Leo_G

Yeah, that's exactly what I do if I'm ever caught playing kinetics on a team (only have a DP/Kin corr). When I play my FF/Eng defender (or more likely, my Sonic/Psi defender), designating time out to refresh my shields isn't a big deal for me as I learn to better allocate my time on those specific characters. It just takes an extra step of care so the buffs don't interfere with blasting.

Those are particular concerns that are brought up by my suggestion. A simple UI solution that might look nice would be an EXP-bub type display (talking about the full/empty exp bub things that fill up as you gain exp by your status bars) around your buff divided into 4 sections. Each bub would be a fraction of x where x would be the maximum we'd want to set the stacking durations to be. You'd know which buffs are yours because it'd be the only one that would have that display (others' buffs would look like normal) and you'd know how close you are to maximum duration when all 4 bubs are filled.

Hopefully it wouldn't be obstructive. If it was small enough to ring around the buff icon in their display, or maybe a pie-section type brightening over the icon...

Anyway, yeah, as you think more on the idea, it starts getting more and more complex and difficult to implement. Hard enough stacking durations may not be supported by the game's system...

Then why was the damage of some attacks decreased yet their endurance and recharges increased (Flares and Combustion; Ice Sword Circle's damage was decreased and its endurance/recharge increased but could be due to the improvement to its radius. Power Push just had a plain damage increase without touching any other values)? Because it was a normalization of the assault sets to make their performance closer to each other. You *could* proceed to the conclusion that the normalization was set into play for the changes to domination but then you'd have to admit the level of difference between pre-change Energy Assault and Fiery Assault/Psi Assault/Elec Assault was satisfactory. I'm simply saying, even if the devs didn't change domination from what it was, the normalization would be needed. The way domination once was was simply a problem with how players wanted to build/play their doms. They didn't want ups and downs (as was apparent by the reactions to the dev's suggestions to change domination).

Apparently, that issue with the playstyle was enough for a change that didn't come with a nerf. Doms now have a damage scale that simulates domination's former damage buff that is constant and doesn't go away.

I suppose you can believe what you want to believe, but I don't sway to blind faith. I seek that '"A" change' you speak of, primarily because I enjoy discussion of suggestions/ideas that could use work to make feasible. I'm not putting blind faith behind the suggestion because I'm some ****** that wants to ruffle your feathers. I just want that less-appreciated buffer to have even more fun than they do now and for some buffers, they just have a smidgen less fun than the buffer enthusiasts that love nothing more than to refresh shields on their team.

Well yes. That's the idea. You can 'put off rebuffing' until you need to...but not in the way you're thinking. I guess it's allowing you to put off rebuffing until you 'need to' or 'want to' depending how you approach it. As is, there's only the 'need to' option.

Look at it from this perspective: If you just got through a tough fight and one or more of your teammates is holding to recover/resettle for whatever reason, you can apply your buffs now to take advantage of the free time. It will put off needing to buff them again and if that fight truly was tough and it went on longer than 5 minutes, you'd have had to reapply your shields mid-fight so they're still fresh at the end. Refreshing them *again* is kind of pointless but necessary. Stacking duration would at least make that somewhat more worth the effort.

Another scenario, if your team is *about* to get into a tough fight they *know* about and are discussing it, reapplying your buffs then or before the [censored!] hits the fan just means you'll have less to worry about during that time if you decided to preemptively extend recharge vs preemptively refresh mid-fight.

Other scenario, if you're dead-set on stacking 3 durations on everyone, you can spread this out during a mission. I.e. buff up everyone at the start (would take a good deal longer tho) and for the remainder of the mission, stagger the buffs so you only need to get 1 or 2 every other fight rather than everyone every few fights.

It's basically opening up the rebuff refresh window.

After explaining, do you see it more from my perspective?

