page 3 [FOCUSED FEEDBACK] Super Strength Adjustments

[Zahnee]

This thread has turned into “Fark rage” and “procs are bad, mmkay.”

 

 

[Eirei07]

2 hours ago, Spaghetti Betty said:

Exactly! There's still enough of a hit to potential survivability that would be """equitable""" across just about any combo you could think of running SS, and it also solves the """"issue"""" of busting through the damage penalty as well! And it doesn't require touching armor stats at all!

 

+1 to this.

[Bill Z Bubba]

9 hours ago, ScarySai said:

Except that's not how the game works. Damage scales are what determine how strong something is. Or are we going to look at fury and start going "Oh well fury gives you 280% damage just for existing, therefore brute is op" it's meaningless.

 

Why are you ignoring damage scalers, then?
Tank: 52.8311
Brute: 41.7087

Jab: .68 *  Melee_damage

Tank Jab: 35.9251

Brute Jab: 28.3619

 

Brute needs 15 points of fury to get past the +26.6668% damage buff just to catch up to the tank.

 

Doublestack rage on both, tank gets +140% damage, brute gets +160% and we'll assume 95% damage enhancement.

Tank Jab: 120.349

Brute Jab: 100.6847

 

Brute still needs +19.53% more damage buff to catch up, or 10 pts fury. Hard to do? Not even remotely.

 

Brute fury is fine because it gets them close to scrapper damage until the scrapper AT-IOs get slapped into the build, of course.

 

Now show me what other melee set in this game can self buff to +140% damage/+40% tohit for 92% of the time. (Sorry, correction, doublestacked means doublecrash, so 83% of the time.)
Claws can doublestack followup for a whopping +52.5% damage and +20% tohit.
Buildup on all the sets that have it is +70%/+20% but is only up, what, maybe a third of the time on high end builds?
(Tank values on this last bit.)

"But SS attacks suck except KO Blow and Foot Stomp!" You're right, they do. And THAT, TOO should have been corrected 20 years ago.

Again, changes are fine. Push 'em.

Edited December 18 by Bill Z Bubba

[Gobbledygook]

I agree that SS needs a damage buff to the powers themselves. I also like the concept of UM.

It's like what happens when Supes and others stop holding back.

I'm not a numbers guy though.

[Steampunkette]

9 hours ago, Eirei07 said:

Your post runs on the assumption that the -10% Def & -20% Res is somehow “equitable”, despite it already being disputed several times in this thread. Not taking account of other factors, the different powersets (def vs hybrid vs resist set vs regen), debuffs and so on. Suffice to say that I am not convinced of the argument of equitability, when there’s a clear cut option for equitability, and it’s the one I put forth.

 

I’m not even convinced that the survivability crash is warranted or appropriate as a “balancing point”, as no one so far has sufficiently proven that Rage SS is massively overperforming using any useful metric. What does “overperforming in damage as a Tanker” even mean? How exactly is double Rage stack better than other powersets, that can *also* leverage procs almost as well? What about the fact that on Brutes, UM is actually trending to perform *better* than Rage, doesn’t that weaken the reasoning for the nerf? The ones who are claiming that it needs the nerf are the ones who have to prove it.

 

Mind that I’m only replying because your post seems to put words in my mouth, which I don’t appreciate. It's fine if you think those things, but don’t prop them up as facts that everyone agrees on.

You're right. It -isn't- equitable.

 

Defense users have it worse.

 

Sure, Resistance characters are going to take more damage from the -20% resistance to all types. But they'll still have all their Debuff Resistance that Defense Characters don't get because Defense avoids getting debuffed.

 

But both defense and resistance characters at the cap will be taking the same amount of damage increase: 260%. That is, on its face, far more equitable. You could niggle over details like Typed versus Positional Defenses, or hem and haw over which sets get hit harder by which groups because of some specific hole or another made worse... but ultimately Resistance sets still retain their debuff resistance and defense sets don't have it at all.

