MisterNick

[ QUOTE ]

Yep, heaven forbid you all us to Diversively Enhance other aspects that you add to defense powers as a band-aid to a system that Postitron already stated has been part of your internal builds since March 2005; yet in those 7 months you never (until this outcry) bothered to consider Super Reflexes or powers in other sets that ONLY are allowed ONE and only one Enhancement type.

Gee, what was/is the point of Enhancement Diversification again? If it is to in fact diversify builds, wouldn't it be more logical to ALLOW Super Reflexes to now Enhance the other power aspects you're adding?

[/ QUOTE ]

The toggles already accept both endurance reduction and defense buff enhancments. The passives are being altered to add damage resistance, per States' recent post.

So, yes, in fact, they are adding things that allow more diverse enhancementsto the powers in SR that only accept one enhancement type.

[ QUOTE ]
Now I do like this idea Statesmen....in fact I love it. I've seen SR scrappers get hit once and die due to the fact they have no resistance...just defense. Makes SR actually playable now

[/ QUOTE ]

This won't have any effect on the one-shotting of SR scrappers. They're not getting resistance to damage, they'll just resist defense debuffs.

Devs, again, I suggest that "debuff resistance" be called "debuff counteraction" instead, to help avoid this sort of confusion.

This is a reasonable method of addressing the silly endurance cost issues that the game currently has, but it's hardly something that "comes with" Enhancement Diversification, which also in no way diversifies enhancements.

You guys are having some trouble with your lexicon.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

No need to step outside the set.

StoneSkin (6slots)+ Granite (1 resist 5 defense) gives you 90 resist with +1 SOs.

That gives you 90 resist S/L same as Inv and better resists to everything else then Inv. Excuse me how is that more defense dependent then Inv? Sorry your simply wrong. Inv has more defense and less resist then a granite tank how is a granite tank more defense based?

[/ QUOTE ]

ARGH! LEARN TO READ!

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes you might try that.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's wrong with you? How many times does one have to say "Invulnerability is not a defense-based set, but should probably get some of this debuff resistance because it does rely, somewhat, on defense", before it makes sense to you? How many times to I have to point out that don't think Invulnerability should have less debuff resistance than Stone before you stop asking me why I do think that? How many worthless little "gotcha" posts are you going to throw out before you realize that you're off-target?

[ QUOTE ]

No need to step outside the set.

StoneSkin (6slots)+ Granite (1 resist 5 defense) gives you 90 resist with +1 SOs.

That gives you 90 resist S/L same as Inv and better resists to everything else then Inv. Excuse me how is that more defense dependent then Inv? Sorry your simply wrong. Inv has more defense and less resist then a granite tank how is a granite tank more defense based?

[/ QUOTE ]

ARGH! LEARN TO READ!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I think the point was that you can slot up Granite Armor for resistance, or defense, but not both, so if you slot up Granite Armor for 90% resists, it won't have a lot of defense, making it not really a "defense-based" set. If you slot up GA heavy for defense, then you can't get 90% resists.

So while Stone as a set can be heavy resistances and heavy defense, no individual stone tanker can really be both at the same time, so his original statement "No set that allows 90% resistance to smashing and lethal, and a Dull Pain power, can legitimately be called 'defense-based'" suggests that there does not exist a set that allows a specific hero to both have 90% resists and nevertheless claim to get the majority of its mitigation from defense ("defense-based").

Of course, this brings up the invincibility argument, but that, most agree, is a special case.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually even if you slotted Granite all defense stone could pull a 90 resist to S/L, or really close if desired. Stoneskin offeres 12.5 base S/L resist its a passive and does stack with Granite and if they wanted they could have tough also. That would give you 77.5 resist with stone skin with even SOs. One slot in granite would bump you to 87.5, or tough would cap you. Either way you'd have 5 or 6 slots in granite for defense.

[/ QUOTE ]

And yet, a) you've stepped outside the set, and b) you're still not receiving most of your mitigation from defense, which Arcanaville correctly pegged as my probably obtusely-made point.

