page 3 [OPEN BETA] Patch Notes for December 19th, 2025

[Riverdusk]

If we're looking at potential massive nerfs to things that are "broken", how about those nukes?  I consider them a bigger and more game trivializing issue than procs.  Powers with which you can regularly just one shot entire mobs with no drawbacks on a regular basis (unlike how they used to be).   Yes, that includes incarnate Judgement nukes.

 

I mean, only fair right?

[Ishiga]

1 hour ago, Riverdusk said:

If we're looking at potential massive nerfs to things that are "broken", how about those nukes?  I consider them a bigger and more game trivializing issue than procs.  Powers with which you can regularly just one shot entire mobs with no drawbacks on a regular basis (unlike how they used to be).   Yes, that includes incarnate Judgement nukes.

 

I mean, only fair right?

Nuke skills have cooldowns appropriate to that level of power.

[Frosticus]

It is kinda silly if you look at something like 

Flashfire (troller)- base dam ~9, base acc 0.8x. 90 sec rech, 16 end

Vs

Geyser (defender)- base dam ~151 with 3 tidal stacks, base acc 1.4x. 125 sec rech, 21 end.

 

So you can easily slot 3 dam/rech+3 procs. Also has 100% chance of mag 3 stun and good  knock up when used with aim. 

 

 

[Riverdusk]

13 hours ago, skoryy said:

Y'all are really that much in a hurry to nerf almost everyone, huh. In the words of Lucius Fox, "Good luck."

 

Shower thought: Procs aren't the problem. The overabundance of AoE burst damage is.

 

Just noticed @skoryy  beat me to it.

 

Procs help low damage AT's a lot more than already high damage AT's.  Just like @Coyote said, I sometimes proc bomb my controllers or defenders.  My scrappers, doms, and blasters I don't.  Any significant nerf to procs just tilts the game even more toward high damage AT's.

 

Not sure why procs always seem to be in such discussion compared to other issues.

 

[Maelwys]

3 hours ago, Faultline said:

I'll preface this by saying: I'm not a powers dev and I will not be making any changes like the one I'm about to mention.

 

I just wrote some code for a separate protect to allow enhancements to know how many with a specific tag are slotted in a power, and this could be used to scale damage procs based on how many there are in the power, something like 10% efficiency loss for each. One proc in power = no change from current situation, six procs in power = 50% damage from the procs in that power.

That sounds suspiciously like "Enhancement Diversification for Damage Procs"... 




 

 

9 hours ago, Erratic1 said:

10 hours ago, arcane said:

10 hours ago, Erratic1 said:

It only invalidates them firing at the same time. How often is that?

Only like every attack

Then that is definitely broken. And somehow Bio and Rage are in need of nerfs instead?

That's not broken. It's merely how probability works.

Consider one power, with 6 damage procs. This is not uncommon for powers with multiple riders like Knockback, Taunt and -Def.

Each of the damage procs there have a completely independent chance to kick in.
Sometimes none of them will activate.
Sometimes they'll all activate simultaneously,
It AVERAGES OUT to a consistent amount of additional damage over time.

As a worked example:

The above shows Footstomp slotted with 5x 3.5PPM procs and a 4.5PPM proc.
With no local recharge aspect* that's an activation rate of 47.9690% per 3.5PPM proc and 61.6744% per 4.5PPM proc.
That works out at an average increase of 71.7501*0.479690=34.418 damage for 3.5PPM procs; and 107.0897*0.616744=66.047 damage for 4.5PPM procs.
_{*Proc activation rate being negatively impacted by local recharge aspect is the bane of the current proc calculations and is something our power devs are very aware of and hate with a passion.}

However it's worth noting that you need to hit your target to gain that additional damage - and using lots of procs in a power that has a regular accuracy modifier can make it quite difficult to cap your hit rate versus higher-conning foes. Which is why Global Accuracy and ToHit boosts (like Rage!) come in very handy for "procbombers".

In any case... because at present there is a flat increase in damage per proc, it's comparatively straightforward to balance around and model for.



