Circeus_NA

[ QUOTE ]
Don't know if anyone cares about this, but I just logged onto the test server and checked Chilling Embrace in the Blaster line-up of powers. According to the text describing the power, a blaster's version of Chilling Embrace does have the new -damage aspect as well. I am assuming then that Jack Frost's Chilling Embrace does as well.

So, if yall want to up your -damage numbers I recommend teaming with ice blasters and controllers now

[/ QUOTE ]

Y'know that really irks me - once again what is supposed to be an Ice Tanker change/fix/addition becomes a change that is for more than just Ice Tanks. So again, what might have been a niche change for Ice Tanks, becomes something others can take advantage of.

So what's an Ice Tank's niche again? Oh yeah, that's right its not defense, its not damage mitigation, its to sit in a freakin' ice cube and whistle dixie for hours on end. That's why Hibernate is my Happy Place, its all I've got.

Also, like I said elsewhere, the damage debuff is very likely affected by level (not con) difference, as all debuffs in game are similarly affected already, including other damage debuffs.

Michael, that implies Wet Ice is around 17%. I'm finding that hard to swallow considering how truly imbalanced that would make the "have/have-not" situation with DEF enhancements.

Are you sure of that?

[ QUOTE ]
People have mentioned that the changes to Phase Shift are for PVP only. Is our Hibernate change only PVP as well?

[/ QUOTE ]

I figure the 45s thing that he told me probably is.

But if the toggle stuff and End Recovery and reduced End that he told me is as well, then he's really very good at not listening at all, even when you're talking right to him like I was.

And well... he posted it here and did not say it was PvP only.

I supposed that doesn't mean it isn't. But if all the changes are PvP only, why even bother.

Doesn't matter... still not going to bother playing Ice for I5.

If I want to play a Tanker, I'll play a Stone Tanker, at least they can survive anything short of a litteral nuclear attack within game when they're in Granite Armor with Rooted Running.

I'll make sure not to even give a crap tomorrow when I'm at WDW, though I may drink a glass of something to complete and utter lack of balance persisting until the day another company releases a competing genre game.

Well it says "about doubled" and mentions 6 even SOs. Which means its likely fixed at 1.1% not 1.0%. If you have 6 SOs for DEF now in the power it works out to 2.42%, but your right, that's not going to save you at all long term.

With the 12.5% Fire RES in FA and PF, and the fact that you can enhance PF you can net at best, with +3 SOs, 42.25%.

I'd like to know about the Frozen Armor situation, specifically what the value actually is (and if its higher than the 17% that Statesman told me in private), I just won't have the time to test this weekend at all (going to Disney World - they can't nerf that!!!). Because the situation we were in 100% guarantees a need to take Tough, no matter how you slice it. And that's a matter they need to address.

It would have been nice to see the Damage Debuff in action, but you gotta figure this goes live next Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday, and that will be the first time we see it. Live. So much for testing.

I figure Stateman considers us "done" since he's cut off contact with me for more than a week now, and there were still many outstanding questions that he never bothered to answer.

Looks to me like the Hibernate changes aren't even really on the test server yet...

On one character, Ice Armor Toggles (CE/WI/FA/GA) remained running, but SuperJump, Sprint, and two temp powers turned off.

On another character only Icicles, WI, and CE remained running, Tough, Frozen Armor, Glacial Armor, Combat Jumping, Sprint, and two temp power all turned off when activated.

It appears 100% identicle to the way it was functioning yesterday.

So I'd consider pulling it from the patch notes.

Edit: yes End Drain still looks about the same as always.

[ QUOTE ]
the problem with the wet ice slotting I think comes from game developers being lazy. They dont want to go through the effort of having to right code for a forced respec on level 50 ice tanks. " How do we do that ? " they say. and same with the game itself, immagination is gone, and they put a different paint job on existing powers and existing animations, calling them new arch types,...
I'm not really impressed with that at all, anyone else notice that?
Same powersets just different names?

[/ QUOTE ]

I dunno, they don't have to even force a respec. We already know they have the tech to do powers where some, all, or none of the effects on the power are enhanceable, so they could just set a fixed value onto Wet Ice if they wanted to, and declare it unenahceable, adn then it wouldn't matter who had how many enhancers that did who cares what in Wet Ice.

