Dirges
-
Posts
249 -
Joined
-
Quote:Originally Posted by ShadowRex_NA
I actually didn't check the powersets before I posted haha and just assumed corrupter did have FF.
So a FF Defender will be better at bubbling then say a Controller with /FF ?
Right, using simple/easy numbers if a controller gives 15% defense, the defender will do 20%. The difference also grows larger with enhancements, since they add to base numbers. So the controller with 50% slotting buffs 22.5% and the defender would do 30%. -
Defenders are the best buffers, by quite a bit.
Now for team safety I find a controller is better, since they can lock down things that get through your buffs. I also don't count corruptors out, while they have weakers buffs, they do help kill things faster, and downed opponents do not have attacks to get through your buffs. BTW I don't remember corr having FF as a secondary, though they do have sonic and cold. -
Quote:You are bound for disapointment then. That is just on masterminds, I just double checked on my corruptor and they can not slot PBAOE set's in caltrops. Since corruptor and controllers have similar buff/debuff numbers that would be the set that gets ported.
There is a reason why (as much as I love it) theorycraft has it limits. If you played with Caltrops you would know it can take PBAOE sets. Whether it's a bug or not it's been like that since forever. So you can put a Sirocco' Dervish damage proc in there. You may even be able to fit in Obliteration proc, Eradication proc and Armageddon proc too since they all PBAOE sets as well. I am not willing to respec to check (someone can check?).
So Caltrops can does have at least 3 potential procs (since one of my MMs is slotted like that) and a possible 6 (one of which is an improved purple proc).
One of the reasons I am dead keen on Traps for Controllers. -
Quote:Originally Posted by StrykerX
Actually it is true unless you fight +6 or higher enemies. Up through +5 enemies only get an accuracy bonus, not a higher to-hit value. Likewise, higher ranking enemies like bosses or AVs get accuracy bonuses but not to-hit boosts. Since accuracy is applied after defense, that means that 45% defense will reduce any +5 or lesser enemy to a 5% base to-hit chance. Their accuracy bonuses may well increase their final to-hit to 7.5% or even 10% or so, but that's still the absolute lowest chance to hit they can possibly have (since nothing can offset increased accuracy in PvE)... you can have 150% defense and it won't make them miss any more often.
Enemies with to-hit buffs, on the other hand, do require more than 45% defense to floor their chances of hitting you. But since only +6 or higher enemies get increased to-hit from level difference, in general this only matters for enemies with to-hit buffs which are relatively rare.You might want to reread what StrykerX posted. They said the same thing you posted, just without the formulas. So saying "no" just means you are disagreeing with yourself.Quote:Originally Posted by AnElfCalledMack
No, that's whether or not 45% defense is really the soft-cap. Any defense beyond 45% is still redundant against +4's, because of the first clamp in the to-hit formula. However, that is before accuracy. After accuracy, those to-hit chances become (5*1.4) = 7% for minions, (5*1.4*1.15) = 8.05% for lieutenants, (5*1.4*1.3) = 9.1% for bosses and EBs, and (5*1.4*1.5) = 10.5% for AVs and GMs. Not 5%.
Except as a cushion for tohit buffs and -def, 45% defense is the soft cap for most game play. -
Quote:Originally Posted by Shred_Monkey
Personally, I'd say the best use of the power is to throw the trops between me and the herd, so if a runner does break away, it's gotta cross the trops to get to the ranged fighters.
In my expierience, trops are a great power to use for damage mitigation and to help a team from levels 1 to 25 or 30. But once people start getting enhancements slotted and building up their survivabilty on their own, caltrops become obsolete.
Your best use doesn't always work, seeing melee AT's can get caltrops and one set they are considered part of their defense, and not a pool power. Now I do agree the best place for them is between the mob and where you do not want them to go, but then again if you are steam rolling placing them in the middle is only a problem for a couple of enemy types.
Caltrops also never become obsolete, I don't care that my stalker has over 50 defense, more protection is more protection. Those couple of attacks that never get used could of been the 2 that just happened to get through and killed me. Layered defenses are always a good thing in my book, then again I have been on a team where every one had FFG and we could snipe in a burn patch. -
Quote:Which is why it is nice that CC is in the same set as a nice aoe -defense debuff.Originally Posted by Muon_Neutrino
At least the right posts got nuked this time.
