What's your plan when Page 3 goes Live?

[Xandyr]

With the changes to MMs on Beta, I think MMs are on the right path (now if we could only get Angel Summoning!). What's your plans when Page 3 goes Live?

  I'm looking forward to respeccing my Thugs/Empathy for sure. May even finally dust off one of my Beasts and Demons as well.

[kelika2]

Because Powerhouse said this is just a part of mastermind changes coming I wont do much.  I dont wanna rethink, rework and retest 60ish masterminds to only redo it in a few months again.  And early on I found out that mastermind secondaries are not the best for survival/defense slotting.  Slotting for melee/smash/lethal defense is a nightmare with current IO sets and whats available for a mastermind.  and the 15% aoe defense mastermind IO that only really leaves ranged defense.   but /dark, /cold, /ff are generally maxed/high anyways

 

and other oddities like necromancy.  lethal/smash, energy/neg energy, fire/cold resists.  if i slot for lethal resist they will be over resist for smashing damage and only feels like im just slotting for one thing and not really worth it in my mind.

 

new and currently leveling masterminds will be tested and played around with tho

[Maelwys]

The main thing I'm changing is ensuring that there is at least one copy of the 3x Gladiator's Armor KB Protection set bonus in each of my builds. Because Henchmen gaining passive KB protection is a big thing.

Many of my MMs had multiple copies of the Blessing of the Zephyr KB Protection IO, but as that's not a true Set Bonus it's not inheriting to henchmen and whilst the Devs have mentioned potentially reworking global IO effects, that has wider repercussions and there's currently no indication that it'll happen any time soon.

 

On a few of my builds I'm also tweaking accuracy upwards, in order to try to get the T3 and T2 henchmen at the point where they're capping their hit rate vs +4 foes with minimal tradeoffs. But getting the T1 henchmen to that point is currently a losing battle (you need Supremacy, Tactics, ED capped accuracy in the pet PLUS at least +50 Global Accuracy from set bonuses) so I'm holding out for a buff (which currently there's no firm confirmation on, but I know that multiple Devs are very aware of the issue!)

 

I'm definitely going to have to revisit ATO slotting in the future whenever they decide exactly what's happening there. And I wouldn't be surprised if the set bonus inheritance figure gets tweaked again (e.g. from 40% to 50%) post-Christmas once the Devs can face adjusting the figure on endless powers again. Again though, these are suspicions rather than anything confirmed.

 

There are lots of changes in the short-term pipeline (and not just for MMs!) including plenty of stuff which the Devs have only hinted at and are keeping firmly under wraps, even from those on Closed Beta. So the biggest advice I can give is to keep a few respecs available.

[tidge]

For my Robotics/Traps MM (which I use daily): I will probably only respec to change the order of certain powers... I have Tough and Weave that I almost never toggle on so I may as well move those to 47 and 49.

 

My 3-bot build already includes more set bonuses than many others typically suggest... I don't rely on %damage in any of the MM attacks.... so I've got a number of set bonuses that other players may not have. I chose the set bonuses to improve the MM, so those bonuses generally transfer well to the henchmen (even at 40%).

 

Each tier of henchmen is slotted somewhere north of +60% Accuracy, and I run Tactics... so the ToHit nerfs hit my full-kit less hard than other players may experience. My testing on Beta in (mostly) even-level content showed that content takes me roughly 20% (max) longer to complete, even if I don't lose henchmen. If the T1/T2 HP nerf continues to be eliminated I am less worried about survivability. I've done some testing on Live where I play typical content with only two of the three T1s, and my completion times are on the order of 20% longer... which I'm not sure is the intention of the Beta changes, but it does appear to be the outcome.

 

I can't see that there is much I can do with my slotting to improve the performance of that MM: I considered adding Assault (for more henchmen damage) but I don't really have a power I am comfortable swapping out, especially with the ToHit penalties. If the ToHit nerf is reconsidered (and I don't think it will be, because it is a mathematical argument with limited consideration) I'd swap out Tactics for Assault.

