Michael_Pullman

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

However, this is only the case when the activation time of a power is small compared to the recharge time. Recharge debuffs only affect the recharge part, so whenever we have a greater than zero activation time, recharge debuffs fail to live up to their "maximum potential".


[/ QUOTE ]

That's a good point (one I keep harping myself when it comes to recharge enhancements) so it begs the question: when people test recharge debuffs against villains, do they factor that in when they time recharge differences, or do most testers presume that villain powers have zero activation time? Do villains (really, the game engine code that deals with NPC villain attack speed) even take such considerations into account when they run their attack "cycles?"

[/ QUOTE ]
Recharge for a power does not occur during its activation time. I'm sure it works on villains as well.

This shouldn't be an issue.

[ QUOTE ]
But the new Chilling Embrace also debuffs damage by 14%! So instead of 100 damage every blow, the mob would do only 93 points of damage.


[/ QUOTE ]
Er, clarification please? I thought a 14% damage debuff would turn 100 into 86?

And would our equivalent resistance be 46% in this case?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Of course, I forgot to mention that just as its never a good idea to trade a defense for a debuff (all things being equal), its never a good idea to trade one debuff for two, unless you only tank even level villains.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. I think that's why in the end Statesman is taking the approach of making the sum of the two debuffs higher than the original, rather than equivalent. 0.14 + 0.32 = 0.46 as opposed to 0.40. Makes it a little bit stronger vs level and RES. Not much, but a little bit. (note: not saying that's "great math", but I suspect that's his approach)

Still since in teams you almost never fight even level foes, he's probably shooting to help there too.

Now if I could just get Statesman to realize how far behind Ice is on Smash/Lethal, with little to show in return for being that far behind, I'd be much happier.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its actually weaker against level, having two effects instead of one.


[/ QUOTE ]
I think you're mistaken.

If we assume that the 0.32 recharge and the 0.14 damage can translate into resistance (they can), then:

(scale * 0.32) + (scale * 0.14) = total damage

If we combine like terms:

scale * (0.32 + 0.14) = total damage

This won't hold true if the scales are different, of course, but I don't think they are. Also, the 0.32 -recharge does nothing against alpha-strikes and one-shotting, but otherwise it can translate directly into resistance.


What Circeus was saying about making it "a little bit stronger vs level and RES," I don't think he's saying that there's no scaling involved. Heck, he called me twice for forgetting about it already!


Anyway, I think you two are thinking TOO hard about this. The simple fact of the matter is that Ices needed a buff, and this is it (hopefully only ONE part of it ).

Remember that the -Damage does two things that a -Recharge won't:
- It will work on the alpha-strike.
- It helps to prevent one-shotting issues. (This is a big one in my opinion.)

Sure, it would be better to boost our defense instead-- after all, Resistance and Defense overlap and don't stack properly (i.e. not as good a benefit). Who knows why they don't? Maybe Statesman can tell us when he's explaining the numbers.

He's not doing it in Dev's Digest, is he? I hope he gets it done soon-- I'm tentatively scheduled for a Manticore TF on Saturday!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
...So why are we bringing this up again? JUST UP OUR DEFENSE ALREADY, DAMNIT!

[/ QUOTE ]
Because the RES thing is resistable, so it doesn't always even out, even if the math says it does, which I'm not sure it does.


[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, but the -Recharge on I4 CE had the same problem, so I think the I4 and I5 CEs would've worked out in the end.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So anyway, they're roughly the same, and your measly 1.3%-difference numbers support this (I should've just looked at those numbers first, eh). But since the damage debuff works instantly (whereas the recharge debuff won't work on the alpha-strike), we can count that as a miniscule buff.

[/ QUOTE ]

The 1.3%ish number comes out of the fact that its only 33% + 7% if the mobs are +0. And I calculate for mobs in the +0 to +4 range. Also keep in mind that most mobs have, at the very least, resistance to Smash/Lethal which means in geneneral its not really 40%... well... ever.

[/ QUOTE ]
But if you talk about level scaling, then your argument won't be about whether CE was mini-nerfed in I5, but about whether the other Tankers do better than Ice against higher-level mobs-- and we already know the answer to that.


But that's all moot now-- Statesman's upping the damage debuff to 14%! Yay! Frankly speaking, this is still only a modest boost-- other damage debuff powers get like 20-30%, don't they? I hope Statesman can give us a higher number.

Okay, my mistake, I got a bit confused here. A 2-second Brawl would be 3 seconds with a 50% debuff, so it wouldn't be a significant change.

And of course, a 50% "debuff," the way the word is being used, is akin to 33% delayed resistance because it's not doubling recharge time, but adding a third to it.

Personally, I'd rather we go with the percentage that the recharge time is lengthened rather than this whole debuff thing-- recharge time percentage translates directly into delayed resistance, whereas you have to do all sorts of mathematical mumbo-jumbo to get equivalent resistance off of a debuff percentage.


