Plonk

[ QUOTE ]
One thing about kin is that can boost its damage more than any other defender, expecially when combined with sonic blast.

Its also the only AT that can keep hasten up pretty much perma after ED because of siphon speed.

The only reason kin should have much trouble with DA is because of opressive gloom and cloak of fear.

Anyway, I had an interesting conversation yesterday with a controller I was teamed with in warburg.

She were quite surprized how easy she could hold an invuln scrapper with both unyeilding and unstoppable running at the same time.

Key word there was "easy".

When I explained that the devs had dropped the scrapper mez protection, the response was:

"Wow, thats a pretty bad nerf. Its not like I had much trouble holding them before. Now its just too easy."

[/ QUOTE ]

What kind of Controller was it?

[ QUOTE ]
Hrm, well, admittedly, I haven't done any PvP recently, so if things have changed, I am mistaken. I have always been very wary of Illusion/Kinetics Controllers in PvP fights, for reasons mentioned before

As for the resistance to end-drain, I am quite positive Regen doesn't have any, but I would not complain *at all* if they added it somewhere in the course of I5/I6

Perhaps I posted to fast. The things I described were, to my knowledge how they were, but as I have not done *any* testing, and you seem to have, I might very well just be out-of-date here

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, okay. Well, I think I'd be justified in complaining that it does have it, actually. It's one of the few things Kinetics really has in PvP and it seems everyone and their grandmother now gets resistance to it (well, no not really but it's still frustrating). Transference doesn't even drain out those who have no drain resistance (seems to be around 1/3-1/2 a bar with 3 drain SOs on those with no resist). I wish they'd bump up the -recovery effect. In fact, I wish they'd boost the secondary effects of Kin in general.

I'll still test things out again this weekend if I can.

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, two applications should shut down a Regen's regeneration quite well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? I'll test it again I guess. I tested it on TS and I couldn't notice and effect, and neither could the Spines/Regen I tried it on. I apologise if I am in error!

[ QUOTE ]
Having teamed many times with Kineticist Defenders and Controllers, I know for a fact that they're able to almost shut down an AV's regeneration rate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, I should have been more clear. I do notice it if I spam it on an AV, although it doesn't seem to shut it down, as you say.

[ QUOTE ]
Regen has no resistance to end-drain. What they do have however is two +End powers that make them gain it back faster. In my own PvP experiences (and I must admit, I have some, but most certainly not as much as a lot of people out there) both Radiation & Kinetics are really harsh on my Regen (Controllers & Defenders, although Controllers are by far the more dangerous).

[/ QUOTE ]

Bizarre. I tried Transference out in PvP on several opponents, and both DA and Regen scrappers' endurance was substantially less drained than many other players (we're talking less than half of what occurred on some of the others).

[ QUOTE ]
Havent tested it yet, but I would say kin would be good against DA scrappers and Fire Tanks...

Low defense and no knockback or slow protection.

[/ QUOTE ]

Kin is abysmal against DA. I can barely end drain them with transference (I guess something in DA gives end drain resist). Siphon Speed's slow is easily mutable, with both SS and SJ overcoming it with ease. Rad's slow is more effective in this respect, on top of being more effective in neutralising DA in general. I don't even know a Kin who takes Repel due to how ineffectual it is both in toggle dropping and kb'ing.

Fire Tanks, I'm not sure. Works okayish against them, I guess, but not any moreso (really, works worse) than Rad or Storm.

[ QUOTE ]
Regen scrappers will be screwed against kin because of the - regen in transfusion. And thats all they get...

[/ QUOTE ]

-Regen in transfusion is negligible even to a non-regenner, as far as I can tell. The effect is so small that I have trouble distinguishing it in PvE, let alone PvP where it is purportedly even weaker. Additionally, Regen has resistance to end drain. Regen's nemesis is Radiation as it really can substantially reduce regen.

Hi, Arcana, I decided to PM you the response. I don't wish to derail the thread too much with the discussion

[ QUOTE ]
When base player accuracy was 75%, that was the base tohit of an Archvillain. The original question was, should all players appear to be archvillains to defense sets only.

In actual fact, the answer is yes, you are supposed to be minions for the purposes of accuracy. Having higher than 50% base tohit is, in a sense, walking around with an automatic tohit buff on constantly. Imagine if all attacks by players did 65% psi damage - all attacks. No one would care much until PvP, when suddenly, resistance sets would be screaming bloody murder.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this really a fair comparison? I'm not doing even close to AV damage, or much damage at all, in general. My pet can do damage, but, it is rare for me to be able to stand still long enough to let the pet do so. Phantasm is rather slow, and I'm overwhelmingly vulnerable when standing still due to having essentially no defense and, in Warburg, no resists.

