Selina_H

The set bonuses are fine. Some of the non-damage ones are quite good, actually. The number of damage sets slotted is always going to be higher because *everyone* can use them - everyone has at least one attack. Not everyone can use immob, hold, knockback or debuff sets, either because their sets don't include those effects, or because as a side effect of a damage attack, the base value of the debuff/control effect is so minor that it's simply not worth slotting for in the majority of cases.

The only ways to truly increase the number of non-damage sets used would be to 1) add debuff/control effects to existing attacks (rare, and usually only happens during balance passes for an underpowered set or AT); 2) increase the base debuff/control effect for a damaging attack (pretty unlikely, except again during a balance pass); or 3) increase the desirability of underplayed debuff/control sets and ATs (possible through generous dev tweaking of powersets and content, but there's always going to be a large segment of the player base that prefers DPS classes).

I don't see them removing the tradeoffs between best enhancement values and best set bonuses - as others have said, this is WAI and helps preserve a degree of build diversity.

A proc activates based on whether the power it's in is available. If you can still use the power when exemped, you'll get the proc effect.

Globals won't work when you exemp more than 3 levels below the level of the IO.

Helpful link: Table of Special IOs

Seconded. A-merits definitely give you a lot more bang for your buck, especially if you're random rolling. If you tend to run a lot of TFs and Ouro arcs anyway, I'd say go for it. But if you're going to be grinding a bunch of content you hate just for the reward merits, it's not worth it. There are other ways to get your shinies.

Yup!

As far as I know, you just have to do the mission. You don't actually *have* to convert the reward merits if you don't want to.

Just remember that you can only convert/buy every 20 hours, and plan accordingly.

I don't understand why you'd want one "worth more" in inf unless you're planning to sell it. I'd rather buy a cheaper one that works exactly the same, as long as I'm a high enough level to slot it. Lots of people do their slotting at 50, so for them there's no advantage to buying a lower level - unless they're trying to flip it. If it's going to stay in the build, by all means grab one for 35 mil instead of 150 mil.

All levels will do the same thing. The Numina's unique and the Miracle unique are both considered Proc120s, which means that they activate off the power they're slotted in. The level of the enhancement doesn't matter. A level 50 Numina's slotted in Health will still work at level 20 - as long as you took Health by then.

They're worth more at low levels because people don't realize this. You can always check Paragon Wiki's Table of Special IOs to see which enhancements are considered Procs and which are Globals, which do work the way you described.

Edit: And yes, lower levels will be available for earlier slotting, something I overlooked as I tend to do most of my IOs from level 35 and up.

Just keep going like you have been. The next "tip" to drop will actually be a Morality Mission. Note: You do NOT need to wait another 20 hours to get this mission to drop.

This was always the case, even before I18 - all the servers per side (including both NA and EU servers) were lumped together. What's changed is that now the Hero market, the Villain market and the (new) Praetorian market are all one.

Yes. Posi replied at length in this thread in the Beta forums.

More clarification:

Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. Any means of mitigation is good if it means fewer team defeats. Especially if you've just let loose your AoE immob on an entire uncontrolled spawn. Right?

Good tanks are capable of keeping track and rotating out aggro so mobs that escape are reeled back in or otherwise controlled. And what are all the other teammates doing while this is going on? The number of minions should be whittled down fairly fast on a large team.

When a certain tactic isn't optimal for a particular situation, you use another one. Adaptability is a hallmark of successful players and successful teams.

I've teamed with Dechs' sand tanker. He knows what he's doing. And any CCer that lets loose an AoE immob - "assuming" that the brute has gathered enough aggro - is, in fact, doing a piss-poor job. Especially if he keeps doing it after repeated faceplants.

The issue I have is with your phrasing, per this post:

This makes it sound as though you are unable to derive any benefit from the increases to recharge and recovery. In fact, you could benefit considerably, but choose not to do so because you don't wish to change your preferred playstyle.