 

The MM ATO slotting changes have no effect on this build; Maintenance Drone is 6xPreventive Maintenance and thus it will ever be. If I ever franken-slot it I wouldn't be putting MM ATO pieces in it.

 

There is a slight chance that opt for slotting a different set in one of my MM attacks. I don't have any +Accuracy bonuses from purples sets so if I end up believing that the henchmen need a little more +Accuracy, I might make such a change.

[Neiska]

Continue to exploit the loopholes they missed and keep them to myself.

[tidge]

3 minutes ago, Neiska said:

Continue to exploit the loopholes they missed and keep them to myself.

 

Honestly, this is the best strategy. 

 

My personal assessment of the fraction of things folks complain about (for MMs) are 80% addressable by choices (power selection, slotting, playstyles),, 19% by adjusting expectations, with 1% (or less) in the category of something that absolutely effects performance, but at a near-trivial level.

 

I don't think anyone cares if my level 50 MM takes 20% longer to finished a x8 mission on Beta, because the changes are motivated by a hypothetical concern about MM players suffering in +3 (or higher) content. MM's already can play Incarnate content at +3 with no henchmen level shift, so it is a legitimate head-scratcher why eliminating the level shift in non-Incarnate content was seen requiring henchmen nerfs.

 

The set bonuses for henchs... that's nice, but it feels like being offered a kiss on the cheek after a slap to the face. At least offer a little bit of tongue!

[Neiska]

1 minute ago, tidge said:

The set bonuses for henchs... that's nice, but it feels like being offered a kiss on the cheek after a slap to the face. At least offer a little bit of tongue!

 

So far my take is - "Last big MM update we didn't break them enough, so we have made MMs 40% more convoluted, 20% more difficult to level, but to compensate we made them 10% better at this very small and niche part of the game that the majority of players don't do."

 

Nerf pet damage in order to give them the level shift. Reduced hit points. Seems to me they want to prop up secondaries that don't buff/heal the pets. Those of us who like to build/play defensively with the tankiest pets and mm possible to solo awesome things, this feels like a big middle finger. And at this point I have absolutely no faith in them making MMs "better," because from where I sit essentially the last 2 years of MM changes have made them weaker.

 

TLDR - "The Nerfs shall continue until you play the way we want with the power combinations we want. Want to do something else or do a different activity? F you. Double nerf for you in particular."

[Uun]

I'm not planning any respecs. I will make slotting changes to the upgrade powers now that they accept something other than endred and recharge. There are a few other minor changes required to powers that no longer accept the slotting I have. 

[tidge]

I'm not as sour on the proposed changes, and I'm sensitive that TPTB are focusing on some balance areas... but my general sense is that the parts of the game that are being considered exhibiting tunnel vision. In particular, there are some rationales tossed about "but better for MMs below level 22, and btw can we get some pylon tests or +5 content tests?" I'm not surprised about the tunnel vision, we had a crazy amount of rethink/rejiggering of Tanks because solo 50+ Tankers could finish some x8 content on average ~10 seconds faster than a Brute could finish. Heaven help us if a MM posted times close to those!

 

A simple example (hypothetical on my part)...

 

Thesis: Eliminate the level shift for (multiple) henchmen

Outcomes: Henchmen are not as easily hit by the level foes being faced by the MM, and they no longer have -ToHit adjustments due to level shift

 

Simple adjustment 1: reduce henchmen HP.

Unintended consequence 1: This was recognized as being somewhat out of alignment with how players actually USE henchmen, which is primarily in Bodyguard mode.

 

Simple adjustment 2: reduce henchmen base ToHit and damage

Unintended Consequence 2: Against level-less it is a big loss, against up to +3, toHit is something of a wash, but when the henches do hit they do less.... so obvious performance hit.

 

I understand... TPTB don't want MMs cakewalking through certain content, even if it is well recognized that some other ATs can do exactly that.

