Bill Z Bubba

While I am a happy follower of cynicism and pessimism, I will state that if I'm lucky enough to get into I-19 beta, I will do whatever I can to make sure that the new inherent fitness is functioning in all 6 kheldian forms come go live.

With I-19, one of the dwarf form's greatest drawbacks, its inability to benefit from fitness, is being removed.

Obviously, removing dwarf form drawbacks IS an option.

You're also ignoring the idea of adding mez resistance, not protection, to the human form. This would still give dwarf form its place as a break free but it would also allow more uptime and thus benefit to the human form toggles.

However, as I stated earlier, I'm certainly not going to push for any further khel changes until I've had a chance to properly test just how much of a buff inherent fitness is going to be.

Ok, that's what I had thought. The wording was odd. And yes, I consider hiding in plain sight to be no different that running away. Both serve the same purpose.

Stalker: Medium HP high burst damage archetype built around a the ability to hide from enemies and placate them when the going gets rough.

Are you really going to try and tell me that the archetype that hides and placates isn't designed for hit and run tactics? Really?

Stalker Spines lost quills, part of spines overall aoe output.
Stalker DB lost Typhoon's Edge, part of DB's overall aoe output.
Stalker Elec melee, lost lightning clap... ok, no loss of aoe there.

In any case, stalker EM's aoe output means squat when discussing EM's aoe output because stalker EM, apparently by design, has none. Any change to whirling hands to increase tank/brute/scrapper aoe output has no relevance to stalkers in any case because it doesn't exist for stalkers.

Talen, I consider stalkers to be blappers with melee mitigation sets specifically designed for hit and run tactics.

So, no, I don't care about stalkers having weak aoe output because they have weak aoe output by design as an archetype and I don't care about their mitigation from energy melee when they have so many other tools to get them out of harm's way.

Option 1 for me. Nuke the old, replace with new.

And while yall are working on such things, please get rid of the disparities between the sexes. Chicks deserve heavy tattooing, muscles and cigars as well.

Looks groovy.

I have to agree across the board with Justaris on this. I think we all need to get some serious play testing in on this before bothering to consider any other buffs.

I'm even looking forward to the added mobility of swift and hurdle in dwarf mode, not to mention having real recovery and regen while in dwarf mode.

Think I'll be taking WD on my PB at 20 this time around.

You could increase the radius of whirling hands and give it a new shorter animation with a higher recharge for more damage all without touching any cottage rule issues.

I have to admit... the forms just became a hell of a lot more attractive to me for both of my khels.

Late edit: I'm finding myself surprised at the lack of excitement about this. Is it because most of the forms users tend to form hop so much that you don't feel this to be as large a change as my brain is telling me it is?

As a point of order, the comparisons I did in those threads have lost a considerable amount of accuracy due to the recent fury nerf.

Even on the high end comparison, I wouldn't use a value higher than 75% fury (150% damge buff) these days. That's going to knock all the brute sets down a peg.

Energy Melee can still dish out considerable single target damage. EDIT: (Unless you're on a team and spend half your time watching the enemy you're trying to use ET or TF on die before the animation finishes, thus completely wasting your attack.) Its aoe output still sucks. Its mitigation from stuns is not something to ignore but its not good enough to explain away the state of the set right now.

If another set has comparable ST output, greater aoe output and comparable or better mitigation, then the set is not balanced.

I don't consider EM balanced. I also don't think improving its ST damage to be an appropriate correction. Either the mitigation the set provides or its aoe output need to be improved.

Dechs,

Calling the lack any mez protection or mez resistance in the human form just so that the dwarf form will have meaning a "smart design" is an opinion and in my opinion not an even remotely accurate one. I'm not stating that it isn't the design, I just don't agree that it's a smart one.

I agree on voids. I consider them extra XP.

As far as the passives not carrying over, your statement in bold of "any other pool power" is false. Hasten carries over. Had you left it at pool passives don't carry over, then your statement would have been accurate.

In any case, Castle responded to my PM on the topic at hand. With his permission I share with you his response: (cuz I keep PMs private unless otherwise agreed upon)

One should never keep all of one's eggs in a single basket.

Just more reason to expect diminishing returns on group buffs.

If there ever was going to be a time that the fitness passives were to be made functional in the kheldian forms now would be the time to do it and push for it heavily.

I don't use the forms on either my level 50 warshade or my current 267th reroll of my peacebringer, but I will happily join in the chorus stating that the new inherent fitness *SHOULD* carry over to the forms.

There is precedent for this move. VEATs have an inherent that grants them slightly higher regen and recovery in much the same way that the dwarf and nova forms come with enough recovery built in to cover the cost of the toggle.

If adding inherent fitness on top of the VEAT inherent isn't a problem, then why would it be a problem for the HEAT forms?