Spiritchaser

Just worth remembering:

This is beta, things change

We don't know if the recharge is enhanceable

We don't know how CP is being dealt with on EA (wrt the addition of CP to the mu pool)

etc. etc.

Once again no-one mentions earth/thermal.

two nearly free IO res procs +thermal shields and stoney is capped for res.

hasten and HE is almost always up

might not be the fastest but it's safe and cheap.

Put the powers where you feel like and spend as little as you want. You probably have enough inf in your back pocket to pay for it...

Oh and it's no slouch on team support either.

[ QUOTE ]
Compared to a resistable -resist for the other sets?

how about -20 resist and -10 defense

all sets would feel that.

[/ QUOTE ]

The first question: would these be resistable or unresistable?

If the former, then sets with defence resistance not balanced against their defence would suffer or benefit unfairly. It's probably difficult to say what the right proportion is, but they're all different, so most will be wrong.

If the latter then sets that rely proportionately heavily on regen, or on a balance of powers, will do unfairly well (WP, I'm looking at you)

Resistance has a constant ratio of debuff resistance to damage resistance. Defence does not. A resistable resistance debuff would, at least without the benefit of actual testing or experience with it, seem like the obvious candidate. Simple and relatively fair.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why would it be disastrous for the power to work as designed?

[/ QUOTE ]

Make the -20% defense debuff resistable by the toon's defense debuff resistance

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not a bad idea.

[/ QUOTE ]

The most balanced debuff would be a resistable resistance debuff. All resistance resists resistance debuffs directly proportional to the value of the resistance being debuffed... Ok that could have been more clear... but it'd have been less fun to write.

The bottom line is that such a debuff would have a mathematically identical proportional increase in the damage transmitted to all sets, regen, def based or resistance based.

Now: one could argue that it might have a slightly disproportional impact on low HP def builds (EA or SR) as it would make them more vulnerable than they already are to damage spikes... but I think on the scale of injustice, you'd be into a second order effect.

A resistable def debuff would be just a little too good for SR, don't you think?

I wouldn't be too surprised if stomp gets the reverse treatment of what whirling hands got on the Energy Assault Dom rework... and the Brute power might get another look at that point too.

I'd also be unsurprised if both SS and MA got a little bit of a tweak when they get their extra animations... like Rage being cut down in power a tad...

Random musing: If Rage were 2/3-1/2 as potent as it now is, but were crashless, and if Focus Chi were the same, would that make for a viable modification to both sets?

There's less psi blueside, that alone might make it a better set for a scrapper.

That and the ongoing CP question...

Just one more comment here:

A lot of recent posts claim that in the late game, with IOs, EA can be plenty strong. That's almost an obvious conclusion.

It is, however, of limited value when performing set balance comparisons. For that, the current datamining principle for set balance will focus generally on actual builds throughout the levels. This will almost necessarily favor builds with limited or no IO enhancement, at least through the lion's share of the game. This is not where EA shines.

In fact, one of the biggest concerns I'd have with the somewhat pervasive idea of changing out CP for an enhanced power is that it comes late.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I really hope the Devs think to make some changes when they see that Heroes will be able to get 2 CPs with Elec Armor....

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed.


Double CP for both Scrappers and Tanks would be a bit much if you ask me.


There DEFINATELY needs to be a change to CP....

[/ QUOTE ]

Hopefully said change will be applied red side.

I'm just really curious to see what they do with CP

Given that electric tanks are coming in I16, and that an electric tank as the set now stands would be essentially a farce, I think we might see some movement on this.

Add in the long standing question about two CPs and you've potentially got a number of answers in the pipe.

[ QUOTE ]
If a person like the straight forward aggro style, it's pretty natural that the stealth is a hindrance, and the power set will probably be not as tough as the person wants it to be. I think energy aura is a pretty good example of a power set that is ok if you play according to its designed theme, but players don't appreciate the design and the power set becomes awful.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess I just don't think there's enough benefit to playing that way.

