Spiritchaser
-
Posts
604 -
Joined
-
Quote:Also, if you're a fan of IOs, consider that EA can still leverage +def into more survival than /Ele will have outside of surge.Originally Posted by Organicide
Billz,
Why EA when ELA is getting the "fix". Think how teh sexy Claws/ELA will be with the Talsorian Claws in red. -
Actually, I was thinking about mobs with tohitdebuff resistance.
Most notably those mobs with purple triangles. -
Steadfast protection is a good start, throw in some kinetic combats if you can find them, and you're well on your way.
Energy def can come from many places, PBAoE sets are often good for this
I think you can run with soul mastery, and less than capped def against most foes, the only caution is that the toggle does take a little time to throw on...
Oh also, anything with substantial debuff resistance is going to laugh off your toggle debuff... if you fight that kind of thing. -
Quote:I think the answers to these have to come in the form of another question.Originally Posted by Doctor_Xaxan
The two main questions I have (as I'm reading over these two older guides) are:
1) Is this a "Medicine pool required" set? I.e. Is the heal from Energy Drain sufficient to make the set reasonably survivable on its own, or like pre-i16 /electric, is medicine "mandatory"?
2) Can I "main brute" (take alphas in large teams) with this defense set? If so, what are some general tips you all can give to help me make that happen?
And thanks for your response, Twilight.
Are you prepared to IO out your build?
IO'd EA can be tremendously strong. You'll have more trouble holding aggro on a sustained basis than other brutes, but for grabbing alphas you're fine.
IO'd EA does not require the meds pool.
If you want to play a more "stock" setup, you're potentially headed for some frustration, depending on what buffs are available to you. -
Unfortunately, I suspect poor word choice is probably most likely in the link, but sooner or later one would expect some more epic options for villains
That'll either mandate a new patron or patronless epics. -
I don't know... SR lacks the minor heal and the major end, but gets more solid resistances, complete defence, more movement, and what can only be described as broken defence resistances. I'd still have to give SR that one, though my SRs have been DM.
I've taken Elec to 50 with the same sets that my EAs have had and I do think that, in general, EA is better post heal buff.
I've played FA with just about everything except SM and DB (oh and BA and WM, I always forget those). The survival is solid against plain vanilla damage, and the extra damage is worth a lot.
WP... Invul... both generally more solid than EA.
Don't get me wrong, in the end game, with IOs, I like EA a lot, in fact I think it probably moves up the rankings quite a bit.
I wouldn't consider /stone to be the same AT. -
ER... I'm guessing that you had PvP on for psi?
With regards to delusions, I'd never suggest that IO'd EA is weak.
I've soft capped a couple, and they're as solid as I generally need.
Back in I... 7 I think I had about 37 or 38% def on my EM/EA with fitness fighting leaping leadership.
But that was about all he had. Damage was a bit suspect and attack chains were a bit off, even by the standards of the day. That said, I had TF that worked on bosses and ET for a "die now button".
Base power levels? Especially early are what I'd take issue with. I DO think survival on EA, especially without fighting and cj are low, particularly as compared to what other sets now have.
Throw the same level of care into non IO'd WP build and you'll be better off.
Sure, base level shields is similarly soft, but it can reach such high heights with IOs that I'm inclined to forgve it.
Again, I think energize (should EA get it) would be a lot. Too much really. Myself I'd front load the heal or throw in some psi def, or maybe transfer some of overload's +HP to the passives... or one of many other things. -
I think the solution is to permit conquests of a magnitude that do not affect cannon.
I really do see enough room in the middle here:
You're not overtly influencing the whole world's economy, but you've subverted a massive chunk of the copper sector...
You could never control the United States, but You have a nice little banana republic to call home, and you've got a pair of congressmen in your pocket too. If all goes well you'll have that senator soon as well...
You can't rule hell, but you've got a nice little pocket dimension full of tortured souls who'll do exactly what you ask...
Queue maniacal laughter...
Those should be reasonably large accomplishments... somewhere in between ruling the world and knocking over another bank.
And yes, I really do think there's room for villain epics without patrons... especially for a copper czar of a black hat with their own island full of tortured souls. -
Quote:Oh dear...Originally Posted by _Deth_
You are completely missing the point of what he said.
I'm sorry you feel that way. -
Quote:Presumably you do a small country domination arcOriginally Posted by Zem
What happens when you win the world domination story arc? What's next? A bank robbery?
Then you get a slightly bigger one if you really want
To collect and trade. -
Quote:The thing is, I don't just want to destroy heroes for the sake of destroying heroes.Originally Posted by Frosticus
You tired of playing tag along hero in the co-op content? strange.
Co-op content would be fine if my villain is presented with an alternative path at some point where I can F over the heroes big time if I so choose, but I understand that would entail a mountain of complexities that go pretty far beyond what is currently presented in the game.