Anyway, I don't think it'd be possible to make a suggestion that results in 'buffing less often', not upset balance *AND* preserve current playstyles, only because if a suggestion were put forth, you'd harp on another facet of the change damaging the status quo. Rather than seeing it like "well, I could do *that* or I can keep doing what I'm doing if I don't mind"...but I could see how it'd give yourself more busy work if you wanted it to.

And I didn't mean pets can't get increased duration, I meant pets can't *offer* increased durations. So a Protector Bot sitting there casting its shield isn't going to give the MM and all its pets long duration shields.

Well, you didn't accuse me of not being able to read, having a mental disorder or say I lack common sense again, so no I don't consider it jumping down my throat (or is it at my throat...slashing at my throat? it feels different typing it compared to just having a conversation and simply saying it).

Simple. Place restrictions as well as diminishing returns on stacking durations. Non-teammates can't boost duration, only refresh. Pets can only refresh. 2 deflection shields would last 6 min (base duration of the shields is 4 I believe). Further diminish to whatever wouldn't be ridiculous (is 10 mins too much for you? How about 8?).

Well, no. I don't suffer from any of those (although what weird phrasing you're talking about I don't know. It wouldn't be averse to point them out. It could just be typos/missing words I failed to type) and English is my first language. Pushing the phrase of reading comprehension and the lack thereof, or any inability to understand my own language is an insult even if unintentional. It's not a huge leap to take that as a personal attack so don't pretend it is.


Thus, "You don't just get one thing without something else being affected." [/quote]

And Zapp's damage was also increased for the endurance cost and recharge increase. That's how the game works. Higher damage attacks cost more endurance and recharge slower. In fact, an equation is usually used to come about the value of each of those attributes in relation to each other. But the adjustment of those didn't really have anything to do with the 'give and take' mantra. The assault sets were simply being normalized (case in point, Fiery Assault and Psi Assault). And the change to domination to remove the damage buff, while in the same update, was not the cause for the normalization. Devs simply work whole issues together and Domination and Assault Sets happen to be lumped on the agenda of 'Revisit Dominators'.


What you point out isn't related to not thinking things through but of lack of discussion. I could go on and write a 'full' proposal of the idea, but what I originally typed was more of a 'what if this? would it help?' to which I got a couple of 'that might a bit if done right'.

The constant insinuations that I'm not reading or lack comprehension just seem unneeded, especially when its in regard to just a one-shot proposal. No one put down numbers, AFAIK. You're so quick to dismiss the ideas with an exaggeration and a fallacy rather than simply pointing out the flaws.


Nah. While I have read all the patch notes for any new issues once released, I'm not going to bother rereading them. I feel no motivation to do so for someone that keeps jumping down my throat

Don't have to. I've experienced it and was educated of what it is and how it impacts a debate right here on these forums. The textbook definition is what you're saying unless you come up with a specific example that supports the conclusion you're jumping to.


Just to sum up what you just said:
Change = nerf. Nerf = Less players. Presented evidence: EM change to Energy Transfer resulted in fewer players of the set. This idea leads to the same end.

Slippery Slope

Simply establish how these chain of events are linked logically and you may have an argument or at least a means to relook at the idea to revise it.

And a change could increase player retention of these characters as well. And if the change were introduced in a manner to not upset balance or alter the established style of play? Or is that not a feasible outcome in your head?

Is 'you're jumping down my throat' an insult to you? Is that not what you're doing? If not, then just simply refrain from bringing other's ability to read into the conversation. Simple as that.

Off topic: Like Sharker_Q said, I apparently come off as confrontational. If you think there's any anger in any of these posts, you're mistaken. I'm simply responding. The exercise comes from *not* typing when I feel confronted. Because then, my fingers travel 200+ WPM (that's fast for me >_>) and I don't bother editing my posts nicer when I do that.

If I feel confronted, I'll go read a few other threads or do something else before coming back to comment. However, I don't feel confronted because I've been working not to. So you jumping at me on not understanding English or how to write and read is good exercise on managing that impulse. Understand?


