Captain Fabulous

[ QUOTE ]
How the crap would it know how much damage the person is taking. That's new tech. And the power would stop working when you zoned.

[/ QUOTE ]

Current tech allows pets to know if you take damage. Many of them will heal you (dark servant, MM bots) when they sense you've taken damage. The issue is figuring out how much, but that's just simple subtraction.

Another way to accomplish this is for the pet to take the same damage taken by the owner. Then it would know how exactly how much damage was taken (I7 MM tech).

If the power is done as a toggle zoning is not an issue, it just resets like all other toggles do.

If it's done as a click power you would have to force it to respawn after zoning. As all other pets to date don't do this I can't say for sure if it's possible, but it seems at least plausible to me that it could be done.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you took Instant Healing and changed it so that it made each hit act like illusory damage -- i.e., for each hit you take, a second or two after the hit you 'instantly healed' part of the damage, then what you'd have would be a defense that would scale the same way that Resistance and Defense did, and could be balanced against them -- 40% Resistance, 40% Defense, and 40% Instant Healing would all, over time, protect a character from 40% of the incoming damage.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can't be done without new tech. Significant new tech. This was one of the ideas I put forward in I3, before I really knew what limitations we have in the system.

[/ QUOTE ]

So then, how does Spectral Wounds work? Because it seems like what's being suggested is just all damage vs the character with Instant Healing working like Spectral Wounds damage.

[/ QUOTE ]

Each attack from Spectral Wounds damages the target, then after a set period, heals the target. Thus, it's all handled by the attacking power. Regen, however, is a defense set, and would need to track all incoming attacks in order for this to work as described.

[/ QUOTE ]

Y'know I was giving this some thought and came up with an interesting idea. Even better I think it can be done with current tech (and it just might work even!)

Ok, the idea is to rework instant healing so that it heals back a percentage of damage taken. Not possible you say with current tech. Spectal Wounds does this, but as an attack, not a defense.

But what if upon the casting of instant healing a "pet" was created -- invisible and non-targetable -- whose sole purpose was to heal the caster whenever it took damage? The pet would be programmed to detect damage taken by the owner and heal accordingly, or share the damage taken by the owner and heal itself and it's owner.

All of this I believe is currently-available tech. The non-targetable pets are (burn, tar patch, caltrops, etc.), invisibility certainly is, and upcoming MM tech allows pets in defensive mode to take damage whenever their owner does.

All of this would be "behind the scenes" and invisible to the user -- all they would see is regaining health after taking damage.

Whadda ya think Castle? It just might work, no?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So how does this still explain how PATRON pool pets can be perma, but Dark Servant the 9th tier power for defenders is still thrown to the curb by not being perma :/. Bringing this up again cause it still exists and is a HUGE QoL issue, not an uberness factor.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is off topic, but I can answer this one. What a lot of people seem to overlook with the whole dark miasma power set is that although the powers are strong, they tend to be unreliable. Twilight grasp for example is a very nice heal and debuff. But if you are desperate for healing, it could very well miss the enemy. The entire powerset follows this theme of being unpredictable, including the pet. You can not guarentee that the pet will be there every time you need it, and that is the theme of the entire set.

[/ QUOTE ]

Without knowing exactly the nature, powers, hit points, etc. of the patron pets you can't judge how useful they'll ultimately be. There's an exceptionally good chance they won't be particularly hardy nor powerful -- meaning they're most likely to die long before you can resummon one; a far cry from being "perma".

[ QUOTE ]
There’s been a ton of discussion regarding Patron Power Pools, so I thought I’d at least give you a perspective from the design end.

When we release levels 41-50 in CoH, we quickly realized that these levels didn’t offer any new powers. Players would be choosing from powers that were already available. While extra powers are nice, it isn’t very interesting. So we asked ourselves what would players want? All Archetypes chafed under their limitations – Tankers had no range, Blasters no defense, etc. – so we thought we give each Archetype the ability to choose lesser versions of powers that would address their weaknesses. Unfortunately, new powers are incredibly art intensive. Instead of making new sets, we choose pre-existing powers and renamed them as Ancillary Power Pools.

During CoV development, I wanted to make sure that the game offered a different experience than CoH. One case of this was that CoV became far more focused on storyline and background than CoH was. We tried to create a vibrant villainous organization that players would want to be part of. For inspiration, I looked to the world of comic books, which are filled with cool, evil organizations. I also wanted our villain versions of “ancillary power pools” to be unique; with the emphasis on Arachnos, I decided to create the Patron system.

Many have complained that this hinders creativity and roleplaying. After all, not everyone wants to be a villain that works for Arachnos. Certainly, a large strength of the City franchise has always been its customizability. To a degree, the Patron powers somewhat inhibit this by compelling people into “working” for certain Arachnos agents. The powers also do not dovetail perfectly into current power sets.

