Dersk

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And yes, every power is endurance efficient if you wait an hour between attacks (what a totally silly thing to say).

[/ QUOTE ]

You have no idea what endurance efficient means, do you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not in the context you seem to be using it in.

Endurance efficiency, practically speaking, means how much endurance you use per chain of attacks.

Not sure why you would calculate it for a single attack in a vacuum if that's what you're (or Starsman are) doing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Damage/endurance, in any instance. An attack, an attack chain, an entire set.

If you kill a target faster than I do using the same amount of endurance, you're not less efficient, but that's how you're describing it.

[ QUOTE ]
And yes, every power is endurance efficient if you wait an hour between attacks (what a totally silly thing to say).

[/ QUOTE ]

You have no idea what endurance efficient means, do you?

If you exclude those that take more attacks than they have enhancement slots to give to those attacks, there aren't many people left to complain.

Endurance constraints do not need to be changed for people that want to progress through their own damage contribution without enhancing the character in a way that allows it.

With the first ten levels, there isn't even a relevant difference between tanker and scrapper damage numbers. AT differences are no more to blame than people adding additional attacks ontop of a character that is already having endurance problems.

edit: The way characters level up, gaining "bigger" attacks to make endurance worse as they level, often without any power choices that do anything to counter the effect, fights against the making of an endurance-efficient character intuitive or easy for new players. I think a graphical representation of "endurance cost due to attacking" in some screen, i.e. easy to understand information, would do more to alleviate this problem than any overhaul to enhancements. We still have posters in this forum that spam attacks without puting damage enhancements in them.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In my last calculator, SS benchmarks 2.6 on endurance efficiency. Fire Melee 2.3 and the normal tanker 3.1. (lower numbers are better.)

The worst scrappers benchmarks at 2.3 with scrapper fire melee benchmarking at 1.8.

That is the sets on isolation, though, no armor toggles accounted for.

[/ QUOTE ]

Small correction ... SM is more end intensive then EM. EM is actually one of the better endurance efficient sets (mostly because of the long animation times of a few powers).

[/ QUOTE ]

You misread his statement. He wasn't saying energy melee is worse than stone. He' saying it's better than stone, as it uses less endurance for the damage it does.

Animation time and number of power selections has nothing to do with it, unless someone is using AEs while other attacks are recharging. Without using hurl, Stone is equally as endurance efficient as axe and mace, for example. Being able to attack faster does not affect damage per endurance, which is what you responded to.

Stone's reputation for being hard on endurance is only supported by those that lack the self-control to attack just as fast as every other set

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

First, Allow double stacking as long as the crash applies through it.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's already like this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not entirely. The defense debuff gets cancelled with double stacking.

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, if the game stays around long enough, and the inf cap is ultimatly raised as a result of inflationary pressures...then someday we all may look back and laugh at the fact that we thought 2 billion was alot.

[/ QUOTE ]

How fast do you produce 1 billion influence outside of the market? Because, that's what he spent just to put those up for bid. Inflation, lol.

I find the complaints of ET's animation time entertaining when, for years, broadsword had three attacks that animated slower for less damage, which gained it the reputation of bursty.

Okay

[ QUOTE ]
The Equilibrium point where tankers have 25% mitigation advantage...

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's an example of invulnerability with resists only, since defense isn't static. 56% enhancement.

Unbuffed @ level 50:
Tankers withstand 1875hp in damage
Brutes withstand 1500hp in damage (please correct me if I'm wrong).

Invuln @ 50, resists only:
Tankers, 70.2% res, withstand 6292hp in damage
Brutes, 52.65% res, withstand 3168hp in damage

Invuln @ 50 with tough, resists only:
Tankers, 90% res, withstand 18750hp in damage
Brutes, 70.2% res, withstand 5034hp in damage

Differences in defense only magnify the gap. The 25% difference in numerical values for defensive powers does not translate into 25% more survivability. While the other damage types aren't quite as pronounced as S/L, withstanding over 300% the S/L damage is hard to mistake as only 25% more. Invuln tankers are only about 25% more survivable than brutes during the duration of unstoppable (edit: when brutes invest in more slots in the power), before defense is counted. Oh, the absolute horror!