A character with 90% resists isn't really "defense-based", in the sense that defense matters more than resistance or health regeneration for damage mitigation. It's fun hyperbole to pretend that Invulnerability is a "defense-based set" now, but it isn't actually true, and that should be kept in mind when asking for debuff resistance in it.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The most unreasonable nerf they've ever made was to debt in I5(yeah, I know allmost everyone disagrees, but you're wrong.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Why was it unreasonable? I'm not in disagreement, I just wonder why.

[/ QUOTE ]

We level too quick, and can't afford enhancers. Thus indirectly nerfing our power level without having to actually have the stones to do it like men (and women)!

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to mention how hard it is to get debt badges now! Dang ol' stealth badge nerf.

[ QUOTE ]

Huh....Granite Armor friend. 90 resist to everything -psi, Earth's Embrace a better form of Dull Pain, Rooted a regen rate compairable to Intergration (only behind by the 50% non-enhanceable part). Granite armor itself offers a substantial resistance to defdebuffs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Granite armor is only 50% resistance. Sure, you can slot it up, but if you slot that instead of defense you're looking at about 28% defense with it up, being as it's exclusive with the other armors. So, no, a stone tanker running Granite Armor can't really be considered to be using a "defense-based" set.

This also ties in with my earlier post, wherein I said that Ice should have better debuff resistance than Stone or SR.

[ QUOTE ]

If Granite can do that and get that resistance can you now explain why Inv that lost all its non-S/L resists can't?

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you not read? "If it doesn't get tweaked to have better resists and less +defense, I think that giving Invincibility a partial defense debuff resistance makes sense."

It would make perfect sense to give Invincibility a debuff resistance on par with Granite Armor, if Invuln remains significantly reliant on +defense.

[ QUOTE ]

Shouldn't Invuln now be included in this as well since its one +Def power is the backbone of the set and is a larger chunk of an Invuln tankers power than all the resist powers combined?

Invuln is no longer considered a Resistance based set. It should be looked at in these discussions and changes as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Invulnerability does have some reliance on defense, but despite the popular opinion around here it's not a "defense-based" set. No set that allows 90% resistance to smashing and lethal, and a Dull Pain power, can legitimately be called "defense-based".

That said, Invulnerability does feel a bit anti-thematic lately, and certainly relies on defense to a greater extent than it once did. If it doesn't get tweaked to have better resists and less +defense, I think that giving Invincibility a partial defense debuff resistance makes sense. I'd rather see the former.

[ QUOTE ]

So, the big question: will CoH enemies resist -def? If so, what happens when my Defenders with -def "bubble popper" powers suddenly find out they're only worth using in the Arena? I don't even like PvP! Worse, what happens when my Controllers with -defs find out they're not worth using at all?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's doubtful that this will immediately apply to villains. Changes to powers don't seem to automatically update on the villain side; note that Nemesis lieutenants still use the old version of Vengeance.

Even if they do, keep in mind that this would currently only apply to villains with Ice, Stone, or SR powers, not ones that use bubbles and such.

Finally, keep in mind that, unless I missed something, -defense (and -accuracy) debuffs were not recently disempowered the way that +defense powers were. They are thus now more powerful, compared to abilities that they run counter to, than they were before I5.

[ QUOTE ]
If, however, you decide to do it Statesman's way, as a fixed resistance, things get ugly. Even at the piddly 17% defense levels of a low level SR scrapper, that still equates to 34% "pseudo resistance" to defense debuffs - in terms of avoiding them (from minions). But the very first debuff that lands blow the protection clean away. The teeny tiny resistances that the devs are adding do not in any way change that.

The top end - ~30% resistances - does feel like it would balance out the high end somewhat, although defense would still be much more brittle than resistance. I'd have to look at what happens when debuff resistance is lower, but constant, to see if its really as effective as it ought to be.


