page 3 [FOCUSED FEEDBACK] Mastermind Archetype Adjustments

[tidge]

5 hours ago, OldPenn said:

 

With this specific statement in mind could you please evaluate the time it takes to select a henchmen so that it can be buffed.  It's fairly common for me to summon pets that get defeated immediately before I can even select them and buff them. 

 

@Maelwys explained the work-around.

 

There is another inherent issue closely related to this: you cannot drop an inspiration on a henchmen that is in the middle of an unresolved animation... and the client-server ping can make it practically impossible to buff a henchmen this way (because the MM also has to be 'idling'). It is easiest seen on my T3 Assault Bot (when it is in combat), but I've seen this with Lore pets and other pet classes too.

 

Team inspirations don't do an animation check, so this is one of those things I think could get fixed, but 'spaghetti code' is certainly going to stop it.

 

The server-client resolution can result in henchmen being close enough to a MM to benefit from ____, but the server hasn't acknowledged this yet. This can also effect how bodyguard mode works!

 

These types of issues are what annoy me most, and I am very tolerant of the sorts of issues other players commonly mention. I don't really expect that these things can be fixed (at some level, they are like race conditions) but since they cannot be fixed, I wish that the dev team was more sympathetic when it comes to abstractly applying nerfs, or limiting buffs. How hard I wish this is directly proportional to how much I wish that other players would recognize that some MM issues may be effectively too difficult to address.

[Grim Lynn]

I wonder if there's a way to, when you're summoning pets, for the same check that determines whether you're summoning the whole tier or just one or two of them to also determine whether the current pets have already been buffed. And, if so, to auto-apply the buff(s) to the incoming minion? Wouldn't help the T3, but hopefully that one is dying less anyway.

 

I assume this wouldn't be a trivial change even if it was dev-approved, but I thought it was an idea worth floating.

[tidge]

Pets/henchmen have a LOT of peculiar effects. I'm sure this is still the case, but it has been a few years: the equivalent "T1/T2" spiders for a Crabbermind all expire at the same time of the oldest one... even if new ones have been summoned to fill gaps in the crew. This isn't how MM henchmen work, how Kheldian pets work, or how Controller pets work.... and those don't all work the same either.

 

I only mention this because "things be complicated".

 

[Dispari]

5 hours ago, ScarySai said:

The interface change is confusing to me, because interface already has a max stack limit that a non-mm with fast enough attacks can hit.

 

Why nerf mms specifically on this one? You've provided reasoning in the past, but it never held up when scrutinized by the actual testers.

Agreed! If the issue is that the MM gets to attain max stacks easier than regular people, why not just make it so the chance of proccing for pets is reduced by 2/3 or something?

[gameboy1234]

On 11/20/2025 at 1:34 PM, tidge said:

There is another inherent issue closely related to this: you cannot drop an inspiration on a henchmen that is in the middle of an unresolved animation... and the client-server ping can make it practically impossible to buff a henchmen this way (because the MM also has to be 'idling'). It is easiest seen on my T3 Assault Bot (when it is in combat), but I've seen this with Lore pets and other pet classes too.

 

Making all inspirations work like team inspirations on Henchmen would fix this!  Seriously I think it's a good idea.  Using the 40% modifier I think would help keep things in check.  Or maybe some divisor based on the number of pets you have out.  But I've noticed for a long time now that Henchmen just won't accept an Inspiration while in combat, it's really annoying, and used to work on live.

 

I do understand the "spaghetti code" issue, but also fixing stuff that's not working should be a bit of a priority.

 

 

Edited 15 hours ago by gameboy1234

[tidge]

1 hour ago, gameboy1234 said:

 But I've noticed for a long time now that Henchmen just won't accept an Inspiration while in combat, it's really annoying, and used to work on live.

 

In addition to the "what is the henchmen doing?", the maximum range between a MM and a henchmen (for dropping inspirations on them) is not particularly great... this is also true of team inspirations. Single inspirations still work, it just that there are several things working against them. HC has tweaked the in-combat henchmen AI, so it is possible that the henchmen are now simply (on average) farther away from the MM than in previous eras.

 

These are the sorts of things *I* (points to self) worry about when considering MM+henchmen performance... the hundreds of little things that other ATs never even have to think about to boost their performance. If other ATs had to worry about "scaling base ToHit rates" but still didn't have to worry about the things MMs deal with, there would be riots.

