Madadh

I went with the Doctored Wounds set so I could get more global recharge. Is it worth the extra slot or two? Hard to say...

LOL!! Very funny. Well said, too, and I concur.

Personally, I'd love a 7.5% move bonus. But, I don't anticipate taking or using any AT specific IOs unless they are in game earnable, which I suspect won't be the case.

This is the fundamental difference of opinion. If you'd stick to this, then while there still probably won't be a consensus reached, at least the levels of frustration in this topic would be greatly reduced.



But then you follow with this, which basically shows that you don't seem to get the point Kyr is trying to make. Numina's wasn't made specifically for blasters. So, it's a perfectly fine set for healing powers. If it was a +heal in say, PBAoE, I might be a bit more critical. And if it was a +heal in a blaster AT set, I'd be a lot more pissed off (assuming I ever played a blaster, but even though I don't, I'd agree in principal that it was a horrible choice for a blaster AT set).

Yes, as you're looking for IOs to get bonuses you specifically want (like ranged) you end up with a lot of bonuses you don't care about. If you tend to look at the AT IOs as just another IO to add to your pool to comb through, then I can see your point of view. In that case it's no big deal that it has a heal in one spot, if the other spots have good stuff. If you look at AT IOs as something a bit different, since it was tailored to your specific AT, it's also reasonable to expect that you not have a bonus that can't possibly do anything for your power sets.

Both points of view are valid, depending on what you think the AT sets are. If all the AT sets had a set bonus or two that wasn't applicable to some power sets in the AT for which they were crafted, that would be very strong evidence that the AT Set IOs were not intended to be viewed any different from any other IO then. In this case, Kyr would be plainly wrong. But this isn't the case. Defenders are unique in this as far as I recall from what I've seen of the AT IOs. So, that being the case, he's got reasonable case for believing as he does as to how the Devs intended the nature of the AT IOs. The Devs probably will never address it, so that being said, both points of view are valid, and neither can be proven. If your agreement is on the nature of the AT IOs, you'll just have to agree to disagree. But, if you agree that the AT IOs are in some way different from other AT IOs, then you can't really disagree with Kyr's position logically, by comparing other sets. If you disagree with Kyr's position as to the nature of the AT specific IOs, then really, that's all you need to say. Going any further just muddies your point.

All of is true. But, if the AT specific sets are only available for purchase, and not earnable, then by far the best and most efficient way to stack recharge will be to pull out the credit card, especially if these are slottable in any attack type power. 8.25% recharge is higher than any other set provides, excepting purples. And you can't slot 3 single target attacks with purple sets (unless 2 of them have stun or sleep as a secondary, and you're willing to have an attack that does base damage). You might very well be able to do this with AT IOs.

But, perhaps they will be earnable. Perhaps there will be a way to avoid stacking this bonuses based on slotting restrictions. Perhaps this will be the only real advantage to buying over earning in game to ever come out in this game ever. Is so, then my concerns will be laid to rest, and you're right, it won't be a 'pay-to-win' scenario.

But, what I said originally was, I'm most concerned with that potentially happening. And I don't think it's plausible to deny that it looks like that could become the case depending on how things go. Thus I don't think my concern unfounded.

Again, what people seem to be failing to get time after time is that there is a fundemental difference between very little practical benefit, and ZERO possible effect at all.

The s/l defense helps quite a bit until you are softcapped, then it helps a lot less, but still some vs high acc enemies, or debuffers, which, even SR isn't completely immune to (practically, but not totally). And, since it's s/l, if we are talking about SR, it can be of help to any non-positional, but s/l typed attacks, as SR usual has pretty small typed defenses.

And as for s/l res to an invul, helps a fixed percentage up to when the invul hits the hard cap, which will be eaiser to do with this set, and, if I recall, it needs some help above and beyond just the sets base powers to do anyhow (granted, tough usually gets ya there easy). But, even then, after hitting the hard cap, it helps still whenever resistance debuffing comes into play.

So you still are comparing things of little, but none the less measurable value, against something that has no intrinsic value at all.


Now, if you say that the no value is close enough to zero value, and thus don't personally care that 1 AT and only one AT got handed a set bonus that has zero possible value for some power-sets of that AT, that's a fair position to take, but to continue to disregard the key fundemental difference that Kyriani brought up and has an issue with is just starting to make seem as if people aren't even reading the thread at all, are perhaps delusional, or aren't even intending to discuss in good faith.

Very valid points. It's just fairly annoying, and added to the other annoyances this issue brought.
I'm really not certain what the 30 second timer is trying to accomplish. If it's meant to make logging out a way to avoid death, I'd be more than willing to accept a, "Drop directly and instantly to the Server select screen, but your alt dies automatically," button.

Since it is "minimally useful", I'm willing to accept it so that I can get rid of the non-combat pets more easily.

Touche.

I have to totally agree. Far more than any concern I have to the implied def=healer bit is my concern that the game may be headed heavily into the 'pay to win' territory.

I was thinking something along the same line. I'm not sure it could be very well balanced. And I'm not sure how easy it would be to implement as a set bonus, but if those two potential hurdles could be cleared, then this idea I think would be a perfect solution.

That's a very fair point. Very precise logic. And it does allow everyone to measure of it's utility parity that is the goal, or if it's slight to some of the defender types that's at the core of each persons individual objections. I'd imagine some people will be on one side, some on the other, and some might be a mix of both.