But waaaaait... a 50% recharge debuff (33% equivalent resistance) and a 7% damage debuff (7% equivalent resistance) is equal to 40%-- the same amount that's being reported for a 66.7% recharge debuff! So they didn't actually nerf CE, but they didn't actually buff it eitherAAARRRGGGHHH!!!

So anyway, they're roughly the same, and your measly 1.3%-difference numbers support this (I should've just looked at those numbers first, eh). But since the damage debuff works instantly (whereas the recharge debuff won't work on the alpha-strike), we can count that as a miniscule buff.


...So why are we bringing this up again? JUST UP OUR DEFENSE ALREADY, DAMNIT!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I remember correctly, people kept throwing around how you increase enemies' recharge times by 25%. That means that the "debuff" the way you're using it has always been 50% as according to others. There hasn't really been a "lowering" in this case.

[/ QUOTE ]

In my case 50% means the recharge time increases 50%. So I'm not sure what you're saying here, but it seems what I'm saying is different.


[/ QUOTE ]
Okay, so there's some misunderstanding going on there.

But in that case, people have always said that the debuff was 25%-- heck, you yourself referenced this number this once! If we have a 50% debuff now, that's STILL a buff from before (albeit not as good as 66.7%).

If you were to ask me, I would even venture to say that the 50% debuff was added in I5. I certainly didn't notice a significant change when Trolls were Brawling me in I3 (2-second Brawl -> 2.5-second Brawl), but I DEFINITELY noticed a change when Patrol Guards were Brawling me in I5 (2-second Brawl -> 4-second Brawl).

If I remember correctly, people kept throwing around how you increase enemies' recharge times by 25%. That means that the "debuff" the way you're using it has always been 50% as according to others. There hasn't really been a "lowering" in this case.


But really, doesn't everyone ALREADY know that Ices were "duped?" Our armors can't floor an even-con mob, for Pete's sake! We used to be able to floor up to +3s-- WITHOUT EA! The resistance-based guys are still capping against +3s, ladies and gentlemen! And come on, did ANYONE think that a 7% damage debuff was a meaningful addition to our powers? We should've been getting twice that, at least!


Right now, I say we fight for where we're REALLY getting hit-- our DEFENSE. This 25/33/whatever % delayed resistance in CE that we're getting, it's negligible compared to our defense. There's no reason why we can't have 20% base Frozen/Glacial and 5-10% unenhanceable Wet Ice!

So I finally got to try the nerfs to Burn. Having been totally prepared by the accounts of others, I found it more funny than annoying when the mobs ran away from me with a literal case of the Hotfoot.

I definitely agree that Burn was overpowered. One application of Burn does the same thing that two Raged Foot Stomps do! That would seriously put Burn in the High to Superior category of damage, and for 7 endurance points?

But I have to agree that the triple whammy is too much. Burn alone now is more of a high Minor attack than a Moderate. Any of the three nerfs should be removed-- they should restore the Recharge, since some of us DO use Burn for the Immobilization resistance.

But while they're doing that, consider one way to use Burn: as a finishing attack. It still seems feasible to finish mobs with a fully-slotted Burn when they're down to a fourth of their life. Mobs have to complete their animations before they can escape, so a bit of timing can help you make the most out of this power. The fact that some mobs will run the long way to escape Burn will score you some extra damage as well. And finally, fully-slotted Blazing Aura is a good complement to Burn. A combination of these two powers actually allowed me to bring mobs to half life after one application of Burn (which seems fair, considering that Burn is a Moderate power and I'm using two powers to achieve this damage).


Also, people have mentioned that the devs say that the fear effect is as designed, but do they also how severe the effect is? Maybe they're thinking that the mobs run from the patch eventually and don't realize that the mobs run from the patch immediately.

[ QUOTE ]

Also, you mentioned that you think the -damage should be 20-30%. That's a little high, I think. I don't recal States ever saying that the purpose of the -damage was specifically for the AV problem. That's just something that we--players--have attributed it too. Of course, it helps with that (barely) but I think AVs are but a piece of the Devs intent on that one.


[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think it's too big a number. I believe Darkest Night and the Radiation damage debuff power (I can never tell the difference between EF and LR) do something in that vicinity, though admittedly I've never observed it that carefully to be sure.

I would like to think that the damage debuff in CE was meant to help stave off one-shotting incidents. Damage debuffs seem to work particularly well in this department-- for small numbers, the debuff is correspondingly small and won't make too much difference in the short run. For large numbers, however, the debuff can mean the difference between barely surviving and not surviving. My Inv sure felt the difference when a Radiation Controller came with us to fight Mother Mayhem (Mother Mayhem is hard? What are you people talking about? ).

Okay, so my testing was more controlled this time, and my initial impressions were incorrect.


I started by trying to get a number for fully-slotted Wet Ice (with +3s) against a Patrol Guard. I turned Wet Ice off and recorded hits versus a total of 180 Brawls (I was aiming for 200 but messed up). Then I ran away, turned on Wet Ice, and went back to the same Patrol Guard for a total of 200 Brawls. No other powers were on-- I popped two greens on the first attempt and one on the second.