What fascinates me is how new this discussion is to the MMP world. I’ve played lots of games over the years, and usually customization wasn’t that big of an issue. I won’t use any particular game as an example, but rather I’ll take D&D 1st edition to demonstrate a difference. Magic Users then couldn’t use swords. Just couldn’t. They couldn’t really wear armor, either. The major reason for this was balance: a sword wielding, armor wearing mage rendered any regular ole fighter pretty darn useless. There was certainly some grumbling – after all, didn’t Gandalf wield a sword? – but pretty much it’s been accepted. In fantasy games today (online and other), the same limitations continue to apply…When designing City of Heroes, I remember a lot of people telling me that it was just plain wrong to give people so many costume choices in the beginning. People wanted to earn individuality over time, not receive it. Yet, to this day, I think character creation is the single most praised element of the City.

If I were to wax philosophical for a moment – I wonder whether it’s the genre (super heroes), the medium (City of Heroes) or the nature of the internet which has led to a greater demand for individuality. MMP’s, for the most part, are simply direct descendants of D&D, as described above. The gameplay, the mechanics, have pretty much followed the same pattern for ALL computer RPG’s. There’s certainly some demand for customization in other games (as I read on their boards), but it’s never quite the same as it is here for CoH. Maybe it’s because super heroes, by definition, are unique; thus, to play a super hero game a player wants to have those choices. But then I look at the internet, where we demand customization even down to our e-mail address. No one wants to be given a particular address, we almost always choose our own “handles.” Heck, I use the same name in nearly every MMP game to this day, as if it were my own digital shadow. Hopefully, some academic will look for this in the future.

Positron and I will certainly keep this in mind for the future…oh, by the way, the reason that Electrical Power is reddish is so that it could mesh well with some Patron Powers. That was the intent, at least. And, unfortunately, Chum Spray has been renamed to Bile Spray. Our powers guys’ felt that Chum was just too campy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, i'm not exactly sure what you're trying to imply. It seems like you're chastising us for expecting CoV ancillary pools to be as diverse as the ones given in CoH. But I don't think it's unreasonable for us to have this expectation. You did, after all, set the standard when you made the CoH ancillaries, no?

I have absolutely no issue with the patron pools as outlined, except one -- they are not diverse enough to be applicable to all toons. I like the idea of patron pools, and agree that it adds a dimension to characters. But by limiting the choices to dark, shark/toxic, energy weapon, and electricity you're basically excluding toons that don't fit the mold (fire, ice, stone, rad, etc.). So as long as we're willing to compromise our toons we can partake in the story you've created, otherwise we're SOL. I'm sorry, but that just seems wrong.

And I can easily see how this is going to create a divide amongst the "haves" and the "have-nots", something you've worked very hard in the past to eliminate. A toon that enters into patron pools will definitely have advantages over those that don't -- ranged and aoe attacks for melee fighters, damage resistance for ranged attackers, and pets for all. But since the patron pools don't easily fit to so many power sets it's reasonable to expect many to just not take them, leaving them weaker overall than those that don't. Yet another reason why some will compromise their toon's concepts just to be able to keep up with everyone else as well as the game (that I'm sure is going to be designed with patron pools in mind). Again, this just seems wrong to me, and flies in the face of previous dev decisions regarding game balance.

Why can't we have the best of both worlds and let us decide which way we want to take our characters? Like I said, I have nothing against the patron pools -- I like the idea; I think it's kinda cool. And for some of my toons they fit. But for just as many other of my toons they don't. Why can't you, in addition to patrol pools, put together a few generic ancillary sets like in CoH? I'm not saying you have to come up with anything new, but a little more diversity for villains would be very much welcome.

Even just one generic set per AT would accomplish so much; a set that was not attached to a patron, one that contained mostly generic powers that would be appropriate for nearly any set (like laser beam eyes, conserve power, temp invulnerability, mez protection, focused accuracy, etc.) In an ideal world I'd love to see multiple sets per AT specific to each set like in CoH, but I'd be happy with just one generic alternative.

It really is having your cake and eating it too -- those that want to go with a patron can and those than don't can still have access to similar abilities and won't feel left out, or worse, underpowered.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Did you know... Task Forces and trials originally didn't auto-exemplar you.

When the exemplar system was introduced in I2, even if you were ex'd down you couldn't run a TF or trial you had outleveled. Sometime later this was changed so you could run a TF or trial you had outleveled if someone ex'd you down into the level range for the TF you were trying to do.

Unfortunately, if you dropped your exemplar at any time you were automatically kicked from the TF. So if your exemplar quit or dc'd at anytime or if you dc'd at anytime you would be kicked from the TF. Imagine doing an eight-hour task force only to have your exemplar dc on the last mission resulting in you be kicked from the TF.