If more than one proc kicking in simultaneously was disallowed, then

(i) The average additional damage granted by multiple procs would plummet.
and
(ii) Powers with longer recharge times would become inherently vastly superior to those with shorter recharge times. Placing even more emphasis on 'optimized' characters taking long-recharge powers with low amounts of local recharge aspect and high amounts of global recharge.

To illustrate this; consider Footstomp with five 3.5PPM damage procs in it (the 4.5PPM proc uses a different probability scale which would needlessly complicate things):
 

The probability of AT LEAST ONE of those damage procs kicking in is 96.19%.
The probability of ONLY ONE of those damage procs kicking in is 17.58%.
That's a difference of 78.61%.


Under the current setup (allowing multiple procs to kick in as the dice land) the results follow a regular binomial probability curve.
The result is a consistent rise in average damage the more damage procs you slot into the power; and fully saturated it looks something like this:
 

ProcActivations	Probability	ProcDamage	AdjustedDamage
0	3.81%	0.000	0.000
1	17.58%	71.750	12.614
2	32.41%	143.500	46.508
3	29.88%	215.250	64.317
4	13.77%	287.000	39.520
5	2.54%	358.751	9.112
			172.0710898	average damage

If you were to disallow stacking (allowing a maximum of one proc to fire off at a time, having more procs merely increases the likelihood) then that would effectively impose a "hard cap" of one proc's worth of damage per power activation; and fully saturated it looks something like this:
 

ProcActivations	Probability	ProcDamage	AdjustedDamage
0	3.81%	0	0
1	17.58%	71.750	12.614
2	32.41%	71.750	23.254
3	29.88%	71.750	21.439
4	13.77%	71.750	9.880
5	2.54%	71.750	1.822
			69.00924618	average damage

 

172.0710898 - 69.00924618 = a loss of 103.062 average damage per Footstomp.

However if Footstomp had a recharge time of 40s (rather than 20s) then the proc activation rate for 3.5PPM procs would cap out at 90%. 71.7501*0.9=64.57509 which is most of the way to the "hard cap" damage limit. Therefore for high-recharge powers adding more procs would provide negligible gain to the point of becoming superfluous.
That's just like how adding more Damage Aspect enhancement to powers was hit by Enhancement Diversification... except it would require you to get your calculator out to figure out exactly where the "sweet spot" is... and heaven help you if the power has procs with different PPM rates - that'd need an excel sheet and some very careful fingerwork.

In short: /jranger.

[Psi-bolt]

1 hour ago, Riverdusk said:

 

Not sure why procs always seem to be in such discussion compared to other issues.

 

Because in many cases, procs’ potency means that other balance changes must consider how the changes will work with the current system of procs in place.  For players who don’t choose to leverage procs to the optimal extent for whatever reason, they may feel that positive change is being prevented by the existence of proc bombing.

 

Personally, I think that procs have gotten to a point where too many players depend on them to change the system meaningfully.  Tweaks around the edges are probably all that we can expect at this point.

[Maelwys]

3 minutes ago, Psi-bolt said:

Because in many cases, procs’ potency means that other balance changes must consider how the changes will work with the current system of procs in place.  For players who don’t choose to leverage procs to the optimal extent for whatever reason, they may feel that positive change is being prevented by the existence of proc bombing.

I think it's also fair to say that some people just don't wanna math.

There are a lot of bugs/inconsistencies in Mids - especially with epic and Sentinel powers and pet/pseudopet abilities and anything that's a "True Chain". And a LOT of people get hopelessly confused merely by the difference between a Global and a Procs and a Proc120s... let alone more involved stuff like how each of those can function differently in clicks/toggles/autos or powers that summon pseudopets (especially ones that immediately self-destruct); or how slotted Set enhancement proc inheritance works with pets/henchmen abilities; or how Arcanatime and ATBE can trim and extend the "buffs" such as Decimation/Gaussian/Soulbound Build Up effects.

The Venn diagram overlap between "people who like poking at builds" and "people who actually understand the mechanics and values of the powers" isn't huge.
And now you're asking them to perform math?