 

So even if it's not a perfect balance, it's definitely vastly more equitable than it is, currently, where Resistance sets basically ignore the survival impact of the crash and Defense sets are crippled by it unless they overcap by 20% to all positions, all types, or some specific combination of the two.

 

As far as your "Clear cut" option, it just takes away the drawbacks of the power. I flanderized your position, certainly, but your suggestion was removing the crash. Which would result in the power being nerfed into the ground because that crash, that drawback, is being used as a balancing lever by the dev team. How reasonable and equitable you want to imagine your position is? Irrelevant. It would result in a major nerf.

 

As far as convincing you of literally anything: You're not going to be convinced. I could pull out all the math in the world and walk you through it, or someone else could, and you'll still say stuff like "What does overperforming in damage as a Tanker even mean?". 

 

The question contains the answer.

 

As far as Brutes and UM vs Rage: Assuming a base damage of 100 on an attack:

 

Due to Scalar the Brute deals 75 damage. With capped Fury they're at 200% putting that up to 225 damage. With Rage that's another 80% bringing us to 285. Doublestacked you're now up to 345. Don't forget to add another 75 or so damage for Enhancements and we're now at a comfortable 420. Blaze it.

 

On the other hand, we have Unleashed Might. So that 75 damage is pushed up by an additional 30% thanks to the second hit of damage UM adds on. So 22.5 more damage puts us at 97.5 as our new "Baseline". Why? Because Fury and other +Dam mods affect both portions of damage. So 97.5 gets increased by 200% from Fury bringing us to 292.5. And then Unrelenting Might is another 20% damage so that's a further 19.5 damage for 312. Toss on the enhancement value for another 97.5 and you're up to 409.5

 

Huh. That's weird. 409.5 is -lower- than 420. Granted, it's a LOT closer than you might immediately expect when looking at the 80% vs 20% of the Rage and UM direct buffs... but still! Brutes actually get GREAT use out of Unrelenting Might while maxed out on Fury! (certainly more than Tankers do) And it is basically always the "Right Choice" for a Brute since you can maintain permanent uptime with no negative effects as long as you're also managing your endurance costs. It's an expensive toggle. 

 

But at the -cap-... UM breaks free. 780 to Rage's 600. 

 

The real big difference between the two is how hard it is to get to the 700% damage cap. Rage will push you there, faster, off a lower initial damage value. UM won't help you get there, much at all, but provides a larger value to be modified.

 

And that's separate from any other considerations of proc-slotting which apply to both builds pretty well equally and can largely be ignored for comparison purposes.

 

 

[Excraft]

On 12/16/2025 at 10:57 PM, ScarySai said:

It's a shitty attack, is what it is.

 

Beanbag energy. I'll never understand people who defend worthless attacks like this.

 

I agree Handclap is shitty, but I don't think of it as an "attack" myself, more light a light/soft control.  I've seen SS/INV tankers who use the stun effectively to mitigate the incoming damage during the Rage crash.  

[Bill Z Bubba]

12 minutes ago, Steampunkette said:

but ultimately Resistance sets still retain their debuff resistance and defense sets don't have it at all.

 

That's not quite right. Resistance does ALWAYS resist resistance debuffs, but all of the defense based armors come with some level of defense debuff resistance. SR obviously caps out at 95% and that's in play all the time. Shield can get close if Active Defense is doublestacked. Unsure on the others but CoD would tell us.

 

But regardless of what anyone else thinks, 1 def = 2 res. And -10% defense/-20% resistance for the rage crash IS more equitable to all armors vs just a -20% defense debuff. Especially since the debuff from rage is UNresistable by both.

Edited December 18 by Bill Z Bubba

[Steampunkette]

7 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

That's not quite right. Resistance does ALWAYS resist resistance debuffs, but all of the defense based armors come with some level of defense debuff resistance. SR obviously caps out at 95% and that's in play all the time. Shield can get close if Active Defense is doublestacked. Unsure on the others but CoD would tell us.

