Arcanaville

[ QUOTE ]
i'm not kidding when i say this, but if regen lost quick recovery without being given back another +end power, i'd quit.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like a challenge. I believe I can design a regen set without quick recovery and without another +end power (sorta) you might still want to play, and would still basically fit the description of regen having the best downtime. But it'll have to wait until I can write it all up.

Give you a hint, though. Suppose integration wasn't so important anymore, and the constant reconstruction clicking went away?

[ QUOTE ]
Whoa. It's not every day you come into a thread you've been followin' and see a redname...

*genuflects*

Anyways - much thanks _Castle_. Shows that even the Hero Builder number is a bit high, and puts Stamina's base at about (exactly?) a 25% buff.

*mails SherkSilver*

Kam

[/ QUOTE ]

Castle is confirming numbers that have been around for a really long time. The numbers I use match this site which has been around for quite a while and I believe is parroting information from a guide that was posted long ago (but the exact original source for this information escapes my memory).

You'll note the site says that stamina doesn't increase the amount of end recovered per recovery tick, but decreases the tick time - which seems to match experience, and amounts to the same net overall recovery boost (dividing the tick time by 1+stamina is the same thing as boosting average recovery per second by 1+stamina).

[ QUOTE ]
new idea for regen and MoG's eventual replacement.

Since regen matches the other secondaries with just the first 7 powers, we need something different for the last two.

so, first we move revive to tier 9. Change nothing about it's recharge. But we change this power to be a compy of Mutation from the Radiation line. Give it a nice damage buff, acc buff, and recharge rdx to all powers as well as 75% hp and 50% end like now. The name becomes "Glorious Revival". I'd go with glorious ressurection but that's a mite religious.

Then, as our new tier 8 power, we get more of the other half of the regen set, recovery. Ideally, this would be a click power that click power that gives double the base recovery of quick recovery. I know, techincally its a conserve power clone. So what? Regen is all about the green and blue, so let's have it then. give it a similar recharge to CP of course. Call it Unflagging or Unrelenting or Tireless or something.

thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

Thought #1: doubling recovery != 1/2 end cost (conserve power). Doubling recovery is better. I don't know why people keep saying that.

Thought #2: Regen does better than match the other secondaries with the first 7. Buffing the last two would cause me to wonder why the best set was getting buffed, when the lower two (SR, Invuln) were not.

Thought #3: Revive probably should be buffed, if for no other reason than high level self-revives should have some benefit beyond eliminating the trip back from the hospital. You're dead: you've already paid the price for your hubris. A buff on a self-revive is much less balance-altering than anything else.

Thought #4: Funny you should mention this, because in my (as yet unposted) scrapper secondary balance analysis, I considered the option of taking quick recovery away from regen, strengthening it, and giving it to SR. Net damage mitigation change: zero. And yet, it creates all sorts of interesting balance opportunities.

[ QUOTE ]
For comparison most attacks have an average 1End cost of End per Second, so the first SO End reducer you put in them will save you 0.25 End per second, about twice what you got for those 3 slots in Stamina.

[/ QUOTE ]

Much more than that; in terms of end per activation second the average is closer to 4end/sec. Slotting end reduce in all of your attacks probably saves more end than all of your toggles likely cost combined.

[ QUOTE ]
im also not taking elude, since it (supposedly) got nerfed, i already had it and it used a lot of end, and running with it off i live about the same time, so i'll respec out of it with i7

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? Elude (and Kuji-in Retsu, the ninjitsu version) has +recovery. Its a click and costs no end to run beyond its initial activation cost. It restores END all the while it runs.

And if there's one thing SR scrappers and stalkers notice, its the day they get Elude.

Are you thinking about Evasion instead?

[ QUOTE ]
If they put a limit of 5 on the number that a power can hit, they ought to fully intend for that power to regularly hit 5.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thus we come full circle, from 2004's "this game has no skill or tactics involved, its just a button masher" to 2006's "whatever the power does, it should do all the time, no matter how I actually use it."

Like S_F said, its a bonus that the devs are happy to give us, because they figure it takes significant skill to use. The best you can possibly hope for by getting the devs to review this power is to make it worse, because its currently better than the attack power equations normally dictate.

I still think the animation time's a bit too long, though

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I was going to advocate any change to SM at all, it would be to speed its activation/running time up a bit. And hey, Castle, since activation times aren't factored into those attack balancing equations (like they ought to be), what do you say? Slightly faster SM, call it even?