[Maelwys]

45 minutes ago, tidge said:

If other ATs had to worry about "scaling base ToHit rates" but still didn't have to worry about the things MMs deal with, there would be riots.

[CaffieneNirvana]

Also, quick, dumb little question 'ere... Will we need to rename any pets like we did for the Controller revamp?

 

I'm not complaining, I just wanna know if I should scramble to go write ALL my babies' names down now while I still can. XD

[Captain Powerhouse]

1 hour ago, CaffieneNirvana said:

Also, quick, dumb little question 'ere... Will we need to rename any pets like we did for the Controller revamp?

 

I don't think you will have to (but not sure how much information the server saves to determine that so can't confirm it won't happen either).

[Neiska]

They say a picture is worth 1000 words. I feel this aptly sum's up my feelings about these changes. 

 

[ScarySai]

On 11/21/2025 at 6:26 AM, gameboy1234 said:

 

Making all inspirations work like team inspirations on Henchmen would fix this!  Seriously I think it's a good idea.  Using the 40% modifier I think would help keep things in check.  Or maybe some divisor based on the number of pets you have out.  But I've noticed for a long time now that Henchmen just won't accept an Inspiration while in combat, it's really annoying, and used to work on live.

 

I do understand the "spaghetti code" issue, but also fixing stuff that's not working should be a bit of a priority.

 

 

 

This is a good idea, not sure they even can, though.

 

 

Aside from that, think the even con "nerf" still needs to be dialed down. It's unnecessary. Not every buff requires counterbalance.

Edited 13 hours ago by ScarySai

[bAss_ackwards]

10 minutes ago, ScarySai said:

 

This is a good idea, not sure they even can, though.

 

 

Aside from that, think the even con "nerf" still needs to be dialed down. It's unnecessary. Not every buff requires counterbalance.

 

Maybe make Supremacy also include a share of what inspirations you have, instead of making a copy of the inspiration on the minions.

[ivanhedgehog]

14 minutes ago, ScarySai said:

 

This is a good idea, not sure they even can, though.

 

 

Aside from that, think the even con "nerf" still needs to be dialed down. It's unnecessary. Not every buff requires counterbalance.

nerfing the base experience to buff harder modes is a bad idea. Balancing an entire AT around set bonuses is even worse. we were told that classes were balanced using so's. now that seems to have changed.

[bAss_ackwards]

3 hours ago, Neiska said:

They say a picture is worth 1000 words. I feel this aptly sum's up my feelings about these changes. 

 

 

Do you have any particular notes on why you feel this way about the MM changes?

[Chrome]

I am not sure what the other guy was talking about but these changes seem  like they are being made to keep MMs "AS THEY ARE" but to keep them viable in the additional difficulty levels.  The changes you have done have not accomplished this or rather have made them worse in many other areas of the game.  the issues that MMs have in most content is directly related to pets being able to effectively hit there targets while maintaining some amount of survival.  I may not be the average MM player per se, but there are a few things that are going on that many others are talking about, including global procs (3%def, 7.5% hp, etc.) not being included in the enhancement changes, reducing over all damage of the pets, and nerfing capabilities that they are currently able to do(solo GM)  and many other little things that make up for the fact that MMs currently take x% more micro management for very little reward.  So the end result is that MMs are actually WORSE than current live in moderate content, and are in the new higher difficulties actually are "AS THEY ARE NOW" which isnt great.  

 

Making changes to MMs is something any MM player has wanted, and making them more viable in current group content +4*8 TF/radio/ contact missions is what really needed to happen.  I feel that simply allowing ALL MM pets to be at level of caster, all incarnate level shifts to apply to the pets without nerfs at all, and remove the enhancement interactions that you have added. is the place to start.  let us see how this plays and if it actually is to OP during that content.  pylon tests and what not ARE NOT VIABLE TESTING for the MM to show its effectiveness.  

 

IF it turns out that the very best players and builds can out shine a Corruptor in damage with a same level of build and skill then GOOD!  No other AT has to manage and control there weapons that an MM has to and a well played high skill character SHOULD have some benefit to playing it.  if i can keep my pets alive and fighting what and where i want them to, and still support my team of 7 other players i should be rewarded for doing so.  If at the end of the day the changes are actually over the top and need to be toned down then gradually tone down the damage that MMs do.  If survivability is still not where it needs to be then try changes like increasing range of supremacy, increase pet HP or heck even MM HP to appropriate levels.  These changes that are currently on BETA seemed like you are trying to keep MMs at the STATUS QUO for the new difficulty but MMs arent good at the current stuff, comparatively  to other ATs, so when you are making these current changes to MMs it feels like you are overall making MMs worse and at the highest level of content they finally feel like now?  this is why the above guy probably feels like that.

