Hopeling

It wasn't changed, that was just never the whole story for AoE attacks.

It was my impression that the most realistic approach to fix redraw is not to allow you to use powers with your weapon out, but rather to actually address the redraw issue - that is, to remove the redraw delay. That's what BAB's fix was going to do, anyway, before he ran into problems and it got sidetracked. That's still nowhere near a trivial change, especially since he appeared to want the redraw animation to still show as long as you weren't fighting, which means the game has to contextually figure out whether the animation should or should not play, but it's (presumably?) easier than making 200+ new power sets.

Er... redraw creates a delay when taking out the weapon, not putting it away. So healing a teammate will mean you have a delay before your next attack, but it will not delay the heal.

It has a fancy shockwave effect that's quite different from Foot Stomp. That's how I usually tell it's safe to go back into melee, actually, since Marauder's body is often obscured by other players and power effects. Not that I'd disagree with a weapon Judgement, either.

Pyronic has the same animation as plain ol' Fireball, so I doubt that's close to the main reason.

Yeah, plus some other types of Energy damage. Peacebringer-style light blasts, for example.

Rather than just making sure there's a judgement for every "master of $element" character, though, I'd rather also see more powers for characters/concepts that have little or no association with elements at all, like brick-types, or many tech-based characters. I'd much rather have an Incarnate Footstomp (or some such) than some kind of acid/poison judgement, even though Smashing is already covered and Toxic isn't.

To expand on the tech-based thing, I don't even care if the power specifically looks technological, I just want it to look like it plausibly might be tech without having to squint and pretend. A nice sky laser, with a generic pointing animation, would be perfect; I can call it an orbital strike, while someone else can use the same power and call it the wrath of the heavens.

Well usually, "Targeted AoE" is the opposite of "PBAoE". Fireball is a TAoE, Footstomp is a PBAoE. The Kronos' powers appear to consider TAoE a different category than "Ranged AoE", where one targets a location (and leaves behind a fire or gas patch) and the other targets a player. Either of those are TAoEs in the usual sense, though, in that you can prevent them from hitting allies by moving away.

That's not always practical to actually do in combat, though. And you won the fight anyway, so the point is rather academic.

Yes, it's a large profit. Both in absolute terms, and relative to his investment.

Large profits are not illogical. The real logic fail is you baselessly assuming that the two times it has sold on Wentworth's are representative of its "true" value, whatever that means.
He can ask any price he wants. If it sells at that price, he was justified in asking it. If it doesn't, he wasn't, and he can try to sell lower, or decide to just keep it.
What is with you and attempting to be the price police in threads of this kind, anyway? Even aside from the logic of it, has it ever actually worked?

The Superior (catalyzed, purple) ATOs have purple enhancement values, yes. The normal (non-Catalyzed, orange) versions have normal IO enhancement values.

Yes, I would. And it does. You listed several forms of it.

Arcanaville's a dunce now?

Off the top of my head, why was the original Unyielding Stance changed to not root you? Because it was ANNOYING. Players just took Teleport and mostly got around the limitation of not moving, so it didn't restrict them much, but was still really annoying.

The Rage crash went through several iterations. IIRC, it was first a high-but-not-quite-high-enough-to-penetrate-mez-protection stun, which was potentially dangerous to use while tanking, because another stun landing would mez you, and at the time that meant all your toggles turning off, not merely suppressing. Death quickly followed. This made the power often not worth using. The stun was later changed to an Only Affecting Self, which also made it not worth using, because a tanker can't tank if he can't attack or taunt (and brutes didn't even exist yet, then). Eventually we arrived at the damage debuff we have today, which is a major downside (and annoying, to some), but not so cripplingly bad it makes the whole power not worth using.

So there you go, two powers that were changed because they were annoying or not worth it. I can't literally quote a red name describing their reasons for the changes and using those specific words, but I think the changes pretty much speak for themselves here.

Edit: And these examples only fit into one category: annoying but worth it, or not annoying but not worth it. Surely, pivotal and defining powers for an entire AT that are both annoying AND not worth it are at least as deserving of change.

Wow, I'm having flashbacks to exactly this same argument two pages ago.

First, those ARE reasons they use to change powers. They have done so a number of times. Asserting otherwise (again) doesn't make you not (still) wrong.

Second, as Lothic says in the very post you quoted, there are very strong justifications for changes, even totally aside from how players feel about the powers or the AT. Individual posters don't all have to prove their own points with ironclad logic and undisputable math; a few people with math and lots of people with gut reactions that match the math is entirely acceptable.

Let me try some simplifying assumptions:
Let's assume a character makes 1 attack per second, and that all enemies are Lt or above. We'll also assume that the stalker proc goes off exactly every 15 seconds.
So, with +4% crit per attack, the scrapper ATO gives .6 extra crits in 15 seconds. With the Scrapper melee mod, this is worth .675 Stalker crits.
The Stalker ATO gives .69 to .9 extra crits in the same period, depending on team size (because the attack might have crit anyway without the proc).

So, with some oversimplifications, the Stalker comes out ahead. But how much has this been distorted by the simplifications I've made?
First, I assumed a character makes 10 attacks in 10 seconds. This is far more than a real attack chain will make, and dramatically favors the scrapper in this comparison, probably by about a factor of 2 for most actual chains.
I also assumed that all enemies are LTs or higher. This also favors the scrapper, because their crit bonus is worth less against minions.
I assumed that the Stalker proc goes off exactly every 15 seconds, which is reasonably accurate, although some chains can do a bit better.
Finally, it's worth noting that the Scrapper crit bonus is spread across all their attacks, while the Stalker can structure their attack chain to get the bonus crit on a good attack.

So, according to this back-of-the-envelope calculation, even after the i22 buff, the Stalker ATO proc should be significantly better than the Scrapper version. However, the Superior Scrapper proc is half-again as good, and the Superior Stalker proc isn't really an improvement, so that narrows the margin somewhat.

This also only compares to the Scrapper proc, and it's not clear how that compares to the other ATO procs.

I'm... not sure what you're asking. The scrapper proc is not actually a proc, it's a global bonus.

I haven't put in a bug report yet. I do agree that it's a strange behavior and probably not intended.

...and those people go on happily with their lives, never needing or wanting to buy extra costume slots.

Buying slots for single characters is an interesting idea, though.

It appears that it's somehow being affected by the purple patch. A Pylon always cons +1 IIRC, so the proc would be at .9 effectiveness, and 7*.9 = 6.3. If you had a level shift when you were testing the orange version of the proc, the proc would be at 1.11 effectiveness against -1's, and 5*1.11 = 5.55. My orange proc gives 30 fury (6.00 effectiveness, for attacking a -49) from a Hellion in AP, and 13.5 fury from a level 35 RWZ dummy (2.7 effectiveness, for attacking a -16).
Well, upthread I noted that it was proccing multiple times per activation, at least in Burn, which it isn't supposed to do. Presumably, this fixes that. It does appear to now proc without targets, at least in Burn.