Debuff auras placeable on both allies and enemies

[WindDemon21]

Much like shifting tides and enflame both can, any aoe placeable aura should really be able to be cast on either the enemy or an ally. Radiation infection, darkest night, sonic disruption, snowstorm etc. Would be a really nice change to those powers.

[golstat2003]

On 7/26/2025 at 2:09 PM, WindDemon21 said:

Much like shifting tides and enflame both can, any aoe placeable aura should really be able to be cast on either the enemy or an ally. Radiation infection, darkest night, sonic disruption, snowstorm etc. Would be a really nice change to those powers.

 

I can't think of any reason why not too. Placing these on a tank (as long as they don't override Tank or Brute aggro) would be interesting.

[Razor Cure]

As much I like the idea..it would make a lot of content way too easy. Tank + rad debuffs on them? That tank basically is never going to die (in most normal content). Plus it would take away almost all the risk of having toggle debuffs. You would never have to worry about throwing them down, and being attacked/mezzed before the effects took hold. 

[WindDemon21]

On 7/29/2025 at 7:27 AM, Razor Cure said:

As much I like the idea..it would make a lot of content way too easy. Tank + rad debuffs on them? That tank basically is never going to die (in most normal content). Plus it would take away almost all the risk of having toggle debuffs. You would never have to worry about throwing them down, and being attacked/mezzed before the effects took hold. 

So basically what buffs already are. Not a good enough argument. Plus you still have to manage the end cost which would now be 100% of the time with no downtime, can run the risk of the teammate or pet moving out of the area, and will still get suppressed when mezzed. The entire point is for it to be more beneficial/set and forget like buffs, but they still have all the same drawbacks they did before, only now with more end cost to compensate for the better ease of use.

[srmalloy]

42 minutes ago, WindDemon21 said:

can run the risk of the teammate or pet moving out of the area

This is already annoyingly in the game. With a character with the Marine powerset, put Shifting Tides on a pet. On an office map, you will find that virtually every time you transit between floors via an elevator, the sections of the map for each floor are far enough apart that the elevator transfer briefly puts you far enough from the pet you put Shifting Tides on that the toggle drops, forcing you to wait for it to recharge before you can reapply it. 

[WindDemon21]

33 minutes ago, srmalloy said:

This is already annoyingly in the game. With a character with the Marine powerset, put Shifting Tides on a pet. On an office map, you will find that virtually every time you transit between floors via an elevator, the sections of the map for each floor are far enough apart that the elevator transfer briefly puts you far enough from the pet you put Shifting Tides on that the toggle drops, forcing you to wait for it to recharge before you can reapply it. 

Yeah but that's no different than other toggles, there's really nothing they can do about that with the elevators unless they gave toggles an infinite range before they drop off. Which i guess they could be able to do that but likely wouldn't since it doesn't impact much of the game. Being able to place toggles on both allies and enemies though, would make a much nicer improvement and QoL for those types of powers. Even ally toggles like sonic repulsion, when solo, being able to use that on the enemy mobs would be a helpful addition, obviously also for enemy toggles being able to place on your own pet on a controller or a melee type would also be the main intent.

[MTeague]

Be careful what you wish for. They may say OK, if it you can keep the toggle up permantnly on an AE around your tank, we have to nerf it's effects by 25%.

[WindDemon21]

19 minutes ago, MTeague said:

Be careful what you wish for. They may say OK, if it you can keep the toggle up permantnly on an AE around your tank, we have to nerf it's effects by 25%.

They definitely wouldn't have to do that. It's a QoL change, not a stat change. That would only be done if they would appropriately fix the radii to be 25ft like darkest night's, but not just being able to cast it on an ally,  that's QoL.

[srmalloy]

4 hours ago, WindDemon21 said:

Yeah but that's no different than other toggles, there's really nothing they can do about that with the elevators unless they gave toggles an infinite range before they drop off.

You're looking at it wrong. Keep the range limit. If the distance between the caster and the anchor exceeds the range limit for more than, say, two seconds, then drop the toggle. If you put a rad debuff on a mob and it runs out of range, it's not likely to be turning around to come back within the time limit, but the two seconds gives a pet used as an anchor time to get run up/down the elevator by the server, after which it's back in range. 

