-Urchin-

I did not suggest you simulate the experience of every single potential Blaster player vs. Melee player, nor did I suggest you collect flawless results as it would be impossible for you to do so, or anything close to either of those two overblown exaggerations.

My suggestion was intended to make this one particular comparison you chose to do provide as useful and flawless data as possible by keeping the characters as pure to their base as they can be, and to keep them as similar as possible with pool powers in the spirit of "all other things being equal".

That the veteran powers "will only matter to 20 max" is irrelevant as the comparison goes from 1-50 and the data should be as accurate as possible for all those levels, not just those above 20. These powers give the characters access to non-intrinsic abilities that compromise the comparison. Ninja Run provides for extra mobility within missions not intrinsic to the compared pair which corrupts the data further.

If you're going to be sloppy in your methods, thus compromising your collected data and any observations made from it, why bother with the exercise at all.

I don't know if it was mentioned elsewhere in the thread, but you probably shouldn't be using veteran powers or ninja run.

These abilities aren't intrinsic to the power sets so including them has probably affected your results in some ways compared to how they would have been if you stuck to the characters' inherent abilities.

I think a bare-boned comparison, limited as much as possible to abilities any new player would have as part of their sets and similar pool powers for the characters when possible, would yield better results.

When I play in teams with my /Devices blaster I contribute by blasting things. I also use caltrops when teams aren't working with perfect precision and I need some mitigation. I use Taser if foes get near as well, due to it meshing with my Sonics primary.

You're right though, in that /Devices isn't the best set for teaming. That makes the set a less than ideal choice for those that wish to team a great deal, but... not every set has to be a great team set, and not every player wishes to team a great deal.

I'm all for changes that increase the flexibility of the set without changing the nature of the set. Ultimately though, those that wish a secondary more oriented to team play situations should choose one suited to that purpose and not expect a secondary not so designed to be modified to suit their purpose.

I like this idea that you had. It may not be liked by all though, as some stealth without using Cloaking Device and don't take the power, and thus would be locked in to the uncloaked forms of trip mine and time bomb which may not be their preference.

I can honestly tell you this is an obvious loss in flexibility unless every player that uses /Devices always feels the need to lay three mines in immediate succession.

It's also a mistake to try to make a forest from a vacant lot.

It doesn't matter why they choose to offer or not offer X. All that matters is whether they choose to offer X. If they do, players that wish to purchase X may do so. If they don't, players cannot regardless of their wishes. Players are in no way entitled to X, and as such they do not need to explain or justify to players why X isn't offered.

The market, like any other, is for customers to buy what they wish from what is on offer... not from what they feel is owed to them.

This would be great for contemporary tights wearing characters, giving them a less painted on look.

This would be great for those ages, and for costumes of any age where the player wants the character to have tights that aren't perfectly form fitting and have a natural material look (as opposed to a skin tight ones with a spandex or latex look).

I think we already have plenty of costume pieces with this kind of feel.

X-----X

Masks that match tights better and have a less painted on look would be quite nice, as would some with the white eye look (preferably not glowing).

Also, it would be wonderful if masks that cover the ears also obscure the ear details instead of just changing the colour of them. Still seeing the ear details really detracts from the look of such masks.

Sure, one could stand in melee while using Dual Pistols ranged attacks. However, that doesn't make it Dual Pistols Melee any more than using Fire Blast at point blank range makes it Fiery Melee.

I could see Blasters wanting a Dual Pistols Manipulation set as a thematic match to Dual Pistols that didn't cause much redraw. Melee attacks using the pistols could be part of that.

I could also see some Defenders and Corrupters wanting some sort of Trick Shot set to go along with their Dual Pistols.

Strangely enough, on my tank in game, which doesn't have any set IOs, just generics at this point.. it seems to me KO Blow misses more often than my other attacks. I think, though, that it is probably flawed perception on my part, the long windup before hand making the whiffs that do happen stick out more.

Part of my rationale for slotting LBE for -def if I take it was to help out all my attacks land if I ran up against an enemy I was having trouble hitting, so it wasn't just for the combo in question.

Perhaps that idea is flawed though, and I'd be better off just slotting it as a conventional attack, as when all the set bonuses come into play accuracy probably won't be a problem, as you say.

It may be beneficial though to have that -def in there until the set IOs are in place. That process is going to take a long time. Until then the -def might be handy every so often, and could be switched to something else when the build matures.

Edit: Actually, looking at it again I think your right. Even with non-set IOs the additional -def is likely not needed, so it's better to slot it more like a normal attack with the exception of adding in the the Achilles Heel proc.

I'm not quite sure what the duration of -resistance for Bruising is, as it seems a bit longer than Mids suggests... but the effect seems a fair amount shorter than that of the Achilles proc if it fires.

