Grey Pilgrim

You're probably hitting on the issue of why Kheldians haven't seen changes for years now. They're not so bad that they can't play the game at the minimal settings (which I do point out to people are still the default to get through the game... anything higher is gravy). The problem is that their performance (and this being mainly Peacebringers) is so far behind other ATs, and how their powers do not mesh together as well as they should (shields given to an AT that shapeshifts, among many others), or as smoothly as they should (long shapeshifting time, along with shorter build up style powers, etc.).

The changes on Test were very much needed to get us more in line with where we should be, but as I and others have pointed out, they are not enough to fix the issues noted in my paragraph above. I don't expect Kheldians to be the #1 top AT (and there is no real one, to be honest. There are people who hate Scrappers, even though they work quite well). I just want them to work well, and have equivalent enough performance to what other ATs can do. We are not there yet, though we are closer, thanks to what has been adjusted thus far.

Dang, you both had some crummy teachers. Any teacher worth their salt should pick up on BS and not allow it. I comment on that specifically in my writing classes, as I used to do it in high school and know very well what it is, and do not want my students thinking they should do it, or that it is okay.

And college is supposed to get you in touch with experts in a field and learn from them. I find it sad that no teachers at your institution were able to teach you anything, Hyper, even if you came in with a lot of background experience. I know I have been an avid reader and writer all my life, but I learned a whole heck of a lot about both and literature from the many excellent professors I had.

Ironically, most of my less worthwhile classes were in education. Some were great, but others were a waste of time and didn't teach me anything new (especially once I started having field experiences at schools). My best were from professors that (once again) were experts, shared that knowledge, and didn't accept weak performances from their students.

It also has a very tiny cone that is similar to Piercing Rounds from Dual Pistols. If you are used to using that power, it's not too much of an issue to use it as an AOE either. I generally play at x2 or x3 on my Blasters (that being my comfort zone for fun and as much challenge as I want to run with), and it's easy to tag more than one target with the power and that many targets. It's laughably easy to do so on a team with many, many targets. So while it's not massively strong for AOE, it does have some that aren't that bad, and its ST damage is quite solid to make up for it (the -regen should be nice on a team for fighting EBs, AVs, and other hard targets).

Kind of depends on what you mean by general formula, I guess. A ranged mez and Aim (or something to kind of make up for no Aim) is what I would see as the basic formula. Anything else changes up a lot, depending on the set.

And as for what is iconic for Beam weapons, I dunno. It's all with what you think of as iconic. The current beams could be seen as iconic, or you could see the old look for beams with Robots for MMs (I was surprised they didn't stick with that look more, it worked pretty well for me).

I would agree, as I said before, that Disintegration is perhaps not as well fitted in to the set as it should/could be, though it is better than it was at the start of closed beta (with no disintegration spread).

See, I don't really agree with you on the function part. I don't want Energy Blast or any other current blast set to be mimicked, I want each set to play differently, but to work well (it's also going to make for better replay value for most people). That means more than just a change in visuals and style.

I do agree that the current set is rather clunky in how it is set up. Having the main source of mitigation be in a short range stun (40 feet), no matter how hard it hits, makes that power less useful and easy to use. And I think rather than having a power called Disintegration, certain attacks should have been given the chance to start disintegration, or Disintegration should have been a way to "tag" or "paint" a target, rather than alerting it to your presence with damage. The boost the Snipe power gets from a target being disintegrated makes no sense, because Snipe powers do not work well when the target is shooting back at you (Synapse seemed to get our complaints about snipes on the beta forums, and hopefully that will go somewhere). I'd rather open with the stun that Disintegration, but the design of the set fights against that as well.

The chance for Disintegration to spread helps a lot (especially now that the chance has been upped), but how Disintegration starts is just rather clunky for a blast set. Ramping up powers are better for melee sets, who can roll with that much more easily (though people can complain about KM as well).

Even with that, Beam Weapons works okay. I'm doing pretty well at x2 on a mostly SO'd build in the 40s, with a little ranged defense from purchased Thunderstrike sets and other powers. It's just not set up as well as I think it should be.