 

Writing only for myself: despite playing a MM every day, I don't think I'll ever roll up another MM. Most of it has to do with a general lack of variety when it comes to character theme. How many more Master/Mistress/Boss of _____ does the game need? When the Clowns are released... sure that would be funny, but I'd still have to play it, and MMs can be tedious to play, and not because of the "level shift". There is a small part of my mind  that looks at new secondaries and wonders how OP I could make them... but again, I'd have to PLAY them and having/measuring OP characters doesn't really appeal to me.

 

 

 

 

[TooManyButtons]

I probably won't be putting any ATOs in powers that aren't either attacks or pets, the slots just aren't there for me. If they made it so that all power sets had one power that could potentially serve as a mule for pet power passives, I'd be much more positive, but as it is some power sets continue to be harder to build.

[Maelwys]

FWIW, the current state of play of MMs on Open Beta; compared to Live is: 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Accuracy/ToHit:

                    Additional +Acc needed in each pet tier to achieve capped (95%) Hit Rates

vs +0 Mob:	(LIVE)	(TEST)			vs +0 Mob:	(LIVE)	(TEST)
(no Supremacy)	26.67%	26.67%	(T3)		(Supremacy)	11.76%	11.76%
	46.15%	41.79%	(T2)			26.67%	23.38%
	69.64%	63.79%	(T1)			43.94%	39.71%
vs +1 Mob:					vs +1 Mob:
(no Supremacy)	46.15%	46.15%	(T3)		(Supremacy)	26.67%	26.67%
	69.64%	66.67%	(T2)			43.94%	41.79%
	97.92%	97.92%	(T1)			63.79%	63.79%
vs +2 Mob:					vs +2 Mob:
(no Supremacy)	69.64%	69.64%	(T3)		(Supremacy)	43.94%	43.94%
	97.92%	97.92%	(T2)			63.79%	63.79%
	143.59%	143.59%	(T1)			93.88%	93.88%
vs +3 Mob:					vs +3 Mob:
(no Supremacy)	97.92%	97.92%	(T3)		(Supremacy)	63.79%	63.79%
	143.59%	137.50%	(T2)			93.88%	90.00%
	216.67%	206.45%	(T1)			137.50%	131.71%
vs +4 Mob:					vs +4 Mob:
(no Supremacy)	143.59%	143.59%	(T3)		(Supremacy)	93.88%	93.88%
	216.67%	206.45%	(T2)			137.50%	131.71%
	375.00%	331.82%	(T1)			216.67%	196.88%
vs +5 Mob:					vs +5 Mob:
(no Supremacy)	216.67%	216.67%	(T3)		(Supremacy)	137.50%	137.50%
	375.00%	331.82%	(T2)			216.67%	196.88%
	1087.50%	630.77%	(T1)			427.78%	313.04%

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Damage Output: 

	T1 (Live)	T2 (Live)	T3 (Live)	T1 (Test)	T2 (Test)	T3 (Test)	Diff (T1)	Diff (T2)	Diff (T3)	Adjusted Diff
+0	0.8	0.9	1	0.6	0.81	1	-25%	-10%	0%	-17.65%
+1	0.65	0.8	0.9	0.5395	0.728	0.9	-17%	-9%	0%	-11.96%
+2	0.48	0.65	0.8	0.48	0.65	0.8	0%	0%	0%	0.00%
+3	0.3	0.48	0.65	0.39	0.528	0.65	30%	10%	0%	12.73%
+4	0.15	0.3	0.48	0.288	0.39	0.48	92%	30%	0%	27.97%
+5	0.08	0.15	0.3	0.18	0.243	0.3	125%	62%	0%	36.65%

(Note: "Adjusted difference" assumes each henchmen dealt identical damage before purple patch. Think: "Realistically what's my worst case scenario here?")

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Damage Taken:

	Diff (T1)	Diff (T2)	Diff (T3)	Adjusted Diff
+0	-18.03%	-9.91%	0.00%	-14.67%
+1	-16.54%	-9.02%	0.00%	-13.21%
+2	-15.28%	-8.27%	0.00%	-12.02%
+3	-14.19%	-7.64%	0.00%	-11.03%
+4	-13.25%	-7.10%	0.00%	-10.19%
+5	-12.43%	-6.63%	0.00%	-9.46%

(Note: "Adjusted difference" here ignores the fact that even-level T1/T2 henchmen will get hit less often. So once again, it'll be better than this in practice!)

