NinjaMonkey

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

<ul type="square"> [*]Interested in RO?
Join our global channel: Repeat Offenders and ask a question or contact a Supergroup Leader[/list]
[/ QUOTE ]

I tried to join the channel month or so ago and it didn't work. Could the channel be full? Most likely it was user error but just in case I thought I'd mention it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope, not full. Still just shy of 1000 members and the channel max is much more than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like I said, user error.

[ QUOTE ]

<ul type="square"> [*]Interested in RO?
Join our global channel: Repeat Offenders and ask a question or contact a Supergroup Leader[/list]
[/ QUOTE ]

I tried to join the channel month or so ago and it didn't work. Could the channel be full? Most likely it was user error but just in case I thought I'd mention it.

[ QUOTE ]
My idea of survivability may seem extreme, but look at the numbers it actually represents.

38% (and that's 3 slotting combat jumping) defense to all but Psi and Toxic...not counting EA. so the only way to max out defense is with a GOOD application of EA.
39% resist versus Smash Lethal
Max resist to cold
15% resist to fire (this could be off, correct if wrong)
And Resist to toxic in hoarfrost.

That's my SUPER SURVIVABLE build.

So you may think I'm going to the EXTREME. But numerically, that's not that extreme. I4 invul was extreme.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I said before:

[ QUOTE ]
Numerically I can't argue that adding aid self and Tough will make your Ice/ tanker more survivable. But that's totally different from saying you NEED those pools to survive. A FF defender can take Leadership and Medicine to make their character more of a team protector but that doesn't mean that if they don't take those pools they aren't protecting the team. Likewise it doesn't mean they should feel like the devs screwed up or the game is messed up because they took all those pool powers and couldn't take their 38 nuke power as a result.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're build is extreme because it's adding two pools and at least 4 powers (IIRC) to what is already a very survivability primary set. You're going with around 13 powers to make a defensive or survivable build. To me that's extreme especially when you may only need 7 or 8.

It's fine if that's what you WANT to do but it's not required. It's also not the fault of the game (imo) that as a result you're left with few attacks and no room for taunt. Otherwise I don't see why the FF/ defender in my example couldn't make the same complaint. Shrug.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes I agree with dropping an attack. I can run Icicles, Jab, Boxing, Foot Stomp and KO Blow. But why not make it where I don't feel like I'm loosing survivability if I didn't have aid self or fighting.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because you have an extreme view of what survivability is and a game shouldn't be designed around extremes.

No offense but you've taken a theme or idea to the extreme and are upset because you feel you need to make a sacrifice to get all the toys you want. Concept or idea builds are fine but I don't see any difference between your idea of a max survival build and the person who wants a totally passive Empathy defender and they get upset because they are forced into tanking a level 1 blast.

Numerically I can't argue that adding aid self and Tough will make your Ice/ tanker more survivable. But that's totally different from saying you NEED those pools to survive. A FF defender can take Leadership and Medicine to make their character more of a team protector but that doesn't mean that if they don't take those pools they aren't protecting the team. Likewise it doesn't mean they should feel like the devs screwed up or the game is messed up because they took all those pool powers and couldn't take their 38 nuke power as a result.

[ QUOTE ]
My issue here is power choices. I'm currently playing ( or was) an Ice/SS tank. Figuring CE/Icicles/Footstomp would give me more than enough aggro control (and for everything but AV's it has). I was trying to build the toughest Ice tank possible to handle AV's etc.

To attain the highest defense/most survivalbe build I planned
All 9 primary powers
Fighting for 3
fitness for 3
medicine for 2
leaping for 2
Rage, Jab, Haymaker, KO Blow and footstomp.

Thats all 24 powers. Because I feel I have to take medicine AND fighting to maximize my character. Now I have to drop the medicine pool in order to take taunt.

So basically if I want the most survivable tank, I can't have the best aggro control....but if I want the best aggroing tank, I can't be the most survivable.......

[/ QUOTE ]

If the goal is most survivable then why not drop an attack like Haymaker? If survivability is your primary goal then sacrifices need to be made. Personally I'd rather watch paint dry but I've seen people who like playing Emp defenders with just one attack - in the end it's your money so do what you want.

I blame myself. During the RV I think I "accidently" killed a character that Cuppa was testing. I still feel dirty.

Hope the new assignment comes with a big fat raise!!

[ QUOTE ]
Burn is only useful in the right team with the right, very specific builds by you. Otherwise it actually destroys what you should do and the effect of that "great damage aura".

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't this like complaing about an AE immob power not really doing all that much until it's combined with something that benefits from the mob not scattering?