Foote's Civil War narrative (I think he always contended that he was not a historian, and he mostly just talks you through what happened with many anecdotes drawn from letters and memoirs and his own description) is three novels, and I'm only... 2/3 of the way through the first (the first is 800 pages). So if you're just casually interested in the American Civil War, it might not be worth it.

I'm a history buff and interested in the Civil War, so it's a great read for me. It's missing the charm of Shelby Foote's drawl (which I think is part of his interest in the documentary), but it's interesting even without it. He really does talk you through EVERYTHING that happens, describing the thoughts and actions of the various parts that made up the Civil War (what led up to it, mostly through the lens of Jefferson Davis and Abraham Lincoln, then what caused the leaders to do what they did around and during the battles). And he makes it all vivid through stories, quotes from memoirs and letters, and his own strong descriptions--he apparently camped out on some of the battlefields at the time of year the battle occurred, so he could get a feel for what it was like.

This makes it long, but it really made me appreciate what happened. I thought I knew the Civil War well before, but there are many notes that I had no idea about. My impressions of the main characters has generally been "Lee was always great before Gettysburg, McLellan was always an idiot," etc. Broad strokes like that, gleaned from history class, shorter books, and the like. But you realize that there is a good chunk at the start of the war where Lee is not in command, and even once he is in command of the main eastern army, he's not perfect. He assaults extremely strong Union positions on hills or ridges (just like at Gettysburg, only not as bad), but he's still not questioned too much. You generally get the impression from most glosses of the Civil War that Stonewall Jackson was quirky but amazing, but the real truth is that he could be a terrible leader at times. He was unsympathetic to exhausted or wounded soldiers, and he could be lazy, sometimes leaving his men out of a much needed fight while he was taking a nap! Crazy... makes me wonder at times why Lee trusted him so much, even though he could be brilliant as well.

So if all that detail sounds good to you, invest the time. I will be working on the other two volumes as well, though it will probably take me a good couple months to get through them, since I read other stuff at the same time, besides working on my own writing.

I'm curious about Twain's autobiography as well. He's always thrown me as a writer, as I sometimes really like his stuff (Mark Twain, Huck Finn, and Life on the Mississippi were all great), but he can sometimes be caustically bitter. If he could be witty and interesting, but not too depressing, the autobiography could be pretty good.

Might be you are confusing terms. I think of the tutorial as what you run before you jump in to Atlas, Mercy, or Nova Praetoria. The new training story arc does seem to go on for awhile... I would think 1-10 would be better, though stuff like IOs isn't really needed that early, either.

I finally read it after reading an article where Neil Gaiman liked it, or it mentioned he was friends with Diana Wynn Jones, which made me wonder what she wrote... or something like that. Definitely wish I had read it sooner.

Reading reviews and seeing the trailer of Miyasake's Howl's Moving Castle made me not want to see it, either. It sounded like it was hard to follow (which the book isn't), and did some odd things with parts of the story and the visuals. Not sure why Miyasake (or however it's spelled, sorry) chose to have the castle walk on legs, either... floating seems altogether more cool, so I don't even know why chose to do that.

I really like Children of Hurin, though. Having it separated out, and because it's more developed than the myths in The Silmarillion, means it's closer to The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings, at least in terms of how well it reads. It has focused themes and a focused voice, fairly strong characters, etc. I appreciated Turin's story much more after having it separated out, I think. Much more focused, and got me thinking more about interconnection between the curse, and how independent characters' choices are in the whole book.

That's not to say The Silmarillion isn't fun, but that one really does read more like a history or mythology (or huge outline, which is what it actually grew out of), while Children is closer to a fantasy novel.

As for Pratchett, I'm reading in the order he published the books, which is nice. You can see how he is developing the world by doing so. I just wish he would stop emphasizing that light moves slowly on Discworld. After the 30th time of a paragraph on the subject, it's no longer funny or interesting. Quick references would be great when the sun rises or something, but he tends to point it out specifically in several sentences.