This resulted in many angry posts on the forums. They were usually responded to by people telling them that they shouldn't be trying that anyway.

Fortunatly, to the joy of players everywhere, this was eventually changed so characters would be auto-exemplared down when starting a TF and wouldn't be kicked if they disconnected.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to point it, originally the devs did say that they didnt plan on implementing this system and that it wasnt broken but was just a temporary solution until they could get it working as intended (think they were meaning the 'flashback' mode thing).

There were so many complaints about not being able to do the tf's that they added the exemping to tf's but if you dropped or whatever you would be removed. (think there was a longer story to it but cant remember the details)

[/ QUOTE ]

That's pretty much the meat of the story. The devs never intended exemplaring to be used in TFs but the system was patched to allow it because so many people requested it. But as you pointed out if you or your host even momentarily lost connection the exemplared toon was kicked from the TF.

The reason this was never fully implemented at the time was the anticipation of what was called the Flashback system. This was supposed to have let toons lock themselves down to a particular level so they could partake in game content they missed the first time, including TFs. Once the Flashback system was implemented, we were told, it would fix any problems that existed with exemplaring.

Unfortunately, after over 6 months of speculation and waiting, Statesman announced they had abandoned Flashback altogether (he supposedly was unhappy with the entire concept) and the current auto-exemplar system was put in place.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Has anyone mentioned the old Zookeeper badge requirements?

Did you know... the Zookeeper badge originally had an error which required ten thousand Rikti monkeys to be killed before the badge could be achieved? Since Zookeeper is a requirement for a popular accolade, this resulted in monkey farming teams running marathon sessions against the psychic, gas-spewing Rikti underlings on an island off the main Peregrine Island which came to be known as Monkey Island.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually Rikti Monkies weren't psychic (well maybe psychotic) with the old Zookeeper badge. The Monkies picked up their Psychic Dart attack when the counted was dropped down.

And I still want a badge called Monkey Herder for all us who had to get 10,000 of the [censoted] little pests. I too went through marathon herding sessions on Monkey Island in Peregrine. Yes, the only time Fuzun actually herded. I'd round up 1/2 of the island for a extended AoE smack down session. So many monkeys my graphic card couldn't render them all. (And I succumbed to the Monkey gas a couple of times. Oh the humility of it. A Tanker sefeated by Monkey farts... )

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh no, they definitely had psionic attacks before the count was dropped. I too spend the better part of an afternoon on a herding team of 8 rounding up the little buggers on Monkey Island with my INV tank. With no psi protection at all I needed my own personal empath to keep me alive. Since I don't remember the monkeys ever not having psi attacks they must have gotten them in I3, which was right around the time I would have been in the correct level range to start dealing with Rikti.

The count was dropped when they instituted caps on AOEs. At only 16 mobs per attack it would be virtually impossible to get to 10,000.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fortunately, those clones don't last very long.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fixed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Heheh, you're right. I should have said "Alas, those clones don't last very long"

Did you know...

That when the game first came out it was very common to see a multitude of "clones" -- dozens of copies of various superheroes such as the Hulk, Wolverine, Superman, etc?

This all came to an abrupt halt not long after Marvel Comics filed their lawsuit against Cryptic for copyright infringement; one day all the clones just... disappeared...

Did you also know that it's not uncommon to see clones appear in the game right after a superhero movie is released? It's happened a number of times, including the Incredibles and the Fantastic Four. Unfortunately, those clones don't last very long.

[ QUOTE ]

Did you know...?

Originally, most Dark Armor toggles wouldn't stack, which often meant that DA Scrappers would have to, depending on their present enemies, determine which Armor aura would be most useful and go into battle with that toggle alone switched on.


[/ QUOTE ]

Neither did temp invulnerability and unyielding, formerly known as unyielding stance. This required the tank to get within melee range of foes, then switch to US. If the baddies ran away (or were pushed aside by pedestrians!) you couldn't attack as you were firmly rooted in place. You had to decide whether to switch back to TI and wait for US to recycle or to sit and hope the baddie would move back into melee range.

Also, for those unaware, capes were not part of the game in beta or at release. They first came around in issue 2. Auras too -- but they were in issue 3.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Temporary Invulnerability was once a click buff?


[/ QUOTE ]

Add to that that Tanks used to be able to get to 100% damage resists with it. Back Ally Brawler/Maurader appear to use the old power and rule, activating the power and then taking 0 damage per smash/lethal hit.

[/ QUOTE ]

AHHH... y'know, that answers a whole lotta questions. I always wondered why it was called temp invulnerability when, as a toggle, it's anything but temp.