One potential issue to watch out for is that, even though it doesn't take accuracy enhancements, it is *not* auto-hit and in fact only has base accuracy. Thus, if you actually want to use it you'll need to do something to ensure it can hit its targets. It doesn't accept accuracy enhancements, but anything that boosts your tohit (such as tactics or the kismet +6% tohit IO) will affect it. Also, although I haven't tested this myself, both accuracy set bonuses and multi-aspect hold set IOs with accuracy components *should* work. -
Quote:You keep talking about defense with just SR in mind, try taking those on with an EA brute. I also wouldn't count the resists on EA for much, just the + 3 defense IO, they are minor and tend to be skipable. SR has more resists the EA does in the end.
That's a whole 2 examples. I could name more examples of psi or toxic damage users easily.
Just by group:
Arachnos
Carnival of Shadows
Rikti
Banished Pantheon
Devouring Earth
Snakes
Psionic Clockwork
Seers
Hydras
I've played a lot of electric armor set alts, and I know what makes them wilt. I've also played many of the options without psi resistance (as in most everything else but dark) and I know how much that hurts.
To contrast my SR brute and stalker are much more durable.
Just to point out all those groups, except howlers, that have res debuffs also have def debuffs. They also tend to come in faster, and hurt non SR defense sets since they don't have max resists to def debuffs.Quote:Wailers
Council (or 5th Column) sonic attacks
Crey Rad scientists
Longbow
I also believe tar patch can be tossed by carnies and CoT
On the OP, it depends on what you look at, type defense tends to be equal to or a little worst then resists. Positional defense tends to be better since it is easier to cap, with SR well ahead with it's debuff protection and resists. Though since most of what makes defense easier to use comes from IO's, and since the game is not balanced around IO's it's WAI. -
Quote:Nice start, but just so you know electric fence does have knockback protection.
Electric Fence:
Your standard control set single target immobilize. It does not stop knockdown, which is good considering all the knockdown you do. It also drains some endurance. This power is more useful for a controller than a dominator, where the extra damage is helpful. Easily skippable. -
Quote:I would make it a knock down toggle as well, since that is a change being made to the power. I would also think it would be a bit less work. I don't think it should be as complicated as you are saying though. It should only effect blaster/kheld primaries. That limits the amount of powers that need changing, and works like the toggles in DP.Originally Posted by DrMike2000
Not a bad idea, Geko.
I'd flip it to be a "controlled Knockback" toggle that limits you to KD, rather than new players having to hunt down a button to experience a staple of the superhero genre, but thats just details.
Certain powers (Repel, Tornado & Bonfire definitely, Hand Clap maybe?) would also have to be flaggged as not affected by this new code - they have to do Knockback rather than knockdown to be balanced.
I can foresee bugs slipping through - Blaster Bonfire in the epics being overlooked or something like that. And these often lead to an extra maintenance where me and other Aussies get locked out for an evening.
It does sound like a lot of work though, especially with all those non-knockback sets around. Players can pretty much already choose if they want to avoid knockback on their own powers by not choosing Energy Blast/MA/Kheldians/Storm.
No it is not, it is about limiting players. Scatter weakens groups by lowering damage, and if uncontrolled can lead to trouble. Saying other shouldn't be as lazy and deal with it, is like saying energy blasters should not blast more then once every 5-10 seconds. Either way effects the fun of others.Quote:Originally Posted by JD_Gumby
It's only a problem in the eyes of certain players who think they should never have to move once they pick a spot and on those who've become so addicted to AoE that they can no longer handle scatter. -
Quote:Getting hit by things is support by most standards. Tanks are support, they keep teams alive by taking hits, pets do this on a smaller scale or with the MM them selves. Damage is a stretch, but how different is having a pet attack compared using -res debuffs and +damage buffs. Both increase kill speed from powers outside off attacks. I just don't see a petless MM providing more support.Originally Posted by Edana
Killing things and getting hit by them is not support; Scrappers are not a support AT. Some pets do have support powers though, and the Lich... Good point, it's not really the having pets I was finding a problem, more that after bubbling 6 pets and 7 teammates I didn't have enough endurance to do much besides recover for the next buff cycle and with the new AoE buffs replacing a couple of zombies would mean having to drink almost a full column of blues.
Ok, so my argument for 'petless' seems to suffer from a black/white view of either having all pets or none; taking Lich and possibly Grave Knights but skipping the horde would cut the amount of pet buffing in half and remove the squishier stuff so reduce resummon costs a lot. Does skipping the tier 1 pets sound reasonable? Getting bubbles and fearsome stare on the same character is definitely appealing enough to take Lich again, and Grave Knights look like they do a lot more damage than the Horde would for the amount of maintainance required.
