Flux_Vector
-
Posts
337 -
Joined
-
We don't know and have no dev confirmation on what powers do or do not increase participation scores.
The only powers that we are reasonably certain have a direct effect on participation score that can be linked to "not getting the threads table" are enemy-targeted powers that deal damage and require a to-hit roll.
There is supposedly no link between "individual participation" and the quality of the reward acquired at the end of a trial. All individual participation does, according to the devs, is determine if you get the 10 threads table, or a randomly-selected component table instead. According to the devs there is no way to individually improve your chances of getting a higher-quality rewards table once you have past the minimum participation metric.
They have not told us what the minimum participation metric is.
They have implied that overall group success, perhaps as measured by badging conditions met/astral merits received during the trial, can increase the quality of our end reward tables, however.
I hope this all helps. Take the information with as large of a grain of salt as required to swallow statements from devs who up front said they weren't planning to reveal everything about the system or its operation, and indeed, didn't clearly alert us to its existing in the first place. Me? I can't find that much salt. -
1 - Name yourself whatever you want. Most of the NPCs are named "Operative" or "Huntsman" or "Arbiter" whatever, but others are working with codenames or pseudonyms anyway. I would pick something that you liked rather than conforming to the NPC conventions, which are sketchy at best.
2 - The official arachnos colors are black and red, and all of the NPC huntsmen and crab spiders follow that theme. Bane spider scouts are black and purple; commandos and executioners are black and red too thouhg.
Dual builds is a great way to go with either VEAT cause you can play both branches. Of course you do have to be a wolf spider to 24, but after that you pick your branch. Be aware that having crab powers gets you the backpack, whether or not you use them.
Also note that huntsman on the forums tends to specifically apply to a build that doesn't take any primary powers from its chosen branch, instead using all of the gun-based powers from the wolf spider selections, augmented by secondary powers from the advanced branch and pool powers only. If that's not what you mean, you may receive some inappropriate advice on your build if you keep using huntsman to describe it. -
Actually, the new enemies just raise the soft-cap 14% to 59%.
If you design either your scrapper or brute to softcap at 45% to smash/lethal with 1 invincibility target, you'll nearly hit the 'incarnate softcap' with invincibility saturation alone. And while there are a number of non-S/L attacks in the trials, most of the really dangerous ones at least have a smashing or lethal component, reaffirming the primacy of 'defend against either s/l or positional' as a main build strategy.
Against just 1 or 2 enemies, meanwhile, DM/inv has more than sufficient survivability without being softcapped, as DM's -tohit will help close the defense gap, and siphon life is a very powerful source of 'cost-free' survivability (ie, it's a power you'd use anyway as part of your attack chain, as opposed to a nondamaging heal or a less-damaging attack like parry). -
Quote:I haven't done the math. It's still variable in that case anyway, and plays somewhat into the brute style (by never soul draining less than a full spawn, to cap your SD). If the poster is really that concerned about min/maxing performance I think they probably ought to do their own analysis that revolves around their personal playstyle, since I really think the major difference between the ATs is playstyle and personal preference based. Brutes have some advantages and will generally be more overall powerful if you play to them, but scrappers are a lot team-friendlier and don't require a specific set of tactics to maximize. And the end result isn't a huge shift anyway, under most cases.Originally Posted by Deus_Otiosus
Is this still true with perma or near perma-soul drain? -
Quote:Right. A capped scrapper outdamages a capped brute (and a brute takes more buffing to get to their cap, too). And at various points of buffing the scrapper overtakes the brute too. But the math for figuring that out is more work than I wanna do to answer a quick question like thisOriginally Posted by bAss_ackwards
The problem with comparing straight Damage bonus is that Scrappers and Brutes have different Melee Damage modifiers. Scrappers for example get more out of Soul Drain and Against All Odds because they have a higher modifier.
So my basic opinion is, unless you team with kins regularly, in the context of DM/inv, neither is going to be capped often enough to make it a primary factor in deciding between ATs, IMO. -
The scrapper damage cap is 500% (or +400%, which is how the combat attribute window describes it - the first 100% is your base damage). not 300%.
Corrections aside: As it stands, the characters would be almost identical in actual performance most of the the time, with brutes having a small statistical edge via fury, their higher hitpoints, and higher res cap... but fury creates a set of tactical advantages and disadvantages that tends to favor the scrapper in teams, unless you play your brute with near-sociopathic selfishness.
Brutes rely on 'defensive fury generation' (ie, multiple things attacking them) to be able to achieve higher than 50-60% fury rates; with sufficient defensive fury most brutes are able to pull down 70-80% fury, at which point they mildly outdamage unbuffed scrappers. In most teams achieving and maintaining that level of defensive fury means 'soloing in the team' and leapfrogging spawns or rushing ahead. Assuming your survivability can handle it (and for either a brute or scrapper, it can), you gain a small damage advantage over an identical scrapper. But you'll tend to leave your teammates twisting in the wind if you do what you have to here.
Scrappers have consistently high damage with no ramp-up time or need to grab big chunks of aggro, and that is fully available all the time. Scrappers can play more or less identically to brutes of identical build, with near total disregard for their teams. They just aren't rewarded for it (or, arguably, aren't penalized for staying with the team).
Brutes lose damage if they perform as tanks and gain damage if they perform as psychos. Scrappers just truck along at the same damage either way. Whichever fits your personal preferences and playstyle better is what I'd pick. Resist buffs are so uncommon and you have so far to go to get to the resist cap on anything besides smashing/lethal as a brute or scrapper that I would not consider the res cap an issue, other than brutes gaining more from Unstoppable. -
Play both!
You can run a very, very successful nightwidow or crab spider on a very modest budget, and they do go up from there if you come into some money later. On a higher budget, fortunatas have reasonable control and high damage output.
Doms, however, have been buffed extensively and are now first-rate damage-dealers with quite strong survivability. They do, however, benefit hugely from the application of IOs. -
Actually, I think my complaining is useless to the devs, for reasons I just enumerated at length. I am trying to convince certain posters in this thread to alter their approaches to the AT, but I am also fairly convinced this is useless, and probably once the devs say that the participation system for the incarnate trials is working as intended and shut down discussion on it, I'll be leaving the forums again except for some occasional build or systems research, because discussion here is ultimately futile. Increasingly, I would be surprised if I've even made anyone seriously think about their pre-existing decisions before reading my posts.