Willpower is closer, as regeneration and healing values aren't different between the ATs, and only change by HP, and IOs blur the line quite a lot. None of that allows fur such dismissal for the massive survivability differences the two ATs can witness.

The damage resistances can go up, but not enough to be worthwhile. RES set bonuses are really too small and too far apart.

Granite defense is, what, 20% unslotted? 32%ish defense to the same sets of damage types isn't possible, though you may be able to achieve something like 30% to melee and ranged if you heavily focus on it, which would likely also limit your epic choies (like needing two epic ranged attacks for thunderstrike sets). 45% to one position, or damage type pair, is possible.

Any of that would seriously impact how much recharge you'd be able to get, which is one of the more popular bonuses for fire tanks, as there aren't many useful IO sets that give defense bonuses and recharge bonuses.

Okay

[ QUOTE ]
They have said that not having reliable repro steps makes this particular bug nigh-impossible to track down, so if anyone can figure out a way of making this happen 100% of the time, I'm sure those guys would name children after you or something.

[/ QUOTE ]

Odd. I get it near 100% of the time when I alt-tab out, usually to my internet explorer (edit: while zoning or logging in/out). I *never* get it in instances the other posters mention when I *don't* alt-tab out of the game.

I'm so used to it that when I alt-tab out while switching characters, my second keypress for the password is to hold backspace down for a few moments, as it'll clear the 110101030385756whatever for the password.

editedit: Of course, now that I've said that, I can't get it do happen at all. Mmmm patches.

ice/stone. AE damage & recharge debuffs, ae knockdowns, ae disorient, excellent single-target damage capabilites, and the endurance to fuel it all for as long as you like.

I think it would make more sense to simply remove the tohit debuff in pvp zones and allow RTTC to stay toggled on, regen or no, when mezzed.

[ QUOTE ]
I have more of a problem with Barrage being a 6 second recharge tier 1 attack than I do with TF or ET taking a long time to animate.

[/ QUOTE ]

While I honestly thought barrage and energy punch would (and should) be swapped with the rebalancing of barrage, I have to say I'm not terribly dissapointed in barrage as a teir 1. The dark/energy I started yesteray because it must suck so bad, would simply 1-shot enemies with barrage with deathshroud doing one or two ticks of damage.

I still don't see why energy punch isn't the mandatory attack.

[ QUOTE ]
My whole point of that paragraph was that your health goes up and down in the middle of a fight. And that you make decisions based on what you see. That was it. Not the amount that you make your decisions on

[/ QUOTE ]

The point of my reply is that, when worried about dying, energy transfer is the wrong attack to use, with any animation.

[ QUOTE ]
Oh, and if you don't feel like you are attacks are slow, then good for you. Like I mentioned earlier in the thread, everyone that gets the power set after the nerf knows what the power does, and makes the decision to go with the power set knowing full well what they are getting. Most or the people that had the power before the nerf don't like it now because we picked the power set based on something that doesn't exist anymore

[/ QUOTE ]

1st, I never suggested EM doesn't "feel slow", except for those that don't have/depend on TF and ET. So yes, good for me. 2nd, I've had energy transfer long before it was changed. I've been arguing about tanks dying because ET and TF are slow, and dismissing complaints of opponents dying faster than ET and TF animate, not about the set being or feeling slow. As far as hitting dead enemies is concerned, I don't see anything you mentioned that explains why it's better for the blaster to hit the dead enemy than it is for the tanker to hit the dead enemy, outside of a faster animation allowing the tanker to do something else sooner (which is true regardless who gets the kill shot).

...outside of feel and psychological reasons, which I mentioned I'm not arguing.

edit: are you arguing that faster animation times for Energy Transfer and Total Focus would help prevent teammates from wasting their attacks? That's the first I've seen anything of the sort, and has nothing to do with the explanations previously given. Seriously?

