Rylas

Well, I like the sound of it, yes. But there are a couple of issues with this.

1. I still have to wait through an animation that takes quite a long time. Then have to miss, before getting a chance to hit again very fast. This doesn't exactly recover the "fast-paced" feel considering you're still waiting through one long animation from the beginning, then getting consolation prizes when it misses.

2. If you're slotted for a lot of accuracy, you won't see this option that often.

I'd be happier with shorter animations. BUT, I'd be willing to entertain the idea of a mechanic that allows you to get shorter animations under certain conditions. Something like Momentum, but it doesn't have to be exactly the same.

I agree. Taking away is bad. And since the feel of the set was taken away long ago, I'd like to see it added back. Even if it's only in small doses. I don't expect big hitting powers to have super short animations, but if we can give it that more active and fast-paced feel, that to me sounds like a good thing. The set used to be a little more "buzz saw" and a lot less "stop and wait".

I hope to convince the devs that some limited restoration might be in order, so long as it's balanced.

Yeah, I was wondering why a defensive toggle dropped.

I think I agreed that people will be upset no matter what. I even said I'll probably not be thrilled with every change. So as someone who's willing to take the bad with the good, I'm still going to ask for shorter animation times. EM was a fast moving set before, and that's what I liked about it. I'm only trying to bring it back to that. Not making it overpowered or anything like that. Just trying to restore a feel that the set had for a long time.

Hopefully you didn't take my use of the word "gimmick" the wrong way. I'm completely fine with the set having one. I only hope it doesn't require the set to still feel slow.

You might have taken me too literal just then. I was only being jovial in my welcoming. I don't assume any one person speaks for any one group. In fact, I don't trust the forums to be a good source for data mining player base statistics.

In case you haven't picked up on this yet, I played the set for fun. I shelved my toon when the nerfs came around not because of damage, but because of animation times that felt way too long. For goodness' sake, I made a Dark/Ice tank once just for the fun of ridiculous crowd control (not that I expected you to know that). So, if you think I'm rooting for a broken set, don't worry.

Well, I think no matter what, people will bemoan any change. Ever. And I doubt I'll love every change that might come down the line for EM. But I'm willing to have a good open discussion. And if you're suggesting adding a gimmick to the set, I think cottage rules go out the window. So changing animations that some people might like now is totally on the table. Besides, some people liked the old animation.

Good! The whole gang is here! Let's dive into this mess!

By the way, BruteSquad, I know I'll end up making suggestions you won't like, so no hard feelings.

Then in that case, wholesale changes and tweaks to Whirling Hands could be made.

I guess if a new mechanic was introduced that would be ok, I don't want to be the equivalent of an old man yelling at kids to get off his lawn and scared of the internet. But I'd prefer to see animation times reduced either way. Then again, if we're talking about bonus damage to powers from a buff mechanic, then you could reduce the animation for ET and TF and bring down the damage. Then regain that damage back with enough build up.

Still, that might step on some KM toes with it's Power Siphon mechanic.

I see. Well if we're talking about a group that we're not sure exists and putting value on that, then no suggestions made in this thread could be listened to. I don't know if that's a fair way to look at things.

I'll give you Gravity, as it's a set. The other two were things that affected more than just a set and span much wider things to consider.

And as I know very little about Gravity, I'm afraid you have me at a disadvantage. What new mechanic did it gain? (not that I don't believe you)

But what if the reason is "I want to improve damage in an area this set greatly under-performs?"

MAGIC!

Err... plenty of people have complained about animation time. They're present in the forums.

Plenty of people complain about dead targets. How much damage do you do to a dead target? None. So people who have complained about damage are present on the forums too.

I think adjustments to damage and animation times to address the feel of the set while keeping it balanced is a completely legitimate approach.

And that means you can't safely assume animation times were the best option either. But we can see that it hasn't gone well for the players who feel frustrated with animation times.