[ QUOTE ]
Precisely the same thing is true for accuracy: when SR scrappers can only get 28% defense *maximum* (without elude), everyone having 75% base tohit didn't make any sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

75% might not; 50% I don't find to make much sense, either, at least on my Ill/Kin. 60-65% would have made more sense, I think.


[ QUOTE ]
My experience is different than yours in terms of how many people can hit through SR defenses. But lets start with miss rate. It gets a little tricky looking at what a "reasonable" miss rate is, because we are talking about two different situations: the original one with base tohit at 75%, and the new one with base tohit at 50%.

When base tohit was 75%, SR scrappers were looking to roughly equal the mitigation of the other scrapper sets. With ED and I6, the discussion gets very complex (complex enough that I haven't redone all my scrapper mitigation analyses yet: too much time in CoV honestly). But on broad strokes, invuln scrappers can still get smash/lethal resistances around 50%, plus (non-perma) dull pain, plus they can stack power pools. In the case of invuln, you can't simply dismiss power pools outright because tough is easier to get than weave, and stacks more strongly (higher relative value adjusted for defense/resistance stacking). But lets just start with 50% resists and periodic dull pain.

When dull pain is up, it adds effective mitigation of about 28% non-stacking to resistances: net invuln smash/lethal mitigation is about 63%.

For SR to get roughly to that level, with 75% base tohit, requires 47% defense. We have 28%. Granted, this does not take into account non-s/l damage, but contrawise it does not take into account dull pain's periodic self heal. Its not meant to prove anything, just meant to show at least in broad strokes where the numbers were.

At base tohit of 50%, SR defenses now offer 56% mitigation, which is in the same zip code as invuln's. It might be higher, it might be lower, when taking into account all other factors, but at least its in the same ballpark.


Now here's an interesting thing. When they reduced player base tohit, in effect they reduced *everyone's* base damage output from player to player. That's important for looking at just how "bad" missing 80% of the time really is. With no buffs, the average player is already going to miss the average player 50% of the time. How much real mitigation is a defense set offering if you are missing it 80% of the time? Basically, damage is reduced from 50% chance to hit, to 20% chance to hit. That's 60% mitigation ( (50-20)/50 ). Put it this way: out of ten swings, normally you'd hit five. Now, you'd hit two. Defense is protecting the target from 3 out of 5 hits: 60%.

In effect, at base 50% tohit, if you are only hitting one time in five, you are doing the exact same damage over time as if you were attacking someone with zero defense but 60% resistances. Again, this is rough numbers, designed to offer context. They can be argued around the margins, but now we are talking mitigation details, not the broad concept.

[/ QUOTE ]

This doesn't take into account the actual dynamics of PvP. Having to hit someone many times before actually getting a successful hit allows for healback (which happens rapidly with spectral wounds, for instance) as well as inability to constantly plug away at the SR long enough to do damage in significant quantity. I'm failing to see how this is a genuinely fair comparison, overall.

[ QUOTE ]
Defense doesn't kill anyone, offense does. If breakfrees are a legitimate response to holds, then there are also counters to the SR scrappers *primary*. No SR power does damage, no SR power boosts damage, no SR power improves accuracy, and no SR power mezzes, so (except for quickness) there is nothing in the SR set to "counter."

[/ QUOTE ]

You brought up holds as being something Controllers have in their favour. I mentioned that it is _easily_ mitigated by break frees, allowing the ice/energy blaster, for instance, to defeat me without much trouble.

SR itself isn't offensive, but, it of course does increase the SR Scrapper's offensive strength against me. Being unable to land hits means I am essentially defenseless as, at least in my experience in PvP, offense and defense are pretty entagled with eachother. With Kinetics, especially, it becomes even more of a problem since it is so reliant on landing hits, including for my heal. As a result, missing 4/5 times makes SR inordinately dangerous to me, with the exception of maybe DA in some cases. In essence, I can't damage quickly enough to be a threat, I can't detoggle, either (since all I have is brawl or multiple applications of transference for that; both of which miss routinely), and I can't protect myself (as MA, at least, cuts right through my defenses and I can't heal myself). These factors also contribute to why I'm having trouble understanding why your calculations for mitigation are particularly representative of real-world conditions in terms of mitigating threat. They may work against pure damage opponents such as blasters, but, they don't seem to represent well for opponents like many controller builds and, I imagine, Defender builds as well.

[ QUOTE ]
Meanwhile, as I said, my experience in Warburg isn't exactly the same as yours. There are in fact players in Warburg that can't kill me, because they simply don't possess sufficient tohit buffs. But then again, controller pets still possess pet accuracy, not the player base accuracy: I was feared by the spectral terror right through elude, and PB offers no fear protection. As a melee-only fighter, hurricane makes it all but impossible to defeat some controllers and defenders, unless they are literally asleep at the keyboard. 80% of my MA/SR's defeats were to blasters, including one that was very effective in hover sniping me while simultaneously spamming web grenade to prevent me from getting into the air to counter attack (I only lasted as long as I did by using overpasses as cover). Keep in mind, for me to be -flyed, web grenade has to hit.

