Time to allow ally shield on self?

[TheAdjustor]

50 minutes ago, WumpusRat said:

Defense sets focus on protecting the user. Support sets have buffs, debuffs, and often attacks as well. Should a set that focuses on self-defense not do that thing better than a set that has a wide variety of abilities and functionality. Buffing sets usually only provide some of that.

 

That would be a question of armors vs defense buffs.  Lets look at that.

 

Super Reflexes(scrapper) vs Force Field(corruptor).

 

SR  (scrapper)

Status Protection: Mag 10+ vs KB,Stun,Sleep, Hold, Immob plus KB Resistance

Recharge Time Bonus:

Achieves 43.4% def to all positions with just SOs. (can softcap if you take concealment as well)

Scaling Damage Resistance

63% Defense Debuff Resistance

 

FF (corruptor)

Status protection: 10+ Hold Stun Immob

Falls just short of softcapping with SOs

No Debuff Resistance

 

It's pretty clear forcefield on a corruptor would be close but weaker than SR on a scrapper but that's half the story.

 

The scrapper's primary does considerably more damage than the corruptors.

Comparing Say Claws vs Archery( both fast S/L sets with minimal secondary effects) it's a laugh.  The corruptor isn't in the same league as the scrapper and that's before even considering self buffing which just makes things worse.

 

So the question is really should support characters be gimped on both offense and personal defense or should they be at least able to have personal defense ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 14, 2019 by TheAdjustor

[Jeuraud]

54 minutes ago, WumpusRat said:

"Support" is a definition of a powerset

Support is a Trinity definition and CoH has never been a Trinity.

Support is also a frame of mind,,, for many people, the frame of mind that the Support is there to focus on them, thus Clerics are just supposed to heal, and Kinetics are supposed to run with Speed Boost, and all are supposed to group, and if you don't do these things then your being selfish.

 

1 hour ago, WumpusRat said:

Defense sets focus on protecting the user. Support sets have buffs, debuffs, and often attacks as well. Should a set that focuses on self-defense not do that thing better than a set that has a wide variety of abilities and functionality?

Sure, so FF

Quote

 

Force Field

"The Force Field powers give you the ability to create shells of energy that protect yourself and your allies from various forms of damage and harm. Force Fields do not reduce damage, but reduces your allies chance of getting hit in the first place."

 

a set that is all about reducing the chance of getting hit should do just as well as SR, another set that is all about reducing the chance of getting hit, and IMO this should be for the FF user, just as it's for the SR user.

 

The only difference between the two power sets is the mindset that Support is supposed to be week and about the group, while Melee is supposed to bring damage... well most of them, and able to solo.

My mindset is that a FF solo, should be just as protected as a SR solo... this is fricken CoH, not a Trinity MMO.

[WumpusRat]

1 hour ago, TheAdjustor said:

 

That would be a question of armors vs defense buffs.  Lets look at that.

 

Super Reflexes(scrapper) vs Force Field(corruptor).

 

SR  (scrapper)

Status Protection: Mag 10+ vs KB,Stun,Sleep, Hold, Immob plus KB Resistance

Recharge Time Bonus:

Achieves 43.4% def to all positions with just SOs. (can softcap if you take concealment as well)

Scaling Damage Resistance

63% Defense Debuff Resistance

 

FF (corruptor)

Status protection: 10+ Hold Stun Immob

Falls just short of softcapping with SOs

No Debuff Resistance

 

It's pretty clear forcefield on a corruptor would be close but weaker than SR on a scrapper but that's half the story.

 

The scrapper's primary does considerably more damage than the corruptors.

Comparing Say Claws vs Archery( both fast S/L sets with minimal secondary effects) it's a laugh.  The corruptor isn't in the same league as the scrapper and that's before even considering self buffing which just makes things worse.

 

So the question is really should support characters be gimped on both offense and personal defense or should they be at least able to have personal defense ?

It's interesting to note that you completely ignore all the other things that Force Field has other than just defense. Force bolt, detention field, repulsion field, force bubble, repulsion bomb, personal force field. If you want Force Field to have the same values as Super Reflex, then all those powers will have to go. In return, you can have the values on insulation shield and deflection shield lowered, and little +def auto powers to be put in their place, to bring you up to par, so you'll have to take at least 5-6 of the powers in the set to bring your defense up. You'll also lose the ability to cast the buffs on other people. We'll even toss in a +recharge passive to make it even closer. There, parity. Sound good?

