page 3 [FOCUSED FEEDBACK] Super Strength Adjustments

[skoryy]

17 minutes ago, golstat2003 said:

 

Rage should just be turned into a glorified buildup. And damage increased across the board for all damage powers in the set. Rage as a gimmick is long past in this modern era.

Which is kind of what's being done with Unleashed Might? You can't turn it into a clicky, though, with what it does to Hand Clap.

Edited December 17 by skoryy

[Warshades]

How about giving a 3rd mutually exclusive Rage power? Keep the original with the -20% defense, have the new one be -40% resist (since they seem to equate 1% def = 2% resist), and have the toggle. Now if defensive sets are worried about defense crash but still want Rage, they can take the resist crash one (although I suspect it won't work out well for them either when they're suffering -40% resist).

 

I really dislike the current change though as a lot of the SS built tanks and brutes that I have chose SS/Rage because they were a resist based set and could help mitigate/not care as much about the defensive loss. Hell, keep the old Rage (-20% def), have the new version (-10% def and -20% resist), and have the toggle. Changing the existing rage to include -20% resist is such a sucker punch for those that specifically built SS chars with resist armor sets and there's really no freaking need to do so when you can just add more mutually exclusive options to fit other armor sets.

[ScarySai]

It kills me that rage is such an absurdly overrated power that we're at the stage where we're bargaining with a 40% resist crash.

 

Give me the new hand clap and delete rage, I genuinely won't care.

Edited December 17 by ScarySai

[Warshades]

1 minute ago, ScarySai said:

It kills me that rage is such an absurdly overrated power that we're at the stage where we're bargaining with a 40% resist crash.

 

My point was to emphasize how ridiculous the -20% resist crash change is. No defensive armor set would ever want to take a Rage crash with -40% resist crash either as it would be even worse than -20% defense which is easier to mitigate by going over the soft cap or popping a purple insp.

[ScarySai]

2 minutes ago, Warshades said:

 

My point was to emphasize how ridiculous the -20% resist crash change is. No defensive armor set would ever want to take a Rage crash with -40% resist crash either as it would be even worse than -20% defense which is easier to mitigate by going over the soft cap or popping a purple insp.

 

Then we are in agreement. Some people really seem to think that -20% resist wouldn't hurt a set like SR, and are just flat out wrong.

Edited December 17 by ScarySai

[skoryy]

15 minutes ago, Warshades said:

How about giving a 3rd mutually exclusive Rage power? Keep the original with the -20% defense, have the new one be -40% resist (since they seem to equate 1% def = 2% resist), and have the toggle. Now if defensive sets are worried about defense crash but still want Rage, they can take the resist crash one (although I suspect it won't work out well for them either when they're suffering -40% resist).

I don't think that's how game balance works. "Here, have a power with a debuff that's completely impotent for your power set!"

[ScarySai]

Just now, skoryy said:

I don't think that's how game balance works. "Here, have a power with a debuff that's completely impotent for your power set!"

 

-defense hurts resist characters, and -res hurts defense characters.

 

This line of thinking is why this new rage crash is largely hated.

[arcane]

On 12/11/2025 at 6:39 PM, Onlyasandwich said:

One of the biggest hurdles a proc heavy build must overcome is hit chance. Rage pretty handily sorts that out, giving you much more freedom to skimp on accuracy.

Yep. Many of my proc monsters have to pick up Vigor or Nerve or a lot of accuracy bonuses, but my SS users are very conveniently exempt from that requirement. 

[PeregrineFalcon]

38 minutes ago, ScarySai said:

Rage has been fine for 21 years, but you think its a problem now. Prove it.

I agree with this. If it was so OP then that should have been addressed 20 years ago. It's been fine for over 20 years and it hasn't broken the game.

 

Thank you for answering my question.

[skoryy]

17 minutes ago, ScarySai said:

 

-defense hurts resist characters, and -res hurts defense characters.

 

This line of thinking is why this new rage crash is largely hated.

 
Its largely hated because res sets were how y'all minimized the crash for those sweet sweet double stacking buffs.

 

[Warshades]

13 minutes ago, skoryy said:

I don't think that's how game balance works. "Here, have a power with a debuff that's completely impotent for your power set!"

Resist sets do feel it, it's just not as impactful when soloing compared to how bad the -def is for defensive sets. Walking into an alpha strike from a mob hits a lot harder with -20% def even on a resist set. In team scenarios, a lot of that -def ends up being mitigated by team wide buff toggles like Maneuvers (at least end-game). 

 

But isn't this the point of the change that was made? To make rage crash more fair for defensive armor sets? It's not like the damage was adjusted and the set itself was essentially balanced around using Rage. It certainly wasn't over performing compared to other top melee sets. If the point is to make it more fair for defensive armor sets, why not offer a version of the rage crash specifically for them? Or if they think this new -10% def and -20% resist is fair, then add this option but keep the old one in place. If they want to add this new option, I'm totally fine with that, but offer us the option of sticking with the old one if we want to, particularly if we built chars specifically with the -20% defense crash in mind, and not a new -10% def and -20% res. 