But then again, I feel the whole plan of changing Wet Ice in that manner is an extremely bad plan, and as I demonstrated previously in the thread adding 7.5% base DEF vs S/L/E/N/F/C to Wet Ice that was Enhanceable would put us into a much better positon in the defensive powerset rankings, and put us more on par with Invuln and Grante Armor. And it'd make us a little less reliant on Tough, which I think most people will end up having to take in I5 to even function.

[ QUOTE ]
It seems like there's a disconnect between how Ice works and how Statesman thinks it should work. It's like there's some kind of weird idea that it's actually effective lodged in the devs' heads.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ice was effective though I4. It had a lot of quirks, and maybe too much DEF, but that DEF got reigned in too far. I still say had they left all other DEF alone, but removed the DEF from EA and make it a Recovery/Taunt power completely we would have been far more in line with the other Tanker sets for I5 than we are now on Test.

I can tell you right now, I've tried a few different builds on Test, I can't really get anything that feels right for the amount of effort needed to play the build. Its to the point where I'm working on my Peacebringer and my Stone Tank (shhh... don't tell the Stone Tanks who are upset with me) and haven't taken my Ice Tanker out on live but once since I5 hit the test server, and I don't really think I plan to play him after I5 goes live.

Doesn't mean I'll stop being a thorn in the devs side about it.

I signed up to play a Tanker not a low damage Scrapper with a bit more health. That's just how I feel about it.

Oh if anyone was interested in exactly what my brain dump about Hibernate to Statesman was, this is from the email I sent to him:

[ QUOTE ]
Okay... Hibernate...

Before I get into it there is no denying that the heal on this power is strong, but as a Tier 9 power it just doesn't compare. Its single pro is the heal.

Slotting it for anything other than a single end doesn't play out well either (I've tried several different ways on test). There is no happy balance to be found between recharge, heal, and endurance that so may other powers can find with their enhancements (take Granite Armor above as a perfect example). Its basically slot for End and move on, because nothing makes it significantly better or more useful.

It also costs tremendously more End than a power like Granite, yet (if you could be hit while in it), the heal would not keep you alive nearly as well as Granite Armor will especially when backed up by Rooted.

Then there's the bogus simulated End crash where powers seem to randomly power off when the power is activated. This seems to have something to do with if you have Stamina and/or if you have End Reducers slotted into the powers. There's not actually a real End Crash when activating the power, but yet the powers turn off. And its not only pool powers, there was a whole thread about it on the forums where people had different results with various powers. I don't think anyone saw the same powers consistently turn off when activating Hibernate.

Then there's the loss of functional management while this power is active. By functional management, I mean the ability to turn powers on or activate them while Hibernated. Hibernate is just a Phase Shift, yet the other 3 self Phase Shift powers I know of in game: Phase Shift, Nebulous Form, and Quantum Flight, all allow you to do whatever you like whenever you like while using the power - including movement (heck Quantum Flight is the fastest movement power in game for the most part).

Also the delay in activation is too long and twofold. You get a delay while activating the power and then a delay while waiting for the heal to kick in. During this time you can be hit and you can be killed.

What needs changing?

The power needs, at the very least, to allow for functional management. People need to be allowed to do more than queue up a single power to fire up as soon as you exit Hibernate. They need to be able to make sure they can fire up their powers (same as with the other Phase Shifts) before they turn Hibernate off.

The heal and immobilize should be in better sync. You should not be immobilized until you are already healing. Right now you immobilize then the increased heal goes off seconds later.

Let us do something else while Hibernating. Unstoppable and Granite Armor allow you to continue fighting, and they are both far stronger than powers defensively than the heal on Hibernate is. And they can be used in conjunction with other powers in the set (the ever popular Granite + Rooted for example). Maybe let us use Chilling Embrace while Hibernated. Something. Anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

I just wanted to post this in case anyone though I might have said anything to garner the 45s limitation. As you can see, some of what I said was taken to heart, and some of what I said its questionable if anything got acted upon.

[ QUOTE ]
I like most of the changes, but I don't understand the 45s change.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its the only change that I'd really say is PvP oriented. Most every PvP battle I've participated in has resulted in me getting frustrated, kicking of Hibernate and forcing a draw.

[ QUOTE ]
{If the new changes ( unannounced) also effects the phase shift of hibernate it would be more effective as well. Meaning the new animation and ability would no longer have the phase shift effect. No that I'm editting this may be difficult to do and still be invun.} Editted change to post.

[/ QUOTE ]

While, as was said, Hibernate is a Phase Shift so powers don't interact while in Hibernate, I will note that I specifically asked that Chilling Embrace and Icicles be allowed to work during Hibernate, to make it an Active power.