Actually, all of those are examples why a stacking duration buff mechanic might be viable without altering any numbers. And Doms weren't brought down (IIRC, their base damage was increased and lots of powers had their damage improved. Some powers were 'balanced' because they weren't previously, not because domination was changed).

Yes, it's possible that changes to the power would be made but I'm hard pressed to believe we'd be looking at reduced buff numbers for it. Maybe an increased endurance cost, but even as is, the buffs we're primarily talking about don't cost that much and would just be more reason to slot some endurance redux.

Fix'd. Just so you understand the perspective I'm in. All you've said is 'because other powers were balanced or nerfed or buffed or changed, don't expect this change without heavy nerfs. It kinda makes no sense (although I can squint really hard and it make a little sense....in a wrong, round-about way).


Please don't imply I'm not. If you're not 'jumping down my throat' then you wouldn't, right? I'm trying to be helpful here. What are you doing?

Slippery slope fallacy.

But what brought up the conclusion I made was your solutions: Use binds or don't play such characters.

Even if just the OP herself quit her Kinetics, it flies in the face of your status quo.

Yeah, that coming from Sharker_Q...

But the only remotely confrontational comment I made involved a soap box and I've already said it was probably an incorrect gesture and putting words in other's mouths.

I've gone back through every post of mine (and most of the thread) and no, I really haven't been confrontational. Persistent? Yes. Honestly, why I've lapsed in my habit of responding to every little annoying tidbit, I do not know.

And I've said my suggestion changes no aspect of the power. It costs the same endurance, it does not stack the same effect, no numbers on any buffs would be changed, the recharge would still remain. The only difference would be the choice of refreshing deflection shield in 4 minutes after you cast it, or cast it twice and it last longer. You're paying the same opportunity cost. No values are changed.

By the by, none of this was brought up or discussed when I suggested it. I would *like* to have a discussion on how this would impact the play of certain characters or how it'd upset game balance if it does...


Fine, how about I accuse you of not knowing how to read.

Sounds to me like the OP is more open minded than a lot of you are being, which is sad for posters with such high reputations (well, not Shark_Q ).

Summary: I have read the thread. The OP's idea is unfinished (which they admitted) and most likely unfeasible (I won't say completely because absolutes will end up making me wrong). The situation that the OP and others have brought up could have some thought put into it to resolve it without upsetting game balance. However, there are others unwilling to put forth their mind power *unless* they get some other fix out of this.

And yes, this was actually said. I've pinpointed the post for you:

So that means, the only way we'd get people to collaborate for this idea to soothe some of the 'buff tedium' is if it came gift wrapped with a means to block unwanted buffs.

I don't know how more cut and dry that could be laid out for you.

So telling me I don't know how to read (repeatedly) isn't considered an insult in your parts? Because I know darn well I've been walking on eggshells this thread to not be confrontational (I don't know you well enough >_>). Any inclination of hostility is on your part. I'm only being persistent because it's an issue brought up by other players often enough to be noticeable.

So keep jumping down by throat. It's good exercise for me.

I still haven't heard what prior dev stance/actions you're talking about that laid precedence for actions to preserve balance with that suggestion. All you said was "If x were to happen then y would happen". If I remember what I was taught in other threads, that is the definition of a slippery slope fallacy.


Well, he said "require more dev time to make it work right" and this is for a non-problem. Could equate to not being worthy of that time in some respects but I can see how it'd be putting words in your mouth. But if you *read* the portion that went along with the quote you have so much revile for, it was regarding to the problems of the suggestion vs the problems being projected onto it ontop of the problems with the suggestion itself. Pulling up AE or PVP or the issues of RPers to support the magnitude of your conceived dilemma (seriously, how do you even know it'd be a drain on END when no one put down any figures or numbers?)? Whatever.

But honestly, Bill, you can keep pushing people's buttons. I don't care. Reading back, the OP even *said* they don't care if the toggle solution doesn't work so hammer on that all you want. No one is married to it.

