Dromio

I got one of the Microsoft Laptop Mice for my kids. It works very very well. Not only does it fit their hand better, it's also cordless, which is one less thing for them to get tangled in.

[ QUOTE ]
<QR>
I still find myself corpse blasting on a regular basis even with the new reduced times. Each mish I would say I waste about 15-20 shots on dead corpses. As far as I remember it wasn't this bad before the animations were fixed. Anyone experiencing more corpse blasting post fix?

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't noticed it happening as much as I used to.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I suppose I should add that I am wondering if I should even take Snap Shot... I would like to, but if I do, it will push me back from getting Aid Self, which I am wanting to use with PFF. And I wouldn't be able to get Force of Nature, either. What do you think?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you'd probably get by just fine up to the 40s, especially since you're used to not having the ability to fire through mez, but post-40, I really would recommend trying to fit it in somewhere, even if it's a respec build.

There's no requirement for blasters to have Snap Shot, it's not going to make the game impossible to play if you don't, but it is a very nice tool to have. Anyone who's fought Malta, Rikti or Carnies will appreciate how drastically it changes the game, being able to defeat a critter while mezzed instead of just standing there, waiting for the single/double-digit damage to finish you off sometime in the next five to ten minutes because you ran out of Break Frees (or, like me, try not to be dependent on them).

[/ QUOTE ]

One thing I did was to put a "Chance for Hold" in Snap Shot. So when I do get held by an LT or lower I have the chance to hold them right back while still in their hold. That sounds confusing, but I think you can see what I mean.

No no no.

Back Alley Bawler.

Almost every one of my characters is stuck in the 36-40 range, I'm really glad to see something like this get put in the game. I think it's an excellent change.

[ QUOTE ]
I wanted to chime in my opinion that solo play should be a secondary consideration when considering modifications to the powerset with team play being the primary.


[/ QUOTE ]

Again, there is an AT that is, or was, primarily for team play, but it wasn't Defenders. In changing Controllers, an AT so team oriented that it didn't even have a damage set, the developers of CoH demonstrated that the ability for every AT to solo effectively is a major concern to them. So much of a concern in fact that the devs took away some of the major ability of Controllers, referring to control, so they could justify putting in containment so that Controllers of all levels could solo much more effectively.

So while you may feel that Defenders should only be considered in a team setting, the treatment of Controllers shows that the solo ability of Defenders is a legitimate concern. And while you may feel that the ability to solo rather than the ability to solo effectively is good enough for Defenders, the treatment of Controllers shows that the developers recognize the latter as a legitimate issue.

Defenders have two powersets: Buff/Debuff and Damage.
Controllers have two powersets: Control and Buff/Debuff.

See anything missing from the Controller description? Yep, Damage. When the game released (which is probably about the time the manual became obsolete) Controllers were the teaming AT, thus no damage powerset.

Unfortunately, because Controllers had so much trouble soloing at lower levels (pre-pet) the developers decided to add in the travesty that is containment, thus granting Controllers what is a third facet or powerset: Damage and throwing a lot of balance out of whack. The primary team focussed AT disappeared, to be replaced by the tank-mages of today.

So yes, Defenders were originally intended to be an AT that was good on a team. But they were not the AT that required teaming, that was the Controllers. What's interesting is that there are Defender builds that are in a very similar soloing boat that Controllers used to be in, and yet there's very little concern about possibly fixing them. FF is one.

At the moment Controllers changed from post pet powerhouses to full game powerhouses, the AT's and their purposes became a lot more skewed, and Defenders inherited the "team player" mantle by default, not by design.

EDIT: I think perception has become reality for a lot of people. The Defender is the "team" AT, and thus no one cares whether they can solo well or not. Those people forget the history of the game, and of Controllers specifically.