The idea that one power works better when combined with another power on a team means that you can be rewarded for teaming and for using just a bit of thinking. It seems to me that if you eliminate things like that you're making a game geared solely to the solo player and making this just a game of losely associated parts that don't add up to something greater. It's almost like switching the Empathy buffs to be for the caster only or maybe making Tar Patch only benefit the caster. Not to the same degree but both show examples of a power getting better with the team, especially when certain combinations are made.

I understand that lots of people like to solo and like to gear balance towards that solo play, I'm guilty of it myself. But it is kind of nice to see a power that benefits from working with a teammate.

[ QUOTE ]
now on the Test Server:

[ QUOTE ]

• The 5% Defense reduction in Scrapper and Brute versions of Unyielding has been reduced to a 3.75% Defense reduction. This value matches then unenhanced Defense gained from the Tough Hide passive power in the same power set. The Tanker version remains unchanged, as the values already match properly.


[/ QUOTE ]
i just thought it was interesting the oft speculated "UY debuff is conveniently close to the Tough Hide base buff" seems to be verified as "intended".

while this is certainly nice for Scrappers and Brutes, who paid a penalty that was harder to overcome, it also kindof implies there are no plans to get rid of the debuff in the near future.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's kind of sad really. In a post I5/I6 world a small change can make a big difference and I've always wanted that penalty removed. At the very least it really hurts when you're starting out and are stuck with it.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So where are the devs on this.

States in beta said he would be keeping a close eye on Dom's after all the Dom's are too weak calls.

Then they said in I7 they were still looking and here we are a month later and nothing said.

So where are the devs in all this, it seems like they really dont care much. Its like dom's dont have enough players to be worth spending time on.

[/ QUOTE ]

States plays a plant/psi Dom (I think), I don't know what level he is yet. Around the end of April, I started a Fire/Energy Dominator on Justice. I'm level 37 now.

Fun? You bet, and I've played all the AT's in both games at pretty much every level. Dominators are definitely my cup of tea.

States and I -still- keep a close eye on Dominators. Datamining supports SOME of the claims made on these boards, but refutes others. Personal experience with the AT also lends credibility to some of the complaints, while showing others are simply blown out of porportion.

I read a bunch of the posts in this thread, not all of them though (yet). A lot of users hit the nail on the head when stating that you can't think of Dominator as "CoV's Controller". We went through a lot of effort to make sure that the ATs played and felt different between the two games. Dominators give up a bit of control for some good direct damage attacks that Controllers would give their left mouse button for.

Then of course there is the Domination ability, which is the real Jekyl and Hyde of the AT. A mild-manner Dominator with a full Domination bar can, at his or her discretion, become an unstoppable machine of destruction and control. While it never lasts "long enough" (even I am disappointed at hearing the sound effect of it wearing off), I've had missions where I have gotten Domination off four times from mission-entry to having Mission Complete appear on the screen. Good times indeed.

We've got a nice tweak to the Domination ability coming down the pipe (it will crank up your Mez resistance while it is active), and are currently data-mining PvP to see what effect our last set of tweaks to the AT have had.

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm, I didn't want to post to anymore threads with the word suck in them but ... ummm ... wow. I think I should put a quote in my sig somewhere. This is a good quote:

[ QUOTE ]
Then of course there is the Domination ability, which is the real Jekyl and Hyde of the AT. A mild-manner Dominator with a full Domination bar can, at his or her discretion, become an unstoppable machine of destruction and control.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the feedback. Hope you have time for more in the future.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Count me in the minority I guess who likes Domination. I can control it. It boosts more than just holds. And it makes my character very strong for a pretty long time.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm aware of what Domination boosts. I'm also aware that it lasts for 00:01:30. I personally don't believe intermittent bursts of effectiveness seperated by long stretches of mediocrity make a balanced AT, but your mileage may very. This is all assuming, of course, that you can even build Domination in the first place. Dying at the wrong time in the wrong place can really cripple you, and don't even get me started on PvP.

What I am acutely aware of is that there are too many situations in which I am completely boned without it. Where I literally contribute nothing and can not function. Thankfully those scenarios should thin out now as I approach 18 where I can finally stack holds, but... For these first 17 levels it has been a total crutch.

[/ QUOTE ]

And I disagree that it's been a crutch early on or that there are long stretches of mediocrity. At least with my Dom an empty end bar doesn't mean I have to rest again all the time since I have the option of Domination. Dieing before Domination builds is just like Dieing with full Fury - it's still dead. Considering your early stages medicore because you can't stack holds is like the Stalker who can barely scrap early on because of no Placate until 12, low defenses, few attacks and slotting issues. Everyone has pain early on compared to what happens later. Whether or not you consider it too much pain is where the phrase YMMV comes into play.