Now, don't take me wrong, I'm really trying to work with you on this. But making suggestions that require adding completely new mechanics to the set are less likely an option than straight up tweaking numbers. Maybe my suggestion isn't so far from viable.

The remark I made wasn't about EM being the only set with slow animations. I was saying we've got 1 [i]energy[i] damage set with some long animation times already in KM. Let's not have 2*.

*I know there's Electric Melee, but it that set has a lot more AoE potential. It already has a different play style because of that.

I hope I didn't give you the impression that I didn't think it was broken. I think I stated as much early in this thread that I understood the need for balance. I also don't want it to be reverted back to what it was.

I'm only speaking about the feel of the set and the way it plays in style compared to what it was. Long animation times have a way of really changing style up quite a bit. In ways different to damage reduction.

Hell, I'd be happy with just a middle ground compromise. Shorten the animation times a little and reduce the damage a little. It doesn't have to be the same animation times as before. EM can keep the DPA it has now in ST damage, but those animation times in your big hitters makes them very undesirable. Especially when your target keeps dying.

Side bar: I get what you're saying about minion health and HP adjustments for large teams, but I find that solution to be less likely to happen.

Well, I've been shelving my Ice/EM tank since the nerfs, so I understand the sentiment. I stopped playing mine because it did change the experience, and not just because of damage. He just never played the same. One sentiment doesn't negate the other, but obviously there are plenty of people on both sides of the fence. Maybe a more compromised approach would be better.

And while Castle's reasons for changes were in good intentions, the massive amount of complaining for EM to get a boost could imply it wasn't that much less intrusive.

We've already got an Energy damage set with long animations (KM), let's not have two.

Or you could be taking on more than you should be. While I think Defensive is great, like any other set it has limits. A -res debuff has nothing to do with any of that.

I just want to point out that this isn't a logical line of reasoning. If I turn on Defensive, it's to survive. If the need to kill faster is required, then Defensive isn't enough to begin with.

For example, the video I posted shows my tank surviving. Period. He wasn't even attacking. Not even the aura was on. He did not need a team to kill them faster to do so.

Well, when I said it's not getting a quarter of the debuff, I was speaking in terms of balancing the set. That's why it was mentioned to begin with. Keep things in context, and you won't have to accuse me of something I'm not doing. And if it is a better trade, that still does not mean it replaces Granite. I'm saying what it pays in proportion to its boost is better. Not that it's survival is better, or on par, with Granite.

To put it another way, "Defensive approaches Granite-level survival while it doesn't approach Granite's penalties at the same rate of balance."

Side note: I'm not continuing this in hopes of changing your opinion about the balance of the adaptation. I'm addressing the issue that you're accusing me of something that's not true and hope to clear up the confusion there.

"Approaching" implies falling short of, it is not the same as "being". No doublespeak was used.

Ok. I don't notice the decrease in damage all that much on a tanker either. Does that help?

Second sentence is an opinion - one I obviously don't happen to share.

Now, if you're going to say that the penalty in damage in Defensive is similar in magnitude to the boost for Offensive, then that would mean the penalty in Offensive needs to be similar to the boost in survival Defensive has.

I don't particularly care to follow that line of reasoning, because that would require a bigger survival penalty for Offensive was in order. Instead, I think the penalty should compare to the boost inside the same adaptation. So Defensive gets a pretty big survival boost. -30% damage, without a -res to offset it, is a fair price.

And I'd say it's ok if you're at less damage than WP, because I think Defensive is capable of being more survivable than WP. I know you'll say that's opinion, but the side-by-side comparison video Arcana posted suggests otherwise. It's at least more useful than just saying something based off opinion alone.

[edit] Also, don't insinuate someone edited a post just to negate something you said. It only comes across as an attempt to slander.

Didn't I just say that it's not Granite 2.0??

My only desire is to make sure the set is balanced enough so that we don't see other adjustments after going live. The amount of survival given to Defensive mode is not offset enough while -Res is still present. I've run around in Defensive through plenty of mobs, and I'm hardly noticing any reduction in kill speed on my Brute. When I turn on Offensive, I notice a reduction in survival AND a damage increase. Defensive should reflect that better.