Without Wet Ice: 55.555% (Patrol Guards have a bonus to Accuracy?)
With Wet Ice: 52%

That would put Wet Ice exactly where everybody said it was: 3%. Then again, it was supposed to be 3% when SLOTTED...

Second, I looked for crowds to jump. I first stopped at a crowd of eight yellow Patrol Guards, Riot Guards, and Mob Specialists (I assume they're all pretty much the same) with Frozen Armor (fully-slotted), Wet Ice (fully-slotted), and Chilling Embrace on. They took me down at a decent rate; I estimate that they would've taken me from full to zilch in ninety seconds. Over the course of the test, I popped three Dramatics twice to prolong the fight and see if I was in the middle of a streakbreaker, to no avail.

So for my next group, I came into a crowd of eight even-con Crey (another mix of Riots, Patrols, and Mobs). Used the same powers-- the enemies brought me down to 85-90% and couldn't get any further no matter how long I waited.

Finally, I ripped all of the SOs from Wet Ice and jumped another group of eight even-con Creys-- all Patrol Guards this time. They immediately brought me down to half life and forced me to pop my last green. However, this seemed to be a streakbreaker moment-- after a minute or so, they simply stopped hitting. Typically, they would take me down to 75%, but would eventually miss enough for me to heal back to 85% (one-slotted Health). I felt like I was on the borderline between surviving them and not, so having Wet Ice slotted did change things marginally.


The difference between my first impressions and my second impressions most likely had to do with surprise over the decent boost in Frozen Armor, and the fact that testing was performed in a semi-chaotic fashion the first time around.


So Wet Ice needs to go up. Make it 5% or 7.5% at least so I can floor even-con minions without having to resort to EA.

I'm pretty sure it was that significant. I'll copy my character over to Test right now and get another feel for it (I've been meaning to see the changes to Burn for my Fire Tanker anyway).


I wouldn't be surprised if Wet Ice was around 17% though. Yes, that would be a pretty significant difference between the haves and have-nots, but I guess the devs are assuming that the best you can keep that up for is five levels. And another 20% would only mean comfortably fighting two levels above normal.

And of course, they must have forgotten how level 50s would be advantaged over the others forever-- either that or they figure that since they're level 50, it doesn't matter anyway.

I just tested the changes.

Wet Ice looks like it's double the I4 value, so it's not horrible at least.

The damage debuff is somewhere around 7-10%. I wasn't using the combat window, so my numbers weren't as accurate. Also, it felt like the damage debuff had a slightly larger radius than the slow, because two Patrol Guards that weren't affected by the slow (i.e. no animation) actually hit me for debuffed damage when I had CE on and for normal damage when I turned it off.


The improvements make me happy, but I still feel like a little more could be added. I had to fire off EA against eight even cons on top of Chilling Embrace, Wet Ice (no defense buffs), and Frozen Armor before I stopped getting a net loss of HP against them.

I think that the damage debuff on Chilling Embrace should reach 20-30%. I thought the damage debuff was added so that we could stop the problem with AVs one-shotting us (without having to add real resistance); that's something Slows won't do.

With any luck, the devs might actually have meant to give us a 17% or 27% debuff, but simply forgot to type the extra number in.

About to check it out right now.

Looks promising, as long as Wet Ice has been doubled from its I4 value.

But I don't get this defense thing at all. What is this "Max Defense?" What do these changes mean? It makes me really concerned about what the to-hit floor for squishies are now though...

Possibly all of this has been mentioned before, but:

I'm really concerned about the base numbers for stuff like Frozen Armor. 15% BASE?! If everyone else can reach the s/l resistance cap against an enemy, defense-based armors in turn have to be able to floor the accuracy of an even-con minion AT LEAST.

Is the bare minimum of 20% Frozen Armor and 5% Wet Ice really that bad? That's flooring even minions and lieutenants when both are fully-slotted (it's wrong to count +3 SOs, because how in the world can I possibly keep my SOs +3 for 28 levels?). And not allowing to slot Wet Ice? What was the reason for this again?

Raising the armors to 20% base also allows for SR to go up to 15%-- that seems like a better number for them.

Energy Absorption should not be factored in as heavily as it is. It doesn't work well against very small groups of enemies, and to encourage players to keep a crowd on them at all times is not only exceedingly slow and difficult, but it encourages HERDING.


But I do like the damage debuff ideas. As long as it's strong enough to mean the difference between getting one-shotted by an AV and not, it'll be a step in the right direction for Ice Tankers.

Just make it work on the higher level enemies FIRST, please.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not begrudging the Inv people their improvements, but Rooted needs a change too for balance! It's not even as though it provides +res like Unyielding. Its side effect (improved health regen) is not combat effective.

[/ QUOTE ]
You're silly. I'll gladly trade you my mobile status and -def in return for your rooted!

Seriously though, I heard once that Rooted could actually be overcome if you get enough speed enhancers somewhere, somehow. I don't how true this is though...