If the argument is made that EA gets less survival, but that it needs less survival because it's stealthy, then the argument is unfinished. The math doesn't balance out. There needs to be an additional benefit for the lost aggro soaking capacity, and the lost high speed barge in option, in favour of a necessarily smaller footprint. There seldom is. Add to this that a stealthy brute will necessarily have a few ticks less fury from aggro. Sure in an endgame build, that might be 2-4% less damage at most, but it's still a loss that should be further compensated for.

Now, if playing a stealthy brute properly actually increased your power, your earning rate or your all up survival, as compared to a higher raw numbers survival brute, then there'd be more of an argument for it's value.

We could look to the AE for inspiration here... it might be interesting to put out a call for mid-level AE content designed to favor combat stealth (EA and DA) then see if, in non IO'd builds, those brutes really did the best. I'm guessing such content is possible. Throw in the requirement that it should also be viable and balanced for all ATs and I'm not so sure.

And again I don't think anyone should be questioning the survival capacity of IO'd EA in the end game. I don't think that needs any yelling about, as far as I'm concerned it's plenty survivable enough. That's not what this is about.

[ QUOTE ]
And your point was that a stealthy brute has nothing significant to add

[/ QUOTE ]

No, my point is that unsuppressible stealth has little to add over regular options.

there's nothing stopping a /SR, WP, SD (or whatever) brute with SS and that stealth IO turning off their aggro aura and snagging a passkey. You do not require stealth to be unsuppressed for that, and you don't need EA to get those powers.

Your suggestion of some of the other uses of EC are fine as far as they go, but I've not seen a one yet that is beyond replication with pool powers and that IO. If you want to stand right in front of a ring mistress and look down her dress, then yes, I imagine EC might have the edge, but I'd hardly call that of real benefit.

The only valid benefit of combat stealth is that it allows you to actually fight. You can get in first strike, You can engage tight spawns without drawing unwanted aggro, or engage some mobs within a spawn whilst the aggro from other mobs in the spawn is focused on something better able to handle it. That's about it.

Solo, in the mid levels, when you're squishy, this is a help for EA on maps with tight spawns, or get a mez in on a tough LT. Of course as has been said before, with the wild majority of situations, more durable sets just don't need to care... Short of a very few AE Arcs I've seen, there's not enough benefit.

On teams, it's less so. It would, for example, be possible to construct a team of /EA and /DA brutes fighting on an AE mission consisting of large spawns of selectively highly dangerous powersets. Energy damage vs. EA, and defence penetration for /EA. With combat stealth, you could probably plow through with fewer worries that the wrong mob would aggro on you... Of course with DA you could probably just mez them all and be done with it, so those mobs would also have to have some mez resistance...

High damage output, defence penetration and mez resistance on the same AE mobs is not really good design, since it doesn't allow play options for many other ATs... but anyway, that's another discussion.

[ QUOTE ]
Try MoLRSF. I get the passkey in a matter of minutes every time without dying. I stealth/SS to it, pop overload, aggro the room and lead them away, SS to the passkey, click it, and SS back to my compadres with unsupressed stealth. A stalker cannot control the aggro and has to resort to some risky scheme to have his buddy TP him away before he dies.

In general, an EA brute is the ultimate stealth/TP toon on a SF, where he has all the advantages of a stalker, even more so with unsupressable stealth, yet puts a stalker to shame in damage output when it comes to fighting the AVs at the end. Did Lady Grey in 25 mins last night.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not saying that EC is useless, just that it's far less usefull than many capacities. [edit: and those calling it useless would probably, if pressed, admit something of the same. it's probably excusable hyperbole] It certainly doesn't deserve any place in a holy shrine. This is especially true when I think you'll find SS plus a stealth IO can accomplish 90%+ of the solo or team oriented functions that EC can, and you hardly need to sacrifice anything to do that.