[ QUOTE ]
Circ, I serious hope that Statesman asked you to keep quiet on other changes to Hibernate.

[/ QUOTE ]

The only thing he had actually said not to mention was it not dropping toggles. The thing I quoted was from a different mesage entirely, and his exact text.

He also didn't answer if we could turn powers back on while Hibernated which was in the list of questions I had sent him as soon as I saw the changes.

I've not gotten an email from him in close to a week now.

[ QUOTE ]
If not, however, it's arguably a nerf. Making it a clicky you can't come out of on will would be "teh suck," as it were. My gf uses it quite often for less than 45 seconds.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. That's why I had been looking for clarification. Only time I use it for longer than about 25s right now is to take a break, or when I'm logging out. So I want to be able to cut out when I'm ready, not when the game says I am.

I figure since at this point Stateman hasn't revealed all the Hibernate changes, and he only asked me to remain quiet on the one point that he already told everyone, I figured I'd post the full details he gave me:

[ QUOTE ]
Hibernate (Tanker and ancillary): Reduced its End Cost. Your toggles will not drop. It has a Recovery Boost. Fixed(improved) its Cast time. You can only stay Hibernated for 45 seconds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please note, that I immediately questioned him on the rate of the Recovery boost and if the Regen boost was changed at all, no response on either of those points. I also wanted to know if we could cancel the power (de-toggle) or if it was now a clicky - I didn't think that part was clear. If its still a toggle, that's cool, because it may, in fact, be the first power that is a duration limited toggle, meaning some new tech.

[ QUOTE ]
I would argue that SR and Dark Armor have clearly better defenses than Ice, and Regen isn't too badly off, either.

[/ QUOTE ]

In fact, with Elude, an SR Scrapper will exceed an Ice Tanker vs most mobs defensively.

Its just another thing that feels wrong.

[ QUOTE ]
7.5% base DEF on Wet Ice vs S/L/E/N/F/C, leave it enhanceable for DEF.

[/ QUOTE ]

And I wanted to add that this generally indicates that Ice would have been fine, and at roughly the same balance point that I presented above had they just left the defenses on Frozen Armor, Glacial Armor, and Wet Ice alone and removed DEF from Energy Absorption completely. Which is something I think I posted before, and I know I've mentioned to Fuzun.

It basically comes down to the 6 Ps: Proper Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance

[ QUOTE ]
Just wondering Circeus if you could come up with some combination of base def's that would put Icee's on par with the other tankers.

Who knows maybe they'd try those numbers in a test...I can hope

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming Energy Absorption is now just a minor DEF booster that happens to be a decent way to recover Endurance, and figuring that we won't get more DEF from it, the best possible and simplist change would be as follows (something I already suggested to Statesman):

7.5% base DEF on Wet Ice vs S/L/E/N/F/C, leave it enhanceable for DEF.

It puts us into a much better place defensively, but doesn't make us as strong a generalist as Stone is or as strong vs S/L as Invuln is. Here's how it would look with just that change (this change would not affect Toxic or Psi so they are not listed):

vs Invuln:
Smash/Lethal: Invuln takes 34% of Ice's damage (not great but read on first)
Energy/Negative: Ice takes 51% of Invuln's damage (we are Energy manipulators now thanks to EA, so this to me makes sense)
Fire: Invuln takes 62% of Ice's damage (still a weakness, and more where a weakness to a damage type with the commonality of Fire should be)
Cold: Ice takes 29% of Invuln's damage (Ice is the clear leader vs Cold)

vs Stone:
Smash/Lethal/Energy/Negative: Stone takes 86% of Ice's damage
Fire: Stone takes 26% of Ice's damage
Cold: Ice takes 68% of Stone's damage

Keep in mind that this would still require 14 mobs to manage, still require Permafrost to be 6 slotted as well.

We still won't be as great Tankers as a Granite Tanker, but considering that they eat a 66% slow (loosing 40% of their attacks, plus movement speed) and 25% damage it balances out some. It also comes very close to making up the difference that Tough does for us here, meaning some might go back to feeling they don't need Tough (not sure myself - I'd have to test it).

We will excels vs Energy/Negative actually beating out Invul, but its a tradeoff because Invuln beats us vs Smash/Lethal, and by a wider margin, and S/L are the most common attacks in game. Gives us that specialty we're missing. And it makes sense - Energy Absorption now defines us as energy manipulators, so should we be better vs Energy?