[WumpusRat]

19 minutes ago, Jeuraud said:

Support is a Trinity definition and CoH has never been a Trinity.

Support is also a frame of mind,,, for many people, the frame of mind that the Support is there to focus on them, thus Clerics are just supposed to heal, and Kinetics are supposed to run with Speed Boost, and all are supposed to group, and if you don't do these things then your being selfish.

"Support" defines a powerset that has multiple buffs that affect other people. That's all. 

 

19 minutes ago, Jeuraud said:

a set that is all about reducing the chance of getting hit should do just as well as SR, another set that is all about reducing the chance of getting hit, and IMO this should be for the FF user, just as it's for the SR user.

 

The only difference between the two power sets is the mindset that Support is supposed to be week and about the group, while Melee is supposed to bring damage... well most of them, and able to solo.

My mindset is that a FF solo, should be just as protected as a SR solo... this is fricken CoH, not a Trinity MMO.

Okay, so like I said above, we'll make FF "just as protected as SR solo". You'll just have to give up force bolt, personal force field, repulsion field, repulsion bomb, detention field and force bubble. The values for insulation shield and deflection shield will be lowered, and bulked back up with some auto powers you can purchase for extra defense. And you'll also lose all ability to affect other players with your powers, it will be purely personal powers at that point. To balance it out, we'll replace one of the powers that you gave up with a +rech power as well. 

 

Now you're just as protected as a SR character. Sound good?

Edited September 14, 2019 by WumpusRat

[Jeuraud]

11 minutes ago, WumpusRat said:

Okay, so like I said above, we'll make FF "just as protected as SR solo". You'll just have to give up force bolt, personal force field, repulsion field, repulsion bomb, detention field and force bubble. The values for insulation shield and deflection shield will be lowered, and bulked back up with some auto powers you can purchase for extra defense. And you'll also lose all ability to affect other players with your powers, it will be purely personal powers at that point. To balance it out, we'll replace one of the powers that you gave up with a +rech power as well. 

 

Now you're just as protected as a SR character. Sound good?

Why are you turning FF into an Armor set?

 

Though what you have done does sound like it might make for an interesting Armor set.

[WumpusRat]

1 minute ago, Jeuraud said:

Why are you turning FF into an Armor set?

 

Though what you have done does sound like it might make for an interesting Armor set.

If you want to be "equal to <insert armor set>", then you'll have to sacrifice some things. Are you really asking what would be wrong with giving a FF character the same defenses as a SR character AND all the other stuff as well? You can't see how that might be, you know, maybe a TINY bit imbalanced? How it might completely crap all over the Sentinel AT in the process?

[Jeuraud]

1 hour ago, WumpusRat said:

If you want to be "equal to <insert armor set>", then you'll have to sacrifice some things. Are you really asking what would be wrong with giving a FF character the same defenses as a SR character AND all the other stuff as well? You can't see how that might be, you know, maybe a TINY bit imbalanced?

Of course FF is going to need to be tweaked, it needed to be tweaked as soon as CoH released.

 

PFF could be turned into a PBaOE +Def/ -Acc toggle, kind of like Time's, Times Juncture.  This would make it both a Buff and Debuff.

People have been trying to loose DF since CoH released so loosing it should be no real loss, but if it were toggled it would make for a unique Hold.

FB could have -Acc added to it and its knockback reduced, to bring it back into a Buff/Debuff power.

Maybe DB will need to be turned into a clickie or it's Def reduced.

I'm sure someone would holler about RF, RB, and FB being tweaked, but they need tweaking to reflect that they are part of a BD set, not an Assault or Manipulation set.

IS and DS are both clickies, unlike the toggles of Armor sets, this give an advantage to Armor sets.

 

Maybe the +Def of the set will need to be tweaked to account for the FF being able to use them, but there is no reason to turn FF into an Armor Set unless you believe that the BDs of CoH should be weak like the Support of other MMOs.

