-
Posts
2499 -
Joined
-
Well, yeah. I'm not honestly sure what impact those charts should be providing for balance discussions, since they are talking about situations that don't really happen in this game. Heck, DPS seems a really reckless thing to discuss in City, because this game is much more about punctuated bursts.
-
Quote:Well, I figured I was being particularly polite on the matter - I don't agree with your presupposed premise, and that's pretty much it, so there's no real point us arguing past one another.Aw, and here I thought if I used your favorite new word I'd get on your good side...
Quote:Then you finish up by complaining that my suggested improvements don't address stalkers, when in fact they do, since my suggested changes include improvements to stun, ET and TF.
Quote:I'd use your favorite word again to describe your argument, but it doesn't really fit, because your arguments are just flat out illogical and factually incorrect, but you are consistent in that technique.
You presume that Energy was fine; you assert that Energy, now, is insufficient for the balance range of play. But you can't prove that, and to be fair, I can't disprove that, because neither of us have anything remotely like provable samples of data. Your assertions satisfy you, my caution satisfies me. -
I'm sorry, I don't understand what you're asking. Can you be more clear?
-
I assume 'concentrated strike' is going to get ignored 'cos it's new?
I thought I'd already made it clear that I don't think your opinion in this discussion holds any weight; you think Energy was balanced before the change, which obviously means this change is a flat-out downpowering of something you think was acceptable. I on the other hand, look at the change, played the set after the change, and can both say with confidence in my own experience that the set is still very strong and compares well to other melee sets, and that if it was markedly better, it was probably overpowered, and viewing the development history that the set was downpowered with basically nothing to return for it, indicating that it was too good.
These devs are not functionally retartded. They know how to make changes that are give-and-take, and they didn't make a give-and-take. They just took. Which indicates there had already been too much give.
The 'I don't like it' arguments hold a lot more weight to me than the 'the set was fine, wtf were they doing?' arguments. The former I can see reasons to help, with things like power customization, or maybe even exploring niche ways to improve the feel of Energy - but to act as if the change was unreasonable, and as if Energy Transfer represents the whole set ('fast set' 'theme of self-damage' 'unreliable stuns') strikes me as incorrect on the facts at best.
Furthermore, Leo consistantly raises a good point; changes to Whirling Hands completely fails to address stalkers. If you feel the set is underpowered, you should be looking for fixes to the set. Not fixes to your brute or your tank. And of the three archetypes, stalkers are definitely the one who needs the most help. -
Quote:Aside from when we crossed the atlantic, I spent the entire road trip to England in a car...
The build up to that point was almost cheap, too (sides lotg). -
Quote:Well, you said 'absolutely,' so I can't argue with that.
Which brings me to a question you posed in another post - should em do more single target damage than fire melee? Absolutely, due to the fact it is severely outclassed in aoe ability. -
The set was only fast because of one attack, which was too fast. The set wasn't fast - one bugged power was fast.
-
-
The issue I have is that there's an attitude that Energy Melee has to be the best at some form of damage to be seen as acceptable. It doesn't.
On the other hand, stunning is one of those mezzes that's rarely resisted. There's the forcefield drones produced by Hollow Point and Sky Raider Engineers, but beyond those guys, stuns are going to do the job against anyone (stuns are the hole for some 'hard to mez' types like high-level Fortunata, for example). Furthermore, EM can stack them up quickly (relatively so). I've seen bosses under those force fields stunned, thanks to an EM stalker - so it's hard for me to consider the stuns as 'bad.' Especially when considering my bias towards dominators and control archetypes.
(I actually, a long time ago, argued that EM, because of its long animations, should have its powers start recharging before the animations were done. I was argued down from that point, but it's closer to the 'recharge bonus' idea than other stuff.)
I think ET is a great power, even now. The fact it used to be greater is frustrating, sure, but that doesn't mean it deserves something because of the change. When I hear people saying things like 'EM was balanced around,' it seems a specious argument, because the set... wasn't. That's why it was changed.