 

This is an opportunity to make MMs solid in current content and scalable to newer content, be bold make MMs strong for once.

[Neiska]

2 hours ago, bAss_ackwards said:

 

Do you have any particular notes on why you feel this way about the MM changes?

 

I've mentioned it elsewhere, but I will summarize -

 

1. MM's are not the top performers, even only with specific builds are they even comparable to other ATs. Most builds/power combinations are actually sub-par. And yet despite the multiple changes over the years, MM's have remained there. These (as well as past) changes don't make MMs "better," except in certain situations or contexts, namely End-game activities when teaming. But for nearly every other activity such as soloing or leveling, MMs are actually worse. That's not an upgrade. That doesn't make MM's "better."

 

2. Some ATs get multiple shake-ups (specifically MMs and Tankers have gotten the most). While other ATs, even OP or the Top things that are Meta (Corruptors, Blasters, etc) aren't even looked at. Which tells me that some things that are OP the powers that be are fine with, but they feel obligated to nerf/laterally buff something that isn't even at the top? I mean, what exactly is the goal, here? To make MMs more desirable in the endgame? Okay, but if so why does that require them being nerfed?

 

3. Compared to when I started HC 5 years ago, going all the way up to today, the changes have made my times doing my own activities worse, not better. Either I can no longer solo the things that I once did, or I still can but it's much more cumbersome to do so. That isn't an upgrade by any metric people want to compare to.

 

4. These changes do not affect all Secondaries equally. The strong secondaries such as EA, Time, Dark, Marine, are not as affected as the weaker secondaries like Radiation or Poison. If we want to use soloing +4/8 as an example, only a few of the strongest primary and secondary pairings will perform, while the others will cap out earlier than that. And these updates will not suddenly make the poorer performing secondaries viable but certainly affects how well the strong ones can perform. To me this does not further build diversity or creativity, quite the opposite in fact.

 

I am hard pressed to think of another game where a class/character has given so many passes but has remained essentially in the same place compared to others. Despite all the changes, time, and attention MMs remain in the bottom 50%. Which makes me wonder what the point is. I am not asking or even expecting them to be suddenly OP, but right now other ATs can do far more with far less with half as much effort, and somehow MMs are the ones that need to be weaker? I cannot help but wonder what exactly is the logic or train of thought here?

 

When I first started, debuffs and building for survival was king if you wanted to solo the hardest difficulties. But as things changed, it seems that building for DPS and "just enough" survival is king, while using tools such as the team taking turns using barrier and clarion to make up for holes or gaps. This has made some secondaries moot entirely, such as Shield and FF with their built in DDP, or even status protection. And if that is the "meta" then why is the philosophy - "we are reducing damage because we are making things slightly more durable" even required? Taking just the HP reduction alone, split across all 6 pets impacts the MM quite a bit where bodyguard mode is concerned.

 

I guess I am just perplexed in the direction here. If the goal is to make MMs desirable for teams doing endgame activities, I don't think this will suddenly make them important where endgame team composition is concerned. But I am supposed to accept nerfs to my solo play and activities to make that possible. All while the top performing meta teams like 1 tanker/7 corruptors are absolutely thrashing the endgame, "this" is what needs rebalancing/reduced?

[Thezanman]

1 hour ago, Neiska said:

Taking just the HP reduction alone, split across all 6 pets impacts the MM quite a bit where bodyguard mode is concerned.

There is no HP reduction, it was reverted.

[Maelwys]

25 minutes ago, Thezanman said:

There is no HP reduction, it was reverted.

This.

To be fair though, the changes have been moving pretty fast (in fact the last few updates haven't even had proper patch notes yet!) so it's very understandable to miss stuff.

FWIW I've posted a quick color coded summary of how (AFAIK) the currently proposed changes for MMs on Open Beta actually compare to Live here:
("levelless" foes like GMs notwithstanding!)