(Ugga bugga me head hurt, just tell me what slot to make enemy fall down fast!)

 

  

3 minutes ago, Psi-bolt said:

Personally, I think that procs have gotten to a point where too many players depend on them to change the system meaningfully.  Tweaks around the edges are probably all that we can expect at this point.

I'm not so sure.

The Devs (and a lot of players) very much hate the fact that local recharge slotting has a big negative impact on proc activations.

It has major drawbacks when the devs adjust existing powers - as reducing the recharge time of a power can sometimes seen as a nerf, not a buff (just look at Whitecap!).
There's also the (to my mind very valid) argument that enhancing your powers shouldn't accidentally make them less damaging.


The devs can now tweak proc effects on a power-by-power basis (see "Incarnate" Proc damage for the T1 and T2 Mastermind Henchmen whenever they were made "even level") so they could technically tweak proc damage of every single power independently if they really wanted to. However I think it's safe to say that that sort of widespread manual tweaking is unlikely due to the sheer scale of all the manual changes that would be required as well as the headaches involved in keeping them balanced going forward.
So It's more likely (in my mind!) that the devs will want to keep proc effects automated but balance activation rate around something other than local recharge. I imagine AreaFactor would still be a big consideration; although I'd prefer they nuked the calculations for "Chain" powers to function more like Cones than "AoEs with sky-high radiuses".

Back on live, CoH had flat proc activation rates for YEARS (the only things that functioned via PPM were the P2W store-bought procs) and it kinda-sorta worked OK.
However others have volunteered lots of possibilities; such as using Endurance Cost instead of Recharge (which sounds feasible initially; but has its own set of hilarious pitfalls).

Disclaimer: I'm not privy to any internal discussions of what they're planning to do or when. So don't take this as "Mael sayz to stop slotting EnduranceReduction b4 March"! 😛
I don't know when the aprocalypse is gonna happen. But I do think it's gonna be more than just a few minor tweaks on a power-by-power basis whenever it finally arrives.
 

[Myrmidon]

5 hours ago, Faultline said:

 

I'll preface this by saying: I'm not a powers dev and I will not be making any changes like the one I'm about to mention.

 

I just wrote some code for a separate protect to allow enhancements to know how many with a specific tag are slotted in a power, and this could be used to scale damage procs based on how many there are in the power, something like 10% efficiency loss for each. One proc in power = no change from current situation, six procs in power = 50% damage from the procs in that power.

 

An interesting compromise.

[arcane]

If the damage of, say, Arsenal Controllers gets nerfed because y’all couldn’t handle more targeted nerfs to powers like Radiation Therapy, DNA Siphon, and Whitecap……

[Erratic1]

2 hours ago, Maelwys said:

That's not broken. It's merely how probability works.

 

If procs, with different PPM rates, always fire together, it is broken because something that should fire at 2PPM and something which fires at 3PPM should not always be going off at the same time. But I admit, it has been a few decades since my last class in statistics.

Edited 16 hours ago by Erratic1

[arcane]

8 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

 

If procs, with different PPM rates, always fire together, it is broken because something that should fire at 2PPM and something which fires at 3PPM should not always be going off at the same time. But I admit, it has been a few decades since my last class in statistics.

You do not understand how PPM works then

[Maelwys]

56 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

If procs, with different PPM rates, always fire together, it is broken because something that should fire at 2PPM and something which fires at 3PPM should not always be going off at the same time. But I admit, it has been a few decades since my last class in statistics.

Whilst "PPM" is short for Procs Per Minute, it only actually bears any resemblance to how often procs kick in over the course of one minute in Auto powers and Toggles.

For click powers... back on Live all non-P2W procs had a flat activation rate which advantaged fast activating and recharging powers. Today on Homecoming (after they were changed to "PPM" in i24) their activation rate varies depending on how much area the attack covers as well as its base recharge time (and any local recharge enhancement).