What I'd like to see redside, and preferably see outside the context of AE, would be the addition of arcs or missions with a grander scale then just knocking over a bank or breaking up bits of a city.
I'd like to manipulate entire financial sectors, disrupt international trade for my own fun, conquer entire island nations (on the sly of course, no reason why my puppet president can't wear a big grin when longbow visits) and even subvert major world governments. Ok, sure not at level 12, but by 50? come on! at that point Looking in the newspaper for a quick snatch and grab might be ok for light entertainment, but that's not a good final career path.
Until redside allows something a little grander than henchman thuggery, and essentially irrelevant vengeance attacks on the freedom phalanx, it'll be disappointing. -
I wouldn't be surprised if the lion's share of new content we're going to see in the near term will be in GR. I 16 strikes me as more of a game functionality issue.
The number of new zones in the paid expansion might be quite substantial, and I have to wonder about all the implications of the zone exemping and I13pvp mechanics, and what those might imply for some of the GR areas.
But whatever's added, however they do it, sooner or later Redside epic proliferation will demand a new patron or two, or else some patronless epics. -
I'm hoping that they make sure they get a few fitness-less /Ele (and hey, maybe /EA) fanatics into Beta.
I've never been able to tolerate the lack of health, and while with Ele, swift and or hurdle isn't quite the must have that it is with /EA, I still can't stand not making use of the extra speed of an Ele and stacking up passives. I've tried the builds a few times, they just never really work for me...
But there's a small group of die hard /Eles (and again, possibly also those /EAs) who really appreciate one less pool set and I hope they get a chance to really wring out whatever's going on behind those closed doors. -
Quote:Originally Posted by Bill Z Bubba
Agreed. But some of the posters here need to remember this little tidbit:
EA will have equivalent mitigation to a post-granite stoner when /stone gets a pbaoe end drain with a minor heal and conserve power in the set.
There is a huge difference between asking for more out of a logical need and asking for more out of greed.
Too many in this thread are doing the latter.
I don't think anyone sane would ask for EA to be as durable as a granite... unless it were afflicted with similar penalties.
Not even then actually, The set has a long standing tradition of being a certain style of thing. That shouldn't change if it doesn't have to. -
Take a step, see how it works. If it's enough? great. If not, take another step.
-
Quote:Actually, from what I recall of the calculations, non-granite stone is fairly close to fire in mitigation... although obviously lacking in mobility which is a monstrous problem for a brute without a friendly kin or a LOT of IO mobility... neither of which should be taken for granted. You don't get fire's extra damage either... but just mitigation? not so bad really.Originally Posted by Bill Z Bubba
Your expectations are not my expectations. /stone is the WORST mitigation set in the game for me. Why? Because the mitigation it offers is less than pathetic for 37 levels. It's mez protection kills your movement. Lack of movement kills fury.
Even after 38, it's locked into teleport or it gets destroyed by curbs.
I had a much harsher reply to your post than this, but I find that it's not worth it to me anymore.
Believe whatever you like. The devs aren't listening to arguments like yours anyway.
I'm not sure what you mean about devs and arguments. As far as I know, the devs datamine for performance.
Assuming there's a genuine performance difference (And with current Ele and to a lesser extent /EA I personally do think there is) It SHOULD show up on a data file somewhere whatever arguments might or might not be made on the forums.
Whether or not any such hypothetical short fall is enough to do anything about is a different issue of course. -
I'm really wishing I'd had a chance to look at EA before the door closed... although at an early stage in a closed beta... who knows if that snapshot would have been accurate or not.
-
Quote:I don't think anyone is looking for identical powersets, identical strengths
because of this, player expectations will change as well. Because Willpower + Psi Melee can do such and such so every other set must do such and such or be compensated for it or Shields + Radiation Melee can solo this and that but you can't with Energy Aura or Elec Armor so those sets are broken.
I would ask that if a set is weaker overall than a second set about half the time, then the second set should be weaker the other half the time... or perhaps WAY stronger a quarter of the time...
Or very approximately so. Noone is going to ask for a stopwatch here, but if one secondary is meaningfully eclipsed by others, without adequate compensation elsewhere? That's a problem.
EDIT: Again, if EA gets energize, this is all out the window. -
Depending on how you interpret this, you might well arrive at the conclusion that each archtype was getting a new epic power set.
That's rather easy to imagine for scrappers and defenders et al., but for red side?
How does one add another patron pool without another patron?
Would the non-subservient finally get their shot at a patronless epic?
Would an existing character now have patron status?
Would LR himself now have a pool?
Or is this just a bit of a twist on the word choice?
For reference the passage in question reads:
"Issue 16 will also improve on the Epic Power Pools. Each archetype is getting an additional power set in their epic power pool, and each power set is getting an additional power so that there will be five powers from which to choose. Using the scrapper as an example: Blaze Mastery was a power set added to the Epic Power Pool which will include the powers Ring of Fire, Char, Fire Blast, Melt Armor, and Fireball. In addition the Body Mastery power set had the power Physical Perfection added for a total of five powers. " -
Quote:Originally Posted by _Deth_
Either way, it is still a mechanic designed for defense sets. .