[/ QUOTE ]

Actually - animation times are part of the factor in balance equation, although Castle left it out.

They admitted that claws was underperforming in some areas, and what did they do to balanace it out? Shortent he animations

[/ QUOTE ]
no, they only did that because it fit the theme of claws. otherwise, it is not a standard balance point at all.

to improve the DPS of claws, they could do one of two things.

1. give more damage to powers with very low dps, in claws case, this meant long animations.
2. shorten those animations

claws is obviously not about the big hitters and in order to properly increase the DPS to where they wanted it, they would have had to make swipe and slash into monster attacks, broadsword end of set type damage. that obviously wasn't an option. so they went with lower times.

i promise you, they do not take animations into account for balance 95% of the time. The rule is "whatever looks cool".

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to amplify, I think that *some* devs think about animations, and all of them realize that they have *some* effect, but there are two things being talked about here:

1. The devs have explicit equations that dictate the precise numbers for recharge and endurance burn, given a particular amount of damage for an attack.

2. It takes an act of God to break them.

So while no one was saying MA was "broken" because its powers did not fit the equation, they changed them to fit. In my opinion, they significantly weakened the set and homogenized it when they did it, but frankly - and I tend not to say things like this - I think whoever made the final call didn't give a crap that it did.

Claws has an Act of God exemption: it was stated that Claws was explicitly designed with certain "inherent bonuses" in end cost and speed, which S_F was able to determine it did not actually have in fact - which is how he was able to draw attention to "fixing" claws. Claws wasn't broken in the sense of being unplayable, it was broken in the sense of not following the very rules the devs (apparently) follow almost to the point being slaves to them.


Animation times are not a part of those set in stone rules. So when Claws was adjusted, Castle was free to - within reason - adjust them. This doesn't happen often not because there are balance issues, but actually because the current game engine requires an animator completely redo the attack animations, and apparently attack animations are crafted by one guy in a basement with a 486/33 and a one button mouse: animation work is extremely constrained over there. They really need to get that guy some help and extra caffeine.

But separate from the animation work constraints, if MA, say, had its animation times cut in half, according to the dev attack balancing equations, that would not be a buff at all.

Not all players understand this. If you ask for Shadow Maul to have more damage, you are asking for it to have its recharge time and endurance costs increased. There are no exceptions to that rule short of an Act of God. If you ask for SM's animation time to be decreased, you might be asking for something that can't happen until 2008 when the animator has time, but ironically you aren't actually asking for an actual buff to the set - in terms of the equations the devs use to judge this. Recharge speed and endurance costs could stay exactly the same - in fact, according to the rules the devs follow, they *must* stay the same.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Scale 0.75, or exactly 5.625%.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fine, get nitpicky why dontcha?

Damn mathmeticians.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mathematicians.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
SO, where are the SR Passive sitting now? Are they still at 7.5% or back down to 5%?

[/ QUOTE ]

5.65% or so, their original value. It appears that they were never actually changed to 7.5%, it was an erroneous patch note. I think. Arcanaville knows. But the passives are definitely at the same value on live and test (c.a. 5.6%).

[/ QUOTE ]

Scale 0.75, or exactly 5.625%.

I've actually measured them to be 5.63%, plus or minus 0.012% or so. So I really certain that's the number. It was never, at any time (I'm pretty sure), ever set to 7.5% for SR scrappers, although they might have been for a short time for SR stalkers. I'm still simultaneously amused and horrified by the reports from SR scrappers who absolutely *loved* the defense boost they never had. I'm sure there are red names that experienced a similar reaction.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
HO's increasing Range was a bug.

The cone sizes for the melee powers is part of the Recharge/Damage/Endurance calculation. Increasing Cone sizes means reducing Damage & increasing End costs or increasing Recharge time to compensate.

In general, though, this probably will not happen.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, could we just get Shadow Maul turned into a single target attack then? It's way too expensive for a very, very stupid cone that it has right now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I would say that most of the time when a larger cone would have had any chance at all to hit something, I generally hit at least two. When I'm hitting one, its usually because one is in melee range, and the other one is standing off, and virtually no change (that wouldn't turn it into energy torrent) would allow me to hit the other one anyway. It takes more practice and skill to hit more than one than a wider and deeper cone would, but I would definitely prefer the current SM to a single target one, and I would probably prefer it to a wider cone version that had either less damage or more end cost.

If I was going to advocate any change to SM at all, it would be to speed its activation/running time up a bit. And hey, Castle, since activation times aren't factored into those attack balancing equations (like they ought to be), what do you say? Slightly faster SM, call it even?