I did answer your questions in my first post in this thread. They're serious answers that would be helpful if you followed them, particularly in terms of build order and slotting. Just because I think the AT needs attention doesn't mean I don't know how to build characters, I've built quite a lot of characters in my soon-to-be 7-years with the game. Favor offense and self-healing in low and middle levels, favor offense and nonhealing mitigation at higher levels. Stay away from white dwarf, use play tactics (superspeed and a stealth IO are gold here) and breakfrees for mez protection instead and use pulsar to help mitigate for teams that need that kind of help, understanding that team mitigation is not really your role.
And while I admit your thread's been kinda been hijacked, you did get quite a bit of helpful answers (even if they don't all agree), and you've more or less said you've made up your mind (and given your evident hostility towards me, I probably just wasted my time providing you with a repeat and exposition of my previous advice). Are you still looking for help on anything? If not, why be worried about the tangental discussions if they aren't getting in the way of your receiving help and advice?
I think you've gotten some bad advice, but it's your choice on what you follow. I would have liked to convince some of the regular posters here not to keep giving the same advice as they've likely been giving for years even as the game has changed around them, but that's their choice too.
If you'd rather, though, I'll offer to continue this discussion with interested parties in PMs. You can request from a moderator that one of your own threads be locked for any or no reason if you are extremely concerned about ending the tangential discussions, unless the forum rules have changed since the last time I was active here.
Edit: This is sort of a pet peeve of mind, but the "fix't" posting thing annoys me, and I consider it trolling. -
Confront does seem to help you counter running enemies, but I'd be more inclined to get a patron immobilize, unless you're only worried about hard-to-immobilize 'hard targets' running (EBs, AVs). Confront's not perfect, I've seen taunted enemies run around anyway, especially if the taunt isn't very strong.
What I might do is respec into it on test first, and do a few test missions where I try to recreate 'running boss' scenarios - like killing all of a spawn but the boss, then hitting him with a debuff. Then if he runs, try confronting him back. -
Quote:Considering that the last time kheldians were looked at the same fixes were applied to both ATs despite said ATs being radically different and the fix not touching any individual powers at all within them, I have serious doubts that the devs are going to listen to player feedback at such a nuanced level.Originally Posted by Smiling_Joe
Two powers need changing. Two. Changing one power will double your dps. Changing one other power will increase your survivability. What sounds more likely to you: convincing the devs that the entire archetype is crap and must be changed, or convincing the devs that two powers are seriously underperforming and need fixed?
If we could show that the powers were bugged or conclusively over-powered, they might fix them, but even bugs mainly are fixed quickly only if said bug was making them stronger than the should've been. (Think Shield Charge).
I'm basing this opinion on history. This is the track record.
It's not hyperbole when you're stating the facts. Just because we "can" fix PBs in two moves, that doesn't mean that the gap isn't exactly as large as I'm describing. In fact, those two moves, are actually rather drastic moves - basically giving PBs a perma-tier9 defense and either breaking the cottage rule on photon seekers to make them "real pets," or turning them from a weak pseudonuke into something competitive with the most powerful AOEs in the entire game (ROA, Fullauto, Hail of Bullets).Quote:I don't disagree that the archetype needs major help, but there's nothing wrong with being pragmatic, either. If changing two powers will change the archetype, then I'm all for focusing on those two powers. Hyperbole will not convince them. Reasoning by one or two players will not convince them. Know what else won't convince them? Putting on our walking shoes and discouraging other players from playing them.
Only datamining on their part will bring any kind of change, and you want to deprive them of that data by staging some sort of mass walkout on the archetype? That's wrong on two levels. First, even if you get everyone reading the forums to stop playing Peacebringers, you've got... only the people on the forums not playing Peacebringers. People playing the game who don't read the forums vastly outnumber us, as if you didn't already know that, and would still be providing that data.
Second, thousands upon thousands of blasters walked around at the debt cap for the first few years of this game, and it was that huge amount of blaster debt that convinced the developers to scrap Defiance 1.0 and come out with Defiance 2.0. People sure didn't avoid the archetype.
Same with stalkers. People might not have teamed with them, but they sure as hell didn't suffer in terms of population. The developers saw that the vast majority of them were in pvp and were solo in pve and decided to help them team.
And again, consider history. Blasters were ignored for years. Dominators, for years. Stalkers, for years. Kheldians, for years until i13, and now for over a year after. PVP? GDN? ED? This game's history is actually rife with devs fixing the wrong problems, applying every fix to a problem that only needed one, or fixing the problems too late. You have way more faith in them and the forums than I do. I almost envy you that.
In fact, in more recent history - with GR, the brute fury change and damage cap lowering were solutions looking for a problem. The difference between scrapper and brute performance, which for some reason people thought would cause scrappers to go extinct under side-switching, was the stated reason for the change. Yet that gap was like... 10-15% at best. Compared to the 100% gap between PBs and WSes, it was rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. It still got the attention because it was either Castle's pet project to nerf brutes, or because prominent scrapper-playing forum posters pushed it. In fact Castle started by leaving brute offense alone and lowering their resist cap to 85%, then changed it to the offense nerf later - the entire appearance of this episode was "they wanted to weaken brutes somehow and just threw nerfs at them until one stuck." What kind of faith am I supposed to be keeping in that? Especially because even with the reduction, my brutes are able to reliably maintain about 70 fury (in fact I can usually keep it over 80), meaning I still outdamage scrappers who aren't getting fulcrum shifted! But mainly I do that by playing in an sociopathic manner, denying the 'meatshield' potential of a brute and disregarding my teammates' wellbeing in order to maximize my own defensive fury generation by leapfrogging spawns and playing away from the team.