We get better defense vs Fire, but its still a clear weakness by comparison, we simply will be taking more damage from it than either Stone or Invuln take.

And vs Cold we become the clear, strong, leader, no one else compares. Period.

It would keep us more survivable at lower levels so people might actually consider playing Ice Tankers past level 20, which is a serious issue right now on test, as they come quite unmanageable (though liveable) right around level 10.

It also sets us as clearly stronger defensively than an Invuln Scrapper which is something we've never been before, not in I4, and not in I5 as it stands today.

Would it be enough? Dunno, but the numbers look much better, and more importantly they feel much better. It won't solve other issues we have, but other steps are being taken for those (like AV damage is being worked on). We will still have to contend with all the DEF debuffs and Acc buffs that mobs get. And people will still be able to get our DEF via luck, but at least they'll need more of them.

At this point its not so much as being able to absorb alphas, its about being at a point where Ice Tankers are taking much more damage over time than other either Invuln or Stone Tankers.

Compared to Invuln:
Smash/Lethal: Invuln is taking 18% of Ice's damage (not balanced)
Energy/Negative: Ice is taking 90% of the damage of Invuln (fairly balanced)
Fire: Invuln is taking 41% of Ice's damage (potentially balanced since this is a weakness, but considering the commonality of Fire attacks, its too much of a weakness comparitively)
Cold: Ice is taking 44% of Invuln's damage (Ice is supposed to be the best vs Cold)
Toxic: looks even if Chilling Embrace is in effect, but since Toxic atttacks are mostly ranged, and CE doesn't work at range its more like Invuln is taking 75% of Ice's damage and is therefore not quite balanced either
Psionic: appears that Ice is taking 70% of Invuln's damage, but again, like Toxic, most Psi attacks are ranged, and CE therefore would not come into play, thus meaning that Ice is really only taking about 93% of Invuln's damage. (potentially balanced?)

Compared to Stone using Granite Armor:
Smash/Lethal/Energy/Negative: Stone is taking 48% of Ice's damage (not balanced)
Fire: Stone is taking 17% of Ice's damage (way to underpowered comparitively even if it is a weakness)
Cold: Stone is taking 97% of Ice's damage (Ice is not even the Cold King)
Toxic: Even with Chilling Embrace running Stone is taking 17% of Ice's damage, but again Toxic mostly comes in to play at range, remove CE and it becomes that Stone is taking only 12.5% if Ice's damage vs Toxic
Psionic: Appears that Ice is taking 75% of Stone's damage, but again Psi is mostly ranged, remove CE and they are in fact, dead even

And to boot those numbers assume Ice has managed to amass a full buff via EA from 14 mobs and EA is slotted for 5 DEF. Even slotting EA for 6 DEF (who without Hasten would do that?), the picture really doesn't get any prettier.

So Ice completely lacks a specialty or dominance vs any damage type - Stone is better all around with Granite Armor running, and Invuln is even better than that vs Smash/Lethal. So I just don't see where Ice fits into the picture, but it appears that the picture in I5 won't really include Tanking.

[ QUOTE ]
But now, with ice tankers being unable to even drop a same-level minion's defense to the minimum without a) herding, and b) adding hasten to their build so they can put six defense SOs in energy absorption, what's the point?

[/ QUOTE ]

As Statesman can attest to from our PM/email exchanges, this is an extremely sore point for me, and one he and I clearly don't see eye to eye on.

He really didn't like that I had my spreadsheet set to 3 spawns (actually I had meant to set it to two and released it as 3 by mistake - doesn't matter for the story though). However, he didn't follow why, in the spreadsheet, I was having Chilling Embrace affect only 10 mobs, and not 10 mobs per spawn.

And I pointed out to him that it was because people will be herding 2 spawns or more together to achieve maximum defensive ability.

He responded (I don't want to put exact quotes) that this the design intent was to have one spawn fought at a time.

I then, nicely (I swear!), reamed him on that point. I made it quite clear that his "intent" and "desire" may be for us to be fighting only one spawn at a time, but the "design" and "implementation" clearly flew in the face of that. Why? Because if you set things to 14 mobs for maximum effienceny, and than balance against that maximum than that's where people will play. I specifically told him that while he's calling "as designed" (even though its "as intended") I'm calling "as played", and that its "as played" that in the end is far more important.

His response was basically "fair enough". Doesn't mean he will change anything, but it did set the tone for a lot of what we discussed.