And I was also baffled by Marauder's 100% resistance as well.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In any case, the current 3 slotted hover isn't fast enough to keep up with people on the ground who have swift + sprint. So instead of spending the entire mission in hover, I have to run, then turn it on in battle, then turn it off and run, etc. Not only a pain, but certainly not in the spirit of my toon.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not switch from hover to FLY instead of run?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because both of the toons that used to have 6 slotted hover use teleport as a travel power. Neither of them have (nor do I wish to give them) fly.

[ QUOTE ]
Hover: We might buff it some, at some point. However, it should never be an effective travel power.

Flight: I'll talk to geko about it. No promises. (I got spoiled by the Holiday Jet Pack, too!)

[/ QUOTE ]

I just want to throw my 2 cents in here. I too used to have 5 or 6 slotted hover on a few toons pre ED, not to replace a travel power (god NO), but basically to be in the air at all times during missions. Part of this desire is strategic, part conceptual design.

In any case, the current 3 slotted hover isn't fast enough to keep up with people on the ground who have swift + sprint. So instead of spending the entire mission in hover, I have to run, then turn it on in battle, then turn it off and run, etc. Not only a pain, but certainly not in the spirit of my toon.

And there are a lot of powers like this. Was the elimination of perma hasten by design, or consequence? PH was a staple of so many toons since beta, and ED just obliterates that. It was said many times before there was nothing inherently wrong with perma hasten because even though you attacked more often, you used more endurance, and that was the tradeoff. Is this no longer the current thinking by the devs? That perma anything is bad?

And what about powers whose recharge times were lengthened so they could not be made perma back in the pre-ED and pre-HO nerf days? Does Unstoppable still need to have a 16 minute recharge?

And fly and teleport are other examples. Fly speed can't be capped any longer, and teleport just got cut in half. You can't possibly think that fly was too fast before and needed a nerf. And what is there possibly to gain by nerfing the hell outta teleport? So now instead of being at 1/2 endurance traveling to the next mish, I'm completely out. Is this necessary?

My overall feelings about ED are mixed, and I don't necessarily think it's a horrible thing. But I do think many powers need to be re-examined and adjusted with ED in mind.

One point that I haven't seen mentioned in this thread (yes I read the entire thread and Jesus Mary Joseph you guys can babble, prattle, and otherwise say in 10 paragraphs what can simply be said in one) are the effects of foe defense debuffs, typically found in great quantity via lethal attacks?

The -5% def in unyielding was touched upon and noted that the -def will now scale. But then so would the -def from lethal attacks, no?

If your overall defense stays 0 or greater after calculating the -defs, then there's no problem. But if you're a toon with no defense, or your adjusted defense becomes negative, then scaling will occur under the new system and you'll actually get hit MORE.

My guess is that solo or on small teams it won't amount to much, but on large teams that are +2s and higher the difference could be quite significant, especially if you rely upon defense (if you don't foes quickly hit the 95% cap). Some melee sets get a def debuff resistance which helps lessen the blow (no idea what the % is on that), but what about defense powers that don't have that resistance, like force fields and invulnerability? The difference in foe accuracy current vs. new could often be greater than the protection given from powers like dispersion bubble or invincibility.

Are there plans to address this issue or does this mean that non-defense based toons will now suffer in these situations at the expense of defensive sets?

[ QUOTE ]
Devs, no ultimatums or doom posts here, I just wanted to let you know that unless you change everything I want you to instantly the second I want it done, I'll be cancelling my account with you just like EVERYONE WHO HAS EVER PLAYED.

*irony detector explodes*

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, for you $35 and a copy of "How to Succeed in Everquest 2 Without Really Trying"

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'll give you $25


[/ QUOTE ]

I have a level 50 tank, and a level 50 blaster and several in their 30's. i'm sure it will go for a couple of hundred bucks on ebay

[/ QUOTE ]

i'll give you $30.......and some magic beans.

[/ QUOTE ]

$31.50... and I'll throw in a copy of "The Power Gamer's Guide to World of Warcraft"

[/ QUOTE ]
I have 3 RL friends playing WoW. Apparently just make a paladin and you are "uber" from what they told me. So the book would be one sentence long.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said it was a book

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'll give you $25


[/ QUOTE ]

I have a level 50 tank, and a level 50 blaster and several in their 30's. i'm sure it will go for a couple of hundred bucks on ebay

[/ QUOTE ]

i'll give you $30.......and some magic beans.

[/ QUOTE ]

$31.50... and I'll throw in a copy of "The Power Gamer's Guide to World of Warcraft"

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'll give you $25


[/ QUOTE ]

I have a level 50 tank, and a level 50 blaster and several in their 30's. i'm sure it will go for a couple of hundred bucks on ebay

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but if they're gimped and useless without their uber permapowers, what good are they to me?