[Rudra]

I have to say, I very much disagree with the OP. I even disagree with the OP's presentation of Enflame and Shifting Tides as references for why it should be done. To me, Shifting Tides is far more of a team buff than anything else. And Enflame doesn't directly debuff or harm the enemy, but rather lets you set a mobile creation point for a damage pseudo-pet. The cited powers for being changed to be able to target friend and foe however are purely enemy debuffs that directly hamper the affected target. So unless the author wants Darkest Night to drop that friendly Tanker's ToHit or that Snowstorm to drop that friendly Tanker's speed and recharge or any other debuff to also affect the party, I have to say no.

 

The point of debuffs are they are applied to what you want to hinder or otherwise render ineffective. Enflame and Shifting Tides don't do that. Yes, Enflame and Shifting Tides can inflict damage on enemies, but at least for Shifting Tides, that seems to be a secondary concern as it more buffs the team. And Enflame still requires the enemy to move into the fire trail to take damage.

[WindDemon21]

2 hours ago, Rudra said:

I have to say, I very much disagree with the OP. I even disagree with the OP's presentation of Enflame and Shifting Tides as references for why it should be done. To me, Shifting Tides is far more of a team buff than anything else. And Enflame doesn't directly debuff or harm the enemy, but rather lets you set a mobile creation point for a damage pseudo-pet. The cited powers for being changed to be able to target friend and foe however are purely enemy debuffs that directly hamper the affected target. So unless the author wants Darkest Night to drop that friendly Tanker's ToHit or that Snowstorm to drop that friendly Tanker's speed and recharge or any other debuff to also affect the party, I have to say no.

 

The point of debuffs are they are applied to what you want to hinder or otherwise render ineffective. Enflame and Shifting Tides don't do that. Yes, Enflame and Shifting Tides can inflict damage on enemies, but at least for Shifting Tides, that seems to be a secondary concern as it more buffs the team. And Enflame still requires the enemy to move into the fire trail to take damage.

Except you're completely wrong. This code already exists in game and works perfectly fine for that via sonic disruption. So there is no issue with the coding of how to do that.

[Rudra]

4 minutes ago, WindDemon21 said:

Except you're completely wrong. This code already exists in game and works perfectly fine for that via sonic disruption. So there is no issue with the coding of how to do that.

That is an odd response to give. I didn't say anything about the code.

[WindDemon21]

13 minutes ago, Rudra said:

That is an odd response to give. I didn't say anything about the code.

Sounded like you were saying that if they were placed on the tank, the tank would end up being debuffed by the debuff instead of the enemies, but that's not true because it already works with Disruption Aura without any issues. Add some -damage and it's just like enervating field. So no reason it can't work for those and others too and be flagged to work for both.

Edited Thursday at 03:15 AM by WindDemon21

[megaericzero]

9 minutes ago, Rudra said:

14 minutes ago, WindDemon21 said:

Except you're completely wrong. This code already exists in game and works perfectly fine for that via sonic disruption. So there is no issue with the coding of how to do that.

That is an odd response to give. I didn't say anything about the code.

If it's an immersion issue, allies also aren't debuffed by standing within those same debuffs' areas of effect. The same as not taking damage from friendly Fire Ball or Rain of Arrows; the same as not receiving negative effects when they're the anchor for location debuffs activated via /powexeclocation.

 

My guess is the counterpoint will be that powers like Darkest Night need to physically pour out of the anchor's body from inside, thereby they can't evade the debuff.

[Rudra]

4 minutes ago, WindDemon21 said:

Sounded like you were saying that if they were placed on the tank, the tank would end up being debuffed by the debuff instead of the enemies, but that's not true because it already works with Disruption Aura without any issues. Add some -damage and it's just like enervating field. So no reason it can't work for those and others too and be flagged to work for both.

No, my point is the intent is a power that exists to afflict the target should only be applied to the target(s) to be afflicted. It has nothing to do with the code. And if you want to make comparisons between Darkest Night, Snow Storm, et al versus Disruption Field? I would much rather retain the 25 feet radius of the debuff than see it nerfed to Disruption Field's 15 feet radius just to be able to throw it on an ally.

 

3 minutes ago, megaericzero said:

If it's an immersion issue, allies also aren't debuffed by standing within those same debuffs' areas of effect. The same as not taking damage from friendly Fire Ball or Rain of Arrows; the same as not receiving negative effects when they're the anchor for location debuffs activated via /powexeclocation.