[ QUOTE ]
The FF's damage is already lower than any other Defender in the game, and I can tell you from experience, his defense is anything but tank mage level. And the defense does not have to be the full 15% of an Insulation or Deflection Shield, it can be 10%, as I suggested, or 7.5%, as long as it reduces the gap between the protection of Dispersion alone, and the protection of Dispersion plus the bubbles.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know, off the top of my head, why couldn't both Dispersion and Deflection/Insulation have base 15%, but lose the ability to stack? That improves the FFers DEF, but leaves teammates in the same boat as they are now. It also might free the FFer to move around more in combat. Perhaps the status resist would still apply to teammates, but not the DEF?

If that's too much, lower them both to 10%. Or whatever.

I still think giving more DEF to the Defender is a good idea, but I'm spending too much time thinking about how to work with the powers that probably don't need much (if any) work.



[ QUOTE ]
My own personal, preference, though, would be to get more damage. I think that I wouldn't need the protection if I had more of a balance towards offense, instead of defense. More defense WOULD help Defenders survive better in groups, though, which would likely help them more in the long run.

[/ QUOTE ]

Believe me, I'd love to get more damage. My thought (as stated earlier in the thread) was to give FF a large DEF debuff in a power, with the idea (in my admittedly small brain) that the ability to hit things more consistently would constitute an indirect damage buff. Not sure if that would work.

[ QUOTE ]
They are? I just need more sleep then. :P Didn't see anything about the Shields suggestions so wasn't sure. (the defender able to use them on themselves, but PFF cancelling it) Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi willnova. As PK said, that most likely wouldn't happen, especially since it's impossible using this engine to target yourself. But a suggestion has been entered to swap the +DEF values on Dispersion and the targetted bubbles, resulting in more DEF for the Defender, maintaining the value provided to a teammate within Dispersion, but lowering the value provided to a teammate outside of Dispersion. I think that suggestion is one you might agree with.

[ QUOTE ]
It *should* be, if it were the case. I'm not any more privy to the numbers than anyone else, but I'm betting it's just not the case statistically. I think it's more of an issue where there may be some that simply don't play or have abandoned the set, there are more that simply accept it as is, taking the big 4 and ignoring the rest in favor of secondary or pool powers, and make the best of it, either in an active or barely-active playstyle.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. I think the problem is that FF is shared by three AT's, two of which are the most powerful in the game, and the last (FF Defenders spcifically) one of the least powerful in the game. That makes for a balancing headache, and the devs have shown no desire to treat the FF Defender powerset as separate from Controllers and MM's. Quite frankly I think that FF Defenders will never see improvement, because the developers think FF works great for Controllers and MM's.

FF has always been a better secondary than a primary. It's no coincidence that it didn't make it into CoV as a primary; they've learned that the current set isn't appropriate as a primary.

<QR>

This thread shouldn't be about judging other people's ideas. No one has the ability to do that other than the developers, and they have put in an appearance so we know they are there. Any useless judgements are simply spam that will make the thread harder to read when Castle comes back to refer to it. I'm afraid we're already to a point where the actual ideas in this thread are going to have to be summed up in a separate thread due to all the spam.

We all have the same overall goal, the improvement of the FF set. There's no way we'll all have the same opinions on how that can be done. Let's try and do what the title of the thread says: make change suggestions, brainstorm, and suggest changes to the changes, but let's all try to make it positively constructive.

Thank you.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm on the fence over this type of change. I like what it would mean for the FF Defender character's survivability, but I'm concerned about what it would mean for team members. This is especially true in PvP where it is very difficult to keep players within the radius of Dispersion Bubble.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know anything about PvP. Perhaps you could help me with that part of it.

My reasoning is that players are going to be bringing their own defenses to the group, and the addition of even the small bubbles with Dispersion value to their personal defenses is still going to have significant value. After all, Dispersion's 10% is similar in percentage to Heightened Senses, and that's been judged to be a effective addition to the Willpower Scrappers/Tankers defenses.