 

 

Therefore Accuracy has improved across the board (although the required enhancement in the T1 henchmen is still well beyond what is feasible at +3 and above!)

However Damage Output is more complicated: +2 is the "break-even" spot; with slightly less damage vs +1 mobs; and slightly more damage vs +3 mobs.

Damage Taken has however improved across the board (taking much less damage than before vs +0s, and still a decent chunk less than before vs +5s)

 

The picture might be bleakest if you're fighting +0 mobs; but even there pets are (at worst!) dealing ~18% less damage whilst being (at worst!) ~15% more survivable.
Given that set bonuses (especially KB protection!) are inheriting to pets too, IMO it's actually a net positive... at least until you consider "levelless" foes like GMs.

The devs have stated that this patch is about establishing a new "even-level-pets baseline" for Masterminds via minimal nerfs/buffs rather than about addressing/resolving Mastermind performance and/or Quality-of-Life issues (such as T1/T2 Hit Rate issues and pet mobility). And the above numbers seem to back that up.

It might help to think of this round of changes as effectively just "setting the scene"... and to expect bigger performance and QOL tweaks in other follow-up patches. 


(Hokes around for some publicly-accessible quotes...)

"major buffs beyond these are likely to come in a follow-up Panel release."

"Just you wait till you see the panel 2 content... you going to lose it. Not sure if out of hate or happiness, maybe both, but the change count alone is likely to be intimidating, and you might understand why we didn't toss everything out at once."

 

"Panel 2 is after the holidays."

🙊 🤐 ⏲️
 

Edited 8 hours ago by Maelwys

[tidge]

6 hours ago, TooManyButtons said:

I probably won't be putting any ATOs in powers that aren't either attacks or pets, the slots just aren't there for me. If they made it so that all power sets had one power that could potentially serve as a mule for pet power passives, I'd be much more positive, but as it is some power sets continue to be harder to build.

 

About ^this^....

 

Because that first upgrade power comes at level 6, and two of the three tiers of henchmen come after level 6, I long ago proposed:

 

1) Alter the core powers of the T1, T2, T3 summons to include the effects of the Level 6 power. City of Data pretty much shows how they are coded.... just drop the "grant" powers and bake in the powers granted.

• I can't imagine anyone playing with all three tiers NOT taking that power.
• The difference between Level 1 and Level 6 is so miniscule that no one should worry about "game balance" by boosting the T1 "for free"
• Applying the first upgrade is about as literal a "going through the motions" power as can be imagined.

2) Replace the level 6 upgrade with a thematic (for primary) summonable, recharge-intensive pet (not a henchman) that

• can accept those globals that otherwise restrict henchmen & pet slotting options
• provides a slight buff (while alive, can vary by primary) to the henchmen... think +ToHit, +Absorb, whatever...

This way, the power sort-of does what it always was intended to do... but can also free up slots in the henchmen (or similar powers, like Gang War) so that we have more options for Henchmen slotting.

 

I think it is completely reasonable to require the second upgrade, since there is a big difference in game balance between level 6 and level 26.

 

However: I want to note that some of the rationale presented for the Beta ultimate ToHit nerf kicking in at level 22 is because "the game is hard for MMs below level 22 but not hard for MMs after that"... despite the HUGE amount of experience required to get from level 22 to 50 compared to the XP to get from 1 to 22.