 

[Arbegla]

3 hours ago, Neiska said:

 

I've mentioned it elsewhere, but I will summarize -

 

1. MM's are not the top performers, even only with specific builds are they even comparable to other ATs. Most builds/power combinations are actually sub-par. And yet despite the multiple changes over the years, MM's have remained there. These (as well as past) changes don't make MMs "better," except in certain situations or contexts, namely End-game activities when teaming. But for nearly every other activity such as soloing or leveling, MMs are actually worse. That's not an upgrade. That doesn't make MM's "better."

 

2. Some ATs get multiple shake-ups (specifically MMs and Tankers have gotten the most). While other ATs, even OP or the Top things that are Meta (Corruptors, Blasters, etc) aren't even looked at. Which tells me that some things that are OP the powers that be are fine with, but they feel obligated to nerf/laterally buff something that isn't even at the top? I mean, what exactly is the goal, here? To make MMs more desirable in the endgame? Okay, but if so why does that require them being nerfed?

 

3. Compared to when I started HC 5 years ago, going all the way up to today, the changes have made my times doing my own activities worse, not better. Either I can no longer solo the things that I once did, or I still can but it's much more cumbersome to do so. That isn't an upgrade by any metric people want to compare to.

 

4. These changes do not affect all Secondaries equally. The strong secondaries such as EA, Time, Dark, Marine, are not as affected as the weaker secondaries like Radiation or Poison. If we want to use soloing +4/8 as an example, only a few of the strongest primary and secondary pairings will perform, while the others will cap out earlier than that. And these updates will not suddenly make the poorer performing secondaries viable but certainly affects how well the strong ones can perform. To me this does not further build diversity or creativity, quite the opposite in fact.

 

I am hard pressed to think of another game where a class/character has given so many passes but has remained essentially in the same place compared to others. Despite all the changes, time, and attention MMs remain in the bottom 50%. Which makes me wonder what the point is. I am not asking or even expecting them to be suddenly OP, but right now other ATs can do far more with far less with half as much effort, and somehow MMs are the ones that need to be weaker? I cannot help but wonder what exactly is the logic or train of thought here?

 

When I first started, debuffs and building for survival was king if you wanted to solo the hardest difficulties. But as things changed, it seems that building for DPS and "just enough" survival is king, while using tools such as the team taking turns using barrier and clarion to make up for holes or gaps. This has made some secondaries moot entirely, such as Shield and FF with their built in DDP, or even status protection. And if that is the "meta" then why is the philosophy - "we are reducing damage because we are making things slightly more durable" even required? Taking just the HP reduction alone, split across all 6 pets impacts the MM quite a bit where bodyguard mode is concerned.

 

I guess I am just perplexed in the direction here. If the goal is to make MMs desirable for teams doing endgame activities, I don't think this will suddenly make them important where endgame team composition is concerned. But I am supposed to accept nerfs to my solo play and activities to make that possible. All while the top performing meta teams like 1 tanker/7 corruptors are absolutely thrashing the endgame, "this" is what needs rebalancing/reduced?

 

 

Based on your comment about the HP Nerf, I think you've only looked at older patch notes and have not actually played the changes on test. Most people who have actually played the changes have noticed a significant change for the positive, and others have ran the numbers to show that the overall measure of these changes are a buff, not a nerf. Even with the tohit scales being adjusted, the overall ACC you need to slot in pets to achieve max tohit is less than what it was before.

Edited 7 hours ago by Arbegla

[Neiska]

2 minutes ago, Arbegla said:

 

 

Based on your comment about the HP Nerf, I think you've only looked at older patch notes and have not actually played the changes on test. Most people who have actually played the changes have noticed a significant change for the positive, and others have ran the numbers to show that the overall measure of these changes are a buff, not a nerf. Even with the tohit scales being adjusted, the overall ACC you need to slot in pets to achieve max tohit

 

@Maelwys was correct, I missed the revision pet HPs is not something I regularly/frequently even look at. And you can't claim "most people" without, actually conducting a poll and such. Because the circles I run with are pretty much the opposite, most people I personally know, talk to, and play with, pretty much universally dislike it. But that doesn't mean most people who test do. And I think you missed my points -

 

1. MMs get several passes that make them better in some instances, worse in others. While other ATs that are regarded as best or meta get a pass. In some cases, for years.

2. This isn't a buff. It's a lateral demotion. If I had to guess, they want to make MMs "viable" for harder difficulties, but are afraid of making them OP outside of those increased difficulties.

3. I have found the stuff I used to do, is objectively worse or more difficult. Not from just this one patch, but as well as previous ones.