 

Regardless if you're a defensive armor set suffering from -res or resist armor set suffering from -def, the effects are still felt. This change just severely impacts characters that I've built (and maybe others) keeping in mind only the -20% def.

[Captain Citadel]

12 minutes ago, arcane said:

Yep. Many of my proc monsters have to pick up Vigor or Nerve or a lot of accuracy bonuses, but my SS users are very conveniently exempt from that requirement. 

And this is why I want the devs to do something about proc-loading, because it really feels like the intended design behind IO sets has always been to use the sets, not to derive superior damage output by slapping together a bunch of random pieces. I think it would force them to work harder to balance powersets around each other instead of balancing them around procs.

[skoryy]

1 minute ago, Captain Citadel said:

And this is why I want the devs to do something about proc-loading, because it really feels like the intended design behind IO sets has always been to use the sets, not to derive superior damage output by slapping together a bunch of random pieces.

The thing about proc-loading is that it does use sets and incarnates. You need those set buffs to make up for all the enhancement buffs you're leaving on the floor to load up on procs, especially if you're exemping and can't rely on incarnates.

[ScarySai]

3 minutes ago, skoryy said:

 
Its largely hated because res sets were how y'all minimized the crash for those sweet sweet double stacking buffs.

 

 

I wish people who don't understand the set would stop acting like they do.

[skoryy]

Just now, ScarySai said:

 

I wish people who don't understand the set would stop acting like they do.

 

Yes, yes, we know.

 

[skoryy]

7 minutes ago, Warshades said:

If the point is to make it more fair for defensive armor sets, why not offer a version of the rage crash specifically for them?

Because they can't make it so that it does debuff A if you're a def set and debuff B if you're a res set. The code doesn't work that way yet, if ever.

[Warshades]

15 minutes ago, skoryy said:

Because they can't make it so that it does debuff A if you're a def set and debuff B if you're a res set. The code doesn't work that way yet, if ever.

 

The code allows them to make mutually exclusive powers, I was only saying to offer a 3rd mutually exclusive option and not to make 1 power have 2 different effects based on which armor set was chosen.

[ScarySai]

Kinda starting to lose the plot, aren't we?

 

[Zahnee]

Here’s how to refocus. 
 

Anti-Ragers: show us some type of objective test with Rage that outright beats Battle Axe or Fiery Melee at anything. Until then you’re attacking Rage without any evidence of overperformance. 

[ScarySai]

Isn't fiery Melee kinda mid outside pylons? But the overall message is sound.

[Zahnee]

6 minutes ago, ScarySai said:

Isn't fiery Melee kinda mid outside pylons? But the overall message is sound.

You could be right but I don’t even talk about Titan Weapon cuz that’s even more of an unrealistic pylon comparison 

[Psi-bolt]

8 minutes ago, ScarySai said:

Kinda starting to lose the plot, aren't we?

 

I’m not sure this thread ever had it.  I don’t really think Rage is being changed because it’s overpowered.  I think that the devs are trying to address players who really don’t know how to build their characters and so they want to minimize the potential effect of poor choices.

 

For folks that don’t hyper optimize for damage, UM will be fine.  For those that do and know how to build their characters they already know how to mitigate the crash.   I genuinely believe that the crash serves a valuable purpose of funneling people into UM.  
 

As we all know by now, the original devs never expected players to be so focused on min-maxing.  The biggest balance change in this game’s history was intended to constrain optimized builds.  I really see this patch being a gentler means of doing the same thing.   Rage isn’t going away.  It isn’t significantly worse than it is pre-change.  People can still have their proc monster, super damage builds.  There’s just an alternative that is really good.

 

BUT you have to give up your optimized for damage build.   I just can’t see this as problematic.

[Psi-bolt]

14 minutes ago, Zahnee said:

Here’s how to refocus. 
 

Anti-Ragers: show us some type of objective test with Rage that outright beats Battle Axe or Fiery Melee at anything. Until then you’re attacking Rage without any evidence of overperformance. 

That’s irrelevant, Rage’s offensive effects aren’t being changed.

[Zahnee]

10 minutes ago, Psi-bolt said:

That’s irrelevant, Rage’s offensive effects aren’t being changed.

It’s 100% relevant because my argument continues to be if a melee powerset has a massive survivability and damage penalty it should be the number one performing set. But it’s not even top 5. 
 

The original crash barely has a justification and no one can prove that it does. 

[ScarySai]

11 minutes ago, Psi-bolt said:

That’s irrelevant, Rage’s offensive effects aren’t being changed.

 

It's not irrelevant, because nerfing a iconic power in a set this hard when it has never been above mid-tier isn't how you do game balance.

 

Also, UM is the better high end option over rage, because ultimately, having better damage scales is better than crutching on a redundant damage buff.