[Maelwys]

8 minutes ago, tidge said:

the Beta ultimate ToHit nerf kicking in at level 22

  

On 11/10/2025 at 10:19 PM, The Curator said:

• Supremacy now grants a bonus to lower level T1 and T2 henchmen regardless of distance.
  • T1 between lvl 1 and 5: +17 ToHit
  • T1 between lvl 6 and 17: +9 ToHit
  • T2 between lvl 1 and 23: +8 ToHit

 

BaseHitRates for T3/T2/T1:

+0	0.75	0.67	0.58
+1	0.65	0.57	0.48
+2	0.56	0.48	0.39
+3	0.48	0.4	0.31
+4	0.39	0.31	0.22
+5	0.3	0.22	0.13

That means from Lv1-Lv5 (when you've got one of them) the T1s are on 0.58+0.17=0.75 ("even level")

And from Lv6-Lv17 (whenever you've got two of them) the T1s are on 0.58+0.9=0.67 ("-1 level")
And from Lv1-Lv23 (whenever you've just one of them) the T2s are on 0.67+0.8=0.75 ("even level")

In other words, everything is essentially getting adjusted to be exactly the same as it is right now on live.

?? 😕
 

Edited 8 hours ago by Maelwys

[tidge]

Yeah I see that... but I play a LOT against level-less giant monsters, which you recognize is not accounted for in the math.

 

I should add... I don't question the "supremacy below level 22/23/24", I question why ABOVE level 22/23/24 there is a base ToHit decrease. Yes I know about level differences, so I am testing some Incarnate content time differences right now.

Edited 8 hours ago by tidge
not

[Maelwys]

38 minutes ago, tidge said:

Yeah I see that... but I play a LOT against level-less giant monsters, which you recognize is not accounted for in the math.

Sure. And I certainly appreciate that the T1 and T2's damage output has plummeted against levelless foes like GMs. However realistically unless the GM in question has +defence buffs; worst-case you'll be having to slot +39.71% acc in your T1 henchmen (with Supremacy but no Tactics) instead of +11.76% to cap your Hit Rate against them.
_{And you can always email yourself Team Insights. Or run Tactics. Let alone using the usual anti-GM stuff like multiple Acid Mortars.}

...but I still don't understand how any of that translates to a "ToHit nerf kicking in at level 22"...?? 😕 (although it IS past midnight here and I'm at least two coffees under par!) 😪

 

Quote

I should add... I don't question the "supremacy below level 22/23/24", I question why ABOVE level 22/23/24 there is a base ToHit decrease. 

Because on Live there's a base ToHit decrease (due to the henchmen beginning to spawn lower-level) and the devs wanted to replicate that same decrease on Test; in order to keep things as similar as possible. Although that decrease kicks in at levels 6 (T1s) 18 (T1s) and 24 (T2s) rather than at level 22. 

And FWIW, I'm (still!) annoyed that they made the pets even-level and then tweaked the ToHits back down again... but I at least understand the rationale behind it - due to the backlash over the Tanker buffs/nerfs the devs are now being incredibly cautious about tweaking AT performance; so they're intentionally taking these MM changes very slowly one step at a time. "Buffing Mastermind Henchmen Hit Rate" is 100% on their radar, but it simply isn't on the cards this patch.
 

Edited 7 hours ago by Maelwys

[tidge]

19 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

And FWIW, I'm (still!) annoyed that they made the pets even-level and then tweaked the ToHits back down again... but I at least understand the rationale behind it - due to the backlash over the Tanker buffs/nerfs the devs are now being incredibly cautious about tweaking AT performance; so they're intentionally taking these MM changes very slowly one step at a time. "Buffing Mastermind Henchmen Hit Rate" simply isn't on the cards this patch.

 

I understand the caution, but with crummier ToHit over most of the content range, I don't know how anyone could believe MMs would come to dominate any content. It's not as if the damage dealing 'nukes' have inherently lower base accuracies to prevent those ATs from dominating. From memory, it is pretty much only the AoE controls that tend to get worse base accuracies.

 

 

[Maelwys]

22 minutes ago, tidge said:

I understand the caution, but with crummier ToHit over most of the content range, I don't know how anyone could believe MMs would come to dominate any content. It's not as if the damage dealing 'nukes' have inherently lower base accuracies to prevent those ATs from dominating. 

