Adding a damage debuff on CE is great - thank you for that. I'm also glad you reduced it's -recharge, rather than upping the endurance cost.
I'm willing to accept that tanks will be, in general, weaker in I5. That's fine. Losing ~10% DEF on Wet Ice does that. Losing ~4% DEF on FA and GA does that.
EA is the sticking point for me. It's still a fine power. Frankly, 0.5% DEF per enemy is not too bad - and makes a significant difference.
The problem is that, prior to I5, Ice Tanks were able to accept somewhat low defense overall because we knew that EA was coming. Once we had EA, we were set we were banking on the fact that EA was a better than average power.
On test, EA is now a good taunt/endurance recovery power, but it no longer completes our defensive picture. Ice Tanks are a bit weak before EA, and we are also weak after EA.
This goes 10 times for Fire. Ice Tanks are now totally vulnerable to fire damage. The only defense we get to them is a mediocre 17% - if we jump into a group of 14+ fire-throwing enemies... not a good idea.
I have three suggetsion for EA - none of them unsaid before this:
1 - Increase the base DEF bonus on EA. 1% would be fine.
2 - Make the first target count for more. Say 7.5% DEF for the first target hit, and 1% thereafter. Make that first boost unenhancable, if you need to.
3 - Make the DEF granted vs Fire significantly higher. I'm thinking 4 or 5x DEF vs Fire. I'm draining the energy out of my foes - I want to extinguish their fires. I want to withstand fire attacks.
Ice tanks are weak to both Psi and Fire. Our PSI weakness is not a problem - it's a common ailment. But our Fire weakness cripples us. With the old EA, it was not much of an issue. But 17% Fire DEF simply will not stave off death for even a second if you are facing 14+ fire-throwing enemies.
--Mr. Strange
Statesman, can we also please talk about rearraging the set some?
Glacial Armor needs to come much sooner now.
Like maybe moving Icicles later (can we get a major End reduction on Icicles please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
Also, the Chiling Embrace debuff is a good idea.
[ QUOTE ]
Chilling Embrace gains the ability to debuff mob damage (though it's Recharge debuff is slightly slower now).
[/ QUOTE ]
So I take it that now Ice Tanks should move there WI slots to CE, slot WI with end, EA with recharges and CE with def debuffs. So now we have some SL in FA, Eng/Neg in GA and a def debuff in CE. Am I missing something here but isn't our def still gone? Without any gain from EA or WI?
Perma Frost is still a power that is questionable to take because frankly the two types of dmg that are most rarely used are toxic and cold. The game is really SL and Fire from 1 to 50. That is the majority of the dm types coming against us (at least in my experience).
[ QUOTE ]
Oh - one other change coming soon to the Training Room...
This was an idea taken right from this forum. Since Ice Armor has no Resistance, it's a zero sum sort of power set. In other words, you're hit or your not. Well, someone (I've forgotten who) suggested adding a Damage Debuff to one of the powers - and we did! Chilling Embrace gains the ability to debuff mob damage (though it's Recharge debuff is slightly slower now).
[/ QUOTE ]
So, for example, instead of hitting you for 100 pts every 5 seconds, he will now hit you for 90 pts every 4 seconds? In 20 seconds, instead of 400 pts damage, it will now be 450? Thanks. Well, maybe he won't survive that long, hopefully.
I hope Wet Ice gets at least 10% defense, now that it is unenhancable.
Adding Toxic to Perma Frost probably won't get more people to take it. You need to add Smashing and Lethal, too.
[ QUOTE ]
This goes 10 times for Fire. Ice Tanks are now totally vulnerable to fire damage. The only defense we get to them is a mediocre 17% - if we jump into a group of 14+ fire-throwing enemies... not a good idea.
--Mr. Strange
[/ QUOTE ]
Alright, I understand that that is bad, but we have to keep with the themes of the game. If fire couldn't effect ice more than other powers then that wouldn't be right.........Just thought I'd say that.
Fire is really too terribly common of a weakness. Especially when you consider Ice already has weakness to Toxic and Psi.
How about instead of giving Wet Ice meaningless unslottable defense, you remove the non-psi defense and give it a decent defense bonus to psi.
This way people who have WI slotted are good, and Ice has something a little more unique. All of this without improving the survivability of Ice tanks by a very large margin.
[ QUOTE ]
Oh - one other change coming soon to the Training Room...
This was an idea taken right from this forum. Since Ice Armor has no Resistance, it's a zero sum sort of power set. In other words, you're hit or your not. Well, someone (I've forgotten who) suggested adding a Damage Debuff to one of the powers - and we did! Chilling Embrace gains the ability to debuff mob damage (though it's Recharge debuff is slightly slower now).
