Sharker_Quint

Originally Posted by Adeon Hawkwood

Nope, read my other posts, I frankly don't care one way or the other. I spend both tickets and merits on random rolls so a conversion wouldn't impact me at all. My argument has simply been that if an exchange was implemented 200:1 would be a sensible exchange rate. Please don't put words in my mouth.

Originally Posted by Adeon Hawkwood

Sure the exploiters can find exploits faster than the devs can fix them, and sure these exploits would then lead to reward merits. Sure you can farm tickets in large quantities and then convert them to merits.

My question is: What would you buy with those merits?

Lets say the devs implemented a 200 tickets = 1 merit conversion. You get on your brute and farm up some ridiculous number of tickets, for the sake of an argument lets say 100,000. You then go and convert those tickets to 500 merits. Now what do you spend those 500 merits on?

You're not buying rare salvage, the merit price for that is 20 merits (or 4000 tickets) for a random piece when you could get a specific piece for 540 tickets

You're not doing rare recipe rolls, those also cost 20 merits (or 4000 tickets) but if you spend the tickets on directly in the 30-34 or 35-39 ranges (generally considered the "best" option) they cost only 3700 tickets (which equates to two additional rolls).

You're not converting them to A-Merits, those are on a 20 hour gate.

You could be direct buying two LotG 7.5%s (and one random roll) but is that really a better option than 27 random rolls? The market forum would say no.

So, if people did start farming tickets for the express purpose of converting them to merits what would they buy with the merits that is more valuable than what they can currently buy with tickets?

Every argument I've seen against this has focused on the Time to Merits ratio but at the end of the day what really matters is the Time to Reward ratio. As far as I can see at a 200:1 conversion ratio a tickets to merit conversion option does not decrease Time to Reward below what is already available with tickets, it simply opens up options.

Originally Posted by Ultimo_

Very well said. Indeed, you captured what I've been saying perfectly.

You're also right, the thread is somewhat pointless, all I wanted to do was say I wasn't crazy about how they decided to address some of the problems with endurance management. I've done that, so I think I'll take the high road and avoid any further mud-slinging.

Originally Posted by Ultimo_

It's funny, you know. If my "past crusades" were so off target, why did so many of them result in changes and additions to the game?

I said Defenders needed help with damage output (and was vigorously flamed for saying so).
Defenders recieved a boost to damage output.

I suggested street sweeping should generate missions (there was little resistance to this idea)
We now have Tip missions.

I (and others) argued Invulnerability needed a revamp (and was vigorously flamed for saying so).
They modified the Invulnerability autopowers.

I (and others) suggested allowing weapon customization (and was vigorously flamed for doing so).
We got weapon customization.

I (and others) suggested power customization (and was vigorously flamed for doing so).
We got new animations and colour customization.

I suggested Secret IDs (and was vigorously flamed for doing so).
We got Day Jobs (not quite what I was after).

I suggested getting rid of the Rep system on the Forums (and was vigorously flamed for doing so).
It's gone.

I could go on.


Of course, some things I've suggested haven't appeared yet, but one never knows.

Originally Posted by Airhammer

Huh ????

Originally Posted by Ultimo_

I don't agree that powers are balanced. All characters are expected to overcome the same challenges, but some ATs and power sets are at a disadvantage when doing so. To continue the example of Defenders vs Blasters, that the Defender does roughly half the damage of the Blaster means he has to attack twice as often to defeat the same foe. That means he uses twice the endurance. If a Blaster uses his whole endurance bar defeating three minions (for instance), the Defender will defeat ONE and be out of endurance before defeating the second. The discrepancy exists between power sets, too, though it's far less pronounced.

Now, I realize that some sets are expected to do less damage because they have additional effects (such as the accuracy debuff of Dark powers), but that's fine as long as the difference isn't overly extreme. Damage is, after all, the only metric that matters in the final analysis since it's the only way to defeat the enemy.





I'll readily admit, I haven't proven there's a problem, I've only percieved it. However, I think comparing damage/endurance levels of the ATs shows there's a discrepancy. Personally, I think the discrepancy is a problem. Others may disagree.




There are many ways of dealing with endurance issues in the game, that's true. However, it's my opinion that these methods are insufficient. We should be fighting the enemy, not a game mechanic, if you see what I mean.

You ask for an example, so I refer you back to the Blaster/Defender. If they both slot their attacks the same way, the Defender will still run out of endurance before the Blaster. If the Defender uses some of these methods you mention, he will be at an even greater disadvantage relative to the Blaster. If he slots more endurance reduction, he loses damage or accuracy. If he slows his attacks, he reduces his damage output even further, and becomes exposed to more damage. Having less health in addition to everything else, he faces greater chance of defeat.





See above.



How much would I change the recovery rate? I don't have a number to give you, but I'd put it somewhere between the current level and the level Stamina provides. I'd see how that works and adjust it up or down as neccessary. Honestly, I really dislike the endurance mechanic in general, but I accept that it's meant to balance gameplay and so should remain in the game. I once considered suggesting that powers have more or less effect depending on endurance level (so if you were at 50% endurance, your attack would do only 50% damage), but I'm not sure that would be better.





I'm not sure how to answer this. "What would happen to powerset balance?" Nothing, with a global change. The balance would still be discrepant. The difference would be that disadvantaged sets would be somewhat more capable. The Defender would now use a full bar to defeat three minions, while the Blaster would use half. At least the Defender would now be better able to defeat the same threat. Again, I don't think a global boost is the best way, but it's better than nothing.

How, or if, this would affect the balance relative to our foes is another question, though.





Sorry for the delay, I have a case study due that needed working on.

Perhaps the thing to do is modify endurance by the damage scalar AS WELL as the damage itself.

I hope that answers you adequately, I appreciate the considered and polite response.

Originally Posted by Sbane12

1. lower npcs in RV by 75 percent

2. remove heavies from effecting players

3. cause an MMs pets to instantly tp with the MM

after being hit by tp foe, but only in off mode


4. reduce range on all psi blast powers to 40 feet
except mental blast and will dom, but make increase
will doms cd to 120 seconds base

5. change functionality of spirit shark in mako pool to
a sniper attack, with interuptable cast time etc, and bring
moonbeam up to equal base damage as shark

6. increase damage on dark blast powers

7. change kinetics tier 1 heal and drain power
(i forget name), to heal AOE around the caster and not
the target

8. increase cast time on fire blast powers, and lower damage accordingly, so the dpa will remain the sam1

9. increase damage on DP powers quite a bit, to make them on par
and viable with such ani times,

10. increase resist and def soft cap for defenders, and corrs, before being effected extreme DR

11. reduce damage on blaster villain mako KOB, and obviously
KMs CS