[n00baka]

I’ve always thought that Forcefield could use better utility, both because several powers feel lacking (looking at you, Detention Field) and because this topic has been brought up again. With the new Repel technology hinted at in another thread, I’d like to see what can be done with affecting enemies as opposed to just layering more defense on the character running the power set. 

 

With regards to the thread as a whole, I feel the suggested idea is too broad. Each power set could stand to be looked at, absolutely. But a blanket fix doesn’t feel right to me, and I would much prefer individual fixes tailored to the set. Maybe allowing Forcefield the ability to apply their shields to themselves would be the right move, but I’m not really of the opinion it would be right or that such a blanket move is the right move. I will happily admit that it’s a pretty decent idea, in that it would provide more powers for the solo FF player. 

[n00baka]

21 minutes ago, Jeuraud said:

PFF could be turned into a PBaOE +Def/ -Acc toggle, kind of like Time's, Times Juncture.  This would make it both a Buff and Debuff.

People have been trying to loose DF since CoH released so loosing it should be no real loss, but if it were toggled it would make for a unique Hold.

FB could have -Acc added to it and its knockback reduced, to bring it back into a Buff/Debuff power.

Maybe DB will need to be turned into a clickie or it's Def reduced.

I'm sure someone would holler about RF, RB, and FB being tweaked, but they need tweaking to reflect that they are part of a BD set, not an Assault or Manipulation set.

IS and DS are both clickies, unlike the toggles of Armor sets, this give an advantage to Armor sets.

I would love for FF to have more utility. Debuffs to the enemy Acc or Dmg, changing Detention Field into a ST Hold with a high debuff attached, heck giving DT a High DoT effect while the enemy is locked away would do wonders for the power (not enough, imo). 

 

Shoot, with Absorb in the game now, FF could benefit from that as a form of ‘reducing enemy attack’s effectiveness’ in certain powers. There’s a lot to work with for the set, but the cottage rule is.... tricky for this. 

 

Edit: sorry for the double post, saw yours after I posted

Edited September 14, 2019 by n00baka

[PaxArcana]

7 hours ago, WumpusRat said:

Should a set that focuses on self-defense not do that thing better than a set that has a wide variety of abilities and functionality?

Someone with Super Reflexes, is much more protected than the no-defense-set guy next tohim who has a pocket FF user keeping him buffed to the nines.

 

To return to the prior comparison, SR versus FF:

 

SR has -Defense Debuff resistance (potentially quite a lot of it), which FF does not.

 

SR also has much better Mez protection (twice the magnitude, and against twice as many things).

[PaxArcana]

5 hours ago, WumpusRat said:

It's interesting to note that you completely ignore all the other things that Force Field has other than just defense. Force bolt, detention field, repulsion field, force bubble, repulsion bomb, personal force field.

Force Bubble is an unbelievable END hog.  My MM on Live, with triple-slotted Stamina, running Maneuvers, Assault, Tactics, and Dispersion Bubble, with every toggle double-slotted for EndRedux and with zero personal, direct attacks to spend END on could never keep it running for more than about thirty seconds without risk of flatlining his blue bar.

 

Personal Force Field is useless - it imposes "Only Affects Self", and you can't fight while it's up.  (And MM pets all go into Passive, and don't fight, either.)  It is, at best, an "OH GOD RUN AWAY" panic button ... and not even a particularly good one.

Repulsion Bomb and Detention Field, I regretted taking on my Robotics/FF mastermind on Live.  His one and only Respec was to get rid of both of those, and PFF.  You can honestly HAVE those, thanks!

 

And the rest of your parity" nonsense, is just that.  Nonsense.  FF would then have the same +Defense, but less Mez protection, less movement speed, ZERO -Defense Debuff resistance, and no Tier 9 clickie to parallel the massive boosts from Elude.

 

Edited September 14, 2019 by PaxArcana

[TheAdjustor]

6 hours ago, WumpusRat said:

It's interesting to note that you completely ignore all the other things that Force Field has other than just defense. Force bolt, detention field, repulsion field, force bubble, repulsion bomb, personal force field. If you want Force Field to have the same values as Super Reflex, then all those powers will have to go. In return, you can have the values on insulation shield and deflection shield lowered, and little +def auto powers to be put in their place, to bring you up to par, so you'll have to take at least 5-6 of the powers in the set to bring your defense up. You'll also lose the ability to cast the buffs on other people. We'll even toss in a +recharge passive to make it even closer. There, parity. Sound good?