 

My guess is the counterpoint will be that powers like Darkest Night need to physically pour out of the anchor's body from inside, thereby they can't evade the debuff.

It isn't even an immersion thing. It is an intent thing to me. See response in this post above.

[WindDemon21]

9 hours ago, Rudra said:

No, my point is the intent is a power that exists to afflict the target should only be applied to the target(s) to be afflicted. It has nothing to do with the code. And if you want to make comparisons between Darkest Night, Snow Storm, et al versus Disruption Field? I would much rather retain the 25 feet radius of the debuff than see it nerfed to Disruption Field's 15 feet radius just to be able to throw it on an ally.

Nobody said anything about the radii being nerfed. I actually said they should all be increased to 25ft. As to your intent, then you can't really explain sonic Disruption then either, and that works just fine as it is. It's just a QOL fix, it doesnt change how the power affects the targets, just where the toggle is placed.There doesn't need to be much more thought into it beyond that.

Edited Thursday at 01:21 PM by WindDemon21
typo

[Rudra]

3 hours ago, WindDemon21 said:

Nobody said anything about the radii being nerfed. I actually said they should all be increased to 25ft. As to your intent, then you can't really explain sonic Disruption then either, and that works just fine as it is.

Sonic's Disruption Field has the advantage of being placed on an ally so the debuff is a constant aura you need not fear being disabled because the team prioritizes your anchor or the anchor runs away. It pays for that with a 15 feet radius effect. There is your explanation and why I am certain existing debuffs that gain the ability to be applied to allies would also be nerfed to a 15 feet radius.

 

Edited Thursday at 04:52 PM by Rudra
Edited for clarity.

[WindDemon21]

2 minutes ago, Rudra said:

Sonic's Disruption Field has the advantage of being placed on an ally so the debuff is a constant aura you need not fear being disabled because the team prioritizes your anchor or the anchor runs away. It pays for that with a 15 feet radius effect. There is your explanation and why I am certain existing debuffs that gain the ability to be applied to allies would also be nerfed to a 15 feet radius.

 

You say advantage. And while yes it is, that's the entire purpose, but it's still a QOL change. That radius isn't 15 ft because of it being placeable on an ally, it's 15ft, well because the devs originally just decided that, but if anything because of what it does. Look at rad debuffs, while I'll argue they should be wider for sure, they are also only 15ft as well, but are currently placeable on enemies only at the moment.

 

Bottom line, it's still a QOL issue for the most part. There is no reason this can't be done, and it shouldn't have to have them nerfed in any way just for that. If YOU think they do, well that's weird, really weird, but that doesn't mean they HAVE to be by any means. They are entirely capable to be workable on both without being adjusted in any way.

 

Same thing goes for increasing their radius to 25ft, but that would be another discussion/thread.

[Rudra]

1 hour ago, WindDemon21 said:

You say advantage. And while yes it is, that's the entire purpose, but it's still a QOL change. That radius isn't 15 ft because of it being placeable on an ally, it's 15ft, well because the devs originally just decided that, but if anything because of what it does. Look at rad debuffs, while I'll argue they should be wider for sure, they are also only 15ft as well, but are currently placeable on enemies only at the moment.

You want to compare Radiation Emission? Okay.

 

Radiation Infection: -18.75% target defense and -18.75% target ToHit,  0.52 END/sec,  8 second recharge, 15 feet radius, 1.5 second cast

Enervating Field: -22.5% target resistance, -15% target damage, 0.65 END/sec, 8 second recharge, 15 feet radius, 1.5 second cast

Darkest Night: -22.5% target damage and -11.25% target ToHit, 0.65 END/sec, 10 second recharge, 25 feet radius, 3.17 second cast

Edit: Snow Storm: -150% target move, -160% target fly, -50% target recharge, 0.65 END/sec, 10 second recharge, 25 feet radius, 2.03 second cast

 

Looks to me like Radiation Infection gets a smaller radius for being cheaper to use, faster to use, and available sooner to use while also granting net more debuffs. Enervating Field gets more net debuffs. is faster to use, and is available sooner to use. Looks fair to me.

 

Edited Thursday at 06:21 PM by Rudra
Edited to change "Emission" to "Infection". And again to correct decimal location and remove double END cost post.

[WindDemon21]

56 minutes ago, Rudra said:

You want to compare Radiation Emission? Okay.