I don't mean "Resistance to Resistance Debuffs"

 

I mean the bundled debuff resistances they get like Recovery debuff resistance in Murky Cloud and ToHit and Regen debuff resistance in Obscure Sustenance. Different sets have different quantities, and different debuff resistances, sure. (Mostly ToHit, Regen, and Slow). But Defense sets do not get those.

 

Resistance characters are hit by those debuffs more often since they don't rely on dodging it to avoid the penalty, so they get resistance to keep from being debuffed directly to Hell. Defense characters just don't get those resistances 'cause they're dodging the attack and instead get hit with the full value when it manages to roll that golden 95% or higher.

 

A Resistance Tanker who takes a -20% Res (All Damage) still has their set's built in ToHit, Regen, Slow, Etc resistances to rely on. A Defense Tanker does not and instead gets hit with those debuffs full force in the face. Defense sets are still taking the shorter end of the stick on the Rage Crash than Resistance sets are.

Edited December 18 by Steampunkette

[ScarySai]

1 hour ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

Why are you ignoring damage scalers, then?

 

Why are you ignoring them? Super strength despite double or even triple stacking rage can't hope to beat its peers, so how am I supposed to take the claim seriously that it "breaks the game" and is "unbalanced" when super strength loses to more than half of the other sets?

 

That number may even go up with the radius buffs. A tanker with double rage isn't even top 20. A 200% damage buff doesn't do anything if your scalable damage is half of other sets.

 

 

As for your question: claws, dark melee and db.

 

UM outperforms rage despite all of that %damage loss, crazy how that works, isn't it? Turns out damage scales are more important. Credit to Ston.

 

Edited December 18 by ScarySai

[Eirei07]

15 minutes ago, Steampunkette said:

You're right. It -isn't- equitable.

 

Defense users have it worse.

 

Sure, Resistance characters are going to take more damage from the -20% resistance to all types. But they'll still have all their Debuff Resistance that Defense Characters don't get because Defense avoids getting debuffed.

 

But both defense and resistance characters at the cap will be taking the same amount of damage increase: 260%. That is, on its face, far more equitable. You could niggle over details like Typed versus Positional Defenses, or hem and haw over which sets get hit harder by which groups because of some specific hole or another made worse... but ultimately Resistance sets still retain their debuff resistance and defense sets don't have it at all.

 

So even if it's not a perfect balance, it's definitely vastly more equitable than it is, currently, where Resistance sets basically ignore the survival impact of the crash and Defense sets are crippled by it unless they overcap by 20% to all positions, all types, or some specific combination of the two.

 

As far as your "Clear cut" option, it just takes away the drawbacks of the power. I flanderized your position, certainly, but your suggestion was removing the crash. Which would result in the power being nerfed into the ground because that crash, that drawback, is being used as a balancing lever by the dev team. How reasonable and equitable you want to imagine your position is? Irrelevant. It would result in a major nerf.

 

So we agree that my earlier proposal is still the most equitable option, yes? You tried to trash it and say it doesn't matter because it'll never happen, and I agree that the devs would unlikely be so genereous. But the reason I was hammering that point is because many posts prior all cite equitability as the reason for the nerf, but in your own words you already argue that it still isn't, really. So I say we dispense with "equitability" as an argument to defend the nerf, and all agree to admit that the change is mainly to impact current Rage users.

 

Now, if I had my druthers, I would rather Rage not be changed at all. Why? Because through all the arguments and number crunching about def sets benefitting, we have yet to see a def based Rage user who has given positive feedback. The only one person so far, who did have an SR/SS Tanker using Rage, didn't like the change. 

 

However, in my latest post above, I showed support for a proposal to pivot the -def crash to something like a -tohit debuff. I am willing to discuss a workable alternative, now we wait and see if the devs are willing to do the same.