Edit: Uh, this thread is about Static Field? Sorry about the major threadjack :/ -
Quote:Sorry you are wrong about a petless MM being argued as better at support. First making things die faster is great support. Second, pets act as meat shields, any hit they take is one a player may not of taken. Finally, a lot of pets have support effect. They have all sorts of controls and debuff effects that add to support. Take your FF how much better would it's support be with just Lich adding it's -tohit and controls.Originally Posted by Edana
I agree that certain powers in sets can be 'core powers' that are part of what makes a set good and the set would overall be less effective without them. My disagreement was specifically with the use of 'unplayable'. Concept characters all over don't take powers that don't 'fit'. Petless MMs deliberately lose 5-6 powers from their primary, but a well built one is still playable as a support character; in fact without the pets to distract them it could be argued that they are better at that part of their role (and prior to GR this was the only way to get a /FF character redside.)
-
It is a sleep but since it is a patch it will re-aply every couple of seconds, so unless some one uses RoF or other similar power it will put enemies your team is not focused on back to sleep. To me it is a key power for the early game.
-
Quote:Originally Posted by Atheism
You have to take all of Cold's primary, save FW, if you want it to be useful, and the slotting is more of a pain on a Cold than it is on a FF.
You make it sound like that is a bad thing, but it is not. Wanting to use most of the set is a sign of a good set. That is the main reason I see cold as better. FF uses a few powers to do a couple of things, cold has several powers that use a lot more effects. -
Quote:Originally Posted by Havoc_X
I see your beer and raise you a Cheesburger:
http://www.thebige.com/fair/activities/Food.asp
The Big Es original Craz-E Burger a bacon cheeseburger sandwiched between two halves of a glazed donut!
But it still isn't deep fried. -
Quote:Though I agree having more armor choices would be nice, Iceman is a bad example.Originally Posted by Dark_Razor
now i've talked to alot of people on champion about why they don't take ice over any other set and it comes down to mostly that ice "Looks Crap"
i can understand in 2006 that is all they could do to make ice look better but in 2010 with GR coming out and the change to the graphics engine why can't they do something to make Ice armor look more fitting
If Iceman looked like a ice tanker he would of got killed off of the X-men comics the issue he got put in
Dev's its time to redo the look of Ice Armor
You guys tell me what you think?
Bottom right corner, the one that looks like a giant snow cone.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Magnetodebut.png -
Quote:Just to point out it is hard to claim that Sony's method is building upon past consoles, especially due to backwards compatibility, since they only one playstation has been fully backwards compatible. Sony's model is more about getting new formats for games out to the public. After all every Sony system has changed how they played games, cd-dvd-bluray-umd-digital download.Originally Posted by Turbo_Ski
That's rather overshadowed by all the praising he gives them in the rest of the review. Also calling the success of the playstation and playstation 2 as luck is just retarded, they were reasonably priced and powerful consoles for their time. Nintendo sticking with cartridges and Sega's poor timing into market with the dreamcast and saturn doesn't equate luck on Sony's part.
Also take in account that Sony's method for consoles has always been building upon the foundation of the previous console and not building a new one from scratch. This is clearly seen in backwards capability going from PS1 to PS2 and the addition of DVD drive. With the PS3 they took a risk by going with blu-ray format which upped the price tag, which would have been fine if Microsoft hadn't been soaking American game developers for about a year in advance and dropping down budget models of the 360 around the same time. Bob also seems to ignore that the PS3's long-term hardware investment is paying off now in more sales and exceeding Xbox in worldwide YTD sales and only 5.4 mil units behind Xbox in the grand total. Sony is also doing 10.4 mil more in game software sales than Microsoft. It only shows that Bob's perspective is a year and half out of date if he thinks Microsoft is dominating Sony, when in actually they are pretty dang even with PS3 promising to surpass with the current trend.
As for the Wii, Bob seems to ignore the current Wii sales are getting less with each passing year. It's proving to be a very strong short-term investment console, which isn't good for Nintendo in the long-run considering they can't get decent 3rd party software support now and will find more difficulty once Sony and Microsoft release their motion control peripherals. If these peripherals prove successful (one most surely will if not both), then the Wii is looking at a future of even greater loss in yearly sales in both hardware and software, despite their strong lead in sales in 2007. The continue lack of 3rd party titles will most likely accelerate this if people are getting rid of their dusty Wiis in favor of 360 and PS3 motion releases, thus decreasing the sale of new Wiis dramatically.