Blasters on the team would be the most affected by this of course, but the potential for the same defense would still be there, it would just require actually paying attention and/or establishing with the FF defender how the two were going to try and stick together. In a team with only Blasters and FF the FF would simply work to keep the Blasters under Dispersion, whereas in a larger group with more AT's in it, the FF could simply small bubble the blaster and then be much more active in the battle because there would be less risk for the blaster (due to the other teammates and their powers). If the Blaster does get aggro, he simply targets the FF and hits /follow, and gets pulled into Dispersion.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't have a hard time rationalizing it; as enemies are fighting their way through the Force Bubble their ability to defend and fend off attacks is reduced. Your attacks now do more damage to enemies affected by the Force Bubble.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, rationale is easy. We should always be able to rationalize something, especially if it's a good idea.

Rather than a +DMG I've always thought a ToHit buff or -DEF debuff might be more easily placed in an FF power. Depending on the magnitude of the ToHit buff or -DEF debuff the resulting lower miss chance would effectively be a damage buff, if indirect. Either one could also be an excellent contribution in PvP and AV fights.

I haven't done any Arcanavillian numbers on it or anything, but I've always thought that might be a way to get an indirect damage buff to the FF defender and her/his team.

I found the thing about Detention, sort of. In another one of Phil's threads someone says:

[ QUOTE ]
The devs long ago discussed why this couldn't happen, even if they were inclined to implement it. My recollection is it went something like - toggles work by pulsing every XX seconds, but det field makes the target unaffected by all powers so when it pulsed, the target would either not be affected by the Det pulse or they would have to be made tangible before the pulse, which would mean they could attack you before the next pulse.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's pretty much how I remember it too. It's not a dev post though, so grain of salt and all that.

[ QUOTE ]
I've found this to be true on quite a LOT of mobs. I don't know why, but there are alot of mobs that can just walk through Force Bubble like it's not even there, but when they get close enough, Repulsion Field knocks them back like it was nothing. Yes, I do use them both, all the time, and sometimes at the SAME time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't they stack? I remember at some point getting knockback with Force Bolt on a mob normally resistant because the mob was standing on an Ice Slick. I always thought KB stacked, it's just really hard to time it right without a constant power as one of the stackers.

Off topic: I just discovered I am completely uncomfortable with referring to Philotic Knight as Phil, and will, in the future, do PK if I have to abbreviate.

[ QUOTE ]
1) Change Detention Field to a timed toggle power that automatically shuts off after a certain amount of time. This is no more a change to the concept of the power than it was a change to the concept of Phase Shift, and the code is already in place. Nothing even needs to be changed about the power, just allow it to be turned off at will.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wasn't there a technical reason they couldn't do this? I'm spacing on it now, but I'm pretty sure that at some point they said there was a technical limitation that made it impossible for Detention to be a toggle. I'll have to see if I can dig that up.

[ QUOTE ]
The +damage doesn't fit thematically either.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jade's point was that the -RES wasn't thematic either, but it was still added to make the Dark set more effective. I'm not arguing in favor of a +DAM, personally I'd rather see something a little more related (like a big DEF debuff), but thematic has been seen in the past to not be a hurdle for changes to a set.

As I mentioned above, thematic is subjective, and thematic justification is easy.

[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately, I'm afraid that ultimately nothing will be done. It's certainly logical to believe that if the devs were going to add a damage boost to Force Field (and Empathy, for that matter, although at least they can boost their allies with Fortitude) they would have done it with they gave the boost to Dark. They probably didn't because, like us, they couldn't think of a way to do with without breaking the concept of seriously changing powers.

I've also mentioned how telling I find it that Force Field and Empathy are specifically excluded from Corruptors. TA is as well, and Empathy wasn't given to villains at all, but I think the absense of Force Field to Corruptors is a definately sign of dev thinking. Corruptors, with damage dealing as their Primary, need an offensive boost, and thus Force Field isn't appropriate to them.

This does seem to suggest at least some of the devs are aware of the issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed totally. It's no coincidence that FF is only found in CoV as a secondary. It's been a better secondary than primary since release.