Hey, that sounds like the effect 'participation' has had on the playerbase as a whole! Experience, it lets you recognize the same mistakes being made again. The process and effect of this adjustment's introduction left such a bad taste in my mouth, it ended up being to straw that broke the camel's back and I quit posting after the GR beta and only came back now because of that 'participation diversification' ruining my, and my friends', enjoyment of the game (two of whom, notably, play peacebringers and are what brought me here). It's a solution in search of a problem that is making things worse than if they'd just left well enough alone, but it's being rammed into the game because it's clearly some dev's pet project or personal issue; no player I've ever known has asked for a system like this and even the players who support the concept admit that it's not working right and is causing more trouble than it's worth.
On the other hand, we could all go try and debt cap our khelds on the trials on purpose to get attention maybe too, like blasters but to be frank, given how the trials play and how hard it is to actually accrue a meaningful amount of debt, I'd rather follow my friend's advice and stick my hand in a meatgrinder than do that. In fact I think the effect of blasters and debt is partly why debt's been softened so much - another example of devs fixing the wrong problems.
And the trial difficulty is another example: I can sit here with a completely straight face and say that 85% damage resistance with no defense in front of it seems like insufficient survivability in the trials because of the type of debuffing applied by seers and ACUs, and the massive damage hits dealt by IDF commanders, war walkers, and mk-iv victorias, I'm not sure I'd even wanna play a warshade in them. The few I've teamed with in the trials were getting flattened pretty hard. I guess getting that first eclipse off is a doozey when almost every spawn has 3 things in it that can oneshot you, but if you let your team engage first they kill the crap out of it with judgements and don't leave you quite enough to buff to cap off of.
I've got a 50 pb with a build so purple it shines from orbit. The only data I think is going to have an impact on the developers is me not ever setting foot in the trials with her, so they can see people are opting out of the endgame with their kheldians. And yes, I think it will take months or years for any datamining to show anything. Which is why for those months and years I want to be playing a character who doesn't demonstrably and numerically suck, despite how pretty their powers are.Quote:If I had my way, I'd convince EVERYONE who could to play a Peacebringer to at least 38 not only to share in my joy of the archetype (languishing though it is) but also to provide the developers with enough data to hilight the problems with it. A walkout is counterproductive to that goal. -
Quote:This isn't a minimal threshold, it's a relative threshold.Originally Posted by Redlynne
Trick question ... should they be able to?
If that's the "benchmark minimum performance threshold" you're going to set, you first need to answer (and explain) why it's a reasonable one to expect. My reading of your post indicates that you have not explained why this benchmark expectation is in any way reasonable.
Should or shouldn't they be able to doesn't matter: numerous other ATs do, regularly, and measure their individual performances by how fast and easily they do. That's what I mean when I say the PB isn't even in the same league as them.
Whether or not that's balanced or good for the game or whatever is moot. It's the reality of the game we have. People are doing it. Edit: And the devs, far from changing it, are making it worse by adding new endgame power tiers (incarnate powers) while raising the difficulty in the incarnate trials to over-compensate and maintain challenge. Builds that are 'mediocre' in normal content become 'deathtraps' in the endgame as a result.
I've said elsewhere that I didn't disagree that PBs can meet the 'dev-defined' minimum threshold of being able to solo on +0x1 difficulty. I merely set that minimum threshold is ludicrously low and should be dismissed because of the importance of the relative threshold.
You don't have to be single-target oriented to meet these benchmarks. But AOE characters are going to find their niches increasingly deprecated by the endgame, as judgement powers become more common and fights with hard targets that are impractical to AOE down have been becoming more common in the content all the way back since the introduction of the ITF and its boss and EB spam... actually, even before that, with the RWZ mothership raid's boss and EB spam. High defense-based or defense-enhanced survivability (to help avoid debuffing cascades), and taking down meaty targets quickly, are the two lynchpins of highly successful modern character.
I didn't make this up, the devs did when they started making the endgame enemies of choice +4 bosses, EBs, and AVs.
Double-edit: It should be clear to anyone who is doing endgame content by now that the "game not being made harder for IOs" doesn't really apply to said endgame. -
Quote:The currently-useless-for-anything-else, but-very-easy-to-accumulate astral merits more than provide the thread needs for my characters.Originally Posted by Fulmens
I'm kinda n00 to all the thread stuff, but is "upgrade 10 shards into 10 threads for 2.5 million inf" useful once you've got your alpha slot taken care of? That seems like a small, but steady, inf sink.
Probably by the time new things get released to spend them on, I'll have not only kitted out several characters with their powers, but also stockpiled a sizable number of them. -
Quote:I meant isn't. It was a typo/error. My bad, I post quickly without proofing sometimes.Originally Posted by Grey Pilgrim
They're... relevant because they explain what Peacebringers need adjusted to get in line with Warshades?
People don't know how to fix them? How so? Pretty much every thread I have seen on the subject cite similar things: recharge on Photon Seekers for the damage they do, Pulsar only a guaranteed Mag 2 stun, Light Form issues, build up not lasting long enough, etc. Suggestions from people that know Peacebringers are often quite similar. The problem is more that NOTHING is done about the issues everyone acknowledges for the AT.
What I'm saying is that the truth is in fact: "this AT has powers all over and is in serious need of improvement" and not "plays okay but needs some adjustments to be closer to other ATs."Quote:Exactly who is doing this? Did you miss MY BOLDED AND CAPS LOCKED STATEMENT THAT PEACEBRINGERS NEED IMPROVEMENTS TO GET IN LINE WITH WARSHADES AND OTHER ATS IN MY PREVIOUS POST? I see no one suggesting the things in number 1 or 2. Peacebringers need adjustment. However, the problem is your 3, where you suggest that Peacebringers cause buyers remorse. Again, Peacebringers are not so weak that they can't play decently in the game. You may not enjoy them, but that does not mean they are not viable
This whole post clearly misreads everything I and others have clarified on the subject. You can't seem to distinguish between "plays okay but needs some adjustments to be closer to other ATs" and "this AT has powers all over and is in serious need of improvement."
"Some adjustments" don't literally double your DPS and increase your survivability peak by 20-fold. That is major adjustment. If you have 100 dollars, and need 200 dollars to buy something, you aren't going to be able to afford it by getting 20 dollars. 20 dollars is 1/5th of what you need.