[/ QUOTE ]

The top end isn't 30% resistance to debuffs (and that still badly needs a new name), it's 97.6% resistance. All of these powers stack, and apply their resistance to any incoming debuffs, regardless of source.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know if this has been touched on, but....

...with the new sonic powers debuffing damage resistance, not defense, will damage resistance be getting the same treatment? Or will it be ignored because it's perceived as being superior to defense?


[/ QUOTE ]

Resistance debuffs dont directly subtract from resistance the way that defense debuffs affect defense. They simply boost the damage suffered by a certain amount--e.g., a 30% damage resistance debuff means 30% more damage to anyone who suffers it.

Defense debuffs, by contrast, subtract linearly, and thus have a greater effect on characters that are hard to hit. -5% defense on a character getting hit 50% of the time is a 10% increase in damage--they're now getting hit 55% of the time. A character getting hit 5% of the time, who suffers -5% defense, now suffers double the damage that they were.

[ QUOTE ]
Well it is great you are addressing builds based on defense but what about the rest of us?

Ok well here is my problem. It referes to pvp. You reduced everyones defense and resistances and changes many powersetsin I5: what about my builds? I play controllers and defenders.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which defenses are you referring to, that your controllers and defenders had reduced? Defender/controller defense buffs don't apply to themselves. If you had Combat Jumping or Hover, your defense was reduced by all of 2%. If you had Hasten, you lost 5% of your defense, but nobody has any sympathy for complaints about that particular loss. Characters with no defensive powers are in the same position relative to debuffs that they were in before I5.

Characters with defensive sets take disproportionately more damage after the same debuff, which is why they need resistance to it. The debuffs are balanced correctly for characters without much +defense, but not for characters with a ton of it.

[ QUOTE ]
MisterNick,
[ QUOTE ]
Elude is gaining XP half as fast, because that character is not fighting half of the time

[/ QUOTE ]

As an SR scrapper, I must refute this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Already done for you, but thanks.

[ QUOTE ]
Don't know if anyone said this or not, but I figured it was worth asking:

If max defense can be achieved at lvl 20 now, why can't max resistance to defense debuff? Just wondering.

[/ QUOTE ]

Max defese, just from powers, generally can't be reached before 20. SR, e.g., has defense powers that aren't acheived until 30+. You're simply allowed to reach your defense cap at 20, and that only by stacking enormous amounts of defensive powers/inspirations.

Okay, I checked into Circeus's original posts. The original justification for comparing Ice to SR including Elude was that Ice needs 14 mobs nearby for full effectiveness, not because you "don't have to fight when Elude is down". This is a reasonable point; it'd be nice to see a side-by-side comparison of SR w/o Elude to Ice with, say, five or six mobs, but barring that I can concede the point.

It's possible that my numbers are wrong; I only very rarely use Elude, and may be working from outdated info myself. If it's 180 seconds with 1000 seconds of recharge, it's actually only down for about 50 seconds with +3 SOs. This is actually making me consider taking it, however . . .

I solo AVs myself, with my SR scrapper--without using Elude. It's not necessary, and not really helpful. Two purples now gives me the same effect, without the crash, and a tray full of them lasts more than long enough. I'd respec out of it, but I don't feel the change is sufficient to use a respec.

Ice needs help. SR needs help. I've been letting myself get sidetracked down an argument that doesn't have a point here, and in which I had my numbers wrong to begin with. I apologize for that. I certainly didn't need to be arguing with SR proponents, defense detractors and the pro-Ice crowd.

