Sarrate

It's also important to note that a 30% dmg buff is not the same as just modifying their base damage. Namely:

*) Any source of +dmg amplifies higher base damage, but is additive with the Vigilance +30% buff. (ie: Aim, PBU, AM, Fulcrum Shift, etc)

*) It counts against the damage cap. If you're a Kin and ride the damage cap already, the new Vigilance does nothing. If it was a straight damage scale increase, it would've still been a boost.

*nod* That's fair, and your stance doesn't surprise me.

Oh, absolutely. It's specifically why I mentioned it was a cone. I think at lvl1 it one shots even con minions. It's crazy good.

True, but lasting until lvl20 at least gets you up to Stamina range, which makes a pretty nice difference. It's not a full set of SOs, but it helps. (Assuming someone grabs Stam immediately at 20.)

Even in the teens, SoM is an excellent tool. Accuracy goes down the crapper, sure, but the damage/cone continue to make it worthwhile. It's not available to new players, though. It really does taint my experience of the teens. (I actually have 3 vet powers now, but I'd pick SoM if I could only keep one.)

Thing with SOs is it gives lowbies too much firepower at low levels. Enemies simply aren't balanced around players having SO strength enhancements. Take a look at what Fury does to Brutes at those levels. To be fair, the teens have their own share of problems. First, many players start dealing less damage compared to what they used to, due to AT scales becoming more prominent. Mob hp also starts scaling up taking damage enhancement into account. Of course, players are still short on slots, and will most likely be dedicating many of those to accuracy in order to hit reliably (also since enhancers aren't at full strength yet).

I wonder if it would make more sense to lessen the difference between Acc TOs, DOs, and SOs. In other words, instead of the 8/16/33 progression we currently have, maybe have them progress 16/24/33 or something. Why acc in particular? Well, with less slots necessary to hit reliably, players would be more free to use the other slots on damage, without nearly as much inflation as just giving everyone SOs would have.

I'm not sure I'd ever advise that. At low levels, characters have a much smaller inventory space. Trying to save 3 of the same kind is much harder than at higher levels where they have more room to bank inspirations for rainy days. what I've found helps most is to save greens/purples/blues as long as I can while just burning reds/yellows. If I end up having a tray full of greens/purples/blues, I'll burn one. Having those buffs up help defeat mobs faster, which helps generate inspirations faster - it's a cycle. (This actually helps higher damage characters more than lower since it amplifies their damage output more significantly, increasing inspiration gain faster than lower damage ATs.)


-----


As an aside, there are many ways to handle resource management. Our current system is harsher at low levels, but by high levels is much easier to manage. (More slots, stronger enhancers, IOs, Stamina, more insp slots, etc.) It provides a very real sense of progression. After getting through the lower levels, things start to become easier to manage. Look back at low levels and you can see you're better. Not saying whether that's good or bad, just what we have.

Take a look at other mechanics out there:

For example, in Champions Online, all players get a power that builds endurance which they can then (fairly rapidly) deplete. (Blocking also generates end. The pro is the player knows that if they take a break from using end draining attacks, they'll have more to spend. On the negative, they're likely to always have to break and generate more end, even at higher levels. Unlike here, they can't "outgrow" their end builders. (Some builds might, but I've never really seen it.) Also, you don't start at full end, but somewhere between 25% and 75% or so (depending on build/equipment). So you may not be able to launch large alpha strikes.


So, here you may do this before getting end under control:
Attack, attack, attack, attack, attack, wait, attack, wait, attack, wait, attack

While at high levels:
Attack, attack, attack, attack, attack, attack, attack, attack, attack, attack

There (wait = auto attack):
Attack, wait, attack, attack, wait, attack, attack, wait, attack, attack, wait

Which is better / would you prefer?

I'm not sure I like the "Beginner's Luck for endurance" idea.

Firstly, the levels that it would be strongest (1-10) are the levels you probably need it the least. Every AT has nearly the same AT mods, so their damage is close together (aside from Brutes). At these levels, player accuracy is pretty good, as well.

The worst levels, in my opion, are 10-20, are where the potency of Beginner's Luck tapers off anyways. For this reason, I don't think it would help that much. Well, that and it would really amplify the feeling that you're getting weaker as you level up. It happens now with Beginner's Luck (A), but it would be magnified with a second BL for endurance.


You know what helps me most from lvl1-20? Sands of Mu. Heightened accuracy due to BL, simulated enhanced damage, and a cone. This allows it to simultaneously speed up killing, save endurance, and not lose as much health per fight (the enemies are dead faster, so they have less time to deal damage). I abuse the heck out of it at low levels.

It was more because of the plethora of secondary effects. Pretty much every attack has a:

*) toxic dot
*) recharge slow
*) movement slow
*) low mag immobilize

Not to mention other attacks have additional special properties on top of that (range for Impale/Throw Spines, guaranteed high mag immob for Implae).

Consider that most attacks only have one or two secondary effects. Some have more than that, but certainly not every attack in the set. (Not saying effects like low mag immobilizes are particularly useful, mind you. However, that's the gist from what I recall of Castle's post - take it with a grain of salt.)