$30, my final offer

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

So no ultimatums, ill simply cancel my account like many others have from the old beta crowd and quietly slink away to other games.
Remember that guys..its a *game* it shouldnt be work or a protest march.


------------------------
Megaton Max 42 INV/SS Tanker on Virtue

[/ QUOTE ]


Sell it on ebay. thats what i'm going to do.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll give you $25

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The most logical reason it went live as-is is because the patch that contained it also contained MANY other things that affect other powersets, missions, bug fixes, and the like.

It's illogical to hold back a entire patch that impacts the entire CoH player base simply because of one power in one set that affects only a small fraction of players, even within the set.

Whether you agree or not it I think it was the right thing to do, and I do believe if Statesman said it'll change, that it will. But SS tanks are not the only toons out there. Others were entitled to the fixes, and it would have been unfair to make them wait even longer than they already have.

Unfortunately, it's not all about us all the time

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, last I looked all these other changes were still being tested and evaluated. So it was unlikely that this was the case. Otherwise the forums would not have suddenly been under rooutine maintenence 4 days after they underwent rountine maintenence. DA and Stone and Ice defenses were still being tweaked and costs checked, invinc's range defense was back in but apparently was lower then it should be (?). This has all the appearance of an "oops!".

[/ QUOTE ]

Honesty it looks a lot like the release of I3. Things went out that had to go out (stability patches, mission fixes, things Statesman refers to as "stuff under the hood" that we as players don't ever see or hear about) that I'm sure were deemed more important than some last minute tweaks. Otherwise why would it have been released (honestly)?

Everything is done for a reason, whether we agree with it or like it. And I'm sure this is the same. It's easy to call it an oops, or premature, or a nerf, or stupid, or whatever. But I'm sure they had their reasons. Despite what we say and think about them when we get peeved, they ARE smart people, and they have a whole community to take care of.

Just asking everyone to step back and look at the big picture -- like the Devs have to all the time.

You may proceed to flame now...

The most logical reason it went live as-is is because the patch that contained it also contained MANY other things that affect other powersets, missions, bug fixes, and the like.

It's illogical to hold back a entire patch that impacts the entire CoH player base simply because of one power in one set that affects only a small fraction of players, even within the set.

Whether you agree or not it I think it was the right thing to do, and I do believe if Statesman said it'll change, that it will. But SS tanks are not the only toons out there. Others were entitled to the fixes, and it would have been unfair to make them wait even longer than they already have.

I for one am happy to get ranged defense back in invincibility (some have questioned whether it's in there, and I did seem to notice a difference while on a TF last night), something that is going to benefit me much more then any change to Rage. And I bet the other tanks are thrilled to know their armors can now stack. That's a huge change, and makes their lives a lot easier.

Unfortunately, it's not all about us all the time

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hmm... here's a thought. If the devs had wanted SS to hit as hard as the other tanker secondaries THEY WOULD HAVE MADE US HIT AS HARD AS THE OTHER TANKER SECONDARIES.

Seems pretty reasonable to me.

Now since we can pretty safely assume the devs DON'T want SS attacks to be as powerful as other tanks, how do you think they're gonna like it when you take what they designed to be a limited-use situational power and use it perma so that you CAN have attacks that are as strong, if not stronger than other tanks?

Now stop and think about that. Wait. Think a little longer. Again

(hint: they don't want SS attacks to be as strong as other tank attacks and I'm misusing a power to allow me to do what they don't want and never intended me to do, that is, have attacks that are as strong as other tanks)

Got it? Now try and see if you can figure out why they're changing Rage?

[/ QUOTE ]

Willy, I have seen several of your post and I know your the advocate of no Perma Rage.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am neither for nor against perma rage. I don't care one way or the other really. How one person builds their toon is up to them. But the Devs on the other hand have repeatedly said, over and over, that click powers with penalties are NOT meant to be perma. They are situational only. This is one (of a few) reasons why permaunstoppable is now nonpermaunstoppable.

I didn't say it. I didn't make it up. Statesman said it. Take it up with him.


[ QUOTE ]
You make an arguement that:

1. perhaps SS was never meant to be as strong as other tanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're talking in terms of raw dps, SS is right in the middle. And yes, it appears that if the devs wanted SS to have stronger attack damage, they would have done it. They already went and boosted damage output in I3 and guess what, SS didn't get more of a boost than anyone else. So yeah, in terms of raw dps I don't think SS was meant to be as strong as some of the other sets.

[ QUOTE ]
2. You have pointed out, several times, in other post that your team should take care of you, when you get into trouble with Rage.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhhh, yes. As a team, doesn't each player have a responsibility to take care of each other, whether Rage is a factor or not? As a tank, I take care of the team by sucking up damage meant for them. An empathy defender takes care of their team by making sure any who needs healing get's it, etc. etc. etc. What's your point?