PBs need almost 100 dps to catch up to warshades. That's near-doubling their current DPS. A doubling of performance isn't a minor adjustment.
That's what I mean by the gap being bigger than people are admitting to. These are the numbers. Heck the highest DPS practical for many 'true offense' ATs, even with full incarnate builds and being so purpled that their shine is visible from orbit, is in the 300-400 range without using -regen powers and/or reactive DOT proccing pets.
That means PBs need almost 1/4 of the maximum dps that's practical to achieve at all, to be added to them, in order to meet up with warshades.
How big of a gap do the numbers have to show before it stops being minor adjustments and 'needs help but viable'? Seriously, give me a number? A threshold. At what point do you draw the line? What makes "needs to be doubled" not enough?
Those aren't rhetorical questions.
It makes perfect sense to me. The devs decide a lot of things based on datamining. I doubt they read these forums, and if they do, they rarely listen to any posters on them unless that poster happens to be part of the openly double-secret forum cartel. Ask the pvpers how well the devs listened to them on the forums.Quote:Okay, this doesn't make much sense. We can't control what the developers do, and I know BAB and Castle at least had some ideas for the AT that they couldn't follow through on because of time constraints. Nothing being done is an issue, but it's not necessarily because no one acknowledges the issue.
You can get get dev attention by posting about it, and that's about it. Even then, there are no guarantees. I and others posted until we were blue in the face about how Fiery Aura needed some tweaking still after I11, and nothing happened. Castle suddenly posted in a Shields thread in the Scrapper forums that mentioned the issue, and BAM! suddenly adjustments were made in time for GR. I don't know what triggered it for him, or even if it was that thread. It might have been on his to-do list and he finally had time for it, I dunno.
But not playing an AT that I like? Heck no. Devices needs help, but it doesn't mean I'm letting my Archery/Devices Blaster sit, same for my Peacebringer. I wish I could like the mechanics of Warshades, but I just can't, and I like Peacebringers. So I have my alpha to rare levels on my Peacebringer, and I'll work him into the next four whenever I can... darn grindy nature of the trials is the only thing holding me back there.
That leaves us with datamining showing a trend as the only way to impress on them that there is a problem. Voting with our feet is something they will eventually notice and potentially take seriously enough to act on.
I am calling it like it is. I've played a PB extensively. It's not competitive with any of my other builds.Quote:Oh, and last but not least:
I am telling it how it is, by the way. Peacebringers need some tweaks but are plenty fun to play. I'm calling you out for not calling it how it is, though.
*added* I do apologize for the caps and bold, and sounding a little cranky, but I do hate having to repeat myself... especially when I'm grading through a huge stack of papers.
For example, a PB can't reasonably do a scrapper RWZ challenge or solo a pylon and might if lucky be barely able to make a serious run at it if loaded with incarnate powers and purples. The truth is though you'd just be throwing that effort into the black hole that is how bad PBs suck to begin with, and end up with a character that is at best equal to an pre-incarnate anything else, and at worst, still not even up with an SO'd warshade.
These are measurable tests you can run for empirical evidence. They produce facts, not opinions.
And I understand about frustration. Trust me, I feel it from my end too. We disagree on the severity of the problem, it seems (that is what #2 was intended to address in the list of 3 problems. Not everything on the list applies to every post or every poster, as I would hope is clear). -
Quote:Why exactly are the reasons relevant? I'm serious here. Enlighten me. The problem in this discussion isn't that people don't know how to fix PBs. There are numerous threads on that subject. The problems in this discussion is that people are 1 - denying PBs even have a problem, and 2 - denying that the problem is important enough to merit resolution, and 3 - giving new players bad advice that will almost invariably lead them into buyer's remorse over their PB a few weeks or months down the road, unless they abandon the character prior to hitting the endgame.Originally Posted by Smiling_Joe
If you're going to quote the numbers from those spreadsheets I made, you might want to go back and look at the reasons for those numbers.
Peacebringers do half to 2/3's the damage of Warshades for one reason and one reason alone: Extracted Essences. Remove the level 32 pets from the equation and Peacebringers are pretty much dead even with Warshades, with a slight nod given to Peacebringers in human form and a slight nod given to Warshades in Dwarf Form.
Buff the Photon Seekers=buff the archetype.
Same goes with survivability. Warshades have ten times the survivability as Peacebringers due to one power: Eclipse. If Light Form were up as often as Eclipse, you'd see the combination of that and the self-contained heals propelling Peacebringers up to par and even past their darker halves' durability.
The fact that you can point to specific powers as 'why' doesn't change the facts of 'what.' Indeed if you want photon seekers and lightform buffed to match extracted essence and eclipse, the first hurdle is convincing the devs that buffs to PBs need to happen at all, which is only made harder by people posting in denial. And is also made harder by people continuing to play PBs, because the most effective way to get dev attention to something is generally to vote with your feet. I'm very cynical about this, but my motivation is really more to address point 3: I don't think the devs are going to read or care about the feedback in this forum. I do think we have something of a social obligation to tell people the truth about what they're getting into when they come here looking for advice.
Edit - fixed bolded word; error changed the entire meaning of phrase. -
Quote:The numbers you did showed PBs doing roughly half the single target and 2/3s the AOE damage of warshades, with at best even survivability and at worst 1/20th the survivability.Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison
This is total BS. We've done the numbers, PBs aren't far behind Warshades on SOs.
How much farther behind do they have to get before some of you will admit it's a problem?!
No, MOLRSF wasQuote:Played and built well they can still do incredible things.
My very first MoSTF had a PB and his contribution to the team was invaluable. MoSTF, at the time, was the hardest task in the game.
And I have the mostf badge on my PB too. Who with me at the controls does, yes, outperform a lot of people.
And my brute with me at the controls outperforms the PB and even more people. My widow, ditto. My defender, ditto. My MM, ditto. All of my alts, including ones with much less extensive and expensive IO builds: Ditto.