I think the major problem with changing FF is that all the changes tend to be considered as spreading across Defenders, Controllers, and Masterminds. The problem is that the latter two need no power boosts, they are already at the top of the power pile. The FF defender however is way at the bottom of that power pile. How can the defender be boosted without pushing the Controllers and Masterminds into the atmosphere? They can't, as long as they are considered as a group.

The solution of course is for changes to be made to just the FF Defenders, but I just don't think the developers look at FF Defenders solely when they consider changes.

[ QUOTE ]
I REALLY wish a redname would come in here and at least say something like: "We'll look at these ideas and consider them for sometime in the future" or even "We like where the set is, don't expect any changes anytime soon."

It would be nice to know if I am wasting my breath here or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is a very good thread, and well timed. Sometimes things pop up, like this sale to NCSoft and the expansion of the dev team, that give me a little hope. So I don't think this thread is a bad idea at this time. You never know, and it can't hurt to discuss and try.

[ QUOTE ]
It has always seemed to me that Forcefields worked better as a secondary than as a Primary. As a Controller secondary, you have, well, control and the added defense and tricks of your secondary.


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm afraid to say that outside of PvP, my Forcefielder doesn't underpeform, at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure the first quotation explains the second.

[ QUOTE ]
I think you mean subjective, but I get your point.

[/ QUOTE ]

I did mean subjective. I get all a-typin' and funky things like "wide area good" and subjective/objective just sneak in there.

[ QUOTE ]
I just think it's very important that the set not change into something that it's not. I don't want to be a Kineticist and debuff or buff damage. If I wanted to do that, I'd MAKE a Kineticist. That's just one example. I think you get my point there.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think I might need a better example. Of course no one is asking for FF to turn into Kinetics. Maybe a more subtle example? I think your objections are more subtle than the example, which is fine. My point though, is that "feel", especially on a subtle level, is extremely subjective (can't say I'm not a learner!), and thus not a tremendously good reason to toss away an idea.

[ QUOTE ]
And here is where I disagree. I think it WILL limit how most people CHOOSE to play FFers because I think most people DO think of themselves as "buffbots". Because of this, I think most people will choose to sit in the middle of the team and not move, wasting all the rest of the powers in the set and making them dusty. That's why I think the "big three" powers should either be left alone, or actually REDUCED in Defensive capabilites as a sacrifice to the Gods of Powerset Balance to allow us more utility in the rest of the set.

[/ QUOTE ]

What choice does the set really give them? As the least defended member of the team, any aggro can be death. Seems to me that "buffbot" is (even according to you) the status quo. If you want that to change, you're going to have to open up not only to changes, but to believing the playerbase can adjust in a positive way to those changes. You're argument seems to be that even if the proposed changes were made, players would still think of themselves as buffbots, or at least that's how I read "Because of this, I think most people will choose to sit in the middle of the team and not move, wasting all the rest of the powers in the set and making them dusty".

I disagree. I think given more self defense FF players will be able to (and apt to) move around and participate in combat, even attacking more because they don't fear getting aggro as much. As I said, this change would be inclusive of existing playstyles, including your own. People who wanted to be buffbots could concentrate on keeping Dispersion on the squishies, while people that wanted to use Repel or Bolt from the middle of combat could do so more effectively. Most likely people would do a combination of both based on the situation.

[ QUOTE ]
I would be open to the idea of a "Defense Debuff" in the set, but what I was opposed to was the idea that "ForceFields is about manipulating Defense" as a JUSTIFICATION for that. I don't buy that justification, because adding Defense is not the same as making someone hold still better so they lose their Defense. Now with all of our "Force" powers you COULD justify adding some Defense DeBuffs in there and say thematically that the enemies are "easier to hit" because they have to "push through the force" (like Force Bubble). You could also justify adding -Slow to enemies with the same justification. I just didn't like that you tried to justify it by saying that FFers are "Defense Manipulators" when we are not really. That's all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Judge the idea, not the justification. Justification is easy.