AFAIK the only place it's been ventured MMs dominate is levelless Pylon fights (particularly Demons/Marine MMs) - although Illusion/ Controllers aren't far behind.

Nukes are a whole 'nother issue. IIRC they were originally supposed to be balanced out by endurance cost and squishiness... hence why Blasters getting both Crashless Nukes and Sustains was a tad contentious. But changing them now would be asking for trouble - could you imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth if they got "adaptive recharge"?
 

Edited 7 hours ago by Maelwys

[Neiska]

3 hours ago, Maelwys said:

Therefore Accuracy has improved across the board (although the required enhancement in the T1 henchmen is still well beyond what is feasible at +3 and above!)

However Damage Output is more complicated: +2 is the "break-even" spot; with slightly less damage vs +1 mobs; and slightly more damage vs +3 mobs.

Damage Taken has however improved across the board (taking much less damage than before vs +0s, and still a decent chunk less than before vs +5s)

 

The picture might be bleakest if you're fighting +0 mobs; but even there pets are (at worst!) dealing ~18% less damage whilst being (at worst!) ~15% more survivable.
Given that set bonuses (especially KB protection!) are inheriting to pets too, IMO it's actually a net positive... at least until you consider "levelless" foes like GMs.

The devs have stated that this patch is about establishing a new "even-level-pets baseline" for Masterminds via minimal nerfs/buffs rather than about addressing/resolving Mastermind performance and/or Quality-of-Life issues (such as T1/T2 Hit Rate issues and pet mobility). And the above numbers seem to back that up.

It might help to think of this round of changes as effectively just "setting the scene"... and to expect bigger performance and QOL tweaks in other follow-up patches. 


(Hokes around for some publicly-accessible quotes...)

"major buffs beyond these are likely to come in a follow-up Panel release."

"Just you wait till you see the panel 2 content... you going to lose it. Not sure if out of hate or happiness, maybe both, but the change count alone is likely to be intimidating, and you might understand why we didn't toss everything out at once."

 

"Panel 2 is after the holidays."

🙊 🤐 ⏲️
 

 

Maelwys, I really respect you and you are likely far more involved in this than I am, but I am skeptical at best that "major buffs beyond these are coming." Case in point - you consider this patch a buff. I consider it a lateral nerf. We never receive "buffs." We get "shuffles" or "trade-offs." I don't consider giving up 18% damage for 15% durability an even trade on this particular AT.

 

For builds that build accordingly for things like pet durability, lets say, robots/time, they are already got strong defenses, so have minimal gain. But give up 18% damage for essentially nothing?

 

About the "but pets get 40% bonus" is really moot, due to how we HAVE to currently slot with the pet unique IOs. They would REALLY have to buff some of them to make them worth slotting as a full set. I will add in a pic of my Robot/Marine as an example - 

 

So, here are the sets I have, with their values - 

3-piece Expedient - 1.5% Energy/Negative resist, 2.5% Mez resist

6 piece Preventative Medicine - 2.25% Smashing/Lethal resist, 15 hitpoints, 3% Fire/Cold resist, 3.75% Endurance Discount, 8.75% Recharge 

4 piece Gladiators armor - 2.5% Recovery, 3 Knockback Protection, 3.75% Toxic/Psionic resist

2 pieces Unbreakable - 2.5% Endurance

2 pieces Superior Mark of Supremacy - 10% Recharge Time

6 pieces Reactive Defenses - 1.5% Smashing/Lethal resist, 15 hitpoints, 3% Fire/Cold resist, 3.75% Endurance Discount, 8.75% Recharge

4 pieces Superior Mark of Supremacy - 10% Recharge Time, 15% Accuracy, 5% Defense Melee, 2.5% Defense Smashing/Lethal

5 pieces of Ragnarok - 4% Recovery, 6% Fire/Cold Resist, 15% Accuracy, 10% Recharge

4 pieces of Shield Wall - 10% Regeneration, 18 Hitpoints, 4.5% Energy/Negative resist