I haven't ever said that "your PB" is worse than "everyone else." I have always said that "your PB" is fighting an uphill performance battle against "your any other alt." Assuming you don't self-gimp your alts, they will do better in your hands in the same situations. You can contrive cases where the PB shines over some character that's not well-suited to it - I mean hey, PBs have more control than fire melee scrappers! But that leaves out the part where the fire melee scrapper is four spawns ahead of the PB and counting because they do triple the damage and don't need the control for anything in the first place.
I did not say always as your straw man states, I said regularly - as in often.Quote:I have seen PBs on incarnate trials and they do well. They do not always win the consolation prize as your hyperbole states.
There's a difference between "optimal" and "extremely substandard." In fact that's kind of what the definition of the terms are and why we have them in our language. I'm not saying that PBs aren't optimal. I'm saying they aren't competitive, and if you're going to be honest and apply endgame standards to the AT, you can't deny that.Quote:If you enjoy playing a PB, there is absolutely no reason not to play one.
They're not an optimal pick, but following that logic to the extreme means we'd all be the same optimized fire/rad and ill/cold controllers.
Which is why the argument always comes back to trying to convince people they don't have to be as good as everyone else, or to saying that if they like it, it's fine to suck, or occasionally that endgame standards are too high or aren't important. And to that last I say: Bull. Getting to 50's trivial and if you like the character as much as a lot of you certainly do, you are going to want to play and enjoy them in the endgame.
But when you suck you stop liking it really fast, especially now that the game has a system in place with 'participation diversification' in order to tell you how you suck. You don't need to get threads every time. Just reasonably often. And you'll be thinking the same thing my friend said the other day when after a trial treated him roughly and he got threads he said, declining to go again: "I'd rather stick my hand a in meatgrinder." -
Beds usually use shelves or wall cabinets for the headboards, and counters or desks for the mattress. Cover with a supergroup floor plate for a 'comforter' or the like.
Arcade cabinets or vending machines or ATMs and so forth, are generally a mix of things like supergroup glass logos, round desk corners, tech retro monitors, shelves again, and small room details like microphones or telephones.
Goodluck! -
After some testing and thought prompted by TopDoc's guide, and considering - but not using as a hard requirement - the 'incarnate trial softcap' of 59% defense, I came up with the following no-purples build for NWs:
Villain Plan by Mids' Villain Designer 1.93
http://www.cohplanner.com/
Click this DataLink to open the build!
Level 50 Natural Arachnos Widow
Primary Power Set: Night Widow Training
Secondary Power Set: Widow Teamwork
Power Pool: Speed
Power Pool: Leaping
Power Pool: Medicine
Power Pool: Leadership
Villain Profile:
Level 1: Swipe -- Mako-Acc/Dmg(A), Mako-Dmg/EndRdx(3), Mako-Dmg/Rchg(3), Mako-Acc/EndRdx/Rchg(5), Mako-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg(5), Mako-Dam%(42)
Level 1: Combat Training: Defensive -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A)
Level 2: Strike -- Mako-Acc/Dmg(A), Mako-Dmg/EndRdx(7), Mako-Dmg/Rchg(7), Mako-Acc/EndRdx/Rchg(13), Mako-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg(15), Mako-Dam%(43)
Level 4: Tactical Training: Maneuvers -- RedFtn-Def(A), RedFtn-Def/EndRdx(37), RedFtn-Def/Rchg(37), RedFtn-EndRdx/Rchg(39), RedFtn-Def/EndRdx/Rchg(43)
Level 6: Hasten -- RechRdx-I(A), RechRdx-I(15), RechRdx-I(17)
Level 8: Follow Up -- C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg(A), C'ngImp-Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg(9), C'ngImp-Dmg/Rchg(9), C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(11), C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx(11), GSFC-Build%(13)
Level 10: Indomitable Will -- S'fstPrt-ResDam/Def+(A)
Level 12: Lunge -- Mako-Acc/Dmg(A), Mako-Dmg/EndRdx(19), Mako-Dmg/Rchg(21), Mako-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg(21), Mako-Dam%(23), RechRdx-I(45)
Level 14: Combat Jumping -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A)
Level 16: Spin -- Oblit-Dmg(A), Oblit-Acc/Rchg(17), Oblit-Dmg/Rchg(19), Oblit-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(31), Oblit-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg(31), Oblit-%Dam(37)
Level 18: Slash -- C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx(A), C'ngImp-Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg(23), C'ngImp-Dmg/EndRdx(29), C'ngImp-Dmg/Rchg(29), C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(31), Mako-Acc/EndRdx/Rchg(45)
Level 20: Super Jump -- Jump-I(A)
Level 22: Foresight -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A), LkGmblr-Def(33), LkGmblr-Def/EndRdx(33)