It's a mechanism that helps avoid the cascade failure effect in defence sets, and untill recently, was only available to those sets which relied almost exclusively on defence for protection.
As of the advent of shields, Defence resistance is available as a granted buff to anyone close enough to the guy with the big tower sheild/riot shield/manhole cover, whether they were a defence set or not.
It has become a resistance mechanic available (albeit only rarely at the moment) to everyone.
You could, I suppose, make the argument that it's tied to a defence buff... that might have some value, though it's worth noting that with many sets the value of the defence:defence resistance ratio varies wildly.
In other words, the level of defence resistance is tunable as a set strengthening measure, and is allowed to float independently with respect to how much or little defence the set actually has. It's not much of a stretch to imagine a set with debuff resistance as it's central strength. Such a set might have little or no defence but heaps of defence resistance.
In current sets Invul, somewhat strongly resists debuffs relative to the amount of defence it has, though this ratio does vary with invul. SR has a ridiculously high level of defence resistance relative to it's defence.
Shields starts out with a modest amount, but due to the enhanceable nature of it's defence resistance (like SR) and due to the stackability of AD, it can be IOd to the point where it too has very high defence resistance relative to it's defence.
Relative to it's defence based protection protection, EA get less. -
Quote:I'd say the smart money is on CP being added as the 5th mu power.
I got a Q than...what the hell is gonna happen to conserve power? -
Quote:To the best of my knowledge, there is no confirmation that /EA is getting energize.Originally Posted by Sitriel
Nobody is mentioning that, because it is not true. Due to Positron talking about this change in an interview and a minor mishap at the beginning of the closed beta that allowed people a little peekaboo at the power list it is quite well known that CP will be replaced with Energize, a short duration half-CP with a regeneration boost and a nice heal all rolled into one neat package.
If it is, then EA will become one of the more powerful sets available, particularly when IO'd... but only in the late game.
It's not what I would call the right choice for EA... it'll still be too soft for the early game, then it'll be arguably too strong in the late game, but at least it'll reward somewhat weak early play with powerful late game play. It's not Ideal, but it would make it impossible to claim that EA, on the whole, was weak.
If it happens. -
Quote:Keep in mind that the devs have previously taken action when an AT demonstrably required pools to do it's job.
taking Pools is a must for any build,.
(tanker taunt) -
Quote:actually i think what you said was:Originally Posted by _Deth_
I haven't suggested anything of the like, now you are just reaching.
my standard is, as I believe I've said: all sets should provide similar potential.Quote:all sets other than Stone are broken by your standard. .
So... all sets don't provide similar potential... and that's... Ok somehow?
The argument can be made that if baseline survival is low, and fully enhanced survival is high, then things might be ok. SD is a bit like that.
That's not how the devs balance things, but... at least I can well understand the argument.
And no, all other sets are NOT broken by my standard. In fact the only sets I'd take some issue with are Ele (soon to be modified) /EA, slightly too weak.
SR gets essentially broken Defence resistance. That's worth a lot. Fire gets its extra damage, invul gets reasonably well balanced performance now, with less general survival than WP, but with superior general debuff protection. etc. etc.
I think we'll just have to agree to dissagree. I'm not sure what After playing a couple of EAs to 50, and a couple of EMs to 50, I do know that IO'd EM/EA can be plenty strong, but it's not one of the greats, or really one of the goods without investment. Certainly my WPs DAs Invuls and Fires have more going for them pre-IO. If this isn't your experience having played these sets to 50... well then so be it.
Id also happily conceed that so long as Grav exists in it's current state, EA shouldn't be anyone's greatest balance concern, As it now stands it works. Thing is, as it now stands, it's still below the curve in my book, offering too little in an unenhanced condition, the state where balance matters most. -
Quote:I'm not sure if I'm reading this right but... would your standard suggest that all sets be generated with wildly differing levels of potential (survival or otherwise)? isn't that rather... er... well lets politely call it wrong?Originally Posted by _Deth_
Tell that to all the people that have played stoners that have done it, both blue and redside, me being one of them. Stone takes almost zero effort to gain the survivability that every other def set has to break it's tail to get. There is no "probably" in overcoming the debuffs in a team setting, at least the majority of them, otherwise you wouldn't have as many people screaming for kins.
If you don't know what I'm thinking of with Inv, then go play one, or talk to one of the many people that play them.
And yeah, I should have included WP with stone and Inv. Well, maybe just Inv, as I have seen people screw that one up too. So yeah, I edit my previous statement, all sets other than Stone are broken by your standard. Hell, even stone may be, as someone new may skip granite while choosing random powers.