Has anyone tested Energy Aura yet?

[luficia]

With it now on Tankers, I'm intending to give this a shot with Radiation Melee. I wanted to know if anyone has tried this with any builds yet as Tanker?

 

I know that based on numbers, Overcharge appears to be essential and it doesn't have the aftereffects when it goes off!

[Warshades]

I wouldn't say that Overload is really essential. The set has very solid defenses to all but psi/toxic and gets solid resists across the board if you go for resist set bonuses. It also has high DDR which you could boost further if you decide to go with radial ageless destiny. At minimum, the 21% DDR from ageless radial + 64% from the armor set would put you at 85% DDR, with additional defense stacks from Energy Drain, you should never have to worry about defense failing for you which makes Overload pointless besides providing toxic/psionic defense.

 

I didn't have the set on mid's to play around with various set bonuses and it's a tiny bit different than the brute/scrapper versions which have Energy Cloak. I did do some IO sets to see various defense/resist values I could get on beta and posted a screenshot on the focused feedback page if you want to take a look. It was hovering around 60% to s/l/e/f/c defense, just a bit lower on negative. This was before factoring in any defense from Energy Drain.

 

 

 

[PeregrineFalcon]

I tested it some on the beta server.

 

The numbers are mediocre, it appears that the Tanker version was nerfed because the devs were worried that EA would be as good as SR, I guess. Defense is worse than SR until you fire off Energy Drain. No defense to Psi is a problem at higher levels. The small amount of Psi resist that it gets doesn't really help, it usually just delays death long enough for you to use Energize or Overload. Usually.

 

And not having Energy Cloak means it doesn't play any different than the other Tanker sets, which kinda defeats the whole purpose of porting EA to Tankers.

[tidge]

I haven't tested in on Tankers, but my expectations match what @PeregrineFalcon describes, based on the way it played for me on a Scrapper. I loved it on a Sentinel FWIW.

 

If I was to try in on a Tanker, I'd absolutely try to maximize HP, and I would use the Force of Will pool to have Unleash Potential available as often as possible. I'd probably franken-slot it with Defense and Heal (and getting whichever Defense globals that don't fit elsewhere in it) but this choice isn't one I can guarantee because of playstyle. For the Scrapper, I found I needed both Defense and Healing way more often than I would have preferred. The extra HP of Tankers should make a big difference (for the way I played and built the Scrapper)

 

Overload (for Tankers) is harder to predict (for me). It probably would get added as an easy IO mule.

[Psi-bolt]

16 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

I tested it some on the beta server.

 

The numbers are mediocre, it appears that the Tanker version was nerfed because the devs were worried that EA would be as good as SR, I guess. Defense is worse than SR until you fire off Energy Drain. No defense to Psi is a problem at higher levels. The small amount of Psi resist that it gets doesn't really help, it usually just delays death long enough for you to use Energize or Overload. Usually.

 

And not having Energy Cloak means it doesn't play any different than the other Tanker sets, which kinda defeats the whole purpose of porting EA to Tankers.

 

While I agree wholeheartedly regarding the loss of Energy Cloak, I don't think that the Tanker version was nerfed or that it's weaker than SR.   SR is a one-trick pony, focused purely on positional defense.  It's the best at it, hitting the normal softcap with SOs.  That's nice.   EA is a layered defense set where you get good defense, decent resists and a heal.  It also get the utility of Energy Drain.  That works better for my playstyle.

 

With reasonable to obtain IO sets, you're looking at an easy road to the softcap in everything but Psi/Toxic.   Alongside 30%+ resists to Sm, Le from just the set.  On beta with a hastily put together build, I was in the 70% Sm, Le, Energy resists along with being at the softcap for those three.   EA really feels to me to be like Invulnerability, but reversing the emphasis on resists with defense. 

 

I do wish it still had Energy Cloak though.  

[Warshades]

2 hours ago, Psi-bolt said:

I do wish it still had Energy Cloak though. 

 

In many ways, the alternative Power Armor that we got is significantly more useful in that the set already easily over caps most typed defenses (except toxic/psi) and the new power provides more useful resist and max HP buffs that makes EA sturdier than just another defensive toggle. What they could've done is made Energy Cloak a mutually exclusive power where you get a choice between it and Power Armor. Energy Cloak certainly wouldn't break EA nor is it the first tanker set that has a stealth toggle as Dark Armor already had that and it would've satisfied the players that preferred to keep it. 