[ QUOTE ]
3. You state tha perhaps the devs never meant for Rage to be perma.

[/ QUOTE ]

I state the devs state that powers like Rage were never meant to be used perma. Again, their words, not mine. Go look up the unstoppable thread. It's all in there.

[ QUOTE ]
For point one. If the Devs have meant for SS to be weaker than the other tanker types, I have never seen a red name post that.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're a bit off base, and apparently not looking hard enough. Statesman said in response to the unpermastoppable issue that this was NOT a move by them to make the SS set weaker, it was a move by them to restore BALANCE to the SS set because <drumroll!!> powers like unstoppable were never meant to be used perma, and because people were, their toons were much more powerful than they should have been. And he repeatedly stated that in creating the various tanker lines they strove for BALANCE, not EQUALITY. He freely admitted they are NOT equal, but BALANCED. Go look it up.

[ QUOTE ]
So until they do post it I'm going to be an advocate for getting as much dps for Wobster as I can.

<snip>

[/ QUOTE ]

They did. So you can go back to your day job now.


[ QUOTE ]
Point two comes into whether I want to team or not. I stated above that I team about 50 percent of the time. So I do not always have a team to cover my back.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, your point being? If you're playing solo and you're about to get a toggle drop from rage, YOU RUN. Speedy Gonzalez style. Andele! Andele!

The issue with being on a team is that if you're in the middle of a battle and your toggles drop you can't just run off as you'll leave your team vunerable to the mobs. But where most translate this situation into insta-death, I am of a more optimistic mindset in that I believe one's teammates can assist them for 15 friggin seconds till one can get their toggles up again. Understand?


[ QUOTE ]
Point three you talk about them never wanting Rage to be perma. Willy, you and I both know that the devs know darn well what is perma and not perma. <snip>

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, do you even have a day job? I DIDN'T SAY IT, STATESMAN DID.

[ QUOTE ]
Personally I see this change coming down the pike because Unyielding became mobile. <snip>

[/ QUOTE ]

It's possible. I summarized that possibility in one of the forums. But it's only speculation. You'd have to ask a dev.

But really, it's sorta irrelevant why, isn't it?

[ QUOTE ]
Well keep fighting for your points Willy and I will keep fighting for mine. Till then see you on the streets of Paragon City.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, you're right. It does feel like fighting. And it shouldn't. And frankly, it's wearing me out [masses of whining crybabies lead by Volante and Goldiewhatsherface scream and jump for joy].

All I've been trying to do is get 3 points across to people:

1.) Rage is going to change so that everyone is going to suffer a penalty. Not my idea (although I support it; if some should be able to get around the penalty and others not, that's not fair). Just relaying what the devs said.

2.) That Rage is not meant be used perma, and therefor is not the devs' way of making the SS set "able to keep up" with the other sets, and that anyone who believes this is misinformed.

3.) That before you denouce the new Rage on test you actually go and try using it. Attempt to develop a workable strategy for it. You may actually find that it works well, and although it's not the old Rage, it's still a useful and very usable power.

Sound advice for anyone who cares to listen.

[ QUOTE ]
The point has already been made multiple times that Geko balanced out the damage of SS taking Rage into account, but lets consider what you've just said anyway.

You are positing the idea that Superstrength damage SHOULD be sub-par, and that this is an INTENTIONAL design element.

Now, please explain to me for what reason WOULD or MUST SS be kept at a sub-par damage level? I'm asking you, WHY would the Devs decide that Super Strength damage must be poor? What possible design reason justifies that?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well not being a dev I cannot speak for them. I can only comment about what they have said, done, and otherwised inferred.

1.) I believe if they thought the SS set was somehow lacking due to it's middle-of-the-road damage output amongst other tanker secondaries that they would have changed it. They've had plenty of opportunity, especially since I3 where all tank powers got a boost. They could've just given it to SS, or made SS's bigger. But they didn't.

Conclusion: SS attacks are purposely, by design, and quite intentionally less damaging than other tank secondaries (which btw is true of Ice and Stone, both of which do less dps than SS)

2.) If Rage was, by design, meant (as a gift from Geko) to somehow "balance out" the damage of SS, he sure went really out of his way to do it (btw, does anyone have the link where he actually states this? I wasn't able to find it).

Problem is, there are some real logic issues here. If Geko had intentionally meant for Rage to be run perma or near perma, don't ya think he would have made it that way?

Had Rage been instituted as a toggle power, then I could understand all of the rationale behind the absolutely ludicrious statement "SS tanks need Rage to keep up with the other tanks". Having it as a toggle power would then make this obvious. We click it on, we get damage like an Axe tanker. We click it off, we save end when we don't want damage like an Axe tanker. Clean. Elegant. Effective.