[ QUOTE ]

Given that there's been at least one SR scrapper who posted demos of his perma-Elude SR soloing AVs, I do think that for the most part, the hit points don't matter. You simply need enough defense to insure that the hits don't come so close together that they hit you. This is known on the scrapper forum, but vehemently denied in any comparison of Ice and SR. And why? That's really what I want to know.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, perhaps this is the problem. You may be out of date on your information. Elude can no longer be made perma.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Beyond that, it is extremely unfair to compare SR's performance with Elude to Ice's general performance. Elude is a two-minute click with a crash that flatlines your endurance for one minute afterward, and has, at best, a two-minute down time--okay, 109 seconds if it's six-slotted with +3 recharge and you have Hasten and Quickness. It's only up half the time, and for half of the time that it's up you can't regain endurance. An SR that used it all the time would only move through missions half as fast. Elude should be taken into account in balancing the two, but the indication we should take from it is that Hibernation should be fixed, not that SRs make equivalent tankers.

[/ QUOTE ]

"It's extremely unfair to compare Ice's performance with SR using Elude, because that shows that SR is as good as - and in some circumstances, better than - Ice."


[/ QUOTE ]

No.

It is unfair to compare Ice's performance under normal circumstances to SR's performance under Elude because Elude is only up half of the time, and it flatlines your Endurance when it ends.

If you want to use Elude vs Ice's general performance, you have to account for the fact that an SR scrapper only fighting under Elude is gaining XP half as fast, because that character is not fighting half of the time--at best. You have to account for the fact that the SR's scrapper's endurance is zero for one minute out of four. You have to account for the fact that SR can do nothing under the effects of the Endurance crash except run away, and that slowly.

Yes, an Ice tanker who fights one minute out of two is probably the equivalent of an SR scrapper with Elude up as often as possible, provided that he also turns off all of his toggles and stops using clicks for one minute out of four.

You have to read the post, and address the points. I'm sorry that you don't like that. Ice is in a bad way, and you don't need to exaggerate that point by suggesting it's even worse for its AT than SR is.

[ QUOTE ]
Just wanted to start with: I actually enjoyed your post. It made me chuckle how you threw my jokes back at me. Awesome!

[/ QUOTE ]

Heh. Well, glad I could help.

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
No, you have virtually every hero capable of reducing their defenses, not to mention villains. Every Broadsword or Katana scrapper, every Assault Rifle blaster, every Radiation/* or */Radiation defender, etc.


[/ QUOTE ]

Hyperbole much? In terms of powersets: 2 out of 6 scrappers, 1 out of 6 defenders, 1 out of 6 controllers, and 1 out of 5 blasters. We missing anything?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, tons. To be fair, I'm wrapping ToHit buffs with Defense debuffs, which I either need to stop doing or need to stop riding other people for doing. However, almost every hero does have a defense debuff or a ToHit buff, either of which will wash out defense in the same way.

Scrappers nearly all have Build up, although you could say that Claws doesn't show this effect due to having to hit with Follow Up before breaking defense, and Invulnerability also boosts ToHit; Blasters all have Build Up, Aim, or Targeting Drone, if not two of those; Tankers have Invulnerability's ToHit buff, and generally have access to Build Up; Defenders tend either to debuff defense (Rad/*, */Rad, Storm) or apply ToHit buffs, and most have access to Aim; Controllers have defense debuffs in their primaries, Defender debuffs or buffs in their secondaries, and pet class creatures have very high accuracy to begin with. Anyone not previously listed can take Tactics.

[ QUOTE ]
I guess I missed out on the "virtually every" chapter in "making a point" school.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here, "virtually every" is the point. Nearly a third of the powers in the game directly affect defense.

[ QUOTE ]

(Love that!)

[/ QUOTE ]

Ffft. You're supposed to let me goad you into incoherency, so t's less work to take apart your argument.

[ QUOTE ]
Well, I suppose I should mention that most scrappers and tankers have a single power that negates most or all Controller abilities... Without slotting!

[/ QUOTE ]

True enough, and that perhaps should be looked at. However, PvP is not the real issue with this change; this primarily effects PvE. Remember that Defender debuffs are non-resistable.