Also it is hard to say wii sales are going down with each passing year when there has only been one year with a decrease in sales. This year should be a decrease as well, but does not make it a trend, more like a normalization of sales. Similar to the PS2 sales. http://www.vgchartz.com/hw_annual_summary.php
The motion devices for the PS3 and 360 will be a joke this generation. Just more shovel ware for those platforms. Even Nintendo realized that motion gaming is not the key to success years ago. -
Quote:Mabe it was the way you worded it, I misunderstood.Originally Posted by Umbral
The question is not whether it's additive. The question is whether Brutes suffer from +dam dilution. They do, in fact, because +dam dilutes itself but Brutes are the only melee AT we're discussing that uses a native +dam mechanism to accomplish its "normal" damage. Because Brutes start off with +dam, they dilute any +dam they get otherwise, granting comparatively lower contribution from any +dam they receive..
I did my math correctly. I was not assuming 100% Fury, I was assuming 100% +dam from Fury (i.e. 50% Fury). Even with that, the numbers are correct for 50% Fury (100% +dam):
1.0 (base damage) + .95 (enhancement) + 1.0 (50% Fury) = 2.95 pre +dam
1.0 (base damage) + .95 (enhancement) + 1.0 (50% Fury) + 1.0 (+dam buff) = 3.95 with +dam
3.95 / 2.95 = 1.339 = 33.9% better damage output
If you're going to challenge my math, make sure you at least know whether I'm wrong or not.
Scrapper: 95% +dam from base slotting; 100% +dam from a buff; the 100% +dam buff equates to a 51.3% increase in damage output.
Brute: 95% +dam from base slotting; 100% +dam from Fury; 100% +dam buff equates to a 33.9% increase in damage output.
For scrappers you only gave one buff, and brutes two, but you worded both almost exactly the same, so I put my numbers in wrong, I apologize.
For the rest we will never agree, I still see no weakening or decreased value for + damage buffs. I see no decrease in the returns. I get 95% from slotting, 100% from fury, 50% from another buff, it is all added to base damage base damage. -
Quote:I have been saying the bolded part, it has nothing to do diluting damage. The difference is about brutes lower base.Originally Posted by Ehina
Dirges, let's say a brute and a scrapper both use an attack that deals 200 dmg. Then imagine you give a 50% dmg bonus to both.
Now imagine the brute had a 200% Fury to factor in, and both got a 100% dmg boost from slotting IOs.
Before the bonus they just deal 200 dmg each.
After the exact same 50% bonus is applied to both, the brute will deal 225 dmg, the scrapper will deal 250 dmg.
The brute got less benefit from the bonus, because its base damage to which it's applied is lower. In the same way brutes get less benefit from powers like Rage, Build up, Against all Odds... etc, than Tankers or Scrappers. It does not mean that they're not useful for them of course
-
Quote:Just to point out in both cases you have an increase 295%, you see + damage is additive. Also you should of put 200% from fury to get the number you wanted. Then again you are just manipulating numbers to get what you want. Here is an example, a brute teams with a couple of /kin, at 50% fury the brute hits their damage cap. Now look at how weak fury is, about 12% of the damage, why not get rid of fury because it is so weak.Originally Posted by Umbral
+Dam dilution demonstrated mathematically:
Scrapper: 95% +dam from base slotting; 100% +dam from a buff; the 100% +dam buff equates to a 51.3% increase in damage output.
Brute: 95% +dam from base slotting; 100% +dam from Fury; 100% +dam buff equates to a 33.9% increase in damage output.
Because Brutes have large amounts of natural +dam that they rely upon to deal damage, they suffer from +dam dilution. Whereas every other AT uses +dam in a method exactly like Scrappers, Brutes suffer from dilution because they're already getting large amount of +dam from their inherent.
Actually, if you want to say that it's based off of base damage, then Brutes are still last. Check it. Brutes have a base damage scalar of .75. Scrappers have a base damage scalar of 1.125. Stalkers have a base damage scalar of 1.0. Tankers have a base damage scalar of .8. Brutes are still at the bottom of the heap for +dam contribution from that perspective.
Even more amusing, you have to remember that Brutes share the same melee buff dmg attribute as Tankers and Stalkers: .1. Scrappers have a .125 melee buff dmg attribute.
If you really want to go about creating tiers of usefulness, Scrappers are at the top because they have a high base damage scalar and the best melee buff dmg attribute, Stalkers are next because they have a higher base damage scalar, followed by Tankers for the same reason, and Brutes are last because they have the worst damage scalar and the same low melee buff dmg attribute.