[ QUOTE ]
I understand since you get Lucky that you Scrappers can be overpowered. So, what about Stalkers we dont get lucky. I would rather it than the Toggle. I think you guys look awefully 1 sided on this Issue. Why don't Stalker archtypes get SR inproved for them. I guess because we get hide. Good thing that has not been nerfed. Wait it has! Why was hide not the Melee toggle or range toggle rather than take lucky away? I guess Villains are not allowed to hold their own like in comics, video games, or real life.

Stalker SR needed that.
Scrapper SR did not need this.

Devs fix this!

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming I understand this passage, and thats a big "if", stalkers lost lucky to get hide, but got lucky's defense folded into evasion. SR Stalker's get exactly the same defense from toggles and passives as SR scrappers do, even though they don't actually have lucky. What they lose is the extra scaling passive resistances in lucky, which are less useful to a stalker than a scrapper anyway. In exchange, they got hide, which when slotted has about an extra 3% defense to all when unsuppressed (and a lot more suppressed), which equates to an extra 10% damage mitigation or so, at SR defense levels. Its mostly a wash.

(60% - HealthPercentage) / 3, per passive. They max out at 60% if you have all three.

[ QUOTE ]
And did you know that Ring Mistresses have this horrible attack called Mask of Vitiation? I had never even heard of it until I was playing something other than my SR scrapper.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Its nastiest effect is really the end drain, and its SR's high defense that protects against that: PB doesn't really protect against MoV. Its the main reason my invuln goes unstoppable against Ring Mistresses, even though unstoppable has no psi protection at all.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The problem I've always had with SR is that you don't get any AoE protection until lvl 28. Try playing against Council hand grenades in the Volcano TF at lvl 27 -- it's impossible. You'll be thrown into the air so many times your butt will never touch the ground until you're dead.
NewScrapper

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry, but I somehow managed this TF with both my Blaster and Defender, neither of which have knockback or status resists

[/ QUOTE ]

SR scrappers have to be very careful about where they engage in large teams with AoE prior to Evasion (which is 35, not 28 - lucky is not exactly stellar AoE protection). A blaster and a defender can just stay far, far away from the action and still be effective. An SR scrapper who wanders too close to the tank can be blown to bits before they know what hit them if they aren't careful.

Of course, wander too far off and you'll grab too much aggro: SR scrappers from the high 20s to the mid 30s have to be very close-orbiting satellites around the tanks: not too far away to be buffed/healed, not too close to be kaboomed. Some get good at this, some don't.

[ QUOTE ]
I want to thank everyone that showed up to our After-E3 Player Meetup at Howie's. It was a really fun time and I enjoyed meeting everyone. We definitely had a good cross-section of players from all of our games!

Yes, I'm a guy. And yes, I am an Illusion Controller. It's really helpful when I have to write the budget.


[/ QUOTE ]

Is this because:

a) the Phantom Army helps pad numbers

b) Deceive can be made perma

c) accountants can relate to a power that Blinds and sleeps simultaneously

d) all of the above

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A1: In I6, this is the base tohit of various Ranks:

Minion: 50%
LT: 57.5%
Boss: 65%
AV: 75%

[/ QUOTE ]
Do Elite Bosses have the same tohit rate as regular bosses?

[/ QUOTE ]


I believe Bosses, Elite Bosses, and possibly snipers had 65% base tohit. Monsters, Pets, Turrets and Archvillains I believe all have 75% base tohit.

[ QUOTE ]
In summary, Defensive sets require a bump in PvP. However, the fix isn't a decimal point, it is a GLOBAL CHANGE that requires the addition of new powers or the nerfing of current powers.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is why the I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler is a good thing to put in now, so people mainly interested in PvE don't have to wait forever for a perfect solution that fixes PvP balance (which is probably an albatross).

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you were getting knocked around??? with practiced brawler?????

[/ QUOTE ]
If I remember correctly, Practiced Brawler is a click power, not a toggle, and it isn't perma -- (is anything perma anymore?) So, if PB goes down even for a heartbeat, you're grenade-surfing.

NewScrapper

[/ QUOTE ]

You can make practiced brawler and boost range perma, at least of the self buffs. There are other things you can kind of make perma, like patches (things like quicksand, tar patch, caltrops, and the like can sometimes be made "perma" as well).

If Practiced Brawler couldn't be made perma, do you think any SR scrapper would currently be complaining about defense?