I am sorry but that's a strawman and a distraction. Nobody has asked for anything of the kind. What has been been said is that buffers should get benefits to themselves similar to what they give the rest of the team. What's more you deliberately gloss over the other half of the equation that ranged powersets with the exception of very few edge cases (flying enemies, for example) are objectively inferior.

[ZeeHero]

Any skill which works on others should work on self. Please do.

[WumpusRat]

6 hours ago, Jeuraud said:

Maybe the +Def of the set will need to be tweaked to account for the FF being able to use them, but there is no reason to turn FF into an Armor Set unless you believe that the BDs of CoH should be weak like the Support of other MMOs.

If you want to be "just as protected as a SR scrapper" as a FF character, then yes, you need to give up utility. It's about balance. It seems as though what you want is for a FF character to have more utility than a SR character AND be just as much defense. Which would be imbalanced.

 

2 hours ago, TheAdjustor said:

Nobody has asked for anything of the kind.

Really? Because a couple comments above Jeuraud asked for that very thing:

8 hours ago, Jeuraud said:

My mindset is that a FF solo, should be just as protected as a SR solo... this is fricken CoH, not a Trinity MMO.

My point is this, and after this I'm done with this thread, because I've said my piece, even if people seem to vehemently disagree with a plea for balance. 

 

If you want support sets (yes, they're "support" sets, get over it Jeuraud) to have tons of utility AND be just as protected as a set tht has NO utility, then just be honest and admit that what you're asking for is for your character to be made overpowered, and that you don't care about game balance. The more flexibility and utility a set has, the weaker it should be at doing all those various things. Jack of all trades, master of none, as the saying goes. SR, for instance, is THE self-defense set. If you want FF to be on par with it for defending yourself, you can't also have it be just as powerful for defending other people AND have a ton of extra utility, because it ends up overshadowing everything else that has similar functionality.

 

Simnilarly, if you allow support sets to ramp up the user to the level of a tank, you're giving a middle finger to the Sentinel AT, and proclaiming that it should simply be deleted from the game, because at that point it becomes POINTLESS to create one. Just make a Corruptor or a Defender, since you'd have just as much (if not more) defenses AND have a ton of team utility.

 

It's about balance. And with that, I'm done.

[TheAdjustor]

6 minutes ago, WumpusRat said:

If you want to be "just as protected as a SR scrapper" as a FF character, then yes, you need to give up utility. It's about balance. It seems as though what you want is for a FF character to have more utility than a SR character AND be just as much defense. Which would be imbalanced.

 

Really? Because a couple comments above Jeuraud asked for that very thing:

My point is this, and after this I'm done with this thread, because I've said my piece, even if people seem to vehemently disagree with a plea for balance. 

 

If you want support sets (yes, they're "support" sets, get over it Jeuraud) to have tons of utility AND be just as protected as a set tht has NO utility, then just be honest and admit that what you're asking for is for your character to be made overpowered, and that you don't care about game balance. The more flexibility and utility a set has, the weaker it should be at doing all those various things. Jack of all trades, master of none, as the saying goes. SR, for instance, is THE self-defense set. If you want FF to be on par with it for defending yourself, you can't also have it be just as powerful for defending other people AND have a ton of extra utility, because it ends up overshadowing everything else that has similar functionality.

 

Simnilarly, if you allow support sets to ramp up the user to the level of a tank, you're giving a middle finger to the Sentinel AT, and proclaiming that it should simply be deleted from the game, because at that point it becomes POINTLESS to create one. Just make a Corruptor or a Defender, since you'd have just as much (if not more) defenses AND have a ton of team utility.

 

It's about balance. And with that, I'm done.

I am sorry I didn't see his post, but even so you are still creating a straw man. The topic is letting support characters benefit from the buffs they give others not giving them melee armor sets, not if they should be given melee armor sets or some sort of equivalent.

 

 

Edited September 14, 2019 by TheAdjustor

[EyeLuvBooks]

I keep seeing a FF character (let's take the Defender because they'd have the best numbers) compared to the SR Scrapper (the Scrapper Primary apparently doesn't matter) and the argument that 'if the Defender wants the same defenses as the Scrapper than they have to sacrifice utility.'