[ QUOTE ]
So 3/4 scrappers and all tankers negate Controllers pretty well. Am I saying they should lose this ability? Not really.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know that they should lose it, but cranking its effectiveness back in PvP might not be a bad idea. A power designed to stop a horde of mezzing minions is probably overpowered aganist a single controller. Again, though, that's another discussion.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm just saying that every rock has its paper. Debuffs are the paper to the defensive rocks out there.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem comes when Defense is paper-thin, and everyone has scissors.

[ QUOTE ]
If the debuffs are really a problem for the game, just get rid of them! It's just confusing and pointless to have debuffs that don't actually debuff in an intuitive fasion.

[/ QUOTE ]

The debuffs will still work, they just won't have a disproportionate effect on defense-based builds. They'll have full effect on everyone else, and they'll be useful against Ice or Stone. SR probably needs to have its debuff resistance tweaked, which I've mentioned.

[ QUOTE ]
What I'd rather see, what it really should have been, is a multiplicative debuff rather than additive.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know if it should have been that or not. Most heroes/villains don't have any +defense, so against them proportional -defense would be useless.

[ QUOTE ]
For every offense, there should be a defense. And for every defense, there should be a counter.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a counter to everything, and there still will be. First of all, this effect isn't currently applied against ToHit buffs, which still entirely dominate defensive sets. Second, this won't (or shouldn't) apply to Defender debuffs in PvP. Third, none of these sets, not even SR, is being given 100% resistance to defense debuffs, although SR is close and probably should be toned down in that area. Finally, defense is and will always be subject to a 5% minimum chance to hit and the streak-breaker code.

Defense has plenty of weaknesses. It has too many, and reducing one of those weaknesses only begins to bring it in line, it doesn't make defensive sets overpowered.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

<snip more irrelevance about PvP and ToHit buffs>

[/ QUOTE ]

So, what are you going to be doing when CoV comes out, PvP zones come into existence, SGs get bases and items of power and raids come into CoH?

[/ QUOTE ]

PvP isn't irrelevant to the discussion of SR, it's just not terribly relevant to the discussion about this particular boost. Everyone, including the devs, have acknowledged that this doesn't address all of the issues, specifically including ToHit buffs. ToHit is the real problem in PvP.

This is a PvE fix. We're waiting on the PvP fix, but we're not discussing it in this particular thread.

[ QUOTE ]

You have a few heroes whose big thing is "I cannot be hit". That's fine, that's cool. These heroes also happen to be really tough even without their defenses -- more hitpoints and damage than most, anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

They're not, actually, really tough without their defenses. That's why they have them. If they were, tankers and scrappers would run around with their toggles off all the time.

[ QUOTE ]
In PvP, these guys are untouchable. Pop 3 yellows, it doesn't matter. Still can't hit them. Okay, quite a challenge.

[/ QUOTE ]

Accuracy inspirations don't apply directly against defenses. If you have no accuracy, boosting your no accuracy by 25% of zero isn't ever going to help you. Inspiration use is not the issue here.

[ QUOTE ]
But then there are a few other heroes who can reduce their defenses. These are generally the weaker heroes to begin with, but they can help to even the odds a bit.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, you have virtually every hero capable of reducing their defenses, not to mention villains. Every Broadsword or Katana scrapper, every Assault Rifle blaster, every Radiation/* or */Radiation defender, etc.

However, do note that Defender debuffs are non-resistable in the arena, which seems to be all that you care about.

None of this touches on ToHit buffs, though, which entirely trivialize defense. If you're somehow having trouble hitting defense builds in the arena, try Tactics.

[ QUOTE ]
So now, those whose best contribution is to minimize the untouchableness of those who are already tougher and deadlier, are now incapable of doing that?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope, but they're apparently incapable of reading.

[ QUOTE ]

The U.S.S. Big Picture has just set sail for distant shores.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's moving along just fine, it's just that folks keep trying to drive the dinghy of Tunnel Vision in front of it, and complaining when it doesn't stop.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Level 45 SR scrapper here, thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Level 50 SR scrapper here, thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

The point being that I have played SR as well, to very high levels. We both know what we're talking about, so appealing to your experience isn't getting you anywhere.