5 pieces of Panaca - 2.5% Recovery, 10% Regeneration, 12 Hitpoints, 7.5% Recharge

3 pieces of Adjusted Targeting - 2% Damage, 3% Energy/Negative Resist

5 pieces of Gravitational Anchor - 4% Recovery, 6% Fire/Cold Resist, 10% Accuracy, 10% Recharge

2 pieces of Unbreakable - 2.5% Endurance

4 pieces of Unbreakable - 2.5% Endurance, 2.25% Energy/Negative Resist, 3.13% Defense Melee, 1.56% Defense Smashing/Lethal

2 pieces of Performance Shifter - 7.5% Movement Speed

 

Now that's all my set bonuses. Now not even all of them apply to pets, like Recharge. I don't know things like Accuracy or Movement Speed would. But here is what I would get with this fairly optimized setup (with all values added together)

- 2.15% Energy/Negative Resist

-7.2% Fire/Cold Resist

-3% Endurance

-3.2 Melee Def

-etc.

 

Honestly? Nothing to write home about. Now, if I re-slotted my entire build to make that 40% set impactful, my overall build would suffer. Substantially. The irony is that one of the most important things that MMs slot for is Recharge, nearly "all" MMs require that (except possibly Forcefields?). Which doesn't affect pets. Which means all this is at odds with one another - you can slot for pets getting set bonuses in mind, bbuutt your overall build is going to be much weaker if you do. Or, if you optimize a build like this, the bonuses your pets get won't be hardly anything at all, single digits in fact. Its a nice little boost, but hardly anything game changing, much less breaking your build over. Especially when considering the set bonuses for like... Call to Arms? And all MMs essentially have a 6 slot tax to begin with, for our unique pet IOs which is more or less required for everyone. (A few can likely get away with skipping 1 or two, IMO but that's semantics really and not something worth breaking an AT over.)

 

Anyway, point being aside from niche things like the Knockback protection, which is nice for sets that don't have any, the rest really is "meh" at best. And this isn't taking into account things like KB to KD, Guissans Buildup unique, etc. Basically there are too many things we have to Frankenslot to make it GOOD, especially without crippling our build just in order to give our pets another .3% Defense or whatever.

 

In closing I do not believe this is a buff. It's at best, a trade. And a trade that focuses on some secondaries but is essentially a kick in the wedding tackle to others. And for me personally, "But it's better doing this harder difficulty" is not a selling point. And this is coming from someone who PREFERS harder difficulties like +4/8.

 

So, yes, this patch does seem to hyper focus on MMs on Harder Difficulties and pet scaling, IMO the tradeoff isn't worth it. And I am doubtful that they will actually make it a net positive for any secondary that already focuses on things like durability or has KB protection in it. Say for Kinetic? "This is Great!" But for Electric Affinity? "Yippe. I am just as durable as before but I do less damage now. YAY." Marine might go "Oh, KB protection. Awesome" But Time is going to go "....horray?"

 

Again, I respect you Maelwys, and you and I have compared notes and things before. But I do not consider this patch a "buff" at all. Nor do I have faith that the powers that be will actually "buff" MMs to the point where they are comparable with other ATs, at least where Damage is concerned. Because until they look at the real issues, like pet movement, pet re-summoning and re-buffing mid combat (especially during a cascading failure situation), all of this is very wishful thinking at best.

 

It won't matter what your pets max values are, if they SPLAT while resummoning them before you can even buff or heal them. It doesn't matter how they perform in +5 on teams, if it takes pets 30 seconds to move from pack to pack (being out of supremacy range the entire time until they catch up) and the pack is nearly dead by the time they get there. The pets may as not even be there for all the DPS they might contribute.

 

Don't get me wrong. I do appreciate them at least thinking about MMs in higher difficulties. But IMO this is the wrong way to go about it. Especially if most of the secondaries struggle on +3, why are they focusing on +5 and beyond? Shouldn't they, oh, I don't know, lift up the ones that are struggling, and THEN make a baseline for all of them? Instead of making a new baseline for the "best of all possible builds" situation?