[ QUOTE ]
All we can do is speculate and brainstorm, and possibly try to interest a developer in what we do. I hope I didn't just go all defensive like I asked others too and remained constructive here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. I think we're better off brainstorming, trying to improve and refine ideas, and letting the developers do the rejecting.

I confess I'm not really sure how to respond to those posts. You shoot stuff down with statements like "I will not be a buffbot" and then say "What I DO want is for more bubblers to stop thinking of themselves as "buffbots"". So are you saying that you don't think of yourself as a buffbot but most other FFers do? I would agree if that's the case. But then how does that change your point?

The problem is that if you shoot down ideas from your seemingly almost unique point of view (even according to yourself) we're never going to get anywhere. The same thing happens if you're allowed to define absolutely what "fits" and "doesn't fit" into the set. I think you realize that, and that's why this second post is such a disclaimer.

What has to happen is that we have to look for the more wide area good of the set. Something that would pull more people to FF (Defenders in particular). Something that would appeal to a larger audience than just you, or just me.

The "feel" of a set is so purely objective that it shouldn't be a large part of the idea limitations. The ease of implementing said ideas is much more relevent. Obviously you and I have differing ideas about the "feel" of the set, and I'll bet there's a thousand other ideas about the "feel" of the set out there. Rejecting ideas based on "feel" isn't productive.

Again, I think you realize that, and that's why you posted your disclaimer post.

That said...

[ QUOTE ]
I'll discuss it further. It completely goes against 2/3rds of our set. Knockback, Repel, and "Phasing". It will cause FFers to NOT want to use MOST of our powers, because we won't be free to run around or reposition ourselves. We'll be firmly established as "buffbots". Dispersion Bubble will then be our new "aura" and we will be required to "rock" it just like our sisters the Empaths are. I say a very STRONG no to this. I am not and refuse to be a buffbot. And I am strongly opposed to anything that will solidify that as "The Way, The Truth, and The Light".


[/ QUOTE ]

Opinion, not fact. It could be that the larger self defense values mean that the FFer can be much more in the thick of things. It could mean that the FFer can take the aggro of FB more effectively. It could mean that the FFer can be an island of defense for the squishies to cuddle up to. I guess to me, I think having more self defense would open up MORE playstyles. Could you play your playstyle if we swapped those numbers? Moving around and knocking people back etc? Absolutely. The defense the small bubbles would provide to the squishies would still be good, and you might be even BETTER at what you do because your self protection is higher. But right now the FF Defender is poorly protected, and that limits how some people perceive and play the set. My opinion is that this change would open up playstyles, not limit them.

[ QUOTE ]
Again, FF is NOT "all about Defense". At least not with a capital D. FF is all about defense, with a lowercase D. What's the difference? Defense is just one number, whereas defense is ANYTHING that you can do to stop your enemies from hitting your allies, with capital Defense being included as a PART of that. Lets take a look one more time at this supposition that "FF is all about Defense".

Personal Force Field - Defense to the bubbler only, turns OFF the Defense from Dispersion Bubble while it's up.

Force Bolt - No Defense, but provides plenty of defense.

Deflection, Insulation and Dispersion - Defense all the way.

Detention Field - No Defense, provides defense.

Repulsion Field - No Defense, provides defense.

Repulsion Bomb - No Defense, provides defense.

Force Bubble - No Defense, provides defense.

FIVE powers do NOT provide Defense. ONE power provides Defense to the bubbler and turns OFF other Defense to the rest of the team. Only THREE powers in the set provide Defense. That's ONE-THIRD of the set. Which means that the other two-thirds aren't primarily about providing team Defense. Instead, they are all about defending your team in other ways.

So once again, is FF really "all about Defense"? I don't think so.


[/ QUOTE ]

Four out of nine is not one third. Quite honestly, if I took those four and stacked them up against the other five in terms of how set defining they are, those four would win hands down. Again, this is opinion, and it's valid as such, but from the outside people see FF as three or four powers, and only the fourth one might vary. Perception is important.