[Bill Z Bubba]

14 minutes ago, ScarySai said:

As for your question: claws, dark melee and db.

 

Pretty chart. Too bad so many told me pylon testing was useless and should be ignored in this very thread. Go back to the clear all stuff for better data.

 

As for the quoted section, claws and db are not getting +140% damage from followup, even triple stacked on a scrapper (+112.5,) which only lasts for one attack anyway AND followup misses at least 5% of the time, unlike rage, and/or blinding feint even with empower, not getting there. Dark Melee, sure, but it ain't doin so 83% of the time. Nowhere NEAR it.

[Wavicle]

8 minutes ago, Eirei07 said:

 

So we agree that my earlier proposal is still the most equitable option, yes? You tried to trash it and say it doesn't matter because it'll never happen, and I agree that the devs would unlikely be so genereous. But the reason I was hammering that point is because many posts prior all cite equitability as the reason for the nerf, but in your own words you already argue that it still isn't, really. So I say we dispense with "equitability" as an argument to defend the nerf, and all agree to admit that the change is mainly to impact current Rage users.

 

Now, if I had my druthers, I would rather Rage not be changed at all. Why? Because through all the arguments and number crunching about def sets benefitting, we have yet to see a def based Rage user who has given positive feedback. The only one person so far, who did have an SR/SS Tanker using Rage, didn't like the change. 

 

However, in my latest post above, I showed support for a proposal to pivot the -def crash to something like a -tohit debuff. I am willing to discuss a workable alternative, now we wait and see if the devs are willing to do the same.

They aren’t going to make it minus to hit, for a couple different reasons. One is that you are supposed to be able to continue to hold Agro through the crash, so they aren’t going to make it hard to hit during it. Another is that if you are double stacking rage, that to hit crash is going to be mitigated by rage itself.

Edited December 18 by Wavicle

[drbuzzard]

13 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

Pretty chart. Too bad so many told me pylon testing was useless and should be ignored in this very thread. Go back to the clear all stuff for better data.

 

As for the quoted section, claws and db are not getting +140% damage from followup, even triple stacked on a scrapper (+112.5,) which only lasts for one attack anyway AND followup misses at least 5% of the time, unlike rage, and/or blinding feint even with empower, not getting there. Dark Melee, sure, but it ain't doin so 83% of the time. Nowhere NEAR it.

 

I have a couple perma soul drain tankers. It's not that hard to do. 

 

Though I should note that dark melee is nothing to write home about. 

Edited December 18 by drbuzzard

[ScarySai]

1 hour ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

Go back to the clear all stuff for better data.

 

1: Provide your own data, its not my job to provide data for your claims, lol.

 

Current data supports me, so have fun on the grind.

 

2: With how DRs work in this game past the first 100% slotted in a power the difference is marginal and only serves to highlight how meaningless your fixation on the damage buff rage provides is.

 

This game is 20 years old, its solved, there are no debates.

Edited December 18 by ScarySai

[Eirei07]

25 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

They aren’t going to make it minus to hit, for a couple different reasons. One is that you are supposed to be able to continue to hold Agro through the crash, so they aren’t going to make it impossible to hit during it. Another is that if you are double stacking rage, that to hit crash is going to be mitigated by rage itself.

 

FWIW you should be replying to Betty or Maewlys for this, but I suppose I could drop my two cent on the matter.

 

1) I'm not sure where you are getting "you are supposed to be able to continue to hold agro" part. Can you substantiate how you are getting this? Also, when solo, losing aggro is a non-issue, you're still getting all the attention. And if I'm following this thread correctly, it seems that Rage's performance when solo has been the big contention point here. 

 

2) Ah, are we negotiating numbers here? Is it fine then if it's either a) Rage's +tohit is adjusted, or b) drop the tohit enough that it can't be sufficiently mitigated.