4. This change does not affect all primaries/secondaries equally. It makes the good ones even better and the bad ones worse, increasing the "gap" between them. Which is bad for build options and diversity. And things given what they are, at this point I have pretty low expectations of the weak secondaries getting actual buffs to make them better.

[Dispari]

As someone who sat through the closed beta experience, I would say, yes this doesn't put MMs in a "better" place than they are now. But we already know they're going to be doing more changes later. This is more like a pre-coat to get it set up so they can come back later and finish the job. A lot of effort and care has been taken to make sure they're not WORSE off, and a lot of the tweaks so far have just been making sure that's true. The points you make about not affecting all sets equally, it was a lot worse at one point, believe me.

This isn't to say the changes are all fine and dandy and I have no complaints. Just that I think we need to wait a while before weighing in with how we feel about the changes overall since they're far from done.

[tidge]

Some more testing, Beta v. Live

 

Heather Townshend's Dark Astoria Arc, at +3 (so net +0, given the Incarnate Shift. Defeat All. No Lore pets used.

 

M1: I had different maps. Beta 11 minutes, Live 9 minutes. I got killed on Beta, but I was answering someone in chat... so hard to take anything from this one

 

M2: Beta 9 mins, live 7 mins. Spawns were slightly moved but same total number.

 

The last two maps are always the same (modulo clicky placement) so those should give a few more data points.

[Neiska]

9 minutes ago, Dispari said:

As someone who sat through the closed beta experience, I would say, yes this doesn't put MMs in a "better" place than they are now. But we already know they're going to be doing more changes later. This is more like a pre-coat to get it set up so they can come back later and finish the job. A lot of effort and care has been taken to make sure they're not WORSE off, and a lot of the tweaks so far have just been making sure that's true. The points you make about not affecting all sets equally, it was a lot worse at one point, believe me.

This isn't to say the changes are all fine and dandy and I have no complaints. Just that I think we need to wait a while before weighing in with how we feel about the changes overall since they're far from done.

 

I understand this is a "warm-up." But given to the changes in the past 5 years, I have little faith that MMs will be actually made better. Most of their changes to MMs over the years I have disliked. The new sets are fun. Generally, dislike the primary shake-up they did 2ish years ago. (Robots in particular.) It hasn't "all" been bad. But I have low expectations that MMs will be made superior or "better" than they are currently, even less that they will nerf the things like ATS or powersets that are already OP. 

[ivanhedgehog]

5 hours ago, Arbegla said:

 

 

Based on your comment about the HP Nerf, I think you've only looked at older patch notes and have not actually played the changes on test. Most people who have actually played the changes have noticed a significant change for the positive, and others have ran the numbers to show that the overall measure of these changes are a buff, not a nerf. Even with the tohit scales being adjusted, the overall ACC you need to slot in pets to achieve max tohit is less than what it was before.

I played a leveling mm using so's. Not a lvl 50 io'd out with sets. They should use a temporary buff to help leveling that expires when you get your incarnate achiev.

[OldPenn]

There are so many ways to fix MicroManagers without redesigns that require respecs. But please don't go to any trouble to make them better at higher levels for me, I already won't play anything over +2 on an MM, so +5, +6 etc.... no thanks.🙂  (Seriously, thanks! but it's not for me.) That's what Blasters, Corrupters, etc., even Tankers are for. That's just not content for my MMs. Come to think of it, that'll be like getting slaughtered in the Labyrinth, so it's not for any of my characters.  Not everyone likes the same kind of challenge, I guess.  I'm a bit of a wimp, I like to go through the story and feel super. (But my main badger is an MM... so I'm either tremendously stupid or I really do like a challenge! ... ok, or both.)

 

When I build an MM I choose IOs for:

1. +recharge - I need to chain cast heals or my pathing/AI challenged pets with low hp die... and when they die, I either fall behind my team casting re-summons, re-buffs, repeating as needed, ...or I die. No matter how I look at this I get frustrated and I can't support both the team and my pets. This is the main reason I hate teaming with my MMs - but only when the team leader chooses a difficulty over yellows. I don't like playing MMs at any difficulty over +2. Will I play at x8? Sure sign me up! But you won't catch me happy in a +4x8 - that's just not content made for me unless there are 3-8 MMs on the team that know enough to stick together.
2. Pet non-set resist and defense IOs.
3. +Endurance mod/End. reduction - because I have a 25% endurance cost penalty that easier-to-play ATs don't have. (My pets don't need this, I do enhance all my pets for End. Reduc., Acc, and Dam.)
4. Most of the non-set "global" IOs for me (see above, and add +def and +res etc. since I typically have a little less than 2/3 the hp as a "glass cannon")

And these won't directly aid my henchmen at all (well other than the pet specific resist and defense IOs - their End. is already managable).