Most any brute, hell, most of my corruptors and doms can use SS+ the Io to pull the mission blitzing trick, and Ive done it just fine with SS and a jetpack in a warehouse mission.

The ONLY advantage EC and CoD in DA give you is unsuppressed stealth. That allows you to minimize your footprint IN combat. That can be useful solo. It's certainly entertaining there, but it's not necessary for the wild majority of other brutes, in the wild majority of cases and the wild majority of builds.

In a VERY few MA missions I've played, it's potentially a strong asset solo, since the mobs in question were tightly packed, plus could almost perfectly penetrate defence, and hit like trucks. Any multi-spawn aggro was death, even to a softcapped EA (DA had a much better time with it's more varied tools)

Yes EC's combat stealth can be useful on a team, but odds are that the brute that has a monsterous footprint, and the wherewithall to survive that aggro will be proportionately MORE usefull to a team.

With regards to EA as a tank in the end game: I'll grant that you certainly can IO your way to being tough enough, and if you spend the extra attack time on taunt, you can manage aggro well enough, particularly if your squishies have a little durability to handle a few sneaks... but I don't think most people are calling EA out on it's end game performance.

If and when combat stealth becomes more necessary and useful, then I'd give it better marks. I've tried writing a few MA arcs for this purpose, but if they're even remotely fair, there's almost always a better tool to use than combat stealth, either solo or on a team. If EA sacrifices additional capacity for it's stealth, then combat stealth needs to be come a more commonly helpful tool than it is now.

We've been over this before and without going into all that, to the OP:

There is a vast thread of discussion on how EA does and or does not suck. Suffice it to say, the answer to that question is obviously not simple. Much of that thread is anachronistic, and while valuable, it's a huge chore to sort through.

EA is squishier than anything else save perhaps ele early, and it takes time to become better. You have poor mitigation out of the box, and before stealth, while other sets are running fairly strong, you lack a tool to avoid what you cannot survive. You can play with more caution (and less speed) than almost every other set, or you can rely on primary mitigation if you have it, or take Aid Self at 14 and respec out later if you want.

In the mid game, you'll solo well enough against most opponents, though of course, so will everything else. If there were a real need for a stealthy brute in team situations, you're it. Unfortunately such a need very seldom exists, or if it does, it benefits the team less than other potential roles. Other tools are generally more efficient. Your potential options for roles on a team are further hampered by your somewhat limited capacity to maintain aggro. Stealth doesn't help this, and your drain isn't the best. A team can benefit a lot from a persistent damage sink. You're less well suited than other brutes to be a persistent damage sink. I've done it, but I've had an easier time doing it on other brutes.

End game? If you're willing to shell out for IOs EA is among the ranks of sets that can sofcap. It can do so with plenty of build room for solid regeneration and with nearly unlimited endurance. That in and of itsself means that as an endgame set, EA has a solid place. As solid as you'd ever likely need.

Is it strongest? hell No. In a world where /SR can softcap for a song, or where /SD can softcap with more HP and resistances and maxed defence resistance, or where /WP can softcap all but psi with more HP, resists and mad regen, there are going to be tougher builds out there... but it should be plenty good enough... and if you feel like chaining cones from the Mako PPP, you'll have an easier time managing that blue bar with this than with those other, tougher options.

With regard to build flexibility: The big benefit of going without fitness is saving 3 power slots. You CAN do this, but I don't suggest doing it early, for a number of reasons.

1. Speed. The big one. Before IO bonuses or end management tools to use sprint, you'll probably want swift and/or hurdle. Brutes without some form of extra speed are sluggish. Sluggish brutes are not especially entertaining.
2. Health regen. Before drain, you have exceptionally limited health recovery, and a very low immortalaity line. This is going to slow you down a lot. Health is worth a lot to an EA, even post drain. Pre drain it's really really valuable
3. If you've got health AND swift already, isn't stamina still one of the better powers you could take? Flexibility in when you use drain lets you heal, or grab aggro when you want to, not when your blue bar demands it.