 

Radiation Infection: -18.75% target defense and -18.75% target ToHit,  0.52 END/sec,  8 second recharge, 15 feet radius, 1.5 second cast

Enervating Field: -22.5% target resistance, -15% target damage, 0.65 END/sec, 8 second recharge, 15 feet radius, 1.5 second cast

Darkest Night: -22.5% target damage and -11.25% target ToHit, 06.5 END/sec, 0.65 END/sec, 10 second recharge, 25 feet radius, 3.17 second cast

Edit: Snow Storm: -150% target move, -160% target fly, -50% target recharge, 0.65 END/sec, 10 second recharge, 25 feet radius, 2.03 second cast

 

Looks to me like Radiation Infection gets a smaller radius for being cheaper to use, faster to use, and available sooner to use while also granting net more debuffs. Enervating Field gets more net debuffs. is faster to use, and is available sooner to use. Looks fair to me.

 

As I said that would be a other thread. Determinations about radii if the debuff value would go down it's possible/likely which is why I said it would be a other thread. This one is specifically just to have them be placeable on both for all debuff toggles. This was never about everything you just said.

 

And also, the rad debuffs are not balanced by being faster to use (nor really cheaper either, .52/s is a big cost and is factored because there are two of them). You forget they were made when the cast times were much longer before and then were turned down. For some odd reasons as well, we were strictly told that cast times do not factor into the balance of a power.

 

So again, this is only about placing debuff toggles on both enemies and allies, to which no, they would not have to be nerfed in order to do so. To think they would have to be for what is a QoL thing is just weird and wrong.

Edited Thursday at 06:17 PM by WindDemon21

[Rudra]

6 minutes ago, WindDemon21 said:

As I said that would be a other thread. Determinations about radii if the debuff value would go down it's possible/likely which is why I said it would be a other thread. This one is specifically just to have them be placeable on both for all debuff toggles. This was never about everything you just said.

 

And also, the rad debuffs are not balanced by being faster to use (nor really cheaper either, .52/s is a big cost and is factored because there are two of them). You forget they were made when the cast times were much longer before and then were turned down. For some odd reasons as well, we were strictly told that cast times do not factor into the balance of a power.

 

So again, this is only about placing debuff toggles on both enemies and allies, to which no, they would not have to be nerfed in order to do so. To think they would have to be for what is a QoL thing is just weird and wrong.

Except they are all interconnected. And the only reason to separate them is to have a case for making powers stronger with no drawback. Like this thread is asking for.

[WindDemon21]

7 minutes ago, Rudra said:

Except they are all interconnected. And the only reason to separate them is to have a case for making powers stronger with no drawback. Like this thread is asking for.

They're not stronger though. They are just being changed what targets they can be placed on, ie QOL

[megaericzero]

1 minute ago, WindDemon21 said:

They're not stronger though. They are just being changed what targets they can be placed on, ie QOL

The change would have an impact on combat. Being able to anchor it to an ally means not having to re-anchor it every mob as long as you keep your endurance up, and your ally can reposition as requested.

 

I don't personally think they'd need nerfing but, given the track record on power changes, it seems safe to assume the devs consider the current status quo precisely balanced and any improvement to efficacy or efficiency - no matter how minor - would be met with a trade-off on some other aspect.

[Super Atom]

You're making me agree with Rudra and that's offensive.

 

Being able to just leave my rad debuffs on the tank and focus exclusively on everything else would be a huge buff for me, which means they'd never make this change without compromises and I'm unwilling to have my rad debuffs nerfed for it.

 

Now. If you made it so they were weaker if placed on friendlies or time limited or something to simulate enemy death, sure.

Edited Thursday at 06:34 PM by Super Atom

[Rudra]

3 minutes ago, WindDemon21 said:

They're not stronger though. They are just being changed what targets they can be placed on, ie QOL

As @megaericzero beat me to, being able to place your enemy debuffs on a target that will not only not try to kill you but also will survive to keep debuffing more enemies as you go makes it very much stronger. The compensation for which is the reduced radius. Your ally can run off out of range of the power and cause it to drop? Oh no. You're talking about putting it on a Tanker. Who the rest of the team will most likely be following to obliterate whatever the Tanker ran to. So the debuff doesn't drop. As opposed to an enemy that gets wiped out before the team moves on.