Edited December 18 by Eirei07

[Wavicle]

1 minute ago, Eirei07 said:

1) I'm not sure where you are getting "you are supposed to be able to continue to hold agro" part. Can you substantiate how you are getting this? Also, when solo, losing aggro is a non-issue, you're still getting all the attention. And if I'm following this thread correctly, it seems that Rage's performance when solo has been the big contention point here. 

That’s why it was changed to -dam in the first place, iirc.

[Bill Z Bubba]

11 minutes ago, drbuzzard said:

I have a couple perma soul drain tankers. It's not that hard to do. 

 

Though I should note that dark melee is nothing to write home about. 

 

Ok, fair. +300% recharge is absolutely doable. And what % of time would you say soul drain is saturated in normal gameplay? I suspect it's not 100%.

[drbuzzard]

1 minute ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

Ok, fair. +300% recharge is absolutely doable. And what % of time would you say soul drain is saturated in normal gameplay? I suspect it's not 100%.

 

Oh certainly not. I also am lousy at pylons or the clears so I can't really measure this stuff worth a damn. On TFs I can keep the tanks at a pretty high level of damage boost (though since the tank nerf I have not really bothered). When it was a high damage edge case, I used it. I've gone on to other builds since. Altitis is a way of life. 

[Steampunkette]

34 minutes ago, Eirei07 said:

 

So we agree that my earlier proposal is still the most equitable option, yes? You tried to trash it and say it doesn't matter because it'll never happen, and I agree that the devs would unlikely be so genereous. But the reason I was hammering that point is because many posts prior all cite equitability as the reason for the nerf, but in your own words you already argue that it still isn't, really. So I say we dispense with "equitability" as an argument to defend the nerf, and all agree to admit that the change is mainly to impact current Rage users.

 

Now, if I had my druthers, I would rather Rage not be changed at all. Why? Because through all the arguments and number crunching about def sets benefitting, we have yet to see a def based Rage user who has given positive feedback. The only one person so far, who did have an SR/SS Tanker using Rage, didn't like the change. 

 

However, in my latest post above, I showed support for a proposal to pivot the -def crash to something like a -tohit debuff. I am willing to discuss a workable alternative, now we wait and see if the devs are willing to do the same.

Nah.

 

Most equitable option is removing Rage from the game and putting Unleashed Might in it's place.

 

There you go. Problem entirely solved.

[Maelwys]

  

4 hours ago, Zahnee said:

I’ll start out by clearing up some confusion about what I meant by -tohit resistance. I didn’t mean that Rage gives tohit debuff resistance but that it’s more resistant to them. 

You literally said "a benefit of Rage is its resistance to ToHit debuffs" and "Rage’s resistance to ToHit debuffs is too strong"... 😑

But OK.

Moving on then...

 

Quote

Your assessment of SS vs Claws is misleading. Claws was only 24s slower on Brute and 16s slower on Tanker for an average of 20s, which isn’t that big of a gap. 

It's still slower.

Your original claim which I've been disputing is: "SS was only high on [Ston's Trapdoor Time] list due to trapdoor tests that were loaded with -ToHit."

However Claws is similarly "resistant to ToHit" (if having superfluous amounts of ToHit equates to being "resistant to Tohit debuffs")... yet it's coming in 4 places behind SS on the Brute times and 5 places behind it on the Tanker times.

 

Quote

You cannot conclude that Rage gives too much +damage 

That is not what is being concluded by me.

What is being concluded by me is: "it's not that "Superstrength with Rage" is OP vs Pylons or anything else regardless of how you choose to proc it. It's that "Superstrength with Rage" starts getting OP if you replace most of the SS set with specific stuff OUTSIDE of SS AND then put your foot on both the Damage Proc and Fury accelerator pedals. At least until everyone starts getting Fulcrum Shifted; which lets the other powersets catch up + overtake it." 
 