I'm not defending energy melee, and I have my own complaints about it, but I find them hard to express among the reports of repeated deaths caused solely by an additional 1.6s in activation, or somesuch.

[ QUOTE ]
If you have 20% health, should I fire off Energy Transfer to get rid of this guy, or should I hit an inspiration?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're at 20% health and use energy transfer, you shoud die. The universe can't tolerate such tactics.

When I'm that low and worried about dying, I don't look at an inspiration on my tray that can save me and think about it.

[ QUOTE ]
You don't feel frustrated when you are in the middle of a group and every time you begin to do ET the mob dies while you are looking at your hands glow?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, because it doesn't happen every time, or even most times. I simply don't see this problem unless I'm hitting minions or damaged lieutenants, when something like energy transfer would be overkill even if I hit.

Of course this is a problem of the types of spawns that are mostly, or entirely, minions (council seems to have a problem with that). That's more of an issue with energy melee's area effect damage capabilities, which I usually don't mind because of the powersets I've paired it with.

[ QUOTE ]
True, if a mob is dead, then a mob is dead. In a team everyone benefits, we all get the same influence and xp. But I want to feel that I contributed to the team by doing some damage.

[/ QUOTE ]

This completely ignores the instances where you hit, and ignores my point about someone else wasting his/her attack instead of you. On all those attacks that you use that hit a dead opponent, there would have been someone else hitting a dead opponent were you slightly faster. You haven't proposed why it's worse for this to happen to one character over another when the end result is exactly the same, except that it happens to your character, and at a dubiously high rate at that.

If you're arguing this simply from a 'feel' perspective, then of course you're correct in how you prefer it. I'm not arguing that energy melee doesn't feel slow for those that depend upon energy transfer and total focus. What I find funny here is I see complaints that Em tankers often die before ET or TF finish and that their target often dies before ET or TF finish. I can only imagine the entertainment value of seeing those two situations happening simultaneously, and laughing for minutes afterwards.

[ QUOTE ]
If not, I could just sit there, and taunt all the mobs to me and let the team take them out. After all, isn't that what a tanker is supposed to do?

[/ QUOTE ]

You certainly do love extremes. That's why I'm having a hard time believing these complaints when they don't match up with my own experiences. They appear to be exactly that, extremes, and not representative of normal gameplay.

[ QUOTE ]
Given that [super reflexes] had a good reputation long before IOs, I really doubt they're 'necessary'.

[/ QUOTE ]


Very long ago. Perma-eldue-long-ago.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
... like changing auto turret to a mobile pet?

[/ QUOTE ]You mean like they did 2 or 3 issues ago?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

[/ QUOTE ]

That didn't break the cottage rule because the basic function of the power didn't change. It's still a summonable pet that does ranged damage, it just follows you now.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't talking about the "cottage rule". Just the part before "or", where he says "I hope the folks railing on and on for Devices change will allow those of us that enjoy the different playstyle to keep our version".

I need a rolling eyes emote.

Something strange is going on with axe's single-target endurance efficiency. That much I can see

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
... like changing auto turret to a mobile pet?

[/ QUOTE ]You mean like they did 2 or 3 issues ago?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

... like changing auto turret to a mobile pet?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe he just ended up ignoring everyone who posted in that one farming thread that went for a dozen pages

[/ QUOTE ] He ignores anybody that doesn't agree with him. He actually stated that once. Personally, I think people like him shouldn't be allowed to interact with others.

[/ QUOTE ]

As his ignore list grows, he won't.

[ QUOTE ]
It has five ticks of 9.79 damage each. According to the formula we worked out earlier, that's an average of 9.79 * 4 * (1-0.8^5) = 26.33 damage.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're acting as though the damage on ring of fire has a chance to cut off early. It's not bonus damage. It's like combustion or incinerate, the dot works 100% of the time.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm a farmer? When did this happen?

[/ QUOTE ]

You log into the same game with the same characters on the same server. You're obviously farming for who-knows-what, as there's no other reason to do that. You've probably even defeated the same type of enemy more than once, clearly making you the problem for whatever is wrong with the game.

FARMER!