[ QUOTE ]
I really dont understand this. My friend's katana/sr is lvl 50, he has never had any of the passive powers. On live he is SLIGHTLY disadvantaged against higher level mobs, particularly those with high acc like rikti drones and rularuu eyeballs. On Test, tried twice in the last week, ALSO with NO passives, he is a GOD. I really don't understand the claims that SR must have the passives AND the toggles to be any good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because another option to taking the passives is to take katana or broadsword, and use parry/divine avalanche. Parry has comparable defense to the SR toggles and superior defense to SR passives (but melee only). Kat/SR is really Kat/SR/SR.

Another alternative is to go DM/SR: DM's accuracy debuffing is also comparable in strength to SR's toggles and superior to the passives (and good against anything you can hit). DM's debuffing is so good that my DM/regen gets hit by things like high level bosses only a little more often than my MA/SR does - with fully slotted toggles and passives.

If you're playing Kat/SR, you aren't playing the same SR I'm playing.

[ QUOTE ]
Bullets seem to do the most damage to my SR scrapper and something like this would be great! :P

[/ QUOTE ]

Bullets seem to do a lot of damage to SR because a lot of lethal gunfire actually has -DEF debuffing in it. Check your buff bar the next time something machine-guns you, and right click on the machine gun buff icon that shows up (if you can safely). You'll probably see -DEF as a secondary effect on a lot of gunfire (family machine guns, malta assault rifles, etc).

[ QUOTE ]
So, since I'm not enough of a number cruncher to actually read all of that... I need a summary. Does this make combat easier or harder for us?

[/ QUOTE ]

A summary of a summary? Ok:

1. If you only fight even minions, you aren't going to notice much of anything.

2. If you don't have a lot of defense, you aren't going to notice much of anything.

3. If you do have a lot of defense, and you fight anything other than even level minions, critters will have a little harder time hitting you. The higher you fight, the harder it will get for them to hit you, relative to I6.

4. But if you have REALLY high defense, in I7 you might get hit *more* often than in I6.

5. If you PvP, forget I said anything.

[ QUOTE ]
That is an excellent guide all in all, although I have to disagree on this empirical statement:

[ QUOTE ]

Q4: But MoG is now even more worthless in I7 than in I6.

A4: Yes. So fix MoG.


[/ QUOTE ]

MoG is not worthless, it isn't now, and it won't be in I7. The only problem with MoG is that it is very situational, and that is not really becoming for a level 9 power.

Used right, I will stipulate that MoG is a great team saver. If things are going badly, the scrapper will activate MoG and hold the enemy off until the team is safely away.

That is, in my opinion, the purpose of MoG. Situational, yes. Worthless, not at all.

[/ QUOTE ]


The phrase "even more worthless" is a signal this is somewhat hyperbole. Nothing can be more worthless than worthless. The issue with MoG is whether its worth enough: its certainly worth less in I7 than in I6: if you thought it was worthless in I6, I7 is certainly going to strengthen that opinion. If you like MoG in I6, I7 may or may not change your mind.

[ QUOTE ]
Except the to-hit thing. I don't remember _Castle_, Geko, or anyone saying anything like that, I'll have to dig up their posts again to double-check.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're not gonna find one.

A couple of things:

1. I believe the LT acc bonus is 1.15 (57.5/50) not 1.16.

2. I believe the level bonus is +10% per level, not whatever it is the spreadsheet is using.

3. The I7 scaler has a discontinuity at +5/+6. From +5 to +6 it doesn't work the same way. I believe that at +5, the acc bonus is 1.5, and at +6 and higher it stays 1.5 but the critters start getting tohit bonuses again. +5% would be a good number to assume from +6 to +10 (the tohit increase that existed from +1 to +5), although I haven't tested this thoroughly yet. But while I could be wrong, I strongly recommend you assume I'm a good guesser in this case.

In fact, I'm so good of a guesser, I'm going to guess that my own +10 number above is wrong.

Disadvantages

Amplifies the disparity between /eng, /elec and other blapper sets. Decreases the chance for any real effect from non /eng non /elec sets, but increases the chance for an energy/electric mez to completely detoggle all of the toggles of the scrapper or tanker.


The main problem with this idea is that its even more all or nothing than conventional toggle dropping. If you make melee vulnerable to mez, then either the vulnerability is so low its meaningless, or its high enough to actually allow melee to be mezzed, and being mezzed is in effect a 100% chance to drop all all your toggles instantly.