saying "Carp Melee is the best choice, all the rest at do [droppings]."  

Why don’t we get world peace while we’re at it?

[Skyhawke]

31 minutes ago, Psyonico said:

Why don’t we get world peace while we’re at it?

 

Or at least Carp Melee. 

[Go0gleplex]

Hmmm...slippery slope there...kinda like the age old D&D alignment feud. 😉  

 

I don't think all powers should have the same numbers...the whole point is to provide an impression of individual heroic/villainous persona to play for either glory or greed. 

That said, I do think that each power set within like categories should be at least close to the same numbers or performance per se to maintain a sense of like potential and avoid those situations where power set A is far more optimized and effective than power set B...so power set B seldom appears in play. But like Snarky alluded to...the game, like life, is complex and nothing performs at some illusory level of fairness and balanced equality; more like a series of reactionary distortions based on causality and chaos theory.  So I trying to achieve homogenation would be akin to tilting at wind mills. Very large, very old, and very cranky wind mills. (chuckles)

[Scarlet Shocker]

8 hours ago, Skyhawke said:

 

Or at least Carp Melee. 

 

Because Carp have scales and would therefore also need balancing!

[Maelwys]

10 hours ago, Skyhawke said:

Or at least Carp Melee. 

TBF the Catch of the Day has arrived on Brainstorm
 

  

On 6/11/2025 at 1:02 AM, The Curator said:

Broadsword

• Swordfish custom weapon option added.

[Player-1]

No, all powers should not be the same or perfectly balanced.

 

They should be relatively balanced though, to where the "worst" powerset is not miles behind the "best" powerset for a given category. You will still have an ST focused set be slower at clearing missions than an AoE focused one, and vice versa for boss takedowns. This is great! It means there are different options for different players to have fun with. 

[shortguy on indom]

• OUT OF CURIOSITY, WHAT COMMON METRIC(S) IS CURRENTLY BEING USED?
• "As long as the enemy groups do not have too much variance, and similar characters are used each run, the test results should show usable deltas."
• AGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT WHOLEHEARTEDLY, FROM A DIFF THREAD.