No matter how you stack it, Brutes get the least out of any +dam contribution mechanism than any other class in the game. This is why Shield Brutes are actually the least overpowered of the Shield ATs and Scrappers are, quite easily, the most broken.
You are also wrong about your dilution only effecting brutes, your own example contradicts your point. Your looking at one buffs numbers compared to every other buffs numbers. If a scrapper has 3 100% damage buffs, that means each buff is only 25% of the whole. In the end though what matters is the final number, and that is why I say +damage is additive, it is the same number until you hit the cap. If you have an attack that does 100 damage, slot it for 95% damage and have a 100% damage buff it will do 295 damage. If you add another 100% damage buff it goes to 395. The number adds up, now where do to numbers dilute.
For some reason I was thinking tankers and brutes base damage mods were reversed, I stand corrected. Though it just changes the order of who gets the most out of +damage before the cap. The main point still stands. -
Quote:You got it backwards, burst damage is great on AV's, especially those with god modes if you can get them before they use them. Stalkers actually excel at tougher targets. They have sustained and burst damage, so I go in AS the AV, then scrap it out with our extra crits. Then when AS is ready, placate and AS again.Originally Posted by Remote_Control
Of course anyone can get a pick up group, the OP seemed focused on TFs. Burst damage is great for knocking out bosses while everyone else cuts down LTs and minions, but when your're taking on AVs and heroes burst damage has no place in the group.
Are stalkers useless on TFs, no, but the group is better served by nearly any other archetype or powerset. -
I never had trouble teaming with my stalkers. My defenses were always enough that the team did not have to keep me alive, and I did respectable single target damage.
I have never encountered anyone quiting or threatening to quit because of a stalker was on the team. About the closest were a couple of times we had a stalker that thought their job was just to scout, or would use AS once then running to the back of the group until hidden again. Both types deserve to be booted, but any stalker that helps the team was invited. -
Quote:I disagree, there is no dilution of +damage. Even at 100% fury, what ever buff KM has will be the same amount as at 0% fury. Unless they hit their cap +damage will always increase their damage the same amount.Originally Posted by Umbral
Actually, Brutes use +dam mechanisms the absolute worst of all ATs specifically because of Fury. Brutes dilute all +dam they recieve because they're already bringing so much +dam to bear. Any power that provides a large amount of +dam is better for other ATs than it is for Brutes, unless that +dam is going to put the other ATs at or above their damage cap (at which point it becomes a question of one AT getting benefits while the other doesn't).
The reason why brutes will get less from a +damage buff is they have a lower base damage to buff. So scrappers and stalkers would get more from a +damage buff, then brutes, and finally tanks. -
Quote:Originally Posted by FireWyvern
If he's not shoulder to shoulder with you, he won't get TT:M. =P
For that exemple, yes i wouldn't have problem with you kicking him. (as long as you warned him first) Because it's not just a power he skipped or a different playstyle. He's actually causing problems and actively making it harder on some teamates (the dom).
Naw, they don't play up front for TTM, it has plenty of range, a trapper plays up front because that is where they should be. -
Quote:so you won't play SS, stone, elec, claws, WM, axe, or DB. You are missing out on a lot of the melee attack sets.Originally Posted by Atheism
As for right now, KM looks unplayable to me because if any of the powers in the set has knockback, I won't play it. Plus, the animations look long.
-
Quote:That smiley was to point out the sarcasm. As far as new AT I always wanted a hero MM, where they get a combo defense/support pet primary and a melee/debuff secondary.Originally Posted by Biospark
Blasters do get Melee powers in their secondary. In fact Energy Manipulation has a full Attack Chain. This is one of the reasons I mentioned that Defender melee DMG mod would need to be increased. Currently it is 0.55 (not 100% positive) which is VERY LOW. It would need to be somewhere between this and Tanker numbers (.65 to .75 IMO).
Also, I have yet to play a defender that cannot function in melee range. It takes a particular mind-set and tactics, but can be done. Also, lets not confuse surviving in melee range for dominating in melee range. I really like the Idea of the Assault sets being proliferated to Defenders/Corruptors, but for Defenders to get straight-up melee sets, It would make alot more sense to add a new AT with an inherent that lets them survive melee range better.
someone suggested something like this once.
I would like a regen brute as well, it is just how to balance them. Since brutes start off with higher HP, regen would perform better then it should.Quote:Originally Posted by Ehina
On the top of my list : Spines, Katana and Regeneration for Brutes