You seem to be under the impression that I'm nerf herding or something. But I'll stress that I suggested removing any -recharge penalties and I've also suggested making PA auto-hit.

[edit] Basically, the -res in Defensive is like turning around and adding -tohit debuffs for Offensive mode. You're negating the penalty. You're putting in something that is antithesis to its purpose. It makes no sense to be there. Better to balance it now than after plenty of people have noticed that Defensive mode is getting off easy.

Trust me, my wording isn't misleading. Certainly not misleading like "beaten mercilessly into a bloody pile of bio mass" is.

Defensive mode approaches Granite-like levels of survival and it's not even getting a quarter of the debuffs. You don't expect that to be balanced? A reduction of 30% damage is a lite price to pay. We don't even have to worry about a recharge reduction.

Worse survival than FA? That's subjective at best.

But it's true, if you want FA 2.0, look elsewhere. Same if you're looking for Granite 2.0. This set is about great adaptability, and it's a very good strength.

I like everything you're saying. But this one bit I feel is a bit two-sided. The slow hard hitting nature of the set was not the original nature of the set. So I don't think we have to avoid particular changes just because some people might like the animations that are not part of the original design.

And I'll agree, people will still complain, but faster animation time and lower damage would probably go a long way with making the set "feel" like its old self. Though I think ET should retain a higher DPA than similar powers due to the self damage.

And yes, some more AoE goodness sounds like a GREAT idea.

For what it's worth, Offensive mode still carries -Res in it and grants Toxic damage procs. I'd suggest test driving it on Beta and judge for yourself. Unless you play against a lot of AVs or GMs, I don't think you'll notice the reduction to the -regen.

Then perhaps you can define what you mean. Because it implies something not accurate to the build on Beta. Or did you actually play the build on Beta now?

Don't let someone's chip on their shoulder and ability to exaggerate greatly deter you from a good set.

Do tanks not have the -Res in Offensive mode? I hadn't noticed or bothered to double check that, but I thought they did.

In regards to the "nerfing" that was done, it's good to keep perspective on the issue. While terms like "significantly reduced" were used, Defensive mode for a Tanker with ten mobs around it can still cap S/L Res, and soft cap F/C/E/N. For a brute, that's 67.5% S/L and 35% on the defense numbers (that's with Tough, Weave, CJ). So while some might say the powers were gutted they were only cut down to very impressive numbers, as opposed to uber-insane numbers.

Also, the regen in Efficient was recently reduced slightly and its recovery was also improved slightly. The overall effect in game was a minor reduction in survival numbers but a noticeable increase in endurance use. And I expect the -Res will be removed from Defensive mode as it negates a lot of the damage debuff penalty.

Not having numbers isn't really flawed. Especially when you're just talking about the feel of a set (numbers are important, don't get me wrong). And EM lost a lot of it's feel. A lot more than it should have. I found your OP to be pretty humurous, so job well done.

Er mah gerd! They get cakes!?

I run on Protector, and if I see you running around, I'll toss some full health minions your way so you can have some fun with them!

Poor wording on my part, perhaps. So I'll rephrase; would you show off Inv's performance as an average or above average set by running against it's main weakness, Psionic damage?

Clearly, I wouldn't be just showing off the strengths alone if I bothered showing the Tank faceplant at the end after a minute and a half of being out of Defensive mode and without even using the T9 power.

Is average SO level performance considered to be nigh-unkillable? I guess we'll have to call it a difference of opinion then.

I guess it's all on how you define "beaten mercilessly into a bloody pile of bio mass." Because DNA is a huge, huge heal as it stands now. I don't need more than 3 targets to get a full bar. Then there's the +regen and +recovery it's capable of giving you. On a 45 second timer (if you slot for recharge).

If you're description of the nerf is anywhere near accurate, how much stronger could it have been?