[/ QUOTE ]
Woot! What precent will the debuff be, since it cant be enhanced...50%? ( a man can dream) If this number is somthing significant, i might actually blow the dust off my ice tanker. My first character! My first love! Give him a reason to exist! Sorry, got caught in the moment.
[ QUOTE ]
Toxic is impossible to tell, so is Psi. Please keep in mind that most Toxic and all Psi attacks are ranged and therefore they will not be in melee range to be affected by Chilling Embrace generally speaking.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just a very minor quibble, but there are, in fact, some melee psychic attacks - the Spectral minions and lieuts of the Circle of Thorns have melee attacks split between psychic and negative energy damage. Otherwise, your point stands.
Ok, so you say Invulnerable is better against some damage types and Ice is better against others States....but the numbers I'm seeing tells that the AMOUNT Invulnerability is better than Ice is OFF THE CHART!!! Not to mention Invulnerability is EXTREMELY better against the most common damage type, that being Smashing/Lethal!!
I guess that all this may depend on the Damage Debuff you propose with Chilling Embrace to mitigate this...but without the facts, it does appear that there is a BIG difference still between Ice and Invulnerable tankers.
To be honest, I was COMPLETELY shocked by the nerfs to Ice tankers, lol...but what do I know? I can see where your going with this, some tankers are better against some forms of damage - each has their caveat so to speak.
However, realize that superior effectiveness against Smashing/Lethal has a MUCH greater impact on the game, then ANY of the other damage types. Especially, when I look at Circeus' response with your updated numbers and the Smashing/Lethal difference is still in the triple digits -while Ice's superiority to the other damage types is no where near this level.
Again, I applaud what you and the devs are trying to do right now, but let's get it right this time for all the AT's. This back and forth with AT's changing drastically every update is killing me! 
Circeus, there is something you (and many others) have glossed over about Statesman's numbers...they are off...WAY off.
As stated, invul passives are 7.5% (which has been tested and everyone agrees on that number) but where the error comes is in the enhancements. Statesman said that max with +3 level SO resists you would get 18.975% from the invul passives. Think that through everyone. To get 18.975% from +3 level enhancements each enhancement would need to provide 25.5% buff (((1 + (6 * .255)) * 7.5) = 18.975). This means that each defense and resist SO is gaining a 9.167% boost each level, as opposed to the accepted (and dev quoted from long ago) 5% boost each level.
Invul max on passives should be 17.85 = ((1 + (6 * (.2 * 1.15))) * 7.5)
Is it possible the internal test server has again had different numbers fed into it than what we encounter on test/live (like what happened with regen before issue 4)? If this is the reason for such drastic changes (because the internal server is providing higher buffs than live/test) could it be possible that the powers are getting lowered too much again?
Please Statesman, can we get some confirmation on if you are just using the wrong numbers from memory...or is your internal server screwy again?
[ QUOTE ]
Unless an Invulnerability Tanker fires off Invincibility when 12 or more mobs are within range,
[/ QUOTE ]
Uhh, Invinc is a toggle, you know that right?
[ QUOTE ]
Oh - one other change coming soon to the Training Room...
This was an idea taken right from this forum. Since Ice Armor has no Resistance, it's a zero sum sort of power set. In other words, you're hit or your not. Well, someone (I've forgotten who) suggested adding a Damage Debuff to one of the powers - and we did! Chilling Embrace gains the ability to debuff mob damage (though it's Recharge debuff is slightly slower now).
[/ QUOTE ]
I was going to go on a major rant about how this sucks, about how it's giving us half-arsed melee-only RES without doing actually giving us any, but I won't.
Because despite that, it sounds like its effective RES vs. All, which will be nice. Might make us a bit less of a punching bag.
I would however say that this power (and similar ones in other sets) really makes clear the need for -Recharge enhancements and -Damage enhancement for debuff powers.
Because as it stands now, most people will take this and only slot it for endurance and taunt.
[ QUOTE ]
Some have asked "have you looked at Circeus' numbers?"
Of course! Circeus does an absolutely terrific job of number crunching. His spreadsheets are great.
Here's my analysis of them.
The Defense given by Invincibility is incorrect in the table. Invincibility has a cap of 14 mobs; no more. The Invincibility Defense max for Tankers (with the Enhancement limitations Circeus placed) around 53% not 107.8%.
That changes the numbers significantly, but Invulnerability still ends up superior overall.
Now that assumes that the Invulnerability Tanker has 14 mobs within the slight range of Invincibility. Let's say that there's only 7 mobs within reach. Now Invincibility's defense boost (according to Circeus' chart) drops down to 26.5%. A quick scan down at the damage comparison shows that Invulnerability is superior only in Smashing, Lethal Damage and Fire damage; Ice bests Invulnerability in the other categories.
