Bill Z Bubba

Oh, yea, that, too!

.... are there too many commas in that sentence?

I'd also like verification.

You forgot Slash which is where the achilles' -damres proc goes.

On the flipside, I'm often told that my opinions don't matter because I'm supposed to be some highly skilled player running around on the fringes of performance and thus have no understanding of how "normal" players play the game.

Yea, I find that to be total BS as well.

Mighty wide brush strokes there.

How about I turn it around and tell everyone what Your motivations are? You know fully well that your pet set is idiotically overpowered and don't want it nerfed for purely selfish reasons. You care nothing about game balance because it makes your epeen shrink up at the thought of any reduction in performance. Correct?

Set the DDR in Active Defense to be non-stackable. That move reduces SD's mitigation at the high end while leaving the mid-low end unaffected.

For AAO, we need to consider some assumptions:

Do we balance it around the age old 3 enemies is base difficulty so we should look at AAO's buff at that level? Or should we look at a more realistic difficulty level for a mid-level SOed up scrapper?

As it stands, AAO provides 46.875% damage buff if there are 5 enemies within 8' of the player and is autohit. It's cast time doesn't count due to being a toggle.

If we look at the other damage buffs, considering SO slotting:

Follow Up (.83 cast)and Blinding Feint (1.2 cast) only provide 37.5% and must hit their target to function.

Soul Drain against 5 targets provides 100% damage buff for 30s but (slotted) recharges in 61.5 seconds and also must hit the target to get the buff with a 2.37 cast.

Build Up needs no tohit check, provides a 100% damage buff for 10 seconds and recharges in 45.15 seconds with a 1.17 cast.

If we average them all out over time:
AAO: 46.875 no tohit check
BU: 21.6 no tohit check
FU/BF: 37.5 w/ tohit check
SD: 46.97 w/ tohit check

I don't know the answer to how much AAO should be nerfed. It's only real sibling is Fiery Embrace but that's about to be changed in a way that it is no longer a damage buff but will instead be extra damage similar to procs.

Gut answer? Leave the initial damage buff alone at 12.5% and drop the amount per enemy considerably. As it stands it caps out at 81.25% dam buff while also providing a solid taunt aura and a 7.5% damage debuff to enemies.

There's another toggle out there that a scrapper can take that buffs damage. It only provides 10.5% damage buff and costs .39 end/sec where AAO only costs .208 end/sec.

Perhaps AAO should be capping somewhere closer to 12.5 + (2.5*10) = 37.5%

Should be using....

http://tomax.cohtitan.com/data/power...ery.Night_Fall

10 * .11 unspecified but doing 10 * 3.06 negative damage for a scrapper.

Scrapper Range Damage shows 27.805 at 50 * .11 = 3.058

That may be the only broken power out there, and it may have been fixed since I brought it up.... <shrug>

Yes! Making it something similar to Dual Blades Sweeping Strike would be nice.

However, my NUMBER ONE REQUEST: Please make an alternate hand animation for all attacks that have a left or right hand only animation.

For example, while flying or hovering, there is a left hand animation for Claws Follow Up but when not flying it doesn't show up. For Claws Focus there is not a left hand animation.

For Dark Melee there are no right hand animations for Siphon Life or Midnight Grasp.

For Brute Soul Mastery there is no right hand animation for Gloom.

I would love it if an alternate hand animation existed for every attack in the game where it makes sense to have one.

Thanks.

Correct. And some of us ARE "fringe" players that like to tackle hard targets where KM's -damage WILL be of benefit especially when stacked on, say SR passive scaling damres.

I didn't read it that way. I read it as "if choosing between the two, why would anyone bother with KM?" Besides concept, I don't have an answer for that.

Translation: Things with team buffs aren't as bad as when they don't have team buffs. Ok.

Everything else you stated is just as true solo as when on teams. Damage auras add damage. True. SD gets an AoE and a variable damage buff aura but still has KB protection. Elec gets a damage aura and KB protection.

I can see where you misinterpreted my post. My intention was not to say that DA sucks. My intention was to state that DA isn't superior to the other sets in any way that warrants it being penalized with the KB hole.

No, I'm not. DA's mitigation levels are not superior enough over the other sets to warrant the lack of KB protection. DA, thanks to all the tools it does have, appears to be right in line with the other sets. Since the other sets get KB protection, why shouldn't DA?

FA's mitigation levels are pathetic. I played it at level 50. IOed to the nines. It's crap. This is supposedly balanced out by its heightened damage output which is being buffed to a point in I-18 that the case can probably be made that it would be on par with the other sets IF it also had the KB hole closed.

True. However, while I may be a complete aberration in many ways, how many high end scrappers don't respec fairly regularly? I can't respec Bill these days unless I buy a recipe off the market or a new freespec lands.

Inv, WP and Dark don't have AAO. I will not toss out the monstrous +damage buff it provides just because you can't build properly or adjust your difficulty levels properly to abuse it.

<.<
>.>

Do NOTHING but plug DA's KB hole.

It has already been stated that the reason of "just because" is an idiotic reason for anything. It shows a lack of actual reasoning and should therefore be discarded as irrelevant and meaningless.

No, FA and DA's mitigation levels are low enough that having more holes in their mitigation is not in any way balanced.

I can understand your opinion that having other mitigation areas increased might be more beneficial than closing the KB hole.

The advice to not play a set because we don't like it is a waste of the time it took you to type it and has absolutely nothing to do with AT powerset balance.