Each proc gets a separate opportunity to kick in each time the power it's slotted in gets "checked" for proc activations.
On toggles/auto powers this check takes place once every 10 seconds; and on click powers it takes place "on power activation".
That means if you slot a power with multiple procs, they'll often all kick in at exactly the same time... especially in click powers that have a very long (>30s) base recharge time.
Different PPM rates just give procs a slightly different likelihood to kick in during those checks; so procs with different PPM rates can (and do!) all trigger simultaneously.

The likelihood of each proc kicking in depends on the proc's listed PPM rate and the power's recharge and area factors according to a fairly complex formula.

Further reading:

In practice, AFAIK most folk either trust Mids (ehh...) or use MacSkull's PPM Calculator Spreadsheet (make a copy) plus City of Data v2 for the base numbers to plug into it.
 

Edited 15 hours ago by Maelwys

[Erratic1]

58 minutes ago, arcane said:

You do not understand how PPM works then

 

I wrote: It only invalidates them firing at the same time. How often is that?

You responded: Only like every attack

I responded: Then that is definitely broken.

 

Per @Maelwys: Each proc gets a separate opportunity to kick in each time the power it's slotted in gets "checked" for proc activations.

 

If each gets a separate opportunity to kick in, why are they going off (according to YOU) every attack? 

 

Or did you not understand what was being written?

 

Edited 15 hours ago by Erratic1

[Erratic1]

43 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

The likelihood of each proc kicking in depends on the proc's listed PPM rate and the power's recharge and area factors according to a fairly complex formula

 

That is what I wrote (outside talking about procs and autopowers because the context was attacks--powers you are clicking (well, there are damage aura toggles).

 

This that you wrote:

 

Quote

The above shows Footstomp slotted with 5x 3.5PPM procs and a 4.5PPM proc.
With no local recharge aspect* that's an activation rate of 47.9690% per 3.5PPM proc and 61.6744% per 4.5PPM proc.
That works out at an average increase of 71.7501*0.479690=34.418 damage for 3.5PPM procs; and 107.0897*0.616744=66.047 damage for 4.5PPM procs.

 

is a more detailed iteration of what I wrote:

 

Quote

If procs, with different PPM rates, always fire together, it is broken because something that should fire at 2PPM and something which fires at 3PPM should not always be going off at the same time.

 

The notion of them always firing together was @arcane's

Edited 15 hours ago by Erratic1

[Captain Fabulous]

5 hours ago, Riverdusk said:

 

Just noticed @skoryy  beat me to it.

 

Procs help low damage AT's a lot more than already high damage AT's.  Just like @Coyote said, I sometimes proc bomb my controllers or defenders.  My scrappers, doms, and blasters I don't.  Any significant nerf to procs just tilts the game even more toward high damage AT's.

 

Not sure why procs always seem to be in such discussion compared to other issues.

 

Because they have been taken far and above their intended use. If Controllers were meant to pump out that kind of damage they would have been given it.
 

 

4 hours ago, Maelwys said:

That sounds suspiciously like "Enhancement Diversification for Damage Procs"... 


 

But I thought y'all think ED was the bestest thing to ever happen to this game? Soooo... 

[Maelwys]

49 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

This that you wrote:

Quote

The above shows Footstomp slotted with 5x 3.5PPM procs and a 4.5PPM proc.
With no local recharge aspect* that's an activation rate of 47.9690% per 3.5PPM proc and 61.6744% per 4.5PPM proc.
That works out at an average increase of 71.7501*0.479690=34.418 damage for 3.5PPM procs; and 107.0897*0.616744=66.047 damage for 4.5PPM procs.

 

is a more detailed iteration of what I wrote:

Quote

If procs, with different PPM rates, always fire together, it is broken because something that should fire at 2PPM and something which fires at 3PPM should not always be going off at the same time.

If we're all saying the same thing in different ways here, then great 👍


But I'm not certain that's the case. The point I was trying to stress was that at the moment multiple procs in the same power quite often all fire off simultaneously; regardless of what "PPM" or "category" those procs belong to. Which means that this:

  

19 hours ago, Erratic1 said:

Procs should be categorized as Damage, Buff, Debuff, and Control and when a power is activated, if there are two or more procs from the same category which would fire, one is chosen randomly to actually do so and others are suppressed.