Unless an Invulnerability Tanker fires off Invincibility when 12 or more mobs are within range, according to Circeus' chart, Ice Armor will be superior to Invulnerability against Cold, Psionic, Toxic, Energy and Negative.
Also, Frozen Armor and Glacial Armor have a base 16% Def, not 15%.
I used Circeus' post here for the spreadsheets.
[/ QUOTE ]
One (possibly nitpicky) point: Invuln does not have to gather its fourteen mobs before using Invincibility - Invince is a toggle. This means you don't have to wait to get those twelve-fourteen mobs in range in order to 'fire it off' - you can make use of the lower +DEF from, say, five or six, while you're gathering up the rest of your minion shield.
Kam
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Toxic is impossible to tell, so is Psi. Please keep in mind that most Toxic and all Psi attacks are ranged and therefore they will not be in melee range to be affected by Chilling Embrace generally speaking.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just a very minor quibble, but there are, in fact, some melee psychic attacks - the Spectral minions and lieuts of the Circle of Thorns have melee attacks split between psychic and negative energy damage. Otherwise, your point stands.
[/ QUOTE ]
Those are mislabeled. It's smashing/negative.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Oh - one other change coming soon to the Training Room...
This was an idea taken right from this forum. Since Ice Armor has no Resistance, it's a zero sum sort of power set. In other words, you're hit or your not. Well, someone (I've forgotten who) suggested adding a Damage Debuff to one of the powers - and we did! Chilling Embrace gains the ability to debuff mob damage (though it's Recharge debuff is slightly slower now).
[/ QUOTE ]
This is a good change, that I like.
And not just because I'm one of the hojillion people who suggested it at one point or another. 
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm vain, so that's exactly why I like it! 
[ QUOTE ]
Oh - one other change coming soon to the Training Room...
This was an idea taken right from this forum. Since Ice Armor has no Resistance, it's a zero sum sort of power set. In other words, you're hit or your not. Well, someone (I've forgotten who) suggested adding a Damage Debuff to one of the powers - and we did! Chilling Embrace gains the ability to debuff mob damage (though it's Recharge debuff is slightly slower now).
[/ QUOTE ]
Interesting, Damage Debuffs rock, as my Dark Miasma playing brethren well know. This should help Ice significantly with the one shot by AVs problem, when combined with the lowered AV damage you have proposed.
Care to tell us the percentage of the damage debuff that you will be assigning to Chilling Embrace?
Also, please clarify as to whether this will be specific to Ice Armor, or if it will apply to Blaster-Ice Manipulation-Chilling Embrace, or to the Chilling Embrace that Ice Control-Jack Frost runs.
Heroes
Dysmal
Lumynous
Sam Steele
Pluck
Wile
Slagheap
Pressure Wave
Rhiannon Bel
Verified
Stellaric
Syd Mallorn
Villains
Jotunheim Skald
Saer Maen
Jen Corbae
Illuminance
Venator Arawn
Taiga Dryad
Tarranos
Maybe its just me but I don't want resistance. I don't want to be an invuln with different graphics. I want what my set is suppose to be and thats defence. Why are you so afraid to give us more defence until we are balanced?
An enemy fires 20 shots hits every time takes 200 HP away from an invuln
An enemy fires 20 shots only hits half the times we take 200 HP's still.
yes acc comes into play thats why we should have a little more def then invuln has resistance. I just don't understand why the devs are willing to give a damage debuff, some resistance but not defining attribute of the AT.
[ QUOTE ]
Unless an Invulnerability Tanker fires off Invincibility when 12 or more mobs are within range, according to Circeus' chart, Ice Armor will be superior to Invulnerability against Cold, Psionic, Toxic, Energy and Negative.
[/ QUOTE ]
Cold damage comes from some Crey enemies, Outcasts in the Chiller line, and Ice Thorn Casters. I may be missing some, but I do recall hearing that cold is the rarest damage type in the game. Which means that being the best at it is, if you'll pardon the phrase, cold comfort at best.
To the best of my knowledge, none of the Ice powers provide defense to Psionic. Any edge Ice may have over Invulnerability against Psionics would be due just to the reduced attack frequency (which won't be as good once the damage debuff happens, but I'm assuming that the damage debuff will be enough to result in a net decrease in incoming damage).
Did Toxic defense finally get implemented? If not, then any protection we've got is coming from Hoarfrost.
Energy and Negative Energy don't have any clouds attached to their silver linings, but since Invulnerability is better than Ice against smash and lethal (the most common damage types, as you said), and we're completely naked against fire now that two of our three sources of protection from it have been gutted and the third offers only token resistance, I think ice is still trailing behind.