It's so much of an half-empty half-full case it's not funny. You can look at what you can't do early on or when Domination isn't available. Or you can look at what you can do as you progress and what you can do with Domination. How happy you are with the non-Domination periods seems to relate directly to how cool and fun you think the Domination periods are (which of course is subjective from person to person). Likewise how much you enjoy MMs relates to how much fun you get out of the pets and what they do in relation to all the nonsense that goes into managing them. Shrug.

/Edit
As an example, I can recall vividly a mayhem mission with a buddy who has a MM where we got the pawn shop side mission. He told me to expect a wave of ambushes after we get the safe. Well, I had no idea how huge the ambush would be. I think at one time we had 4 groups (2 longbow and 2 security) all at once in the shop. There was no way we should have survived it but we did because I had Domination. That one situation would have killed almost any duo who wasn't "medicore". Domination allowed me to take our duo and make us perform like a team of 2.5 or even 3 players. Sure it took good work on both of our parts (you still need to be a good player) but having been in that situation many times before with almost every type of AT out there, I can safely say we should have died.

Here's the key to Domination for someone like me. To this day that one fight stands out after countless hours of mindless mobs. There are other such moments that also stay with me but I can attribute that one to Domination and I expect it to happen again. That's why I see Domination as half-full and see it as a fantastic inherent that doesn't cripple the AT but make it, just like Fury.

/Edit

Side note not directed to anyone. I'm done contributing to the post count of another post with "Dom" and "suck" in the title. I feel dirty I contributed as much as I did already. Looking for other posts instead.

[ QUOTE ]
That the AT is balanced around its inherent is, I think, a little ridiculous. The inherent should compliment the AT, not define it. The devs need to stop looking to Domination for a quick fix and a crutch and address the fundamental problems with the AT.

[/ QUOTE ]

It works for Brutes just fine. Scrappers too but not to such a large extent. Seems like most complaints about Controllers always end up with the damage they do because of ... yup, Containment.

Put it this way, Vigilance compliments the defender very well in his role of team player. It's also one of the most complained about inherents in the game. As far as Domination kicking in more near death, you might want to read some of what Blasters have said on the subject of inherents that require you almost die to work.

Count me in the minority I guess who likes Domination. I can control it. It boosts more than just holds. And it makes my character very strong for a pretty long time.

[ QUOTE ]
fury isnt really that great in PvP. Well let me revise that, Its great if someone stands there and lets you get your attack chain off cleanly every time. So therefore its not great in PvP.

[/ QUOTE ]

It also isn't great if you don't get a good share of aggro. No problem if you solo or team with maybe a Corrupter or Dom or Stalker, but if you team with a MM (which are popular) it's just a pain. The pets move you around and make the enemy mobs flip out and forget you. At least with a Corrupter or Dom or Stalker they will let you take the aggro and probably collect a good number of hits. With MMs you spend all your time just chasing it seems like.

And that doesn't even cover how everyone else likes to pause between fights to buff and what not which totally hoses Fury. A team of Brutes is usually good because they understand what it takes to keep Fury going but otherwise Fury gets pretty hard to keep going after you just add a single teammate.

[ QUOTE ]
Actually I really like the brute/tanker comparison because it has exactly the same problem as the controller/dom comparison. On paper the brute looks like a joke, it has fewer hit points, lower defense and lower base damage. But it also has fury. Because of thier inherent power they are far from a joke, and actually play much more like scrappers than tanks.

Doms have the same issue in that they are kinda of like controllers but have domination. With domination we aren't like any other AT, there is no real comparison so most people ignore domination and compare us to controllers, that's essentially ignoring SMASH and comparing brutes to tanks.

Domination is an incredible power and can be up alot, easily 2 or 3 times in even a short mission if you push it, and more in longer missions. Having marginally less control than controllers 3/4s of the time is a small trade off for having vastly better control the other quarter of the time. At least to me, if it bothers you that much play another class.

[/ QUOTE ]

I also like the Fury / Domination comparison. Rarely do Brutes talk about how they have issues and leave out Fury. It just goes without saying that Fury is what makes them and it's worth pretty much any price. Yet most Dom complaints try to downplay Domination's contribution or significance. There are times when I cannot rely on Fury or I'm hampered by it's nature just like there are times when Domination or the lack of it holds me back. I see a lot of similar things with the two but Fury gets a lot of leeway.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The same concept holds for every CoV 'version' of a CoH AT. Corruptors don't do quite as much damage as Blasters

[/ QUOTE ]

Except Corruptors are the analogy of Defenders, rather than Blasters, and Corruptors do MORE damage than Defenders.