But NO, Rage was NOT designed as a toggle power. Rage was designed as a timed click power with a penalty. Why go through all the programming to design a timed click power with a penalty when a simple toggle power would do the trick? Hell, why go through any of the trouble at all? If they wanted SS tanks to have the damage output of other tanks it would have been far easier for Geko to change our base damage ratios than to create a brand new and unique click penalty power.

Conclusion: The only logical conclusion anyone can draw based upon these simple observations (not to mention the five some-odd times this has been said by Statesman), that click powers with a penalty are situational, and NOT meant to be used perma. When this is done you have effectively pushed your toon outside the established specs the devs developed for your AT. And as any former permaunstoppable tank will tell you, the devs don't like it and the devs will fix it.

3.) In a recent post by Statesman he said that by using mez protection powers to prevent being disoriented when Rage wore off (thereby not suffering the penalty), one had an unfair advantage over others who did not have those mez protection powers, and this was going to also be fixed.

Conclusion: not only do the devs fully intend to have us use Rage in the manner in which they intended (non-perma, situational only), they're going to make sure that EVERYONE who uses it suffers it's penalty.

And I will disagree with you that SS attack power is at a "sub-par damage level" or that the damage is "poor".

First off, how many damage enhancements do you have in your attack powers? Are they SOs? Are they at least your level or higher (white or green)?

Y'see I have an INV/SS tanker. I would not call my damage output "sub par" or "poor" by any stretch of the imagination. At lvl 31 my damage output is easily at or exceeds that of my friend's lvl 30 BS/RE scrapper. And here's the kicker. I don't use perma anything! Never had, never will! I have Rage, and it's not even slotted. I very rarely use it (only when I must in life or death situations)

I use a good ole thing called a damage enhancement. And I use lots of them. Y'see, three of them in one power gives that power double the damage. Rage, on the other hand, only adds 80% of the BASE damage, lasts 2 minutes, and WILL have a penalty.

Conclusion: if you want your SS tank to do lots and lots of damage, add lots and lots of damage enhancements to them. They cost no extra endurance, come with no timer, no penalty, and work around the clock, seven days a week.

But let's do some math.

Let's say that Haymaker has a base damage of 100 hp. Now if I put only one SO enhancement in there Haymaker will do 133 hps. With 3 SO enhancements (2 extra slots) Haymaker will do 200 hps. With 6 SO enhancements, 300 hps.

Now, an unslotted Haymaker on Rage does 180 hp. A single slotted Haymaker, 213 hp (Rage only works against the base damage of 100). A 3 slotted Haymaker, 280 hp. A 6 slotted Haymaker, 380 hp.

Conclusion: adding 3 SO damage enhancements to an attack power (2 additional slots) will give you a greater damage output than will an unslotted attack power with Rage, and only 18 less damage than a single slotted Haymaker with Rage. And this greater damage will work all the time, never expire, and has no penalty.

Conclusion: Rage adds an extra 80% to an attack powers base damage for 2 minutes, with a toggle drop at expiration. Extra damage provided: moderate. Suggested use: highly situational, extreme needs only.

Bottom Line: if you want your SS attacks to do more damage put damage enhancemets in them. The return is far greater with absolutely no cost or penalty.

Rage should only be used in cases of extreme duress, life or death situations, where the modest extra damage it provides could mean the difference between success and debt.

Any questions?

[ QUOTE ]
Jahay makes an excellent point.

WHY must Rage even have a drawback?

SS does subpar damage compared to most other Tanker Secondaries.

Energy Melee for example does more damage per attack, compared to SS, PLUS they get a Build Up power and they don't have to sacrifice rediculous amounts of endurance when it expires.

All Rage does, with the exception of increased accuracy while it is running, is increase our damage output so that we are on par or close to the same damage as Energy Melee, Axe, Fire, etc.. But at the COST of having to take yet another power (Rage) and having to run it Perma (1rdx +P Hasten) or 4 rchg rdx's.... then you factor in the disorient that may or may not get you killed when Rage recycles and I think that is more the adequate for the small increase to accuracy.

So again... WHY must Rage have such a significant penalty??


To sum this up:

* Rage damage increase is a wash. All it does is increase our weaker damage output and put us on par with other Tanker Secondaries BUT at the cost of having to run yet another perma power. Therefore, IMO, the damage increase can be factored out!

* Rage accuracy increase is another beast altogether, but gaining an additional 25-33% accuracy at the cost of running one or two perma powers, really worth Disorients or huge endurance crashes? Good lord I think not!

In closing: leave Rage alone or REMOVE the penalties. Rage is an absolute MUST HAVE power if a Super Strength Hero wants to hit as hard as many of the other Tanker Secondaries! Rage DOES NOT overpower SS Tankers or give any significant advantages over other solid hitting Secondaries, with the exception of a modest ToHit Buff. Are we to really believe that ToHit buff is worth the penalties being attached to this power?