That said I think arguing about Defense vs. defense in this context is kind of pointless.

In my post the defense debuff was brought up to try and deal with the issue of FF defenders and AV's. Right now I think almost any defender is more effective against an AV than FF, and to try and add utility in that situation is, I think, going to require a little bit of a rewrite. A set that is about (and I'm going to try and get this "right") Defense, Knockback, Repel, and "Phasing" is going to have problems affecting an AV fight. So something else might need to be added in there.

It was a concern brought up, and I tried to address it.

[ QUOTE ]
It's ironic that the users of the only defender primary solely dedicated to overall team safety ...

... have some of the lowest /personal/ damage mitigation in all of defenderdom. Even weirder: kin, defenderdom's best set for amping up offensive performance, can provide better damage mitigation than FF in certain situations.

What FF needs is a broader array of tools for keeping the entire team (including the bubbler herself) safe.

As an addendum: FF is the only defender primary whose entire arsenal of mob-affecting powers can be neutered by AVs and monsters. That is an awesomely stupid design decision.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me echo again my proposal for switching the numbers in Dispersion and the targetted bubbles, which other people have brought up earlier in the thread. I can't think of an easier change to make, it's just switching values, yet the effect on the set would be dramatic. It would also not need to differentiate between Defenders, Controllers, and Masterminds, as I'm sure all three would love to have more personal defense.

In a team it means that the FF could provide the exact same amount of defense as he/she does now, as long as dispersion was located in the right spot, or the teammates were in dispersion. That's much more tactically interesting than throwing the bubbles and not having to worry about teammates for two minutes.

Also, this would be a straight swap. The FFer gets much better soloability and survivability while essentially being just as effective in groups. I admit this is one of those things where I can't understand why anyone would NOT want this to happen, but that's probably a limitation on my part. I'd love to see this specific change discussed further.

So make that change, then add DEF (for only the FFer) into Force Bubble. Now the level 32 power is a real goal. I would make FB slightly smaller, but not a lot, so that the FFer could run it in groups without ticking off the meleers more easily. I don't think FF would need to exchange anything for that bit of DEF in the power, if they do, let it be the smaller radius that provides the negative.

Change the graphics of Detention. No exchange needed here either, and we know they know how to change it. Just make it almost opaque and move on.

I like the idea of the bomb becoming a placeable knockdown pet. It fits the set, and as it's the level 8 power and is currently horrible I see no reason that FF would have to exchange anything for it. The only problem I see is the potential work in making the change, but since they already have the code for such a thing, I think it's a realistic possibility.

[ QUOTE ]
The issue here, of course, is that most groups have enough staying power against an AV, but the punch to take them out in a timely fashion. FF doesn't help at all in the damage/accuracy department, nor can we debuff either resistance or regeneration. This is a major flaw in the set, but conceptually very hard to change.

[/ QUOTE ]

First off I think it would be well within the concept of FF to add a Defense Debuff somewhere in the set. Perhaps to FB, or the Bomb. FF after all is all about Defense, and there's nothing saying it has to all be buffing defense. Were I going to pick I'd say make the Bomb the placeable knockdown pet, like Ice Slick, and give it a Defense Debuff. I don't see where that's too powerful, considering it's level 8, and there's precendent for similar powers with RES debuffs and slows.

Even if all the changes above were implemented, including the defense debuff, FF wouldn't be on the same map as Rad or Dark or Kin. They would sure help though. I also don't see anything there other than the big change to the bomb that couldn't be done quickly and easily.

<qr>

Sidekick/Mentoring. The ability for two or more friends to play together no matter their level should be one of the top, if not the top, goals for any MMOG developers. This is my favorite innovation, among many very strong innovations, put forth by CoH.

I'd like to add one to this thread, one that was mentioned in a short aside earlier. Think of the OPTIONS that CoX has given its players!

We have the ultimate in appearance options. And then in addition we have up to five costume slots!

Want to street sweep and not do instances? Feel free. In fact you can do that with smaller groups of foes in a regular zone or with larger groups of foes in a hazard zone. Options.