And I was very clear that in setting the # of mobs required to something beyond 1 spawn almost certainly guaranteed that people will not stick to only 1 spawn. And that if he set the # of mobs from 7 to 10, he'd have a much better chance of seeing his "intent" a reality.

I'm fairly certain he did not at all get my resoning about the complete need for sustained DEF on a DEF based melee character.

And like I said, he basically told me they design around combats lasting 45s, but I think they're really measuring the time it takes to drop a spawn. Specifically he told me this is why EA lasts 45s. And I suspect that's why the new Instant Healing lasts 60s.

However, again implementation gets in the way of that. Because Defender and Controller buffs all last in the area of 2 to 4 minutes. This of course means that battles last as long as buff cycles, as they do in any MMO. Which means times like 45s and 60s are far too short. Again "intent" not agreeing with "design".

Ah well...

Hey RL, great post! I only disagree on one point...

[ QUOTE ]
the only thing that Ice has a total advantage over other tanks is in cold resistence and its secondary effect slow resistence (although a stone tank with granite is a defacto equal to ice in cold resistence with Granite)...so really the only thing that ice is superior in is resistence to slow.... We don't even own cold damage resistence.

[/ QUOTE ]

A Stone Tanker running Granite Armor actually out-performs us by 3% vs Cold. Why? Because they also get significantly more DEF vs Cold on top of their capped RES vs Cold than Ice does.

[ QUOTE ]
Every powerset has something that they can have as their claim-to-fame. In used to be that Ice was the defense set.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also we lost our status as being the Anti-Sapper tanker. A sorely missed attribute

[ QUOTE ]
<sigh> Look. Ice Armour is not terribly viable when put side to side with the other Tanker sets. Yes that is part opinion and part personal experience. It just doesn't have the resources necessary to make it a reliable tanker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Heh. Well, as someone who's played Ice/Stone, Ice/Mace, Ice/Energy, and Ice/Ice, I'd say you really need to try out some other combos. I never particularly felt that any one was more viable than the other (I didn't care for Mace, but not because it wasn't viable). Remember that "clever" is all in how you use the tools.

And this thread is *specifically* about the Ice Armor powerset.

For future reference, an "Ice Tanker" is one who has Ice Armor primary. Just like a "Stone Tanker" is one with Stone Armor primary, "Invuln Tanker" has Invulnerability primary, and a "Fire Tanker" has Fiery Aura primary.

So keep the secondaries out of it.

[ QUOTE ]
Whats EA with full slotted End Drain like?

[/ QUOTE ]

On Test? Same as it is on live.

[ QUOTE ]
Not only does Ice Patch offer the already mentioned benefits and doesn't need a to-hit role *cough* and can be powered out three at a time (with recharge slotts)...

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but Fault slotted with disorient and I can leave stuff disoriented for more than a minute. And it only takes 20s to get the power back. And it can work on Bosses with a single application, which I'm pretty sure Ice Patch can't.

[ QUOTE ]
Taking the defense out of Wet Ice has not freed up 5 slots for us to reassign, it has actually cost us an additional 5 slots because we have to take Permafrost and because it is so pathetic we have to slot Health too.

[/ QUOTE ]

And Tough slotted out too.

And I'm sorry, Ice Patch is useful, yes. But overall, from the perspective of an Ice Armor Tanker, its as useful as Fault from Stone Melee, and Hand Clap from Super Strength. So I think to claim that a primary is balanced around a secondary is not at all correct. Ice Patch is, in fact, as useful to any primary.

[ QUOTE ]
Sweet! Well for starters force fielders don't get 55% defense they get around 18% max, the other bubbles only to other people. We get no sleep nor damage debuffs and the only way to really protect ourselves is to cut us off from helping our team and remove our mez resistance(think original hibernate but it's your job to keep people alive).

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but the point of FF is to buff other people, not yourself. The point of a tanker is, in fact, to buff themselves. I'm sorry you don't like that, but I wouldn't hold your breath on FF ever getting more than that 18% DEF for itself, said as someone who has a bubbler.