What I do care about is the general heart of the suggestion and the underlying issue brought up. No, I don't play many buffers (not that I don't like the style, I just like the style of my other characters more) but I love to play with buffers. If my buffers aren't having fun buffing me, I'd like to look into why. We know why the suggestions could not work, but how about telling us why they should not work? Because your solution is basically taking away my buffers. *No one* takes away *anyone's* buffers.

"Leave it alone" is a viable stance. Now make it rather than trying to be a big **** and puffing out your chest.

Point out why this is a 'non-problem' or ways to alleviate the problem others have with short duration buffs (I already have mine...I just don't constantly SB/CM everyone, just when its needed). Already said how? Then you're just repeating yourself and wasting your time, really. But hounding how you hate an idea for a problem you don't think exist is beyond a waste of your time.

No one's telling you what to say but at least address the issue at hand. I have expressed issue with 'buff tedium' and so have others in the thread. Why not level with those post rather than trying to pick a fight with me? Lol or are you on a roll?

The rest really doesn't need to be responded to. If we're looking at an issue that could use a QoL patch to help while you're just hearing us as whining, there is little we'll get from this discussion.


And the part talking about AE and PvP as wastes of time that brought nothing but timesinks for the dev. Surely that's not a soapbox of a completely different and debatable topic that could very well derail things even more.

Forget reading comprehension. Apparently, you just don't read things so you have a reason to jump down people's throats.

PS: Yes, I did read the exchange (although the one you're talking about is only regarding the MMORPG thing and *not* AE and PVP). The point is, if you're going to come in bumping a thread you think solves a non-problem, hopping on a soapbox to derail it with other 'stuff' doesn't make you right.

THEN PROPOSE A SOLUTION THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT WORSE!

My goodness, is this rocket science or what?

Did I not try offering a suggestion that may help out with the problem? You can too, right?

No, what you're trying to do is railroad the suggestion into doing what you want it to do, which may be something completely different from what the OP is trying to look at.

There's a difference between bringing up an issue with an idea suggested and bringing up an issue so you can try and roll it into someone else's solution. There's not a problem with trying to solve multiple problems with one solution, but don't try shoveling it onto someone else's shoulders and point and yell as if they brought about this problem.

Yes, pointing out the drawbacks to a suggestion isn't a bad thing. However, it's more productive to try and apply solutions to those issues if you can but admitting you don't have any isn't a horrible thing to do either.

Like the endurance issue of toggling a team with speed boost? Yeah, a 1-cost toggle that simply lets you add teammates to the buff pool (i.e. SB will only cost x to toggle on but you have to spend the endurance to cast it on each teammate) wouldn't be the horrible drain on resources like is being brought up...


Things don't have to be difficult to be tedious.

See? This is what I'm talking about. First, you have to decide what the problem *IS*. You can't even agree that maybe, just maybe, keeping several different buffs on a team is tedious. Fine. I can agree that that playstyle is not for everyone. But if we're trying to widen the gap between more manageable and tedious, someone arguing this as a non-problem pretty much makes the entire thread moot to them. Why even respond?

If you want to get on your soapbox and bring up sweeping arguments about AE, PVP and the general state of MMORPGs, that's you. Just don't think it actually gives you a solid argument to back your stance...

But that isn't the problem being addressed by the OP. Looking through the thread that inspired this one, the complaint was "Stop nagging me about buffing you the second they expire" which links off into the OP's stance of "Short duration buffs can be a nuisance".

How that goes into "Keep your buffs away from me!" is beyond me. That's another issue.

And currently, if a buffer isn't compliant, they'll still throw speed boost on you. If they were toggles, they'd toggle them on you anyway. If the durations stacked, they'd still throw 5 on you + an extra 3 just because you said something.

What I'm saying is, players being non-compliant is *ANOTHER* issue, not this one. *THIS* issue seems to hinge on the question of "do short duration buffs interfere with other tasks or not?" Honestly, I'd simply say the Kinetic player shouldn't bother casting speed boost at all unless a teammate is moving remarkably slow (Granite tanker/brute or stuck in quicksand/caltrops, etc) or when the teammate's endurance is low. But what do I know? You're a kinetics, you're expected to keep speedboost on everyone that wants it all the time...which can often be all 7 teammates.