Would be a HORRIFYINGLY HARSH nerf to proc damage.

Every Single Target attack with a base recharge time of about 15s+ would suddenly become unable to notably benefit from more than a single proc in each "category".
The only way that'd balance out is if they increased the current damage of each proc by several hundred percent. Which I guess is technically possible, but extremely unlikely.


 

 

49 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

The notion of them always firing together was @arcane's

Assuming you mean this:
  

15 hours ago, arcane said:

Only like every attack

 

I'm pretty sure that was intended to be hyperbole.

No proc will "always" trigger every single time because of the hard upper limit of 90% activation rate on each proc.

However I have a substantial number of powers with multiple procs wherein each proc has a capped (90%) chance of triggering. So the likelihood of 5-6 procs triggering simultaneously can be very very high; just not 100%. Nukes. Total Focus. KO Blow. Ground Zero. Weaken Resolve. Infrigidate. Flash Bang. Epic/Patron Pool Thunder Strike. etc.

 

Edited 14 hours ago by Maelwys

[Erratic1]

5 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

I'm pretty sure that was intended to be hyperbole.

 

He should cut down on the hyperbole, especially as he like to talk about people completely losing their minds. 😏

 

8 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

However I have a substantial number of powers with multiple procs wherein each proc has a capped (90%) chance of triggering. So the likelihood of 5-6 procs triggering simultaneously can be very very high; just not 100%. Nukes. Total Focus. KO Blow. Ground Zero. Weaken Resolve. Infrigidate. Flash Bang. Epic/Patron Pool Thunder Strike. etc.

 

So Rage absolutely, totally, without a doubt needs a downside for bringing Super Strength up to where other sets operate without a drawback and the alternative is a UM, which while fine for a Brute, is basically a watered down, weaker version of Rage on a Tanker, and that supposed to be fine. Bio has to be hammered for "reasons" even though whatever it brings to the table which could remotely be considered more powerful than other armor sets is not as game influencing as proc'd out powers, but procs cannot in any way, shape, or form be touched lest we invoke the collapse of the false vacuum undergirding the universe and all matter cease to exist?

 

Did I get the hyperbole right?

 

Hold on...feeling some extra hyperbole coming on....

 

People arguing that the changes to Rage were a bit heavy handed had completely lost their minds according to Mr. Hyperbole Master, so I am guessing people saying procs are sacrosanct far more vociferously here are engaged in the death of all consciousness across space and time.

 

 That out of the way, and with absolutely no snark or snideness intended, I always enjoy your insights and wish you a joyful season and Happy New Years. 🙂

[arcane]

How often does more than one (aka two) proc fire in an attack slotted with 6 procs? Seemingly damn near every attack, yes.

 

Invalidating that possibility would be a respec-requiring nerf to every single character I have. And the same to any other person who plays this game with an ounce of interest in pursuing offensive performance.

Edited 13 hours ago by arcane

[Maelwys]

  

5 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

So Rage absolutely, totally, without a doubt needs a downside for bringing Super Strength up to where other sets operate without a drawback and the alternative is a UM, which while fine for a Brute, is basically a watered down, weaker version of Rage on a Tanker, and that supposed to be fine. Bio has to be hammered for "reasons" even though whatever it brings to the table which could remotely be considered more powerful than other armor sets is not as game influencing as proc'd out powers, but procs cannot in any way, shape, or form be touched lest we invoke the collapse of the false vacuum undergirding the universe and all matter cease to exist?

Ehh, they're taking the Rage changes back to cook for longer ( @Player-1 has admitted as such publicly here). Personally I quite like the way UM is trying to boost the in-set powers and having both it and Rage available can be optimal in different cases. I'm just not a fan of the Rage Crash (neither current nor proposed).

Bio's had some of the issues flagged as bugs and rolled back already. I think the changes to Parasitic Aura's uptime are a bit over the top; but the rest of where the set appears to be settling (post bugfixes and scheduled rollbacks) isn't looking too bad.