Not quite, it will hit up to 10 targets. So even if you have 15 targets in melee range, it will only effect 10 of them.

All of this. Also keep in mind that def works against all most while -tohit only works against those being debuffed. If you're close to the softcap, it will definitely help. How much it helps, however, will vary based on what you fight.

[edit I mention this because if you're fighting a group of mobs that are pegging you from range, RttC's tohit debuff won't help.]

I wouldn't quite go that far, Fireheart. There are "best" sets for certain situations. However, there is a very wide variety of situations so there are a lot of "bests" according to those situations.

Having said that, just because one set is best at something doesn't mean that you (generic) will like it. At that point, the "which set is best at X" question morphs into "which set is best at X that I enjoy."

That is a question no one on the forum can answer definitively. We can guess, but that's all.

If you don't mind a long answer, I suggest you read Positron's thoughts on the matter

[edit: That's for all "don't nerf, buff" situations, not this one in particular.]

It's not necessarily that the questions aren't valid - it's that "what is best" threads have the same outcome every time, and they all look like this one. It's happened time and time again, regardless of who made the post. They tend to follow the flow of:

What's best?
Best at what? / There is no best. / Play what you like. / Set X is best.
I agree, they're all good. / Set A is the best at B. / Uh, no, Set Y is much better than Set X.
No, Set X is better than Set Y because of ___ and ___.
You're both wrong, Set Z is superior because of ___ and ___.
etc

Different people with different perceptions and opinions on what is best. Some include IOs, some don't Some PUG, some don't. Some solo, others only team. Some people have no qualms about using inspirations while others view them as a cardinal sin. Some have experienced all sets, some haven't. etc.

All these things boil down to a never ending debate on what's "best."

On a more related note, cool stories, everyone.

Actually, he reverted the changes to Clear Mind because there currently wasn't a way to make reapplying CM-like powers drop the protection for a split second. (ie: I have 45s left on CM and I have 1 hold on me. If the emp refreshes is, the current one will be removed, I'll be held, then the new CM will be applied. That split second hold is enough to drop offensive toggles.) That's why CM still self stacks, not because of Ghost Widow.

(I've tanked her plenty of times without any CM; it's a nice safety blanket, but not a necessity.)

Actually, you forgot one more:

Brute GFS - Scale 1 lethal dmg, Scale 1.44 fire dmg

Scrapper GFS - Scale 0.84 lethal dmg, Scale 1.44 fire dmg

The Brute's version of GFS is better than the Scrapper version, considering all other stats (rech, end cost, dot dmg) are the same.


[edit: Moonlighter - I don't think so. If you want to check intent, see if Invincibility detoggles. Keep in mind that those are design decisions, but there is no automatic system to enforce it. When I13 first rolled out, Brute RttC didn't detoggle while held.]

Then the Tanker(s) were doing something wrong. :P

I agree with the former, but disagree with the latter. There are a lot of attacks that are flagged with multiple types. Energy Blast, Energy Melee, Dark Melee, Fire Melee, Ice Melee, Ice Blast, Archery (Blazing/Explosive Arrow), Psi Blast (Telekinetic Blast), Sonic Blast, etc.

I'd consider powers dealing multiple damage types but only flagged as one of them to be the exception, rather than the rule. (Powers completely missing a flag, such as Dominate lacking the range flag, are rarer still.)

Agreed. I'd include Taunt and Gauntlet-lite for Brutes, too. Unless a Tanker uses Taunt and a Brute doesn't, the Brute will out threat the Tanker - same taunt durations, same threat mod, while having higher damage.

Yeah, me too. I'm not a big alter (though I have more alts here than any other game), so it gets to be a drag after a while not to be able to do anything for my characters. It's also a bit frustrating that not all characters can get as much out of IOs as others can. I'm hoping that the Incarnate system equalizes power levels a bit.

Okay, I laughed. (I'm a sucker for "your mom" jokes.)

Both of these weigh very heavily in my mind. The character I'd want to utilize the Incarnate system on is my WP/Fire Tanker. What worries me a bit is going through it with him, and screwing up. As with all systems, it'll take time to explore and find out the nuances of the system. Looking back at my first characters, first IO builds, etc... yeah...

I don't know if there will be any choices to be had (I'm hoping there are), and if so, will they be reversable if I do pick poorly?

It's been like that for a long time. Once you have 17 mobs attacking you, you can't get anymore. They'll completely ignore you.

Here is a demorecord of me testing the aggro cap last year. I herd up 17 monkies, and taunting will not grab any more. If I damage a mob, then one of the mobs previously aggroed to me will be pushed off and return to their spawn. I suspect it was done to prevent...

...this. If you're correct and you could aggro 17 mobs and actively beat on a 18th without retaliation, then that's a bug. Gathering 17 and attacking an 18th should push one of the 17 off and add the 18th to it.

...and some idiots join them.

What's running through there mind at the moment isn't necessarily "We can't do it with a Regen Scrapper," but more along the lines of "Do I trust this PUG I don't know using a powerset notorious for spontaneous deaths to not to die?"

I'll be honest, I'd have reservations too.

[edit: Which is basically what Werner posted in the first response. Heh.]