The way I'm slotting LBE in my experimental Mids build that includes it I sacrifice some damage to get the -def to 22% for 6 seconds, long enough to follow up with Jab and KO Blow in that window... with a 20% chance of stacking an additional 20% -resistance for 10 seconds for KO Blow to benefit from.

I think that with Jab first followed by LBE that KO Blow might fall outside the Bruising time window, preventing the potential stack of -resistance in the KO Blow strike.

I use Combat Jumping/Super Jump, so either power would work.

Looking at Mids it lists a radius for Hurl. Since the attack seems single target, I'm wondering if the taunt of that attack is AoE, which would allow it to help with aggro.

On the other hand, Mids shows that LBE can be slotted for -defense, and have the Achilles process for possible -resistance, so it could be used as a combo damage/utility power, and perhaps as a ranged single target taunt.

I also wonder if Bruising would stack with the Achilles proc if it fired. That could make for an potentially good combo of LBE+JAB+KO Blow, if the stars all aligned... making KO Blow more likely to hit, and possibly cause much greater damage.

Wonderful!

That puts you in a perfect position to answer my question.

No doubt even now you are composing a response to my query, founded on your detailed knowledge of both powers.

I look forward to reading it with eager anticipation.

In an unrelated note, my first post has been updated.

Your solution doesn't account for the opportunity cost of shielding, and the tactical ramifications that may arise. Part of the cost of shielding is that while you are doing that, you are unable to do other things such as blast or control. As it is now, this cost scales with the size of the team, and is especially noticeable for MMs, who essentially shield two teams. With your system, the endurance cost scales with team size as it does now, but the opportunity cost is mostly negated after the initial application.

As such, this change amounts to a buff, which is fine.. if it is felt the sets need a buff. If not, the new hands-off approach would have to be offset with an additional cost to the player.

Further, the opportunity cost of shielding isn't simply represented by direct costs only to the player, but also influence how events unfold around him in critical situations.

In very difficult encounters a shielder may be in a situation where he has to decide between re-shielding Hero X or using one of his other abilities for which there is immediate need. With your system, such critical choices will never need to be made. Will that make shield sets more tedious in the end?

I suppose though, in way, it would make shielding similar to Willpower for melee archetypes.. Toggle and forget, and focus on using your other abilities. Lots of people like Willpower, so maybe having fire and forget shielding would greatly appeal... to some.

I'd personally be more attracted to making a shielding character if your idea was implemented, as I see these sets as a bit too fussy for me as they are.

However, some current shielders in this thread have posted they're content with the current system and they may be less enthused with your idea.

For some, having more time to use their other powers isn't why they chose these sets. For some, actively shielding is what they want to do. Replacing that with automatic shielding and more active use of their other powers may, to them, be a poor substitute.

What one finds tedious another finds enjoyable.

Perhaps, what could be done, is to leave some shield sets as they are now... cycle-based shielding... and change some shield sets (or introduce new ones) that are effectively toggle-based shielding, working in the manner that you describe.

Perhaps adding new ones would be best. It might be easier to add new archetypes than to rebalance old ones, and players wouldn't be faced with major changes to existing characters. Either way, it would give more options to players for shielders.

My advice to players, in general, was if they don't like the mechanics of a set to play one with mechanics they enjoy.

Since you, in particular, have played four buffers to 50, presumably you liked the mechanics as they are well enough.

Otherwise... you would have played something else.

Soooo... I don't see how you felt my post was all about you, but feel free to indulge in that interpretation if you wish.

Anyway, as I see it, the issue is pretty simple.

Patient: Doctor, it hurts when I do that.
Doctor: Quit doing that.

Play it if you like it. If you don't, play something else. Applying cyclical shields isn't the only game in town.

The alternative is at the character creation screen, where one has total control over the character they make.

There are many sets available that suit a wide variety of tastes. Not all of them require cyclical re-shielding.

It seems a bit ridiculous to choose to play - or to continue to play - a power set one feels to be tedious.

Pick... something... else...

There are many that choose shield sets precisely because they work the way they do.

Why should they potentially lose out on the mechanics and play style that they chose to enjoy when those that don't like how shields work can pick another set?

Changing the way shields work to suit the desires of those that don't like the sets as they are now could result in those that do no longer enjoying their characters.

It seems to me the easiest and best fix is for players to choose sets they enjoy the mechanics of, rather than trying to shoehorn sets into mechanics they enjoy.

Finding names can be difficult. It would be nice if those not in use for a prolonged period of time would be freed up for active players.

Anyway, some names that might fit your theme, available at the time of this post are:

(The) Seeing Eye

(The) Seeing Sentinel

Grim Gaze

Nightclops

Umbral Watcher