[ QUOTE ]
SR does have a weakness. No self heal. No real resistances to damage. Yes it's high and no, you don't have total immunity, you have the token 5% weakness in there. But if you're hit you're hit hard and can't really recover as quickly as any other defensive set in the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

SR has many weaknesses, and a few strengths, but SR's defense itself does need to have a weakness, else it's actually better than equivalent damage resistance or regen. SR doesn't need 97.6% resistance to the things that can overcome it. Even if it does, it's a poor point to start testing from.

[ QUOTE ]

You mean like SR's defensive values? Which started obscenely low...got boosted over 4 issues....then when I5 hit reverted again?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, SR's defenses got reduced in I5. Just like everyone. Get over it.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It has little else, granted, but it does have a speed buff, recharge buff and slow debuff resistance, all in Quickness. It has extra endurance recovery in Elude. It resists confusion and perception debuffs. It has, bar none, the best self status protection in the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Speed buff doesn't help against incoming damage. Recharge buff is significantly lower then hasten, which has always been odd as Primary > Secondary > Pool does not seem to be applied there. And the slow debuff resistance in Quickness is a joke. Practically non existant and non enhanceable

[/ QUOTE ]

So, in other words, it has other things. Whether or not those things are enough, and whether or not you have an answer to our having the best status protection, it's not reasonable to say that it has nothing else, which is exactly what you said. You can pooh-pooh our Slow debuff resistance all that you want, but it's there, as are all of the other effects that you seem to want to trivialize.


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
SR is not a tanker set but considering that SR scrappers a) don't have the hit points of tankers or a fair number of other scrappers... b) lack any form of self heal and c) lack resistance SR's resistance to def debuffs needs to be a lot higher than any other sets if it's to stand a chance out there in the big wide world and be comparable to all its fellows.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's the thing: even 100+% defense debuff resistance isn't enough, by itself, to make SR the equal of Regen or Invulnerability. Obviously, something else has to give. Given that, 75% debuff resistance may be more than enough in a scrapper set. It may give you enough time to start killing before the debuffs drop you all the way into the red.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well no, it isn't enough but it's a start. It's, in a sense the Devs say 'yes, you need help. We'll start small'. That's the important thing for most of the SRs on these boards...we've finally seen some progress. Not great but better then being told 'we're being looked at' with no hints about anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

97.6% debuff resistance is a start. 75% debuff resistance is also a start, and it allows Ice tankers to outdo us here. This early on, total immunity is not the best place to be testing from.

These things are not final. Suggesting we don't need all that much debuff resistance is not the same thing as saying we're fine. We don't need to jealously guard anything we might be given, especially if that thing by itself is not enough.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Scrappers kill things; that's their job.

[/ QUOTE ]

Scrappers also act as the poor man's tank and as the secondary tank in any team.

[/ QUOTE ]

Secondary. As in, not as good as the primary tank, which would be an actual tank. Our defense values are already higher than an Ice tank's, which is fine because they have Hoarfrost and some minor--not negligible, but minor--resistances. Our debuff resistance does not also need to be higher than theirs.

[ QUOTE ]
we need to be able to survive the things that hit hardest...not to the degree of a tanker...that's why tankers have more hit points, higher values and a 5-man autohit taunt and scrappers has a 1 man confront.

[/ QUOTE ]

They have higher values in all of their resistance effects, yes. This is a resistance effect, even if the name gets changed. Ergo, they should have higher values in it.

<snip more irrelevance about PvP and ToHit buffs>

[ QUOTE ]
Why all the complicated code within code within code?

[/ QUOTE ]

You just complained about code complication, and then suggested that the fundamentally change the way that the entire game works. I don't think you have a sense of the scale of your proposal. Adding a new system is always going to be easier than completely overhauling the entire combat system, which is what you suggest. Changing the effect of defense buffs also requires a rebalancing of nearly every set in the game in light of the new paradigm.