OK. I've very glad I asked it strait out. I completely agree with point 1. I mostly agree with point 2. I'd completely agree with point 2, but I can tell if it's overreaction or not, because of the medium being used. If people are sitting at their keyboards foaming at the mouth, I'd totally agree. If they are calmly miffed that the devs choose to reinforce the long fought against Def=Healer mindset that is still too common, and in so doing slight (however minor the slight might be) the contributions of Stormies that skip O2 (which is fairly common), all TAs, all Sonics, et, then I don't think it's totally an overreaction. But your point on the relative value of some of the bonuses offered other ATs is very valid. If I popped into the Blaster or Controller subforum, and found them irritated, I'd not totally fault them, but I do think it's slightly different, in that, as has been said before, those bonuses at least apply some tiny benefit to every powerset in that AT.

But, largely, we agree. I don't know why you didn't just state at the start, "I see your point, and it makes some sense, but I don't think it's that big of a deal," and then leave it at that, but I'm glad we are finally on the same page.

One point I'd like to make in regard to your point #1, though, is that even though devs have made mistakes (or even let's say, questionable choices) before, and will again, they have also shown a willingness to revisit them, and possibly change them. And, minor though it may be to some, it's going to be less minor to some, more minor to others. I have no problems with anyone pointing out something that, however minor, is worthy of change, and making a case for it. In this case, it's minor enough I'd never have started the discussion on it. But once someone else did, I had no problem voicing my support, even though it's certainly not the 1st place thing on my personal list.

Thanks again for being willing to clear things up.

Ah, sorry, yes, I misread that. I thought that negation was you negating what you thought I was implying, not a negative reply to my actual query.

If you weren't planning on using the set specifically for that bonus and if you agree that it's not that good a bonus for all defenders
and it isn't purely self interest that motivates you, then I'm at a loss as to understand why you seem to dead set against changing it to something else, assuming that something else would be balanced and applicable to all defenders.

If, instead of being purely contrary, you could explain what your actual objection is, maybe a change could be found that would both satisfy players of all defender powersets and you.

All true, but all this change has done was put AE on more-or-less even footing with normal missions, which don't have an inspiration vendor immediately outside of every door.

I'm not saying I'm thrilled with this change, but it's not exactly like you're making it out.

If I'm going to get up in arms over things from this issue, it'd be that some things aren't documented. That I don't even know if KB has been intentionally changed without comment, or if it's a bug. That a well reported UI bug is in live, and wasn't even mentioned as a known issue when this issue was released. That /buycoh is gone (again without any documentation) with no alternative that I'm aware of for quickly swapping from alt, to alt. That the badges interface still looks horrible and is royal pain to use now, which was also mentioned as a problem in the beta.

I don't think I'd really get irate over the base issue, since it's so darned funny, but if it wasn't funny, I'd add that to my list.

There is always a very well funded, well hyped, MMO on the horizon. That's pretty irrelevant, based on all past examples.

Now, disinterest, and apathy on the part of the players, now that'll kill an MMO. And issues like this, with such promise, to go this pear-shaped, when so much of this should have been avoidable is the way to generate such feelings on the part of the players.

Am I crying 'DOOM.' No, but this issue really needs to be an exception, not the new rule..

True, but by that logic, controllers (and Dominators) should get a Set bonus that just buffs Confuse, because they would be the logical choice over other ATs. But, this just doesn't make sense for a AT specific IO Set, and more than the Heal does for defenders.

I will agree that the heal bonus is not best for defenders. I am pretty sure I had been saying that all along for an AT specific set this was the case, and it seemed to me as if you were disagreeing on that point. Glad to hear that at least on that point we were in agreement.

I would agree if you were and we were both talking about regular IO sets that aren't AT specific. I would disagree with the analogy being valid if your level 50 is slotting Executioner's Contract and you are comparing that to an AT IO set as we'd be talking about different things. I would disagree totally if you are talking about AT Specific IO Sets.

I see your point here, and fail to see how it's relevant. Not that I'm blaming you for that, I'll admit, that I think I was trying to quote you from somewhere else, but now I have no clue where. I'll just give you the nod on that one, and wonder why I brought it up, as it doesn't really bear on the topic at hand.



You may very well be right on this front. It will help, some, at least, until fury is built, but it is a very paltry bonus for a set that gains MUCH more from Fury than from +Damage bonuses. However, even if Brutes DO have it worse, that doesn't in any way change that the fact that a +Heal for a Defender AT Specific IO Set is a lousy bonus in this instance.

I also didn't see you actually answer the direct question I asked...

The programmers are usually done with their contribution by the time a software push is being made.

Ah! I see. That sorta makes sense. So you think you only lose buffs when entering a mish exempts ya?

I thought you said the buff (inspire) stayed when you tested it with a newspaper. To be fair, if it's only a AE change, then it's about as focused as it can be to not include most normal content.

Although I gotta totally agree. I'm also not in favour of undocumented changes (I'd not call this a nerf as if anything, it made things more dangerous, not less).

While I am not going to second the belittling comments (attacking someone's skills when I don't know the circumstances isn't my style generally), I will add that this finished product just isn't good enough. Leave it as it was till an improvement can be made, because this isn't it. While I would like if the new information can eventually be presented in some way this is not the way; this is a 1/2 step forward in info availability for 2 steps back in useability.

If this is true, I'd say it's a much bigger AE farm attack than the Ambush farms.