Ah well. Some wounds run deep.
(I am a little sad that my genuinely helpful post to Ultimo was completely ignored. :\ ) -
It's only really good if you lack for a PBAOE control, don't have a damage aura and really want some extra recharge from the taunt sets. So no fire/ or /earth. I can see a Grav going for it, to have a better every-spawn power.
(GRAVITY IS FINE) -
Quote:I find your argument somewhat specious; energy is not only about attacks that do self-damage. One could just as easily say that ET pays HP to get a power to recharge faster, not to do more damage.Considering significant portion of energy melee's damage is coming from an attack that damages the user, as well as energy melee having arguably the worst AE damage of any melee set, there are a lot of people in these forums that have expressed exactly that in therms of single target damage. Even then, fiery melee would have significantly better AE damage and overall more efficient damage per endurance. I deliberately ignore the crackpots asking for large sums of AE damage.
While it's all nice and wonderful to simply place the attack set with the least mitigation as the set deserving the highest single target damage, one must weigh energy melee's damage it inflicts upon its own user against the benefit of disorients which, like most controls, don't always work.
And 'it doesn't sometimes work' is not a great argument against the stuns as a design element. Fire's DoTs are random in their duration and damage, and even if they're not, sometimes fire gets resisted. -
... That without trying, without marketeering, without actively generating money at all, I'm still sitting on billions of inf, knowing that all sorts of people are complaining about the market being too hard, and that the only thing that separates my habits from theirs is a small amount of knowledge, knowledge freely available.
I'm very happy to be an elitist when the line between 'elite' and 'not elite' is the effort it requires to cook a decent meal. -
-
Yes, they do. Invoke Panic goes from Mag 2 (meh) to Mag 4.
-
Depends on the powersets. My earth/earth might be able to make use of Phase Shift; throwing down a pseudopet for control, then Phase Shifting into position, while the alpha gets wasted, that's pretty nice, and the powers need no extra slotting.
On high-recharge permadom builds that don't need to lean on a lot of other slots, I'd actually consider snagging the Presence Pool. With permadom, the AoE Terrorize is mag 4, and not a terrible radius - which can make it an acceptable emergency mez if you lack a damage aura. -
That's because the CoHWiki would rather parrot box art than have actual information.
-
How do you define king, though?
King in extreme IO circumstances?
King when buffed?
King solo?
King teamed?
For what it's worth, just a history note for people; the note that led to the fix on ET was submitted by Castle to GEKO. Ie, back when Statesman was around. It happened over two years after States left. the problem had nothing to do with proliferation, it had nothing to do with PVP, it was just that the individual power's DPA was completely out of whack with what the powers guy's rules said was reasonable.
(Dates rough) -
Kinda hard to imagine him 6-slotting IOs for damage.
-
Maybe the fact you haven't played him in years is hampering your ability and your memory.
-
Ditto. The only time I've ever seriously tried to de-socket a character was when I pulled out 27 purples, and that was tedious as all get-out and discouraged me from ever doing it again.
-
Quote:Don't you realise, nobody in the world likes knockback!?I have to say, I rather like Energy Melee, but Energy Transfer seems to me to be missing something. My original suggestion, that it could use a Knockback effect, was met with the expected resistance (no one seems to like knockback but me), but I have had some other thoughts.
(Flashbacks to Kinetic Melee beta, forgive me)
Quote:My suggestion that at least the option of knockback be added stands. I mean, the animation thrusts out both arms like you're pushing, but the enemy doesn't go anywhere. Make it knockdown, with the option of making it knockback by slotting appropriately.
That said, if you like the idea of your version of ET to knock people over sometimes, there's a knockdown proc available to the set Stupefy, which is a 20% for knockback. Not enough to get persistantly annoying, but enough to give you that 'Boom, POW' feeling you might be looking for.
Case in point. While this idea is doable - look at Bullet Rain - it's a little optimistic to think that it's going to do but open wounds to go tooling with the ET animation now.