[ QUOTE ]
Brutes are a little squishier than Tanks, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except, again, Brutes are the analogy to Scrappers, not Tankers, and Brutes are more RESILIENT than Scrappers, while actually being able to outdamage them over the course of a mission if they keep a fast pace, too.

So those are really bad examples, to be honest.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually you're both right.

If you go by shared powers then Defender / Corrupter and Scrapper / Brute are most similar. But don't forget what the boards were like back when CoV was first released. People were screaming how Brutes were or were not Tanks for one. Why? Because they were the closest thing to tank in CoV terms. Same goes for Corrupters who are the closest thing to a blaster in CoV.

If you think in terms of a role or function then Brute / Tanker and Corrupter / Blaster are similar. Want someone to take the alpha? Brute is the strongest. Want someone to dish out lots of damage to a mob? Corrupter is your guy.

Gradually people learned (or still are) that the way the game was played for over a year doesn't really fit so well in CoV. A MM can tank if you want (getting him to do it is another story). A Corrupter can be your Defender type too if you want (also getting him to do so is another story).

I think you're both right really. It's what caused some much friction when CoV came out. It still rubs people the wrong way today.

[ QUOTE ]
Do dominators suck?
Are they fun?
Why do people say they arent good?

[/ QUOTE ]

Answering your question with my own.

Personally I don't find MMs that much fun. Does that mean they suck? If not then why do people say they are so great?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

If you've ever played defenders or scanned the boards for a while you've see the all-rad and all-kin groups running around who have been doing stuff like this for a while now. I don't see why it's a surprise now. If multiple controllers can hold Hammi I'm not sure why people think the devs will shut down this double domination thing.



[/ QUOTE ]

Becaue it isn't working as intended. A power that has a 4 minute recharge AND requires people to attack stuff 50 times (minimum) isn't meant to be perma'ed. That's pretty obvious, right?

We can argue about whether we SHOULD feel like Brutes, kept on our Domination high by solid applications of Corruptor buffs (it's comparable) or not, but I'm pretty sure Domination isn't MEANT to work like that.

So I'm sure it'll get fixed.


[/ QUOTE ]

In the end I think it depends on how you view the devs.


<ul type="square">[*]If you think they're morons or mean or anti-fun then a person probably thinks it will be shut down. [*]If you think they're reasonable then the first thing they will probably say is "how is this affecting the game"?[/list]
I just don't see it as any more or less game breaking as what a group of /rad or /kin can do to the game.

In essence I think they "allow" the all-rad or a-kin groups to do sick things because it doesn't happen all that often. I've seen demos where AVs are destroyed in something like 15-20s by such groups, and I'm sure the devs didn't plan it that way, but they let it go because it's not like every other group is built this way.

If tons of people starting doing this, and if it results in normal hard parts of the game becoming insanely easy, then I expect they will look at it. Then again, I don't think the devs are evil morons.

I agree with what Peace_on_Earth is saying. There seems to be some really strange and biased opinions of this being thrown around.

People are looking at double Domination as what the single Dom is doing and forgetting the team support to get there. It's not that the Dom is overpowered it's that the team worked together.

What really floors me is how hypocritical some of the views on this appear to be. On the one hand no one has a problem with 3 /Rad corrupters flooring the to-hit of an AV but the idea of 3 corrupters teaming with a Dom is just overpowered and will need to be nerfed? All the stories on debuffing an AV to the floor involve somewhere around 2-4 Corrupters. This scenario involves nearly the same number of Corrupters with a Dom added.

But suddenly it's too hard to find these Corrupters for some reason? Or it's too much to expect to get these Corrupters to team with a Dom? Or these Corrupters are already too busy to be bothered? It seems like when the Corr v Dom debate goes on it's a slam dunk 100% guarantee that you will find any corrupter you want and as many as you want. But now that a Dom has a way to reach double Domination with Corrupter help, it's nearly impossible to find them? Someone in the name of Statesman explain that logic to me.

I'm not sure I see a big difference between this any plenty of other sick combinations that are possible in the game. Multiple Rad debuffers can floor to-hit. Multiple Kin buffs can raise a brute to insane damage levels. Combine multiple Kin buffs, with a simple Dom immob, and a Brute with Burn and you have really sick damage that recharges really fast and ends up even higher if you add another Fire Brute.

If you've ever played defenders or scanned the boards for a while you've see the all-rad and all-kin groups running around who have been doing stuff like this for a while now. I don't see why it's a surprise now. If multiple controllers can hold Hammi I'm not sure why people think the devs will shut down this double domination thing.