Isn't unwanted buffs an entirely different issue? I can see how it relates to the issue at hand but it isn't introduced or exacerbated by trying to push for this QoL improvement.

And who said everyone had to agree on everything? If you're collaborating, your distinguishing the issue and thinking of ways to resolve it in some way. If you don't think an issue is present, why not bring up an argument stating why you think it's a 'non-problem' while others say there can be?

Not sure how stacked duration on specific buffs would upset balance (or what prior dev stance you're talking about). The only issue I could see arising is with +rech buffs that affect the caster (Accelerate Metabolism) and those could just be tagged not to if the code was written to do so. They could simply limit it to ST buffs (Clarity, Clear Mind, Deflection Field, Ice Shield, Speed Boost, etc).

Similarities:
-Hmm, each AT has a chance to deal double damage with some of their attacks >_>
-The power Concentrated Strike, has a 20% chance or instantly recharging Power Siphon and Build up (however, Brute or Tankers do not get this)

Differences:
-Scrappers get Power Siphon, a self buff that boosts ToHit a little and makes all of your attacks (except your AoE ones) buff your damage if they connect. The effect lasts 20 seconds and each damage buff lasts 10sec from when you gain it (also applies an extra -dmg debuff if I'm not mistaken)
-Scrappers get a moderate damage narrow cone knockback attack (lots of players don't like it) called Repulsing Torrent.
-Scrappers get Confront
-Stalkers get Assassin's Strike instead of Repulsing Torrent.
-Stalkers get Build up instead of Power Siphon.
-Stalkers get Placate instead of Confront.

I'd say they're both worth a try playing. I don't have any experience with the Scrapper version (only have a KM Tanker and Stalker) but I'd say they each have their perks. A couple of quirks with the Stalker version: Assassin's Strike casts nearly a second faster than the other stalker sets, Build up seems to cast nearly a second slower though and Burst (the PBAoE attack) has a 100% chance of critical on all targets from hide instead of 50% chance for non-single target attacks like the other sets.

Depends what you consider balance is. The power costs no endurance and doesn't ever suppress. Why bother being concerned that it recharges at all? On the other hand, if you turn off Hide to reveal yourself for whatever reason (honestly, you have no business 'accidentally' turning it off. What happens when you 'accidentally' turn off your mez protection?) being situationally aware when you may need to hide again would be in your best interest.

What I'm saying is, how are we to know what the power is balanced by and who's to say it has no reason for such measures. While I wouldn't be against reducing the recharge on it, the change wouldn't really make a lick of difference and ultimately isn't even needed/wanted.

But this isn't about balance, it's about aesthetics. Aesthetically, reducing hide's recharge does little (I guess if I want to be seen, I could just cut it off and back on when I need it). Altering the look of Hide as an option (and other stealth powers) is where we should be pushing for.

Well, for one, what attack could you use twice in the span of Placate + the attack? Can't be Eagle's Claw, or 1kcuts or Midnight Grasp or any of the good mid-tier attacks like Focus/Soaring Dragon/Crane Kick cause those have to animate and recharge before you use it again.

Also consider that placate cost 0 endurance. So you're getting the damage of that attack twice for half of what it's suppose to cost.

Lastly, using Placate with an AoE for 50% chance of critical after an AS is just plain effective. One trick I find I use is using AS *then* build up (for demoralize), placate (kind of helps that anything near me will most likely be feared thanks to Cloak of Fear and demoralize debuffs and fears more on top) and go to town with whatever AoEs I have.

Then there's the many other applications of Placate such as dying with an enemy nearby. Awake+Breakfree then placate the guy (since placate is free) and then hide (because hide is free).

Placate isn't like Taunt/Confront for the other melees. It's actually useful solo (well, that -range they get *is* pretty useful) and great for damage if used opportunistically.