 

You'll notice I don't have a few stats on my list.

     Accuracy : I don't need it.  I do .55% damage for +25% endurance cost.  I'll let my pets do all the damage with few exceptions (Necro Spectres and self heal FTW!).

     Damage : See above, not worth taking, and I need to spam heals instead of attacks anyway.

 

Set bonuses helping the pets a little did sound pretty sweet when I first read it.  After I thought about it, I don't need it.  It would be nice to slot the ATOs on player attacks, since their enhancement stats could be used there.  It's not a bad thing, though, since we have +dam set bonuses that are essentially wasted now.  I wouldn't mind seeing +Healing take the place of the +Damage, though, since that would be used.

 

Here's a wishlist of what I can think of off the top of my head that I'd want before a change that requires a respec of all my MMs (in no particular order):

• I wish I could enhance my henchmen ToHit without increasing their perception. They see so far they run away from buffs and heals, and pull new groups before I'm ready for them to be pulled.  What I really wish is that I could set their perception range! With teammates using Tactics and VEAT Tactics my pets are running away from me all the time.
• I wish I could still buff my Ninjas and tell them NOT to EVER use caltrops. The enemy pathing AI is absolutely stupid when caltrops is involved, and ruins Ninjas for me. I'd much rather give up an entire attack than give them one that they can never use properly, except by rare accident.
• I wish henchmen would stay where I tell them to stay (and disregard melee attacks that require movement to execute), and stay where I tell them to GoTo. When they run to my ordered spot, touch a toe to it, and then run out range of heals/buffs they frustrate me.
• I wish I could define a leash for my pets. Then maybe I could use Bodyguard mode. I currently don't. They are almost always on Aggressive or Passive.  I can't wait for the game that uses the new "AI" that can be taught standing orders (top priority: never get farther than 60 ft. from me, if you do then cancel and come back) - but that's a wish for another game.
• I wish the pet defense and resist special IOs used the same range as Supremacy, if for no other reason than consistency.
• I wish MM ATOs weren't all geared for 6 slotted +142% damage that not only can't be used (except in part), it doesn't apply to the henchmen (well, a little bit of it will now IF they're not already at damage cap, which mine try to be). I guess I should be grateful that I don't feel like I should 6 slot them, as 2 slotting Superior Mark of Supremacy in 3 pets and 4 slotting Superior Command of the MicroManager in one of the pets (both for the +recharge%) allows the extra slots to get end. redux, acc, and dam to acceptable enhancement.
• I wish as an MM I could compete with the damage dealt by damage ATs, like Corrupter and Blaster. I was helping lower folk street sweep for accolade defeat badges when I realized I can do it sooo much faster on my Blaster and Corrupters.  I guess since with 6 of them plus me I thought that a 50 would clear level 9-11 mobs faster, but it turned out the MM was slower.  I'm not asking to be the best DPS class, but I'd like to be better than I am now when I think of how much more work goes into playing MM over the high DPS ATs (not including melee types since melee has it's own demons to deal with). 

 Adding "don't worry, this isn't the end, we're planning on doing so much more next year" makes me want to put all my MMs on the shelf, because I hate working in Mids when I could be playing.  But even so, I can't play characters that need to be respec'd. I'm not going to bother respecing for a 'part one'. Don't get me wrong, the way this game is designed and the way my brain "works" mean I honestly believe I couldn't stand to play this game without Mids.  It's entirely too deep and complicated for what little brain I have left.  I shudder to think how much work those people have to do to update Mids for an update that shouldn't change gameplay very much. I know you can't think that way, and I'm not asking you to.  I have to since I can't play until I've respec'd, and I can't respec until the changes go live and Mids updates.

 

With all that said, I do want to sincerely thank you for your work, work ethic, and ambition.  What I think you're trying to do is absolutely Super!  Even when I don't have love for 'line 22 of the patch notes' (or whatever) doesn't mean I don't have love for you!  In the end keep on keepin' on, I have many other characters I like to play, too!