 

Utter hogwash. Yes, in order to maintain SOME semblance of balance the Defender would have to give up SOMETHING but remember that they already have...damage. There is no way that a Defender Secondary...ANY Secondary, is going to come close to a Scrapper's numbers. Based on a brief glimpse at Pine's the Scrapper will average TWICE as much damage over time.

 

One of the reasons Controllers do less damage was explained as 'they're in less danger because they can change the battlefield.' In other words, Controllers can set up situations where they take less damage on average that a melee toon. In order to balance this, they were given less damage so they'll be defeating mobs more slowly.

 

Wouldn't the 'Shielded Defender' be doing the exact same thing? Sure, he's tough to hit and somewhat better protected from Mez (once they GET that far...) but he's still going to be doing significantly less damage than the melee counterpart. THAT'S the balance! Safer, but slower...the opposite of the Blaster's 'fast but dangerous' playstyle.

 

So what if the Defender can push a minion around? Not like it helps defeat them or anything.

 

I don't believe in things being locked in place just 'we always did them that way.' Emmert did lots of things that the players hated, the later devs reversed those decisions and the players were much happier as a result.

[Jeuraud]

3 hours ago, WumpusRat said:

My point is this, and after this I'm done with this thread, because I've said my piece, even if people seem to vehemently disagree with a plea for balance.

I believe this statement

10 hours ago, Jeuraud said:

Maybe the +Def of the set will need to be tweaked to account for the FF being able to use them,

is about balance,

and that you are all about keeping BD down at the Support level of other MMOs, and protecting your Sentinel which you have mentioned

3 hours ago, WumpusRat said:

, you're giving a middle finger to the Sentinel AT,

numerous times in this thread.

People will run a Sentinel because they want the protection of FF & SR, and the range attacks of the Blaster, but don't want to mess with the clickies of FF, which is part of the disadvantage of BD... having your primary protection being a clickie is part of the balance equation whether you want to recognize that or not.

When people started to complain about the clickies of FF they should be directed to the Sentinel; I would be very much against turning them into Toggles because FF is a BD set not a Armor set.

 

I also believe that I have said all I need to say in this thread.

 

Edited September 14, 2019 by Jeuraud

[srmalloy]

On 9/10/2019 at 4:05 PM, biostem said:

Iean, if you can surround enemies in fire, and even summon living embodiments of fire, why does it take so long just to fling around some fire balls?

The animations and power activation time slapped me across the face recently when I was watching a YouTube video about archery in the Middle Ages, and it was pointed out that, except for crossbows, if you have a heavy-draw-weight war bow you don't stand there with the bow at full draw while you take aim carefully, then release, because you can't hold it steady, and your aim turns to slime because you're waving the bow around trying to hold it steady -- and then seeing the animations in CoH where you're doing exactly this, and the high-damage, high-accuracy attacks are animated as you shooting your bow completely wrong,in a way that would be destroying your accuracy.

[biostem]

1 minute ago, srmalloy said:

The animations and power activation time slapped me across the face recently when I was watching a YouTube video about archery in the Middle Ages, and it was pointed out that, except for crossbows, if you have a heavy-draw-weight war bow you don't stand there with the bow at full draw while you take aim carefully, then release, because you can't hold it steady, and your aim turns to slime because you're waving the bow around trying to hold it steady -- and then seeing the animations in CoH where you're doing exactly this, and the high-damage, high-accuracy attacks are animated as you shooting your bow completely wrong,in a way that would be destroying your accuracy.

Well, how about the fact that they use the exact same animation for a longbow, a recurve bow, and a modern compound bow?  But, yeah - a lot is sacrificed in the name of balance and ease of implementation...

[MirrorDarkly]

I would like to see this issue examined by the dev's. To me the biggest thing is that some sets like Time massively buff there users defenses on top of everything else they do.

 

Then you have sets like force field that do far less then, and don't allow the user to benefit from most of it.

 

I guess I just don't see any rime or reason as to why some sets buff everyone and others exclude the user so heavely.

[TheAdjustor]

3 hours ago, MirrorDarkly said:

I would like to see this issue examined by the dev's. To me the biggest thing is that some sets like Time massively buff there users defenses on top of everything else they do.