I just take BU and Placate early (once they unlock) and use temp/vet/inherent powers until I get more powers. No point piling on the powers early when you've got no slots for them. And taking advantage of that Beginner's Luck buff works amazingly. Just craft yourself a hammer or bat, keep a few recipes/salvage in your inventory and use them regularly. Of course, use AS, BU and Placate to their fullest and use everything else when they're down...

The late teens and early 20s is when I pick up attacks, armors and the like. I've only lvled 1 new stalker alt up from lvl 1 as of late (KM/EA stalker) and did this. I didn't even pick up my mez protection until 22 and even then, I rarely ran it unless the enemies were spamming mezzes (thank you non-suppressing toggles!).

Funny how no one ever brings up Sonic Blast's Dreadful Wail...

Anyway, I think the main reason the sets you point to (Archery, Dual Pistols and Assault Rifle) get non-crashing mini-nukes that recharge faster is because the sets consist primarily or wholly of a highly resisted damage type.

The other sets, like psi blast, ice blast, fire blast, etc. have less resisted types of damage by comparison. Also, sets like Sonic Blast, Electric Blast and Dark Blast have particularly potent secondary effects that are also prevalent in their nukes while Archery and AR kind of don't have supreme secondary effect (more of a mix) and DP has watered down versions.

It's like there is a price one must pay to get a mini-nuke (or depending how you see it, perks you get for taking a crashing set). I wouldn't expect any more sets with mini-nukes unless it's a weapon blasting set or the set does primarily smashing or lethal damage.

Seriously, if the devs made a new set...like....toxic blast with great toxic damage mixed with fire damage. Would you expect a potent mini-non-crash-nuke on top of your -speed/-regen/holds secondary effect? Conversely, if a new toxic blast set *did* have a mini nuke, I'd expect it to do a mix of toxic and lethal damage with mainly just some -speed and immobilize thrown in...

You're looking at it from the wrong angle.

Just speaking generally, the devs could implement a blast set where the caster traces his hands in the air in some type of sign and the resulting attack has no traveling particle, just a kind of energy/slashing/bursting FX on the target(s). Slap on some type of theme that's unique and add secondary effects/mechanics that make sense and you've got a new set. It's just, by chance, the devs decided to call it 'Hex Blast' or some such and theme the secondary effect after the blasts being various magics.

Add in alternate animations with the character typing on a holo-display, hand sign ninjutsu or just squeezing their temples for some alternate origin themes (which should be easy since the blasts have no actual emanation point from the body and just body movement) and that about covers it. But that leaves the questions: Would people like it? Would this personify 'magic' for those yerning for such a set? Or would posters complain about it seeming origin specific?

Hmmm, sounds pretty selfish to me. The devs are adding content to their game to make it more favorable to a wider group of players as well as adding variable mechanics for *everybody*. Even if you don't want some additions or don't like some changes doesn't change the fact that what your dollar *is* funding is other stuff you *do* want like upgraded graphics, costume pieces, new maps, more play modes, etc.

It's like walking into a McDonalds to buy a McRib but thinking you should get a discount cause the secret sauce on their Big Mac isn't to your liking.

Or more relative, if the devs try to add some more to PvP, would you throw your arms up in a hissy fit just because it's not what you want?

Just because the devs are adding variable content doesn't mean they aren't adding more normal contacts, missions, TFs and GM/AV encounters for you. In the very same issue, did they not add more tip missions too?

How about getting off your duff and whining about forum-nazis telling you to 'lrn2ply' and start dropping some suggestions for regular missions/content? I can think of quite a few, like expanded tip missions, new/varied bank/safeguard missions and so on...Hell, it shouldn't be that hard since all you're looking for is the same old stuff that anyone can damn near duplicate for you in AE.

Get the Origins Booster Pack and use the runes or tarot card auras.

You can set it so the auras only occur while you're actually casting the attacks. You can also use a plethora of other combat auras (or just plain auras) to simulate a magical effect.