 

Quote

How do you explain Tanker Savage and Fiery Melee beating Super Strength on the clear speed test when they don’t have Rage?

That was covered already in my first post on the subject.

To recap: "whenever you SIX SLOT an AoE with procs, you forgo both Accuracy and Damage aspect slotting in that AoE. Rage's +ToHit buff makes accuracy aspect slotting irrelevant, and its +Damage buff significantly lessens the blow from forgoing damage aspect slotting. And Brutes care even less about damage aspect (due to Fury) than Tankers." 


But sure... I'll walk you through it:


On the Tanker times; SS came in 3rd place, a little behind Savage Melee (with Fiery Melee well ahead of both). Martial Arts came in 6 seconds later.
On the Brute times; SS came in 1st place, just in front of Savage Melee. The next-best set was 20s behind... and again it was Martial Arts.
 

Savage Melee has access to multiple powerful in-set AoEs including a T9 "Nuke" and can slot multiple -res procs. Blood Thirst also lowers the recharge time of its own and off-powerset attacks. It comes as no surprise it would do well here. It's extremely weighted towards AoE damage output.

Fiery Melee on Tankers has access to two powerful in-set 15ft radius AoEs and multiple -res procs. However on Brutes it only has access to a single in-set 10ft radius AoE so their AoE coverage plummets.

Super Strength has access to precisely one AoE. Foot Stomp. And as I highlighted in that same first post: "Footstomp does too much damage for its Radius. Always has. The whole set is weighted around it...". Regardless of whether it's on a Brute or a Tanker, it's decent DPA and 15ft Radius. And it reliably activates FF +Rech procs. "Rage" as mentioned previously should be helping to shore up any lost accuracy and damage aspect from procbombing AoEs (with Brutes being less affected than Tankers by that lost damage aspect, due to Fury).

Martial Arts also has only one AoE. But again it's a good one - Dragon's Tail is high DPA with a comparatively quick recharge cycle. And it reliably activates FF +rech procs. It does however have a slightly lower radius than the other sets' AoEs (8ft on Brutes, 12ft on Tankers).

So we should be expecting Savage Melee to do well on both Tankers and Brutes; Fiery Melee to do well on Tankers but not on Brutes; Super Strength to do well on Tankers and very well on Brutes; and Martial Arts to do well on Tankers and rather well on Brutes. And that's exactly what happened.



Also, it's probably worth pointing out that one of the changes since the testing took place resulted in Tanker AoE proc rate being lowered. AoE attacks on Tankers were previously getting their radiuses boosted by the global buff in Gauntlet (which didn't negatively impact PPM activation rate) whereas now they have a larger base value listed within each of the attacks themselves (which does lower the rate). Foot Stomp was one of the few attacks to be unaffected by this; because it's already sitting at the maximum 15ft radius.
 

Quote

This is all speculation until someone decides to run tests in the current build. 

You do not need to run exhaustive testing if a claim is so basic as to be self evident and mathematically provable.

(Rage + non-SS-powerset attacks) > (Build Up + non-SS-powerset attacks)
Especially if those attacks are procbombed and you're making them on a Brute.

Ergo, Rage is unbalanced whenever it comes to those off-set attacks.


- - - - - - - - - -


I'm honestly not trying to be difficult here.
I'm trying to restate a position which is to me blatantly obvious but which you (to my knowledge) have so far not acknowledged as valid:

Specific Powers within the Super Strength powerset stray outside of regular balance equations: Footstomp and Rage being the big offenders.
Super Strength as a powerset is fine because the devs intentionally balanced the rest of its powers to cope with this state of affairs.

Footstomp by itself has little-to-no potential to overly upset character balance; as it has no effect on other powers; the most it can do is cause a character to deal a slightly more damage over a wider area than they really should be capable of doing.