 

2 hours ago, Psi-bolt said:

EA really feels to me to be like Invulnerability, but reversing the emphasis on resists with defense. 

 

I can see the comparison, though I like to compare it more to a typed defense version of Shield Defense. Shield has it's advantages, positional defense is better than typed defense, it also gets Shield Charge and AAO to boost damage output. Comparatively, EA on tanks has an easy endurance management tool in Energy Drain and a reliable heal/regen tool in Energize.

 

19 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

I tested it some on the beta server.

 

The numbers are mediocre, it appears that the Tanker version was nerfed because the devs were worried that EA would be as good as SR, I guess. Defense is worse than SR until you fire off Energy Drain. No defense to Psi is a problem at higher levels. The small amount of Psi resist that it gets doesn't really help, it usually just delays death long enough for you to use Energize or Overload. Usually.

 

I am not sure how you were testing it. I could see EA struggling if you didn't do an IO'd out set build. I ran mine through several Arachnos and Carnival +4/8x missions and didn't feel like it struggled to survive at all. I do tend to build more towards survival so that may be part of the reason. EA doesn't really need to focus on building for defense as it already gets rather high base numbers. Focusing set bonuses towards resists helps out a lot as you can easily hit 70-90% resists to most damage types on top of having soft capped to def to all but toxic/psi, reliable heal, and decent regen with Energize active. It can become really sturdy when built to be so.

 

I'm also not really sure what significant nerfs you're referring to, at least as far as tanks go. IIRC, the defense scale of Energy Drain and Power Shield were slightly lowered. This makes little to no impact for tanks who already start with higher base defense values. If anything, replacing Energy Cloak with Power Armor buffed EA even more as it makes it easier to reach near capped max HP, improves regen from Energize due to higher max HP, and gets higher resists.

[Psi-bolt]

1 minute ago, Warshades said:

 

In many ways, the alternative Power Armor that we got is significantly more useful in that the set already easily over caps most typed defenses (except toxic/psi) and the new power provides more useful resist and max HP buffs that makes EA sturdier than just another defensive toggle. What they could've done is made Energy Cloak a mutually exclusive power where you get a choice between it and Power Armor. Energy Cloak certainly wouldn't break EA nor is it the first tanker set that has a stealth toggle as Dark Armor already had that and it would've satisfied the players that preferred to keep it. 

 

 

I can see the comparison, though I like to compare it more to a typed defense version of Shield Defense. Shield has it's advantages, positional defense is better than typed defense, it also gets Shield Charge and AAO to boost damage output. Comparatively, EA on tanks has an easy endurance management tool in Energy Drain and a reliable heal/regen tool in Energize.

 

Don't get me wrong, Power Armor is definitely better and by a lot for Tanking.  I do see why they didn't go the mutually exclusive route since for the unwary, taking the stealth power over Power Armor is a suboptimal choice.  Hell, I'm not sure I would take it on the Tanker over Power Armor since I wanted Superspeed anyway.

 

As for the comparison to Shield, I likewise can see that comparison.  It feels more like Invulnerability to me because of Energize.  A set with multiple layers of mitigation with a heal on top is generally my preferred set up and really makes the set a good generalist.

 

[Psyonico]

I took an Energy/Staff up to 22 last night.  It feels very sturdy, even at lower levels.

 

I really like power armor, seems like a nice addition to an already sturdy set.

[Troo]

20 minutes ago, Warshades said:

I could see EA struggling if you didn't do an IO'd out set build.

 

So for the majority of the game.. I just want to confirm what you are saying.

 

I understand the play-style that basically skips to 50, makes a dialed in build, and starts from there. It is just a fairly narrow experience that is not reflective of new player, leveling up,  limited resources, or less dialed in builds.

[Psi-bolt]

20 minutes ago, Troo said:

 

So for the majority of the game.. I just want to confirm what you are saying.

 

I understand the play-style that basically skips to 50, makes a dialed in build, and starts from there. It is just a fairly narrow experience that is not reflective of new player, leveling up,  limited resources, or less dialed in builds.

 

I leveled an EA/EM to 21 last night, it's pretty smooth both solo and in teams with just SOs.   A brand new player wouldn't struggle any more with EA than Invulnerability or Shield in my opinion.   It's a solid set leveling so far, and I know it's going to be stupid good once built out.

[Warshades]

4 minutes ago, Troo said:

So for the majority of the game.. I just want to confirm what you are saying.