 

Then you have sets like force field that do far less then, and don't allow the user to benefit from most of it.

 

I guess I just don't see any rime or reason as to why some sets buff everyone and others exclude the user so heavely.

I can give you a guess. The game had multiple people over time deciding it's direction and even when it had the same people in charge, they didn't consider game integrity as job 1 so much as maybe job 8.

[Replacement]

On 9/13/2019 at 9:52 PM, GM Sijin said:

I don't know where I'd stand on this issue. There's a lot of arguments for and against various things that are fairly valid. The disparity in solo-usefulness has always existed. Let's compare two of the worst offenders:

Empathy vs Dark Miasma.

 

Literally every power in Dark Miasma benefits the user solo (arguments around Black Hole's usefulness not withstanding). All of which (excepting the offensive effects of the rez) have good uptime/availability.

The 3 auras are the only powers in Empathy that benefits the user solo, two of which have bad uptime.

 

This disparity is absolutely incredible. But I've never had a problem with that, as I understood that the support sets were designed, and balanced, around having a team.

 

I just asked myself: Is that an acceptable game design?

And I find I have two incompatible answers:

In an MMO? I'd expect it.

In City of? I'm... not sure.

 

I challenge myself with the question "Why is it ok for debuff-focused sets to almost exclusively work solo, where buff sets are mostly the opposite?" I don't have a satisfactory answer to that.

I think it made sense in 2004.  I do not think it made sense in 2008, or 2011.  The reality is, you don't need to make Force Field Defenders "solo only" to get them to party.  In the same way a Brute is fantastic at soloing, but it's still the excruciating path to 50.

 

Self-counterpoint: buffs are not resisted, which gives them an inherent advantage against content.  So I can understand if they decided that "weighed" the same as solo-incompetence.  I just don't agree or think it's reasonable anymore.

[EyeLuvBooks]

10 hours ago, Replacement said:

I think it made sense in 2004.  I do not think it made sense in 2008, or 2011.  The reality is, you don't need to make Force Field Defenders "solo only" to get them to party.  In the same way a Brute is fantastic at soloing, but it's still the excruciating path to 50.

 

Self-counterpoint: buffs are not resisted, which gives them an inherent advantage against content.  So I can understand if they decided that "weighed" the same as solo-incompetence.  I just don't agree or think it's reasonable anymore.

Now that the minimum team limits for the TFs and SFs have been removed, the devs are obviously leaning more towards the idea that while teams are an important part of the game, they're no longer required. You can find dozens of Youtube videos of 'squishy' ATs like Blasters, Defenders and Controllers/Doms soloing even EBs. Clearly a major portion of this is due to Crafting but that's part of the point. IMHO any buff (other than a Rez) that ONLY works on others should be reworked.

 

The Empath/team model was fine when the game started but it began to evolve with Inventions and even more so with Incarnate levels. It's obsolete and should be re-examined to see if it couldn't be brought up to date somehow.

 

What about altering them so they're more like the Epic Powers that self-buff? Most of those last about 90 seconds or so with a Recharge of 3 minutes. So you CAN make them Permanent but you have to slot for it. Change the buffs like CM and the shields from their current 'last 3-4 minutes, recharge in 10 seconds, others only' to 'lasts 4 minutes, recharge 4 minutes, has reduced effect on self.'

[Cooltastic]

I had a thought...

 

Don't know if it's a good one or not so you all can be the judge.

 

What if AT's with defender sets got their stats adjusted by the size of the team they're in. So from 1(solo) providing the largest inherent buff to 8(full team) providing the least inherent buff. This inherent would boost they're overall damage and provide increasingly stronger buff strength to self from they're current ally only buffs. Of course this means allowing the current ally only buffs to now also effect the caster.

 

To not change how the current full team formal is set at to greatly, I would suggest while in a full team of 8 the caster of said buffs would only receive 30% of the overall buff that they're ally's get to receive.  Then while playing solo you would get the max buff amount that your ally's would normally receive. Which means a 10% difference per teammate. All these buff abilities would obviously need to be changed to activate on yourself if you aren't currently targeting another player.

 

Most AT's are able to solo difficult content, but AT's with these defender sets need some help to bring them up to par with these other AT's so that they're not forced to always be in a team if they want to play that AT.