However removing up to 5/6ths of the additional damage from Procbombed attacks seems like it'd be in a league of its own, nerdrage-wise.

Don't get me wrong, I hate the current implementation of PPM and I 100% want to see its sensitivity on local recharge aspect stomped out. But procs granting additional high amounts of damage is not by itself an issue for me - and IMO slotting more damage procs into a power should always be a viable choice to increase your damage. If anything I want more damage procs to be made available; especially in Ranged Single Target damage and non-Hold CC sets (like Fear and Stun). Slotting more procs is already balanced against the fact that you're forgoeing aspect enhancement and so need to cope with the power's endurance cost and accuracy requirements etc. etc. through other means.
The problem (as I see it) is that currently proc activation rate is drastically negatively affected by local recharge aspect; to the point where it is actively hampering the powers team's balancing efforts and it makes players slotting recharge into their own powers "harmful".
 

  

5 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

 That out of the way, and with absolutely no snark or snideness intended, I always enjoy your insights and wish you a joyful season and Happy New Years. 🙂

You too! 🎄

[Glacier Peak]

Slotting 6 Damage (or any similar type) enhancements in to a power creates diminishing returns. Achieving damage cap (through whatever means) creates a ceiling for damage output for a character. 

 

Both of these things are bypassed by slotting Damage procs. 

 

Damage is king. Mezzing enemies is a means to achieve damage output under less hostile circumstances. Defense and resistance are a means to achieve damage output under less threatening circumstances. Buffs and debuffs are means to achieve greater damage output of a team at the expense of contributing directly to damage output. Long live the king...

Edited 13 hours ago by Glacier Peak

[Bionic_Flea]

10 hours ago, Faultline said:

protect

 

Protect or Project?

 

Also: Dooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooom!

[arcane]

33 minutes ago, Glacier Peak said:

Slotting 6 Damage (or any similar type) enhancements in to a power creates diminishing returns. Achieving damage cap (through whatever means) creates a ceiling for damage output for a character. 

 

Both of these things are bypassed by slotting Damage procs. 

 

Damage is king. Mezzing enemies is a means to achieve damage output under less hostile circumstances. Defense and resistance are a means to achieve damage output under less threatening circumstances. Buffs and debuffs are means to achieve greater damage output of a team at the expense of contributing directly to damage output. Long live the king...

Outside of extreme examples though, the benefit is not that insane when you consider the sacrifices. I’m pretty sure most posters here would consider my zero defense glass cannons to be unplayable.

[Glacier Peak]

52 minutes ago, arcane said:

Outside of extreme examples though, the benefit is not that insane when you consider the sacrifices. I’m pretty sure most posters here would consider my zero defense glass cannons to be unplayable.

Slap a Barrier and a player is off to the races. 

 

Chug a tray of Purples and a player is on top of the mountain. 

 

Cash in on temps and a player can cross the Rubicon unchallenged. 

 

Why even play with teammates when a player can summon pets instead?

 

Extreme examples or just the same tools players have had since 2004.

 

Damage is king. 

[arcane]

27 minutes ago, Glacier Peak said:

Slap a Barrier and a player is off to the races. 

 

Chug a tray of Purples and a player is on top of the mountain. 

 

Cash in on temps and a player can cross the Rubicon unchallenged. 

 

Why even play with teammates when a player can summon pets instead?

 

Extreme examples or just the same tools players have had since 2004.

 

Damage is king. 

Sure. But interesting that when I suggest those same tactics myself, other posters are insistent that they shouldn’t have to rely on such things to survive at +5x8. Perhaps I am still making some sort of sacrifice 🤔

[skoryy]

9 hours ago, Riverdusk said:

Just noticed @skoryy  beat me to it.

 

Yeah, but I should've mentioned it's not just nukes.  Nukes, judgements, tanker AoEs, epic AoEs, other AoEs and then there's procs.  I was running with my savage brute the other day and finding most of the spawn was dusted before the animation for Blood Thirst was finished.  Everyone wants to be first with the AoE damage, and there's multiple ways of doing so.