But overall, I love the humor (often verbal: I especially get a kick out of how he uses Death's way of speaking to have different text... it really works well in Mort) and his ideas. Pretty interesting, even if I disagree that "we get whatever we expect when we die." Death is still fun, and clearly had an impact on the Death in Good Omens.

I never said Dwarf form was a trap, and I have no clue what Arbiter Hawk thinks of how well our forms work now. I would agree that they both could use a little help and have always agreed with that premise when we talked about it in the beta forums.

As for what Arbiter Hawk is happy about, he seems content to leave us sit where we are for this issue and keep his eye on us. It's up to us to prove to him that further changes are needed. His tone in his posts suggests we will have to be quite persuasive, but everything I have heard from him suggest he is one to be cautious, so that does not mean anything.

The change to the taunt in Dwarf was a minor change, but it was a big boost to how well it tanks. Apparently you have never had the bad luck to be tanking for a team versus targets that have a lot of defense or -to hit. I have tanked for such teams against Nosferatu, Nemesis with Vengeance stacked, and Devouring Earth. Doing so was always an exercise in frustration, as I would start with aggro and see it slowly peel away as I could not hit mobs with my attacks or taunt. The change is not going to make Dwarf form blow a Tank out of the water, but it is going to make it a better and more reliable tank than it is now (and do better than human form in that regard).

As for the status resistance, again, you seem to have better luck than me. You fight a lot of Council as a Kheldian, and I always noticed how much they slowed me down. This is bad enough in the other forms, but in Dwarf (where you are supposed to get more aggro), it was quite easy to hardly see your powers recharging. And this is WITH a Winter's Gift -slow slotted. Same issue for end draining. I have had Freaks, Carnies, and Seers drain me out of Dwarf form when I was tanking for a team. End drain is extremely common in this game, and you WILL get hit by it if you are trying to tank well for your team.

Both effects are quite detrimental to you as a tanker/in tanker form, and such changes were seen as quite beneficial to tanking resist sets like Fiery and Dark. It would be the same for Dwarf form, and would provide further ways for that form to distinguish itself from Human form, which it needs currently. Nor would the changes overpower the form, just make it more competitive with existing resist sets, which is what Dwarf form is roughly modeled after (all resistance and a heal).

Be realistic, now. Before this change, Eclipse was one of the best tier 9 defense set powers in the game. Light Form, on the other hand, was far weaker in comparison. With the change, the two are now roughly balanced, with different cons and pros to them that balance out. Eclipse's drawback is that it needs to target enemies first, it's positive mainly being that it can easily gain a lot of resistance (beyond what Light Form can offer). Light Form's drawback is that it has a significant crash, but its positive is that it is just a click power.

I don't even know what to do with your last statement. Even if the ST damage in Dwarf form was improved so you could drop a boss in Dwarf form more quickly (or on par with tanks... and believe me, the two are nowhere close, now), people would still play tanks. As others have pointed out, your HP will still by higher as a tank, you'll have more powers at your disposal, you will have Bruising (-20 res on a target or two of your choosing), you will have an aura, etc. Plus, the two ATs play significantly different. As long as both are roughly equal, people will play one or the other because they like how one plays over the other. There is no need for Dwarf form to be significantly weaker than an actual tank for damage.

As it is, Dwarf Form does not compete with a regular Tanker at all (and I have a lot of Tanks... none of them are all that slow to defeat bosses, but Dwarf form is). Warshades can do okay for damage in Dwarf form if they have pets out, but their damage is still going to be weaker than tanks for ST damage. And against a hard target, it gets harder and harder to keep the fluffies out.

SG-1 probably should have ended with Season 8, as it caps things off perfectly for that series. In the commentary for the first episode of Season 9, they even say they debated giving the series a new name (Stargate: Command), which is something I think they should have done. Richard Dean Anderson leaving the show made a big difference, and Season 9 sets things up almost like it's a new show anyway.