Want to do instances? You can do radio missions that will take you to somewhere in your current zone, and have no arc. Or you can do contact missions that will take you around the city, and could have an arc that contains many missions, and sometimes temporary powers. Options.

Don't want to do a mission, skip it, you have that option (once a week). Don't want to do a bank mission, tell the contact you don't want to.

Don't want to take a travel power? Sounds good. You'll be fine. It's an option.

I'm sure I could come up with more, but for me options are what really sum up the CoX experience.

[ QUOTE ]
* "Invisible Players/Enemies on Map" - Again, we think we may have this fixed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, that would be awesome. I sure hope the fix works!

One thing that I'm doing with my A/NRG is to stack Stunning Shot and Stun to disorient (and detoggle) bosses. Works great, and once I get more disorient slots in those powers it'll be even better.

While FF is certainly rant-worthy, it has problems far and above the few things that you're bringing up. I mean here's a Defender primary that works as well or better for Controllers and possibly Masterminds in five out of the nine powers. In the rankings Controllers use FF at 92% efficiency just based off of numbers, and not including synergy with pets.

As far as your point about Bodyguard, well, just think of it like when the developers announced that Defenders' big advantage in PvP was that "debuffs were irresistable"; FF just tends to not intrude into their thinking too awfully much.

Just as a question, I had proposed a while ago swapping the values on Dispersion and Deflection/Insulation so that the total +DEF provided by the FFer wouldn't change, but the personal +DEF provided to the FFer would be greater. How do you think this would work for MM's?

Thanks!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'm not a great debater, and I especially hesitate to be opposite Arcanaville, whom I respect a great deal from other posts and threads, but I do think I see the other side's view, and I'll be happy to try and represent it as best I can.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well, in this case you don't have to be, since I agree with you and Concern that there are potential synergy issues with defender and controller sets, separate from the direct benefits each might get out of a set individually. But synergy problems should probably be looked at in a more holistic manner, and within the AT and not across ATs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I certainly agree with you and Concern and Obitus there. Thankfully.



I think looking at changes that can be made to Defenders as a whole is very difficult. The sets can be so different from one another in what they need and what they provide.

FF is a lost cause I'm afraid. Any changes would have to be balanced between Controllers/MM's (two powerful AT's) and Defenders (and let's face it, FF Defenders don't have much going for them), and that doesn't add up to good things for the Defender. I think their best solution would be to scrap the whole primary and build another one with some of the same powers, but not linked (and thus able to be balanced separately) to the Controller/MM sets.

Heck, the Defender set that seen the most changes since release is Dark, no surprise there since it was the only one that didn't require balancing two AT's around.

[ QUOTE ]
Arcanaville's point (at the risk of putting words in her mouth) was simply that your contention (and others') that FF is superior for Controllers, is not as clear-cut as perhaps you might like to think. From my perspective, you haven't addressed any of her objections in a logical manner. Can you explain how exactly the Controller version of FF is superior, despite that the Defender version will be providing more than 40% more mitigation through DEF? Even if you DO include Controller Primaries in the discussion, which is a bit shady, that's going to be a hard case to make.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well Concern and I made some points about FF's synergy with pet classes that I think are good. Heck, just having a built in target for those ally only bubbles would mean you would be able to use them a heck of a lot more, espcially with a Mastermind (or Illusion controller) who gets pets a lot sooner. Being able to raise your party to a defense cap doesn't do you too much good if you don't have a party. To put it another way, the simple fact that for most controllers and all masterminds the ally only bubbles can be used solo as well as on a team more than makes up for their lower DEF values. IMO of course.

Knockback is more valuable with pets as well, the more pets, the more value simply because of the number of attacks able to be aimed at the mob while it gets up. In a set with so much knockback that's not a small advantage.

We mentioned aggro, which an FF defender has a very difficult time handling in groups or solo due to low personal defense. Controllers of any level will be much better off due to holds (and later, pets), and masterminds don't need to attack at all, thus avoiding aggro issues.