To be fair, lets just run down the current state of affairs (quoted from another thread I posted in):

[ QUOTE ]
Smash/Lethal: Invuln takes 18% of Ice's damage (or Invuln is 92% more effective)

Energy/Negative: Ice takes 91% of Invuln's damage (or Ice is 9% more effective)

Fire: Invuln takes 41% of Ice's damage (or Invuln is 59% more effective)

Cold: Ice tanks 44% of Invuln's damage (or Ice is 56% more effective)

Toxic: Looks dead even, but most Toxic attacks are ranged. Take Chilling Embrace out of the picture, and Invuln takes 75% of Ice's damage (or they appear to be equal, but really Invuln is 25% more effective)

Psi: Ice takes 70% of Invuln's damage, but again, like Toxic, Psi attacks are mostly ranged, meaning that its more like Ice is taking 92% of Invuln's damage (or Ice apears to be 30% more effective, but is more like 8% more effective)

And those margins are only worse compared to just Granite Armor alone. Or an Eluded SR Scrapper.

So I'd still say we're a fair margin from being balanced especially vs Smashing and Lethal damage.

We should also be stronger vs both Cold and Fire still, the extra 5% Fire RES, only half of which is enhanceable is not enough. And the RES for Toxic in Permafrost was wholly needed.

[/ QUOTE ]

As for Hibernate, I did a brain dump of the basic problems with the power, and I understand a bit of why it worked as it did, but at the same time I think Statesman realized I wasn't going to accept those reasons either, so I think in theory the Hibernate changes will be good, not great, but definitely better - but I also was asked not to comment on the complete changes either.

My general feelings (and me general concensus in talking with Statesman is that feelings are more important to him than the numbers are) resulting from the conversation with Statesman are as follows...

I've suggested a number of things and tried more than a few times to impress upon Statesman the importance for melee sets, and especially a defensively oriented AT like the Tanker, of the concept of sustained defenses. And how important they are.

Along that line, I've acutally pushed to have the DEF removed completely from EA, folded into Wet Ice and allow Wet Ice to continue to be enhanceable. This would not close the gap for Ice completely by any means, but it would help tremendously more than 15% DEF broken over 14 mobs. 15% constant DEF is much more needed.

I've also suggested alternatives where EA worked vs 3 or 5 mobs, and had the DEF folded down accordingly. I also suggested a version of EA where its End Transfer continued to work vs maybe only 10 mobs, but if even 1 mobs was hit the full DEF from EA would be provided for the duration.

My preference? Wet Ice getting the DEF from EA folded in.

I've been pushing for a good answer on the Smash/Lethal gap, in almost every email I've sent to Statesman, and still not gotten a response on this topic.

I've been pushing to have the End cost of Icicles reduced by at least half, to make it measure up better to Blazing Aura, and still not gotten a response here either. (note: my testing on the Test server demonstrates to me that the End Cost of Icicles basically prohibits active gameplay for an Ice Tanker when running all its other armors, including Tough which is a practical requirement due to the S/L gap, and even if using EA every 25-30 seconds).

Statesman is also very concerned that the spreadsheet has 29 defensive slots for Ice and 32 for Invuln. He keeps asking me to bump Energy Absorption to have 6 slots of DEF. I keep refering him back to my point about sustained defenses being of the utmost importance, especially to a DEF based melee character. And he tells me that with 45s duration on EA that we're covered as most in game battles last only 45s (this is according to him a number from datamining).

I remind him that datamining should demonstrate that in the absense of Hasten, there is not an Ice Tanker who doesn't have at least 1 Recharge in Energy Absorption. I also point out that the length of most Defender/Controller buffs runs completely contrary to the 45s mark. And that it would mean that Ice only had its best defense 75% of the time, as opposed to Invuln having it 100% of the time, which is the purpose of the 1 Recharge enhancer and only 5 DEF slots for EA on my sheet.

Then I remind him that its even less because Wet Ice will not need to be slotted live, and he says that's good because then more slots can be spent elsewhere. Like Tough which is practically required? is how I respond. I also tell him that Ice tankers would love to have more places to spend slots for Defense if he'd just be willing to provide them.

I then question why something like Granite Armor is allowed to completely defy that logic. After all for penalties that are far less steep than dying, complete immobilization/inability to act, or an End Crash, the also get back tons of slots and even powers because powers and slots are what Stone tanks drop when they respec around Granite. And that 1 power fully slotted completely eclipses Ice, and mostly eclipses Invuln.

I also question why for about 50% of the time (on average, depending on slotting) an SR Scrapper is allowed to completely overcome the defenses of an Ice Tanker.

Again these are just things I don't get, understand, or follow, and that I feel require explanation.

And generally we keep going back and forth. But for every inch less frustrated with the whole thing I become, I become 10 inches more frustrated when I don't see any real progress.

So that's where I feel things stand, and how I generally feel.