[/ QUOTE ]

It sounds like, then, maybe toHit should be adjusted on a set-by-set basis. Having base 50% on Kinetics primary just seems ludicrously low to me considering that it has no defense or toHit buffs or debuffs in it to mitigate the problem. Maybe the change makes sense on some sets, but, I don't really agree that it's a sensible decision globally. As I noted above, it sounds like your calculations may be at least somewhat accurate against Blasters. They just don't seem to make much sense against something like me

[ QUOTE ]
We come back to the original question: picture in your mind defense working correctly, in your estimation. Now ask yourself what you would do to "counter" defense, when its working correctly in your estimation. Now, as honestly as you can, evaluate how effective your response would be. If it gives you a win more than 50% of the time, that's saying something.

Classic game-balance trick: cut and choose. Take your toon, and my toon (MA/SR). Now, here's the game: you decide how defense and tohit will work. Then I decide which one I will play, and you have to play the other one. Now, come up with a suggestion for defense and tohit you'd be happy with under those conditions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, as it currently stands, I would be more than happy to switch places with you in PvP, as I'd be surprised if I were to win even 25% of the time. What I think might help is giving Kinetics around a 60-65% toHit to offset the fact that it can't help itself in terms of accuracy. This would at least allow for me to heal myself and hopefully get some help from end drain. I can't do much damage compared to you, though, so I'd still be in a rather precarious state of affairs. For the Ill secondary, maybe having a higher accuracy for Deceive and Blind would help. I'm not asking for a constant win here. Some semblance of balance (such as 50% win/lose) is not only acceptable; it's what I'm hoping for. As it stands right now, winning even 50% of the time is pretty much a pipe dream currently, and I've done everything I can in terms of powers and slotting to try to improve that situation.

I apologise if I'm simply being an imbecile with respect to this subject. I'm trying to understand the game as best I can, but I can imagine I may make mistakes here and there. I really did go on TS, though, and try to test some of these things out with various scrappers earlier in the week, though, including MA/SR. It seems like there's a fine line between enough defense and too much for SR, and I'm not exactly sure where that line is since I haven't had the opportunity to test different levels of defense on their side and toHit on my side. Anyhow, when the MA/SR is hitting through my defenses at greater than 80% success (I actually tested them on and then off; didn't seem to make much of a difference) and I'm hitting him with nearly 80% failure rate, and each of his hits is generally far more deadly to me than my hits to him, there really seems to be a balance problem.

Thanks for replying, Arcana! I appreciate your help in discussing this

[ QUOTE ]
Defense sets are balanced against even level minions: i.e. villains with base 50% tohit. Reducing players to a similar level makes sense given that: I've been basically asking for precisely that change for quite a while.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't quite understand how it "makes sense"; are we all supposed to just be minions?

[ QUOTE ]
Whenever someone suggests that defense is "working too well" my standard question is, and no vague answers please: just how much can they be allowed to make you miss before its working "too good?"

[/ QUOTE ]

I find if I'm missing more than 80% of the time, especially considering how low my damage output is and the recycle times on pretty much all of my powers, that that is, at the very least, rather unenjoyable. Although, it does seem to be giving defense sets inordinate amounts of protection compared to others (such as resist sets). Also, the effect of 50% toHit seems to be one sided for me. Everyone and their mother can hit through SI + Hover + Maneuvers on me even with 3 slotted defense, yet, I miss even Blasters routinely. I don't know if it's just something on me is bugged, but, nearly perma-whiffing on defense sets and missing routinely on people who have no defense at all seems pretty screwy.

[ QUOTE ]
I ask because I'm generally amazed at the typical responses, when I get a response at all: in the past, people have generally suggested that missing much more than half the time was intolerable: certainly missing 3 times in 4 was horribly broken. Except thats a level of mitigation far under what all other scrapper sets can achieve.

[/ QUOTE ]

PvE is not the same as PvP. It would be a rare occurence to even have 10 players hitting you at once, whereas that could happen in PvE. Trying to justify hit mitigation based on conditions in PvE seems bizarre to me as the net result in PvP may be incongruosly high levels of survivability. In my experient in Warburg thus far, this does indeed appear to be the case.

[ QUOTE ]
Super reflexes can only get about 28% defense maximum, without resorting to elude or inspirations. If you are permanently missing against SR, its either because they popped lucks (in which case that's working as intended - anyone can do that to you), or they are running under elude (in which case that too is working as intended, if elude wasn't making you miss pretty much constantly without heavy tohit buffing, it would be totally worthless).