Your suggestion might work for CoH2, if and when it arrives, but for better or worse CoH works like it does, and they can't change the way that defense works any more than they can eliminate gravity from the game--the force, not the power set.

Actually, that might be easier than changing how defense works.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2. Reduce SRs debuff counteraction (resistance). SR isn't a tank set, and based on the defensive principles applied elsewhere, it should only achieve 83% of the other sets' maximum debuff resistance (scrapper resistance cap 75%/tanker resistance cap 90%).


4. Fiddle with the numbers to achieve about 75% resistance to debuffs in SR and Stone (not considering Elude and Granite), and about 90% in Ice. I don't know that those are necessarily high enough, but it's a better starting point, IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry, but having endured SR for a fairly hefty time I have to disagree with you there MisterNick.

[/ QUOTE ]

Level 45 SR scrapper here, thanks. I don't need this debuff resistance to get by, but it will help to get me closer to "on par" with the other sets. By that token, any resistance to defense debuffs is going to help a lot. I don't need total immunity to them; that's silly, every set should have a weakness. 75%, as I just said above, may not be high enough, but it's better to start low and test it higher than start high and have to reduce it. Actually, I suppose that they've already started high, but it's better to reduce it early and bring it back up than to be forced to reduce it later.


[ QUOTE ]
SR's debuff resistance is that damn high because it has NOTHING else. No self heal, no damage debuff aura, no resistance...nothing but pure defense.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, that's not actually true. It has little else, granted, but it does have a speed buff, recharge buff and slow debuff resistance, all in Quickness. It has extra endurance recovery in Elude. It resists confusion and perception debuffs. It has, bar none, the best self status protection in the game.

[ QUOTE ]
SR is not a tanker set but considering that SR scrappers a) don't have the hit points of tankers or a fair number of other scrappers... b) lack any form of self heal and c) lack resistance SR's resistance to def debuffs needs to be a lot higher than any other sets if it's to stand a chance out there in the big wide world and be comparable to all its fellows.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's the thing: even 100+% defense debuff resistance isn't enough, by itself, to make SR the equal of Regen or Invulnerability. Obviously, something else has to give. Given that, 75% debuff resistance may be more than enough in a scrapper set. It may give you enough time to start killing before the debuffs drop you all the way into the red.

Scrappers kill things; that's their job. They avoid damage just enough to kill things. Tankers, on the other hand, need to be able to soak up hits. A few debuffs can be allowed to stack on a scrapper in the course of doing his or her job. A tank, at least who is primarily about defense, needs to have near total immunity to defense debuffs in order to keep taking hits.

[ QUOTE ]
Statesman...I salute you. In PvE SRs are now one step closer to being comparable to their fellow scrappers in survivability.

In PvP however...they're still a joke.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just gotta twist the knife there, eh? How many times does the man have to say that they're still looking at things like ToHit buffs?

After mulling this over for a while, these are my suggestions:

1. Call it something else. Having a game with both "resistance" and "debuff resistance" is begging for confused newbies. This applies to things like Quickness or Speed Boosts debuff resistance as well. I suggest that you say these powers counteract the appropriate debuffs.

2. Reduce SRs debuff counteraction (resistance). SR isn't a tank set, and based on the defensive principles applied elsewhere, it should only achieve 83% of the other sets' maximum debuff resistance (scrapper resistance cap 75%/tanker resistance cap 90%).

3. Buff Ice's counteraction/resistance relative to the other sets'. Ice is a tanker set primarily about defense. It should outdo, in this arena, both a scrapper set and a tanker set not primarily about defense. SR can exceed that temporarily with Elude, which is fine. Ice, by the same token, should have something of this sort applied to Hibernate; perhaps Hibernate should end any defense debuffs currently applied to the character?

4. Fiddle with the numbers to achieve about 75% resistance to debuffs in SR and Stone (not considering Elude and Granite), and about 90% in Ice. I don't know that those are necessarily high enough, but it's a better starting point, IMO.