QF

[/ QUOTE ]


Hmm... here's a thought. If the devs had wanted SS to hit as hard as the other tanker secondaries THEY WOULD HAVE MADE US HIT AS HARD AS THE OTHER TANKER SECONDARIES.

Seems pretty reasonable to me.

Now since we can pretty safely assume the devs DON'T want SS attacks to be as powerful as other tanks, how do you think they're gonna like it when you take what they designed to be a limited-use situational power and use it perma so that you CAN have attacks that are as strong, if not stronger than other tanks?

Now stop and think about that. Wait. Think a little longer. Again

(hint: they don't want SS attacks to be as strong as other tank attacks and I'm misusing a power to allow me to do what they don't want and never intended me to do, that is, have attacks that are as strong as other tanks)

Got it? Now try and see if you can figure out why they're changing Rage?

[ QUOTE ]
This is strictly an idea for the purposes of brainstorming possible solutions (so feel free to poke holes in the idea or add suggested improvements/modifications to the idea).

What if you took Rage and made it a toggle with a high endurance cost. So a player could choose to toggle it on and off during moments when they felt they needed that little bit of an extra "kick". Instead of giving it a set damage multiplier like build up, allow the power to be slotted with damage, endurance reduction, or recharge enhancements - thus forcing players to choose what balance between the factors they want to use. In essence it could act in a manner similar to the focused accuracy power - only geared more towards damage rather than accuracy. Players who wanted to be able to run rage continuously could do so - but they'd have to sacrifice recharge time (in the event that the power dropped) or damage accordingly. Whereas a player who chooses to only run the power in emergencies, could slot it to multiply his damage by a great degree - but only for very short times due to endurance restraints.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmm... not a bad idea at all. First thing I've heard that could be be a decent alternative to what's on test now. Excellent!

[ QUOTE ]
WillyW. I will reply to you once, and once only.

You assume to know what Statesman meant. However, he ASKED for additional opinions and input, something YOU are trying to discourage.

Your arguments are predicated on one assumption, that you know EXACTLY what the devs are intending. Since your name is not red, you obviously do not know what the devs' intent is.

That is why you are misinformed and are clueless. You are not a dev. Therefore, you have no idea what they actually intend for the game.

We, on the other hand, are providing actual test results and constructive opinions and possible options. You are just stating one argument, which is flawed because, again YOU ARE NOT A DEV!

Please take your trolling elsewhere and allow us who actually care about the game and wish to strike a balance on the future development of it post our thoughts without having to listen to you ramble on your "understanding" of the devs' intent.

Also, honestly, I don't like the tone of any of your posts. I have yet to see a single one that was not condesending and none of them have been constructive. Please get off the high horse. The lack of oxygen up there is apparently causing some problems.

Remember, Stateman himself asked for our opinions and observations on the change. That from a post you claim to have read.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good, then I will never have to endure replying to you again.

I don't assume to know what Statesman said, I KNOW what he said. It was clear and concise. There was no vagueness, no doubt. And I don't have to assume to know what the devs' intents are CAUSE THEY TOLD US. And yes, Statesman asked for our opinions. But I somehow get the feeling (and it's only a feeling mind you -- I would never want to give anyone the assumption I might actually know or understand something that was not spelled out to them in nursery school blocks) they expect you to have a basic understanding of the changes taking place and why. But you apparently don't. And even when I tried to explain it to you, you call me names and tell me I'm misinformed. Ok fine. Whatever.

The problem is if you don't understand the nature of the changes you can't possibly be in a position to give useful criticism or suggestions. Hence why I have been desperately trying to get people to understand what's going on. But all they want to do is whine and make useless suggestions that make no sense and do not advance your cause at all.

This is why all the suggestions are "how bout a -10% hit" or "how bout a -50% hit", which, in understanding the nature of the changes, I know is a rather useless uninformed suggestion as it will not in any way do what the devs have told us and shown us they want to have done.

Why you think I keep pulling these things out of thin air I don't know. You have access to the same forums and posts as I do. Why you can't interpret them in the same manner as I, I don't know. Their intent is very clear and is spelled out in plain simple english.

And I'm not trying to discourage input. I'm trying to help you understand so that you can contribute USEFUL input. But you don't want to understand. You are convinced you are right and I don't know what the hell I'm talking about. And that's fine. I'm not the one having problems with the changes in Rage. No problems at all. Won't affect me one bit.

And frankly I'm not to hot on your tone either. I never called you names, I never harassed you, but apparently when you do it to me, it's ok, but if my "tone" comes across the least bit condescending, then I'm way up on a high horse. Again, whatever. Do want you want to do. Jump to any conclusion you want. I really don't care anymore.