[/ QUOTE ]

I hit them occasionally, but, it's extremely difficult. To the point that I'm pretty much defenseless against them, and they plow right through my defenses like they aren't even there. Maybe insights should modify toHit, so that I can then actually hit through them. They're seem clearly not antithetical to lucks in their current state, at least based on my experience in this game.

[ QUOTE ]
Most people, if they miss three in a row and then are killed by an SR scrapper, conclude defense is overpowered. Its not: that's defense working correctly. When my blaster gets held, cannot fight back, and is killed by a controller, the conclusion is not that holds are too powerful, and need to be taken away. Or is it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Holds can be mitigated by Break Frees. Insights appear to modify percentage of final toHit (like an Acc enhancement) rather than the base. So while the blaster can essentially shrug off my holds and then pile drive me in seconds, I'm completely helpless against the SR scrapper. The other problem I find is that SR scrappers also enjoy inordinate levels (compared to other sets) of status protection as a result, as well as debuff protection (due to missing).

Maybe toHit should be addressed on a set-by-set or AT-by-AT basis. I don't know. Or, have insights work differently. It's not that I want defense sets to be useless in PvP. It's just that it doesn't seem particularly balanced as it is, especially considering that my toHit has already taken a dive from ED's effect on tactics.

[ QUOTE ]
We've reduced base To Hit from 75% to 50% for PvP purposes. This change was made to give Defense sets more effectiveness. With the ED changes, coupled with the prevalence of +To Hit buffs it was necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's nice that you're trying to help defense sets, but, I also think this is a bit overkill. I now have a totally binary relationship with Scrappers in PvP. I can hit resist sets with my Controller and I miss constantly against defense sets. I also miss constantly against defense sets in other ATs. This is despite having 3 slotted tactics PLUS 2 Acc SOs PLUS Insights. That, to me, does not seem balanced in the slightest. It means I literally cannot defend myself against defense-based foes since all I do is perma-whiff on them. I realise they need their defense to work, but, I find its simply working too well.

I tried killing roughly 200 non-summoned leut. Illusionists. I only seemed to make it around 1/5 the way or so into the badge.

You still can progress that way, but, the fastest way is milking a few MIs, I found.

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah and he used to be able to destroy an entire solar system with a sneeze and give women *ahem* with a kiss (no I'm not kidding on either of those).

Heck at one point he could bring the dead back to life.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL

Well, even conceptually speaking I think SJ makes more sense as SJ is arguably a function of his having Super Strength (as was the case with the original Superman).

It's just something to consider

Fly? Originally Superman was able to leap tall buildings in a single bound...e.g. Super Jump. I guess Fly came in later for marketing purposes, or something like that.

I just wanted to note that I for one am not a huge proponent of a cap increase as opposed to a base damage increase. Increasing that cap just makes /devices even weaker than it already is versus the other secondaries in terms of raw offensive power. I personally think every secondary should have a Build Up power, too, though perhaps the /dev one could come without accuracy boost or something of that sort to balance for TD.

I also do think the Blaster AT should deal more damage than the Scrapper AT. I think it's a bit bogus to argue that Scrappers take on more risk at the higher levels than Blasters do. Blasters already incur quite a bit of aggro, especially fire blasters, and they have no defences to speak of to help that out. On top of that, Blasters aren't really good for anything _but_ dealing damage - it's their specialised role. Scrappers don't face that dilemma or drawback, and it makes a lot more sense in terms of balance to give them weaker damage-dealing strength than Blasters and weaker defence than Tankers because, ultimately, they're still stronger on their own even then compared to either since they have stronger defence than Blasters and (optimally) stronger offence than Tankers. Giving them offence or defence on par with either of the other ATs introduces an unfair and imbalanced advantage for the Scrapper AT and introducing a claim like "greater risk" not only seems a bit spurious but, on top of that, doesn't take care of the problem that making Blasters less powerful is to take away the only thing that really makes the AT valuable vs. any of the others.

I mean, if you want to engineer the game so that Scrappers die as easily as Blasters do, go for it. Ergo, somehow design things in such a way that their combination of aggro-incurment and probability of being hit is roughly the same as Blasters, so that despite being in melee they incur similar fragility. I doubt anyone who plays a Scrapper is going to go for this, and it's because (most) people know that Scrappers are a great deal more resilient and enjoy greater longevity than Blasters, even despite being in melee, and especially when there is no defender to heal spam the Blaster. At this point, the Blaster AT is not only weaker than Scrappers, it's weaker than basically every other AT. The focus on the Scrapper AT is mainly because it is the one most clearly violating the specialised-role architecture (as it shouldn't have one, and shouldn't be given the competence in any area of one that does have one).