 

I understand the play-style that basically skips to 50, makes a dialed in build, and starts from there. It is just a fairly narrow experience that is not reflective of new player, leveling up,  limited resources, or less dialed in builds.

 

That's a fair point and like I said, I can understand EA struggling if you're playing without set bonuses. 

 

If I build a char and intend to play that char often, I will work on fully IOing and decking them out to get the most that I can out of them. With regards to limited resources, there are ways to earn influence through the AH or farming, though even playing naturally you will eventually earn enough influence to fully build out a char. 

 

I don't really look at how well a set performs without set bonuses and IOs. To me, that's like comparing 2 completely different sets and you could say that a lot of sets will feel weak and underwhelming without bonuses. Like playing illusion controller without perma PA is a night and day difference in what they can accomplish. I'll provide a quick example of EA tanks with and without set bonuses.

With just regular lvl 50 IOs, it's nothing impressive.

 

 

 

Once you actually throw in sets and get bonuses (I did have resilience alpha slot on, but that was the only incarnate added), it looks very different.

 

 

It really depends on what perspective you're looking at for power sets and builds. I prefer to look at the final build that I have planned out for a character. Looking at how it is to play that character from 1-50 without sets is a different perspective and you'll have a different experience out of it. The final product of EA can be extremely tough, but that takes time and investment into it.

[Troo]

5 minutes ago, Warshades said:

It really depends on what perspective you're looking at for power sets and builds. I prefer to look at the final build that I have planned out for a character. Looking at how it is to play that character from 1-50 without sets is a different perspective and you'll have a different experience out of it. The final product of EA can be extremely tough, but that takes time and investment into it.

 

Totally fair. I appreciate your response.

Your first example "just regular lvl 50 IOs" includes accolades. Removing them can increase the gap.

 

[Troo]

 

Having to consider normal leveling, normal builds, level 50s, fully optimized 50s with accolades and then also incarnates and min/maxing. Not an easy assignment.

 

Let's call the lower end: Normal leveling, normal builds, level 50s.

The higher end being: Optimized 50s with accolades and incarnates. (we'll just drop min/max from balance consideration)

 

What we see too often is the lower end (new players and casual players) bearing the brunt of having to 'balance' the higher end of the spectrum.

 

[soapbox]

I've always appreciated a game teaching players as they level up. Elegantly introducing new powers, capabilities, and advantages while also revealing new challenges, visual clues, hints, triggers, and alternate solutions. Blending learning with natural game play to where it may not be obvious and combining that with a good variety of capabilities can result in high replay-ability. 

City of Villains/Heroes has some secret sauce. Opinions may vary on what that entails.

[end soapbox]

[PeregrineFalcon]

4 hours ago, Psi-bolt said:

I do wish it still had Energy Cloak though.  

Me too. That was what set EA apart from other sets. Like Fire Armor has its damage auras, Ice has its Ice Patch, EA had built in stealth. That was its thing. But I guess stealth would be OP on a Tank? I don't know.

 

2 hours ago, Warshades said:

I'm also not really sure what significant nerfs you're referring to, at least as far as tanks go. IIRC, the defense scale of Energy Drain and Power Shield were slightly lowered.

"I'm not sure what nerfs you're referring to" then goes on to name the exact powers that were nerfed. Wait, what?!?! (Where's my confused emoji?)

 

In the beta test thread I actually showed the numbers from Brute EA and then did the math for a direct port with the Tanker modifier. Once I finally got the math right, the numbers were a bit higher than what Tankers finally got, and with less of a Psi/Toxic hole. So they nerfed Tanker EA not only by nerfing Energy Drain and Power Shield, but by removing Energy Aura entirely and giving us something else with completely different numbers.

 

So Tanker EA lost the stealth and lost defense numbers.

[tidge]

Apropos of (almost) nothing: I find that IOs (*1) help (me) more with Offense than Resistance/Defense. There are a some reasons why *I* feel this way. 

1. Global Recharge and Global Accuracy (and +ToHit) are much more noticeable than anything else during typical play
2. I play enough characters with terrible Resistance that it gets hard (but not impossible) for me to tell the difference between 70% Resistances and 90%+ Resistances
3. Defenses are easier to notice solo, but once teamed I can usually see by a quick glance to my combat attributes window that someone is buffing them.

(*1) The "help" is the difference between me liking an offense set (with high Global Recharge) and not liking a set.... but on the defense side I simply get better feels, not radically different ones. MMV.