We've talked about that in the beta forums as well. The light form change was needed, as the old version wasn't all that great and was worse than Eclipse in comparison. And it's still only mag 3 protection in Light form, so more than one stacking of a mez type is going to get you, which can't be said of Dwarf.

Dwarf does need improving, but Light Form is not the problem. The auto-hit taunt is going to be a help to make it a more effective tanking power, bu it still needs some status resistance (-end, -slow) to make it work. I think every resist based set in the game now has status resistance because they are going to be hit by everything, and Dwarf could use the same treatment. As I pointed out in the beta forums, this could be a great way for Dwarf to work better/different from Human and be more of a viable choice.

I would also so Dwarf needs to get closer to Tank damage numbers, because Dwarf has way more trouble with dropping bosses than my Tanks ever do.

I don't think it's true now on Beta that Peacebringers have better survivability, either. They have steadier, more reliable performance you could say (since their buffs can remain the same), but Warshades can go higher than they can. Their superior mez capabilities also helps things.

But yes, ever since the new difficulty settings, you can't really say Warshades are better in a team environment. Just one that offers more targets for their AOE-derived buffs, etc. I remember Dechs saying he became more survivable when he dialed up the number of enemies he fought (even if that seems counter-intuitive), which makes sense, given how Warshades work.

It's the usual reference to unfortunate Japanese anime adult movies, featuring tentacle creatures. There are certain aspects of Japanese culture that I like, but that one is definitely not a shining attribute.

Anyway, I think that change to our heal could be a helpful one, but I don't know if I would want it to be only like other PbAOE heals. They don't heal for much, even if they are helpful. Maybe a heal and a slight regen boost? But yes, anything that would make our support power better would be good... even making it so it heals as much as heal other would be good (for Controllers, not expecting Defender levels, even though that is all of 3% more).

Still would say Pulsar needs to be a guaranteed Mag 3 with that. The power is flat out weak and poor still, and even if it was improved as suggested, Warshades would be better than Peacebringers at mez, which is fine by me. I don't mind Warshades having more mezzing capability, I just want what we have to work, and as you said, for our other support powers to be decent.

As for Inner Light, Joe, it was just one of the improvements needed for our damage. I think the changes was needed, but we needed more to go with it.

I don't think I have ever seen him comment on these. For my part, I don't know that they are necessarily needed. Dwarf form's numbers could be adjusted from where they are to balance it, and I think the slot numbers are what they are (and we are all supposedly going to get three more if they can get the tech figured out in the next issue or so). If our inherent, caps, and forms were set up right for their numbers, too, I don't think that we really need more slots. Especially after we get three more slots in the 20s.

The comparison only makes sense if you are going to use it in saying that Solar Flare is not strong enough. I've talked about it enough already, but Solar Flare should be better than a Tanker AOE power, and one that is structured around Rage as well. Human form is not equal to Dwarf, which is the tank form.

We do... more damage than Tanks? I dunno, maybe than an Ice tank, but looking at Joe's numbers, I don't think Peacebringers outdo Tanks. Dwarf form certainly does not. Nova... probably better for AOE, but it does have lower HP and mez protection (if Light Form is up), and should do more damage to compensate. I think many tank sets would compete or do better for ST damage, though. Human form is pretty iffy for how much better it would be as well, for many of the same reasons. I'm quite certain that I could do better or be competitive with anything human form could do on my Invuln/Mace, Fire/Fire, Shield/SS, and WP/DB Tanks. In fact, I know they could, comparing how my PB does solo on test, and how all of those soloed facing the same or even tougher conditions.

The changes help, but not as much as you are suggesting.

*added*

Joe, what was your idea for fixing Build Up? I don't really recall it. I did always think Build Up needed some help, and it at least got it. I would say it's good enough for what it needs to be as a power, it just wasn't the only fix Peacebringers needed for their offense to be better.

"Because it's dull, you twit, it'll hurt more!"

*swings around to glare at Captain Foamerang*

"And keep the stitches small."

Heh, my wife had never seen Robin Hood, so I made sure to have her watch it with me. She already liked Rickman from Harry Potter, but it's hard not to like him even more after seeing Robin Hood.