It just boggles my mind that tons of excuses have been made in the past for how easy it is to grab any power, set, or AT you want and build a strong team ... as long as it excluded the Dom. I've seen the argument made tons of times that a PuG will just grab from thin air all the pieces they need or want and ignore the Dom with LFT up as if to say you can easily get what you want (power, set, AT) whenever you want. But now that there's a combination that might work with Doms it seems like it's suddenly not that easy to grab anything you want all the time.

[ QUOTE ]
oh wahhh, its not like its a huge bug even if it is a bug. Again the only way I was able to make it happen was with 2 rad corrupters, hasten, and the temp power for the crey map "objects". I have a feeling you need a whole arnsenal of /rad or /kin to replicate that temporary power.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dunno ShrikeX. It seems like it's plenty easy to get 2 or 3 /Rad Corrupters whenever you want to take down an AV. At least that is the impression I get when reading the posts on how Corrupters are preferred. So I'm not so sure why it's a stretch to say that you need 2 or 3 /Kin Corrupters. Unless it's a one way street agrument that is based on being unfair but I don't think anyone would do that knowingly.

Thanks for posting the experience. Probably another case where I would have too busy to even notice my Dom button ready again had it been me.

Congrats on the success. Only request I have is to do it again with the ATs you didn't have the first time so we can cut down the level of doom noise on some forums. It's not like you have anything else to do right?

The details and screenshots were a nice touch - thanks again.

Neat guide, thanks for making it. I'm going to toggle this one.

Thanks for updating the guide. I found it recently and after testing an Ice build during the RV event I'm really thinking of rolling or re-rolling an Ice tanker.

It's sad that /ice is so lackluster in PvP. For the RV test I had ice/ice and it was pretty bad. I can see it being a great PvE build as long as you enjoy teaming with someone to do damage for you. But in pvp the /ice tricks seem resisted so often it's a terrible waste of powers that could be doing damage.

I already have a few SS builds so I'd like to avoid that. I have an EM Brute and Tank so I'd like to avoid that too. Yet I can't argue they are probably best if you want to PvP, which just adds to your game playing. It's a shame /ice isn't better.

If I break down and roll that Ice tanker I'll be back to check ths out again. Thanks again.

[ QUOTE ]
Hurricane's -ACC is even stronger. Its base is around 35%, enhanceable to around 58%. That'll floor an even-con minion.

[/ QUOTE ]

If true that puts it around 2.8 on the base scale. I've plugged these into a spreadsheet to remember it later. Very interesting.

I just can't get over the gap between RI and DN. I play both and never noticed such a gap in how they play, in fact, I always felt that DN was stronger. With Rad/ I usually take Choking Cloud to help add more defense because it seemed like I needed more (something I never felt with Dark/).

Very cool info. I like having the base numbers for debates on balance. Although even using numbers doesn't always help.

That's very odd that the base for RI is 30% and DN is nearly half at 18%. I thought they were roughly the same. I assume Corrupter values are 25% of those.

Well if correct the spreadsheet should come in handy for discussions.

I must be slow because I just found this now. I think I may prove I'm slow by asking a dumb question.

The sheet has the column for -tohit mod but isn't RI a -acc and DN a -tohit power? I've read that ACC and to-hit are separate pieces of the puzzle so I assumed that the powers worked differently. The sheet only has entries for +DEF and -tohit so either DN and RI do the same thing and the planner I'm looking at is wrong, or I'm not sure how to show the different modifiers using the sheet.

Side note - where are you getting 18% for DN? The planner I'm using shows 35%.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I read the guide a few pages in this thread but have a stupid question. Am I right in that this in no way affects the double ding that acc debuff and to-hit debuff powers get (as level increases your power loses it's effect and the critter to-hit increases)?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, this is the effect of the purple patch: your tohit drops when attacking higher level critters, which reduces the chance for a debuff to land in the first place (unless its autohit), and reduces the effectiveness of all your effects, including damage and debuff strength. These effects are completely unaffected.

Critters got 50% tohit and some accuracy - like accuracy enhancements - to compensate. This has the *side effect* of improving the scalability of defense. But no actual mechanical change was made: everything "works" as it did before.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to confirm, so the acc and to-hit debuffs are straight applications to the formula you've included in your guide? That is, assuming an even con / no purple patch side effects, a 50% to-hit combined with a 25% to-hit debuff is altered to a 37.5% to-hit and then used in the formula (same for acc debuff)? I'd like to take the work you did and make a quick spreadsheet for the values for minion/lt/boss/av and scale it with level (0, +1, +2) to show see how the values end up.