Rage however does affect other powers; and it can increase the Hit Rate and Damage aspect of those powers well beyond what they were ever originally balanced for - especially when "double stacked". And the greater the number of powerful "non-SuperStrength" attacks a character takes and the more effort they put into relying on and mechanically exploiting those attacks for maximum damage output; the better off Rage will make those attacks. To the point where SuperStrength, when min-maxxed, can often entirely revolve around "Rage" affecting multiple non-Super-Strength powerset attacks; plus Footstomp (typically slotted with a FF +Rech proc to help keep everything else flowing).

Therefore:
(i) Rage is indeed currently "unbalanced".

(ii) That's what is holding the devs back from buffing the rest of the attacks within the Super Strength Powerset.
(iii) Any change the devs make to Rage's offensive performance is highly likely to result in a nerf to its current boost for those off-powerset attacks.

You only have to look at the devs' currently proposed new approach (Unleashed Might) to see blatantly obvious evidence of (iii) at work.
UM is intentionally boosting the damage of attacks within the Superstrength powerset by LOTS and the damage of attacks outside the SS powerset only by SOME.
 

Edited December 18 by Maelwys

[Zahnee]

55 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

Pretty chart. Too bad so many told me pylon testing was useless and should be ignored in this very thread. Go back to the clear all stuff for better data.

 

As for the quoted section, claws and db are not getting +140% damage from followup, even triple stacked on a scrapper (+112.5,) which only lasts for one attack anyway AND followup misses at least 5% of the time, unlike rage, and/or blinding feint even with empower, not getting there. Dark Melee, sure, but it ain't doin so 83% of the time. Nowhere NEAR it.

The primary pylon test that should be ignored is your Claws/SR that 6 slotted Critical Strikes in Follow Up.

[Eirei07]

10 minutes ago, Steampunkette said:

Nah.

 

Most equitable option is removing Rage from the game and putting Unleashed Might in it's place.

 

There you go. Problem entirely solved.

 

Ah, if only the devs are brave enough to actually straight up do it, instead of trying to kill it indirectly. 

[skoryy]

16 hours ago, aethereal said:

It was a mistake but it's a mistake that too hard to fix at the root at this point

 

My thought on thoughts like this is that we don't know what else Synapse and Hit Streak had planned as far as big changes following the PPM change. They might've been asked but who knows if their notes and memories were still enough to build from.  Homecoming devs came into this like a half-built renovation and the homeowners have already moved back in, they've had to work around that.  Something to keep in mind as we give feedback.  CP's not Hit Streak, and neither of them were Jack.

 

4 hours ago, Psi-bolt said:

It’s a Christmas miracle (probably just a break) it’s gone on this long.   We’re way beyond discussing the specific changes on beta.

Thread got a lot more excellent and educational once a couple names were thrown on the ignore list, just sayin'.

Edited December 18 by skoryy

[Steampunkette]

Just now, Eirei07 said:

 

Ah, if only the devs are brave enough to actually straight up do it, instead of trying to kill it indirectly. 

They're only killing it for the people who are whining about the 20% resistance debuff.

 

Rage is about to be -way- better for a Defense Build than it's ever been! I've been playing an SS/SR Brute for a couple months, now, on live, and it's been hellish whenever the crash hits. But with the Rage Change? She'll survive way better in those situations rather than collapsing like a flan in the oven. It'll still hurt... but 140% -less-.

 

Not the devs' fault that some people are going to whinge and moan 'cause they've specifically built SS characters exclusively around Resistance defense sets in order to essentially ignore the defensive crash for 20 years. Some folks are going to whine and kick and scream. Nothing can be done to prevent that.

 

But given the choice? I'd rather see this Tage change and the addition of UM as an alternative, rather than Rage just get cut. Three times more build variety.

[Bill Z Bubba]

14 minutes ago, Zahnee said:

The primary pylon test that should be ignored is your Claws/SR that 6 slotted Critical Strikes in Follow Up.

 

Ahh, so sad. However will I ever survive without your build approval? I like the set bonuses.