Even ignoring the Rickman addition to the film, I think Costner gets more hate for that film than he should. He's not the only one to play Robin without the accent, and he was more serviceable in the role than bad (ie, got the job done but wasn't amazing, either).

I guess I'll just agree to disagree on The Untouchables. I don't agree with all the averaged ratings on IMDB, but it's pretty strong on there (8/10, and I've seen movies that I thought were better get lower than 8). I know we don't all like ratings on the forums, but it is a pretty strong film.

To go beyond the ratings, I prefer the train station sequence to most action sequences you see in current films. Contrast the train station with its build up of tension and the ability to know what is at stake and see what is going on, versus blinding quick cuts and action that leave you unsure of what is going on, or not even caring much about who is fighting. And I cared for all the people in Costner's group. Costner does a likeable job in his role, and the story goes from initial failure, to success, to near defeat, to victory. It's a strong overall arc, and the train sequence and fight at the end have a good payoff to me after all the characterization and action ahead of time. I know I hated that one assassin quite a bit after what he did.

And as for Ocean's, I dunno, I got the impression that the cast was having fun with Twelve still, but Thirteen just... wasn't all that humorous and I didn't really care all that much about their opponent, either. That's pretty bad, considering Pacino was in the role, but I guess Garcia beat him to it, this time around.

Not with you on The Untouchables. I still think that's a good movie, and I know it's railway station scene is pretty well regarded by movie critics. Heck, if Leslie Nielsen spoofed it, you know it had to be decent.

I would go with Ocean's Twelve, but I found Thirteen to be even worse. There's still an element of fun to Twelve, but man, everyone seems tired of things with Thirteen, the spark is gone.

Seriously? You need your heart cut out with a spoon if you honestly think that.

Ah, so many good ones. I was first introduced to Edward Blake's "The Tyger" from that second episode you mentioned. Kind of sad, since I liked reading so much, but poetry has never been something I have been able to read too much. Little notes like that always worked on that show and gave it a lot of power.

This list is making me want to watch the show again. It was quite good. Surprised Ra's Al'Ghul (or however the heck you spell his name) didn't make any episodes... those were always memorable for me. I know one of the better Batman Beyond episodes featured him, and had a hilarious line. "Lady, you are freaking me out." "You? She kissed me!"

There was also one great TAS episode where Batman lost his sight. I liked that ep a lot because Batman never gave up, despite that. Made him seem a lot tougher and more brave since you are used to him being all powerful.

Gah, and then there was another great episode where he goes up against a ninja he studied with, who had studied a mortal technique. Facing your own mortality so well always gets me.

They're probably some big science or chemistry textbooks. They (almost literally) charge an arm and a leg for those. I know they usually have small publishing runs and all, but I really do wish publishers would keep costs down a little more.

I remember buying a physics textbook for $100 and then having the campus bookstore offer me $10 for it at as a buyback the end of the semester. I laughed in the guys face and said I might as well keep it and look at it a few times for the rest of my life, as that was a better deal than the insult he was offering me.

For the OP, is there merit to having a new crisis again so soon? I haven't yet watched the series to the end, but it seems kind of lame to have a new huge crisis again so soon.

I guess that's better than a bunch of question marks, but it's still a little depressing. I hope they don't consider that rating done, because it doesn't cover it all well enough. They really have to stop thinking they can go halfway with Kheldians: that's what got Kheldians into the fix they are in already. Do it right the first time.

To be fair, Arbiter Hawk seems to be going for the same thing. It's making him more cautious on some things than I think he should be, but it's still a decent approach. The rating thing, however, can and should be done right now. If anything, they need a rating for each form. Yes, that's added difficulty, but that's a *bonus* of having a unique AT like Kheldians. Don't see Kheldians as a tricky thing to fix or work with. See them as a way to really show off what CoX can do.

Funny, but overall not constructive. If we can stay positive, that's the way to go... we've already gone into the doldrums, and I know they're not helpful to our case with the devs.