Level 24: Mind Link -- RedFtn-Def/EndRdx(A), RedFtn-Def/Rchg(25), RedFtn-EndRdx/Rchg(25), RedFtn-Def/EndRdx/Rchg(27), RedFtn-Def(27)
Level 26: Mental Training -- Run-I(A)
Level 28: Tactical Training: Leadership -- GSFC-ToHit(A), GSFC-ToHit/Rchg(48), GSFC-ToHit/Rchg/EndRdx(48), GSFC-Rchg/EndRdx(48), GSFC-ToHit/EndRdx(50)
Level 30: Mask Presence -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A)
Level 32: Poison Dart -- Decim-Acc/Dmg(A), Decim-Dmg/EndRdx(33), Decim-Dmg/Rchg(34), Decim-Acc/EndRdx/Rchg(34), Decim-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(34)
Level 35: Dart Burst -- Posi-Acc/Dmg(A), Posi-Dmg/EndRdx(36), Posi-Dmg/Rchg(36), Posi-Dam%(36), Posi-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx(46)
Level 38: Aid Other -- Heal-I(A)
Level 41: Aid Self -- IntRdx-I(A), Numna-Heal(42), Numna-Heal/EndRdx(42), Numna-Heal/Rchg(50), Dct'dW-EndRdx/Rchg(50)
Level 44: Tactical Training: Assault -- EndRdx-I(A)
Level 47: Assault -- EndRdx-I(A)
Level 49: Elude -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A)
Level 50: Cardiac Core Paragon
Level 0: Born In Battle
Level 0: High Pain Threshold
Level 0: Invader
Level 0: Marshal
------------
Level 1: Brawl -- Empty(A)
Level 1: Sprint -- ULeap-Stlth(A)
Level 1: Conditioning
Level 2: Rest -- RechRdx-I(A)
Level 4: Ninja Run
Level 2: Swift -- Run-I(A)
Level 2: Health -- Mrcl-Rcvry+(A), Mrcl-Heal(43), Numna-Regen/Rcvry+(45), Numna-Heal(46), Numna-Heal/EndRdx(46)
Level 2: Hurdle -- Jump-I(A)
Level 2: Stamina -- P'Shift-EndMod(A), P'Shift-EndMod/Rchg(39), P'Shift-EndMod/Acc/Rchg(39), P'Shift-Acc/Rchg(40), P'Shift-EndMod/Acc(40), P'Shift-End%(40)
------------
Code:And the following "unlimited budget" build:| Copy & Paste this data into Mids' Hero Designer to view the build | |-------------------------------------------------------------------| |MxDz;1435;685;1370;HEX;| |78DA65935973124114857BC2100C4B02814036B292844018A1F43D958A5113C9568| |9C6F2054718C318046AC08ABEF91BDCE256E596B83CABA57FCAE5DD05EFDCD349B0| |A080AFE74CF7E97BEEF42CDF3EE315E2EEAC5042F325BD56CBCD597ABE58AED4725| |B66A1B2EB5AD1EBB72CBD245C42887196729B966E96CDF2B6B6626E17EBB9FFC5C8| |A6A1DFDCAD583B9AD4E56560B15C342CA35CD70E07EEB54AA5A46D540DA3E0E561D| |6D0ABE4E0E38B65A360E6CDB2D17578AB6058B5A2590D2E54CDBC3667E5EB663EB7| |ACD7EA8675A7976A4BD0EF2525C1A7E114D70919D1B60D1419AA09DC604CEF30E6D| |D04855709D1A3D8D22BAF54C84881513B8CDA61E48551278C12305A2023078C5447| |271BC5DC808731E965247C8C316AA913D3DB9C49F8017EE00D55E1E23A1A4ED7559| |64E18C035863B0F1450D387361B67A98A0E19A7234283A83820238F8CE3419C6EC4| |09214E0839C2C83183EDC3549F4F1AF9D0977D32EA92465DBF783BFF6F46F71FC6D| |05FA0C18809878DE7B42A205705506B18390675007186106706BD8DD0F641AC12C1| |384B8B6E3C20BB633DA8682404F819599A10914F2082D6F7A2F5BD687D3F5ADF8FA| |77381A6F7C9847D29DEE23C4903D261609F539C3C00DE02EF1899F78C259A1E950E| |5154F482D20EA36E75788F3025461E33469F004F81678CD7347D4C4E1FFBC8358C7| |F023E035F19A92F8C28756542766522C6D2304971E9101FC0C9BEC8A54CAF33321B| |4096718E4A4ECA9293A3380CE4A0494983B44AB3D2729F34820DAA476F177DE9231| |22D4ABA45C9B428A75A94D32D4A566D7A271DDCEAD563A9B1A61EBD9F42C169EDF0| |0BFBB4F1ED6F54BC22572B78AE3F8E25555952ECCE2716193397385D0A2D4BA165D| |F9B1D70F87E1E4B4EE51E9734791F78C0987A083C02F618B341FB1F65ADBB390E8F| |B79AC6979BC6579AC6FF00FA6CE718| |-------------------------------------------------------------------|
Villain Plan by Mids' Villain Designer 1.93
http://www.cohplanner.com/
Click this DataLink to open the build!
Level 50 Natural Arachnos Widow
Primary Power Set: Night Widow Training
Secondary Power Set: Widow Teamwork
Power Pool: Speed
Power Pool: Flight
Power Pool: Medicine
Power Pool: Leadership
Villain Profile:
Level 1: Swipe -- Mako-Acc/Dmg(A), Mako-Dmg/EndRdx(3), Mako-Dmg/Rchg(3), Mako-Acc/EndRdx/Rchg(5), Mako-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg(5), Mako-Dam%(42)
Level 1: Combat Training: Defensive -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A)
Level 2: Strike -- Mako-Acc/Dmg(A), Mako-Dmg/EndRdx(7), Mako-Dmg/Rchg(7), Mako-Acc/EndRdx/Rchg(13), Mako-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg(15), Mako-Dam%(43)
Level 4: Tactical Training: Maneuvers -- RedFtn-Def(A), RedFtn-Def/EndRdx(34), RedFtn-Def/Rchg(37), RedFtn-EndRdx/Rchg(37), RedFtn-Def/EndRdx/Rchg(39)
Level 6: Hasten -- RechRdx-I(A), RechRdx-I(15), RechRdx-I(19)
Level 8: Follow Up -- C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg(A), C'ngImp-Dmg/EndRdx(9), C'ngImp-Dmg/Rchg(9), C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(11), C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx(11), GSFC-Build%(13)
Level 10: Indomitable Will -- S'fstPrt-ResDam/Def+(A), GA-3defTpProc(45)
Level 12: Lunge -- C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg(A), C'ngImp-Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg(19), C'ngImp-Dmg/Rchg(21), C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(21), C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx(23), Mako-Dam%(45)
Level 14: Fly -- Winter-ResSlow(A)