Even later in the build, I still feel the fitness pool is a very good Idea for EA, for just these reasons. All three reasons become weaker with each passing level, but taken together I still find them overwhelming for my own builds, even at level 50... Still, there's no denying that the option's there.

For more background discussion, this has already been talked about at some length in the EA thread. Yes in a different context, but those interested in the existing thought on the subject might look there.

As far as I can tell, it started with SF's suggestion in post #11725585 of that thread, with the suggestion of a +max end power instead of CP. From there might I suggest the next few pages as reading material.

As far as I know, post #11735623 is the first time we talked about putting +health +end in /EA and /Ele, but I could be sorely mistaken on that count. I am relatively certain that it's been talked about SOMEWHERE before...

Some key points of discussion raised in that thread included the need to preserve stamanaless operation. An Ele or EA can do without fitness now, partly because of CP. Whatever goes in there should maintain that option.

Also keep in mind that much of the discussion in the EA thread happened before changes to that powerset.

Nah, just a roundabout way of suggesting that this is probably tougher than SR against a lot of psi, when all things are considered.

I'm far too lazy to do the math rigerously. Besides, I should be driving to work right now.

[ QUOTE ]
Pfft, if psi defense isn't at 45% too, this isn't softcapped.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you impose the same requirement on SR? becase you know...

Not all psi is positional...

EDIT: to be fair this is really only a problem against very high con foes and maybe an AV, but still...

Damn that's impressive... I may have to do that at some point.

They haven't fixed grav yet and by all that goes freem, it should be first.

The permanent +end +hp has been suggested in the EA thread a few times

To my mind it's one of the better options, particularly if it's fully enhanceable. The same power could be transferred to /EA without breaking things down, and depending on the magnitude of the +HP, it might even make a hypothetical Ele/ tank something one could at least imagine without laughter.

[ QUOTE ]
As for the "Cottage Rule", how many Energy Assault Dominators are complaining about Power Push being changed to an attack instead of a single-target soft control power?


[/ QUOTE ]

And that's an interesting point, remember, power push didn't LOSE it's existing functionality, it just gained more on top of it.

As such I don't think you could argue that it breaks the cottage rule.

[ QUOTE ]
It should be called Conserve Energy and supply a +HP/heal component similar to Dull Pain along with the endurance discount.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this would be an excellent way to do it. Basically take dull pain, cut the health boost in half... or whatever, take conserve power, cut the end discount to... I don't know, whatever's fair, and call it good. Playtest the recharge and duration.

Such a change might also open the option of putting conserve power into a patron pool. I can see a lot of less IO'd brutes enjoying that kind of thing...

Basically you don't fundimentally change a power such that it nolonger does what it used to do unless there's no other reasonable choice.

I think the first reference had to do with changing buildup such that it built you a cottage...

I wouldn't suggest eliminating the power conservation of CP... but reducing the magnitude of its buff, and ADDING something else as well might be a lot easier to sell.

I really don't see /Ele hitting anything like those levels of DR, The most I could see would be something like 50%.

Even in a degraded condition, 30% def (a crude equivalent of SR's 60% resists) could be meaningful, if only ablaitively.

Still, I can't help feeling that it's only really going to benefit those who stack another 15-25% defence, then benefit from asymptotic performance once they blow under 30% health.

I'd still vote for a change to CP, but if I had to vote for a scaling passive in electric, I'd vote for +regen, maybe even enhancable +regen.

[ QUOTE ]
Energy Melee gives the player "good" ST damage, "good" mitigation in the form of stuns, "poor" AoE damage, and a "good" damage type (energy is not highly resisted).

Sorry to burst your EM-Hate Bubble, but it's not a bottom-feeder.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough, however don't forget this: EM has miserable AoE mitigation... AoE controls like foot stomp, fault or even hand clap can count a lot for a brute.