Let me note here, lest I sound overly critical, that I think you absolutely *should* play in whatever manner you find most enjoyable. Some players enjoy optimizing their attack chains, to be able to spam their best, most efficient attacks as often as possible. Some players enjoy cranking up the difficulty to +4/x8. Some players enjoy going after AVs. In my experience, most players have neither a perfectly optimized solo attack chain nor enough extra recovery for protracted battles; they see the opportunity to do so, via Speed Boost, as much win.

You mean this?

Granted, Speed Boost isn't strictly necessary - in the vast majority of cases, it's not going to make the difference between a win and a team wipe. And it's certainly possible to build a character for whom SB is of limited benefit.

Arguing that it provides no benefit at all, however - because you have other options, even if they aren't the most reliable or efficient ones - is disingenuous.

Clearly the benefits Speed Boost provides are of no value to you personally, and that's fine. Other players are still weighing the benefits, which they value, against all the annoyances that come with the power.

Trust me - I passed that point with you long ago.

Nice strawman. Or perhaps your own basic reading and comprehension skills aren't quite as uber as you thought. Nowhere in my post did I argue that any change to the game changes the nature of the market. That's as ridiculous as your assertion that only certain specified intrinsic changes to market transaction mechanics count as changing the market "status quo."

Again with the reading comprehension. Where did I say that I believed that a change in purple drop rates would be insignificant?

What is this supposed to prove, exactly?

Pot, meet kettle.

Considering your own high-handed, condescending tone throughout this entire discussion, I hardly think you're in a position to accuse others of being "internet bullies."

Edit: At this point I'm going to request that any further replies go to PMs, out of courtesy to the other posters in the thread. Apologies for the derail.

Looks like the Stealth IOs all count as Proc120s, which means that they'll be active as long as the power they're slotted in is still available.

Straight from Paragon Wiki: "E.g., a level 50 Stealth in Sprint will work even if exemplared to level 10."

The link I posted above should take you right to the Wiki's Table of Special IOs. It's a handy tool for keeping the types of the various IOs straight.

According to the table at Paragon Wiki, the KB protection IOs all count as "globals" rather than "procs" and are therefore subject to exemping rules:

"Globals are Special IOs that act like Set Bonuses in that they are always on even if the power isn't activated and even if the power is greyed out because of exemplaring! However, the one thing that will shut off a Global IO is exemplaring more than three levels under the level of that Global IO."

This. I don't mind content that's failable due to the player's own mistakes or wrong actions. As other people have said, failure *can* foster drama and character development. But failing a mission *simply because it's written that way* and there's no player action that could change the outcome? Not fun.

I already handwave away dev-created content that godmodes my character. I'd probably do the same with a player arc that did this, and avoid that author's material in the future.

According to this "logic," an increase in the purple/PvP recipe drop rate isn't a change either, just more of the same. In fact, *any* change in drop rates isn't an actual change - it's just moving numbers around. The effects of market psychology shouldn't be considered, because player behavior isn't absolutely, 100% guaranteed to change in response to these hypothetical non-changes.

I wonder if there's anything A_F *would* consider a change, other than a complete overhaul of the bid/sell system mechanic, since anything else is "extrinsic" and therefore obviously (and conveniently) doesn't count. Because it seems to me that the devs, potentially tasked with actually having to code a market merger, would certainly consider that a change. It's not going to write itself.

What is clear to me is that the statement that "The market community is protective of the status quo, and really does not argue in good faith concerning any ideas that might upset the status quo" (from A_F's original post) is patently false unless one accepts a ridiculously narrow and massaged view of what exactly constitutes market change - in other words, A_F's personal, private definition of an intrinsic system mechanics change - a view that was made clear (I use the term loosely) only in subsequent posts.

The whole point of the full original post wasn't to discuss what does and does not constitute actual "change" - it was (caveat: from my perspective) an attempt to vilify the market regulars as nothing more than "internet bullies piling on a weak target." Anyone who wishes to characterize the market community as wicked curmudgeons resisting the inevitable forces of progress - despite all evidence to the contrary - would do well to follow A_F's brazenly disingenuous example.