Level 16: Spin -- Oblit-Dmg(A), Oblit-Acc/Rchg(17), Oblit-Dmg/Rchg(17), Oblit-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(31), Oblit-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg(31), Oblit-%Dam(37)
Level 18: Slash -- Hectmb-Dam%(A), Hectmb-Dmg/Rchg(23), Hectmb-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(29), Hectmb-Acc/Rchg(29), Hectmb-Dmg/EndRdx(31), C'ngImp-Dmg/EndRdx(45)
Level 20: Poison Dart -- Apoc-Dmg(A), Apoc-Dmg/Rchg(43), Apoc-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(50), Apoc-Acc/Rchg(50), Apoc-Dmg/EndRdx(50)
Level 22: Foresight -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A), LkGmblr-Def(33), LkGmblr-Def/EndRdx(33)
Level 24: Mind Link -- RedFtn-Def/EndRdx(A), RedFtn-Def/Rchg(25), RedFtn-EndRdx/Rchg(25), RedFtn-Def/EndRdx/Rchg(27), RedFtn-Def(27)
Level 26: Mental Training -- Run-I(A)
Level 28: Tactical Training: Leadership -- GSFC-ToHit(A), GSFC-ToHit/EndRdx(42), GSFC-Rchg/EndRdx(42), GSFC-ToHit/Rchg(48), GSFC-ToHit/Rchg/EndRdx(48)
Level 30: Aid Other -- HO:Golgi(A)
Level 32: Aid Self -- IntRdx-I(A), HO:Golgi(33), HO:Golgi(34)
Level 35: Dart Burst -- Ragnrk-Dmg(A), Ragnrk-Dmg/Rchg(36), Ragnrk-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(36), Ragnrk-Acc/Rchg(36), Ragnrk-Dmg/EndRdx(46)
Level 38: Tactical Training: Assault -- EndRdx-I(A)
Level 41: Elude -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A)
Level 44: Mask Presence -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A)
Level 47: Maneuvers -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A), EndRdx-I(48)
Level 49: Assault -- EndRdx-I(A)
Level 0: Born In Battle
Level 0: High Pain Threshold
Level 0: Invader
Level 0: Marshal
Level 50: Cardiac Core Paragon
------------
Level 1: Brawl -- Empty(A)
Level 1: Sprint -- ULeap-Stlth(A)
Level 1: Conditioning
Level 2: Rest -- Empty(A)
Level 4: Ninja Run
Level 2: Swift -- Empty(A)
Level 2: Health -- Mrcl-Rcvry+(A), Numna-Heal(34), Numna-Regen/Rcvry+(43), Mrcl-Heal(46), Panac-Heal/+End(46)
Level 2: Hurdle -- Empty(A)
Level 2: Stamina -- P'Shift-EndMod(A), P'Shift-EndMod/Rchg(39), P'Shift-EndMod/Acc/Rchg(39), P'Shift-Acc/Rchg(40), P'Shift-EndMod/Acc(40), P'Shift-End%(40)
------------
Honestly, I consider the unlimited budget version to be very optional. The major advantage in my opinion is its superior proc availability.Code:| Copy & Paste this data into Mids' Hero Designer to view the build | |-------------------------------------------------------------------| |MxDz;1434;680;1360;HEX;| |78DA6593595313511085EF24132259201B040831842D906512162DDF280A4140364| |B14CB973826231989496A120B7DF337B8BE58E5062E3FCEE5DD057BFA5C2156A692| |FA7ACEBD7DA67BFACEE6A3CB3E219E2C0825B254D59BCDE2A2A5972AB57AB3B8679| |6EB87EE2DBDF5D0D2ABC22D841863A9B86BE966CDACED6B5BE67EA555FC5F8CEE1A| |FA83C3BA75A0495DDE06D76A15C3326A2DED5FE0D9A9D7ABDAF5866194BD1CAE546| |D3F3FC79B46D92C9935A397EF360CBD6C58CD8AD9082F37CC92B668955A66A9B8A9| |375B86F578804A4BD3FF2D3582EBC425EE116684631FA8305413B8CF983E602C790| |80A6709D1A7D8D23B9F54C8488151178CBA60E483510F8CD2305A2623278C54670F| |1B253D8C712FE0634CFA19A3F4465DD8EE7065E00784800F54855B38B80AF71D96C| |EE9C05D86A7049451D317878D15AAA21BB64A779482B8C8CE3AED9563F2F3CAAEBC| |F00B198C08FC22F0EB875F165D79A94C3FB2843FC6464764D42B8D7A7FF25303BF8| |0DF8CF37F8013C6B8E0ACD794159459C10CAFF4A718C353C034B2D28C2C5A7D4359| |6164A9E12CAFA4738C190DC80305C69A0733B45F6A1F86391201028C0DDA1095438| |A623A0398CE00A63384E90C61805769FBA03C1C8339AE6895A49874881DF153A73F| |039F18F963E02323EEB6470087F82582EA1409D212D01C8918BB8EC8A5A4E47BEA7| |B54F63D3ACB4E6373C03C708191BBC8B842454DC83A2792ECB84DD2947CF0145EC5| |3A4919B92B032948A568F2B86890F2C80FD14A416E2E401A564F3F30FAD125D21D4| |AA14399E950E63A94F90E65A35D717293DBEAE9977AB2A39E7EA242E184EE80B00F| |1AAF7EA54615A57DF5FB99A22AEB14A444F206B79BBEC9C8ADB1984BF261FDD661F| |0E34C71294FB99EC967C07346EA05F01278C5B8E6E1FAB9A8BDB6F8565B7CBB2D5E| |08DB5988FF0246A2EB08| |-------------------------------------------------------------------|
-
I don't know many people who are opting to convert incarnate components with inf. Even people who can afford to and have all the rares needed are preferring to trial more and hope for the very rare to drop rather than throw 400 million into it.
I think it's largely because most of the very rare incarnate powers are only a minor improvement over the rare versions, but are literally more than twice as costly in terms of resources (since they require two rare powers, plus a very rare component, to craft). Most of the people people I know personally are looking at that, going, "all that plus 400m or 30 empy merits? Eh, I don't really need it." The few that are considering it have fully purpled out builds already and are sitting on billions of inf with nothing to spend it on, and are growing fatigued with the trial system and its broken-seeming reward paradigm. Those people may drop the 400m to get it over with and stop trialing.
I really doubt the devs intended that to be motive behind this if it's intended as a broadly-used inf sink instead of more of a 'safety valve' for potentially unacceptably low reward rates.