[Warshades]

7 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

"I'm not sure what nerfs you're referring to" then goes on to name the exact powers that were nerfed. Wait, what?!?! (Where's my confused emoji?)

 

You do realize that tanks just got EA? There was no previous version of EA that tanks used to have that got changed to qualify as a nerf as this is their first iteration of it. EA was nerfed on other ATs by those changes but for tanks specifically, only changes from this current form could be quantified as a nerf or buff. Hence the part after that quote where I stated "at least as far as tanks go". 

 

7 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

So they nerfed Tanker EA not only by nerfing Energy Drain and Power Shield, but by removing Energy Aura entirely and giving us something else with completely different numbers.

 

We'll just have to agree to disagree. In my opinion, Power Armor is a superior passive buff and more useful than Energy Cloak would ever be for tanker version of EA. As I said in previous post on this thread, I'm all for Energy Cloak being added back as a mutually exclusive option in place of Power Armor for those that prefer that option, but I view Power Armor as an improvement for the tanker version of EA. 

[luficia]

I-I just wanted to know since I wanted to roll a Tanker Energy Aura / Radiation Melee. I didn't mean to spark a debate. 

[Warshades]

You're completely fine @luficia. My apologies for my own part in going off topic. Going back to your original question, Overload would primarily be useful if facing significant tox/psi damage. It may depend on how you build your EA tank as to whether you need it or not. I ran my EA tank on beta through both Arachnos and Carnies at +4/8x and did not feel that I was ever at risk of dying. If you build for tox/psi resist through IO sets, it gets more than enough to survive such content compared to how relatively rare tox/psi damage is as a whole. 

 

You could use Overload as a slot mule if you slot toggles like I did with 4 piece shield walls as an example. I've always built EA on other ATs to get as much resist as possible after reaching S/L/E/N/F/C soft cap and it has always turned out extremely tough for any mobs to kill. 

[Sovera]

8 hours ago, luficia said:

I-I just wanted to know since I wanted to roll a Tanker Energy Aura / Radiation Melee. I didn't mean to spark a debate. 

 

I just built an EA/Fire for a friend. It's not Rad melee but the slotting shouldn't be too hard to migrate. I was a bit surprised at the contortions I had to go through to cap negative defense.

 

It's not quite what I would have used for myself (he wanted more S/L hence the, for me, superfluous Blistering Cold slotting) but he has his likes so I just tweaked the numbers. It will rely on a second ATO stack and Barrier's 5% to finish capping S/L/N but T/P will always lag behind as they are meant to be the armor's hole and, as mentioned, a surprising amount of contortionism was needed to get the rest of the numbers up so T/P doesn't get enough focus.

 

Tanker (Energy Aura - Fiery Melee).mbd

 

The current Mids doesn't take into account the defense from Energy Absorption nor the recharge from Entropic Aura.

 

Edited Thursday at 11:33 AM by Sovera

[Psi-bolt]

On 6/18/2025 at 10:05 PM, luficia said:

I-I just wanted to know since I wanted to roll a Tanker Energy Aura / Radiation Melee. I didn't mean to spark a debate. 

 

But we like to debate here!  😃

[ZemX]

On 6/18/2025 at 12:34 PM, PeregrineFalcon said:

Me too. That was what set EA apart from other sets. Like Fire Armor has its damage auras, Ice has its Ice Patch, EA had built in stealth. That was its thing. But I guess stealth would be OP on a Tank? I don't know.

 

Not OP. since they haven't removed it from Dark Armor.   But I wouldn't be surprised if they think it's not thematic or useful for a Tanker.   And I have to say, I'd rather have the +maxHP/resists than a stealth toggle.  

 

Besides, any well-built Tanker already has TankerStealth^(tm) which is exactly like any other stealth except everyone can see you as you run past them like this--->😁🖕

[Troo]

1 hour ago, ZemX said:

😁🖕

 

lol

[PeregrineFalcon]

3 hours ago, ZemX said:

Besides, any well-built Tanker already has TankerStealth^(tm) which is exactly like any other stealth except everyone can see you as you run past them like this--->😁🖕

Yeah, I know what you mean. 😁

 

I kinda wanted it to be like EA is on all the other characters I've had it on. What's the point in even calling it EA if it's not like the EA that everyone else gets?

 

I guess I'm one of the few that thinks that way, judging by how few people were interested enough to even post in the EA Feedback thread.