I don't think it's shady at all to include Controller primaries, depending on what's being discussed. If the question is whether or not Controllers are better at Damage Mitigation than Defenders, then we need to take the whole picture into account. If we're talking about FF, then perhaps not so much, though we probably should be talking about FF as part of a bigger picture (including controller/MM primaries and Defender secondaries) and not on an island by itself since that situation isn't really applicable to the game.

The problem we've always had trying to get changes to the FF line is to some extent what we're talking about here. People (developers) look at the numbers and wonder what the problem is. The problem is that those numbers come from a grand total of two powers that require refreshing every four minutes, and that does not make for compelling gameplay. It hardly makes for gameplay at all. What we've always wanted is not better numbers, but better gameplay, better utility, and I'm pretty sure that most FFers would sacrifice some numbers to see that happen.

I'm not a great debater, and I especially hesitate to be opposite Arcanaville, whom I respect a great deal from other posts and threads, but I do think I see the other side's view, and I'll be happy to try and represent it as best I can.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For FF at least, there is very little, if any, incentive to take it as a primary other than concept. The whole set works much better, more synergistically, with controllers and MM's.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know what? I think this is probably close to the crux of the whole Defender/Controller/Blaster issue. Controller Primaries/Secondaries synergize extremely well. There are *lots* of ways to use the powers together to make the whole greater than the sum of the parts. Defender primaries / secondaries (and Blasters for the most part) do not work together *nearly* so well. It is no coincidence that the Defender sets considered to be the strongest - like Dark and Rad - are those whose primaries best leverage their secondaries. And this is in large part because for most Defender secondaries the damage component is the only power function that can be meaningfully leveraged by primary powers. It is no coincidence that the Dark secondary - for example - is so much stronger for many primaries than the others. Powers like TT can work together with other Defender abilities to synergize in ways that no power in Energy Blast can manage. And the to-hit debuff stacks with many Defender buffs and debuffs better than anything in...say...Archery. Even Dark doesn't go nearly far enough to my mind, but it shows hints of the direction all Defender secondaries ought to go in order to bring Defenders as a whole up to par.

Blaster secondaries... I'll leave to a different discussion. That's a whole 'nother kettle o' fish.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well thanks Star! I don't post as much (or as well) as you and BurningChick and CDN_Guardian, but I read every FF thread that comes along and I love thinking about stuff like this. To add to what I said above, I'd bet there's a darn good reason FF is in CoV as only a secondary, and only for an AT with pets: the developers now recognize that's where it belongs.

That said, and while I don't disagree with what you said, I think the absolute crux of the issue is overlap. Overlap in AT purposes and overlap in powersets. It's the overlap with blasters that keeps Defender damage down, and it's the overlap with controllers that keep Defender control down. Defender powesets are mostly shared with Blasters and Controllers as well, making them at best difficult to balance and at worst redundant.

FF is very much, I think, an especially problem line, and one that I think simply cannot be saved without some major work. And I think we're just too far into CoH's lifetime to think that will happen.

[ QUOTE ]
Just having a pet allows controllers to use Defender powers to greater effect than any defender could. Speed Boosted Singularity, Animated Stone, Imps, or Phantasm. Or any other buff other power.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT.

The presence of pets does wonderful things to someone with the FF set for example. All of a sudden you have built in teammates to use your "bubble other" powers. Or for the previous version of Repulsion bomb.

If a FF defender knocks back a mob, he might get two attacks on that mob before it gets up. With pets he might get three times that. Note that can apply to Force Bolt, Repulsion Bomb, and Repulsion Field.

As mentioned those same pets can possibly help deal with aggro generated by Force Bubble.

For MM's at least, pets can be told to leave a detentioned enemy alone, something that's much more difficult for a Defender to do.

For FF at least, there is very little, if any, incentive to take it as a primary other than concept. The whole set works much better, more synergistically, with controllers and MM's.