Supply does seem to be up at level 50. I'd add that I think in the next 1-3 weeks we're going to see at least a small demand surge, especially if the devs don't pull back from "participation diversification" as people abandon characters that don't do well in the trials - at least up until the patch fixing the uncommon droprate, many people report extremely consistent rewards by character - and then finish levelling up their new characters to 50 and are looking to IO them. -
The end game, which is where the problem appears, is not really set up for SOs. Go take an SO'd anything into the incarnate trials and tell me how effective you feel, and how much fun you have feeling that way. They even increased the NPC base to-hit in the trials, the only reason I can offer for which is that they are compensating for the heightened player defenses provided by IOs. Not to mention auto-hit attacks, one-shotting attacks, massive damage, and auto-hitting debuffs.
The "3 +0 minions = one player" metric was clearly abandoned by issue 4. It was outright repudiated by the devs before the release of COV. Heck, if you're here long enough to even remember that phrase, you're here long enough to remember it was being said during the dumpster diving map-herding heydey were tankers were soloing 80 enemies of all ranks, at once. It always was Jack Emmert's pipe dream of a balance point, and never was an actual indicator of anything from the outset except how out of touch Statesman was with the game.
In short: get with the times. It's not 2005 anymore.
You want to minimize the relative performance gap by saying my bar is too high, but the bar is "warshades" and gap is still huge. On SOs, even, peacebringers are half of warshades. Think about how much worse it gets when you look at having perma eclipse and 3 extracted essences out. And how they compare to scrappers or brutes or VEATS is probably somewhere between "I can't watch" and "oh, the humanity."
I understand you like the AT and have fun with it. That's great.
But don't mislead people about it and misrepresent the issue here. It's not that "some ATs are better and some are worse but they're all in the same ballpark and you will do fine as a PB" in this instance. It's not the same ballpark. It's not even the same league. And when the people you're advising "oh go ahead you'll be just as good as anyone else with your PB" get to 50 and are dying like dogs in the incarnate trials and getting the threads table that's the consolation-slash-doorsitter prize on a regular basis that means you didn't "participate enough" to even qualify for a real reward, which is exactly the endgame trial experience that PBs I know are having despite having well-tuned IO builds, I hope those people come back here and tell you what I'm about to: you should be ashamed of yourself for lying to them based on your personal biases about what's really in store for them at level 51 and beyond, when you could have saved them the effort and expense of finding it out the hard way if you only could take off your rose colored glasses and give them some straight talk that is fully supported by actual numerical analysis. -
The game's heavily instanced.
Hero-side is easier and more rewarding, on the whole. There's been at least a moderate amount of "redside flight" with play characters, if not with RP characters, and the latter will be found primarily in bases or pocket D. I wish the devs would release stats on what percentage of villains changed to hero, versus hero that changed to villain. -
Ninjitsu is broadly considered the 'go-to' set for overall power, especially in an IO build.
-
Kinetic melee's attacks have the secondary effect of a -damage debuff. That's the -dam effect you are seeing on them. Every time you hit something with a KM attack, you make it do a little less damage per hit.
The plus-damage effect you are seeing on them is a "defuryance" type buff similar to what blasters get for attacking. That buff is only applied during your Power Siphon time, however. It does stack up.
So when power siphon (that 'BU replacement') is up, attacking will make your attacks hit harder. It's probably superior to actually having BU in terms of overall DPS. For scrappers when Concentrated Strike crits, the timer on it resets immediately, so it's possible to have 'streaks' of power siphon time, too. But since stalkers now can reset BU with a crit from concentrated, and can crit at will via placate and hide - and can just plain have a higher crit rate because of their inherent - I think a skilled KM stalker would be able to have BU up almost constantly. -
"It depends on the situation."
Brutes who can maintain 70 or higher fury will meet or exceed the damage of an unbuffed scrapper. Otherwise scrappers will outdamage brutes. If you're tanking medium to large spawns, getting and keeping that much fury isn't a problem. If you're not getting defensive fury generation, you're unlikely to get over 50-60 fury just from attacking and a few stray shots from the mobs.
Off the cuff I think claws' followup favors scrappers and their higher AT modifier, though. It's basically a constant damage buff, which I think would tend to get 'swallowed by' fury and/or the brute's lower AT mod, but is very, very sweet on a scrapper. -
Coming to this thread a little late. I haven't read it. Sorry if I'm repeating anything that's been said elsewhere.
MMs were quite good at the release of COV. They became extremely good with the inclusion of bodyguard mode. However, since then it's largely been all downhill for them.
Most ATs gain significantly from IO set slotting; MMs gain moderately to little, depending on their powersets. Only a handful of individual proc IOs actually affect pet states, while set bonuses to the MM do not, and the pet damage sets themselves are relatively lackluster compared to melee or ranged damage sets, both in terms of slotting value and in terms of set bonuses. But since the pets are the major portion of an MM's offensive power as well as critical to his survivability, the fact that they don't inherit set bonuses means that MMs derive that much less of a power increase from a build.
The change that stopped recharge from affecting pets was a cop-out in lieu of fixing the attack selection AI, and was caused by a problem with a few pets - not most, or even many. I think the major offenders weren't even MM pets, but rather fire imps and animated stone. At a point in the game where other ATs are able to reach much-improved performance through recharge bonuses and buffing, the major source of MM damage can't, even if it pets were changed to inherit set bonuses from their summoner.
Finally, the game's content has changed. Endgame play now includes numerous enemies capable of one-shotting most players without at least 2,000 hitpoints or high degrees of damage resists. Naturally, this level of damage completely obliterates pets who happen to draw stray aggro or a moderate amount of AOE splash.
This doesn't even count the fact that pet contributions to trials didn't count towards their master's participation rating, dooming MMs to terrible trial rewards under that 'broken as intended' system.
So yeah. MMs have fallen pretty far from where they were, in my opinion. You can still make some reasonably powerful ones, but those combos almost universally are benefitting from certain highly-effective secondary powers. -
In some of the more open areas you can hit the glowies from range without aggroing any of the spawns around them. You still need to be careful and watch where you're shooting from, and watch patrols. And when the glowy explodes you're going to get spotted, more than likely.
The best advice I can give for squishies in lambda, though, honestly is not to run it. Like alot of other things in this game, vote with your feet if you want it to be changed.