And on a tangent, I have to agree with whoever it was that said 0.5% defense is not worth using or slotting, so just take it out of Wet Ice and remove the ability to slot defense enhancers with it so people don't waste slots putting defense enhancements in it.
[ QUOTE ]
Oh - one other change coming soon to the Training Room...
This was an idea taken right from this forum. Since Ice Armor has no Resistance, it's a zero sum sort of power set. In other words, you're hit or your not. Well, someone (I've forgotten who) suggested adding a Damage Debuff to one of the powers - and we did! Chilling Embrace gains the ability to debuff mob damage (though it's Recharge debuff is slightly slower now).
[/ QUOTE ]
Not good enough. Resistance or nothing. An ice tank cannot slot CE to increase damage debuff. And something tells me that the debuff won't be that high so not to tread on defender/controller toes. If invuls are great agianist sm/le why not make ice great against energy/neg energy. Give perma frost a nice ngy/neg resistance instead of toxic. Another thing EA's end buff should contenue until the buff wears off, sense we use it for defense at the begining of a fight.
[ QUOTE ]
People have recorded the base of Invincibility at 3.5%, so I was only going by that, please feel free to give the correct number (for range too please!)
3.5% * (1 + (6 * .22)) = 8.12% per mob.
8.12% * 14 mobs is 113.68.
[/ QUOTE ]
The number isn't 3.5% base - it's 1.5%. To be honest - I don't know where the data came from that led to 3.5%.
Certainly, your points on Toxic and Psi are true; let's not forget that Invulnerability has an inherent weakness to Psi in Unyielding, though. It's safe to say that Ice is better (albeit marginally) because it lacks that weakness.
You're 100% correct about assuming 14 mobs in EA AND Invincibility - though something else isn't taken into account. Invincibility works only while mobs are in melee. So as the number of mobs decrease, Invincibility decreases. If a Tanker leaves melee range for 1 second, the buff from Invincibility fades...This isn't the case with EA; it's a click that lasts 45 seconds. The calculation of mobs is done at the moment it's used - and that buff carries throughout the 45 seconds. It doesn't decrease like Invincibility.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
People have recorded the base of Invincibility at 3.5%, so I was only going by that, please feel free to give the correct number (for range too please!)
3.5% * (1 + (6 * .22)) = 8.12% per mob.
8.12% * 14 mobs is 113.68.
[/ QUOTE ]
The number isn't 3.5% base - it's 1.5%. To be honest - I don't know where the data came from that led to 3.5%.
Certainly, your points on Toxic and Psi are true; let's not forget that Invulnerability has an inherent weakness to Psi in Unyielding, though. It's safe to say that Ice is better (albeit marginally) because it lacks that weakness.
You're 100% correct about assuming 14 mobs in EA AND Invincibility - though something else isn't taken into account. Invincibility works only while mobs are in melee. So as the number of mobs decrease, Invincibility decreases. If a Tanker leaves melee range for 1 second, the buff from Invincibility fades...This isn't the case with EA; it's a click that lasts 45 seconds. The calculation of mobs is done at the moment it's used - and that buff carries throughout the 45 seconds. It doesn't decrease like Invincibility.
[/ QUOTE ]
But Ice Tanks do have a weakness to Psychic
[ QUOTE ]
Circeus, there is something you (and many others) have glossed over about Statesman's numbers...they are off...WAY off.
As stated, invul passives are 7.5% (which has been tested and everyone agrees on that number) but where the error comes is in the enhancements. Statesman said that max with +3 level SO resists you would get 18.975% from the invul passives. Think that through everyone. To get 18.975% from +3 level enhancements each enhancement would need to provide 25.5% buff (((1 + (6 * .255)) * 7.5) = 18.975). This means that each defense and resist SO is gaining a 9.167% boost each level, as opposed to the accepted (and dev quoted from long ago) 5% boost each level.
Invul max on passives should be 17.85 = ((1 + (6 * (.2 * 1.15))) * 7.5)
[/ QUOTE ]
7.5% base * (1+ (6 Enhancements * .2 Enhancement increase)) * 1.15 for +3 Enhancements = 18.975.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Circeus, there is something you (and many others) have glossed over about Statesman's numbers...they are off...WAY off.
As stated, invul passives are 7.5% (which has been tested and everyone agrees on that number) but where the error comes is in the enhancements. Statesman said that max with +3 level SO resists you would get 18.975% from the invul passives. Think that through everyone. To get 18.975% from +3 level enhancements each enhancement would need to provide 25.5% buff (((1 + (6 * .255)) * 7.5) = 18.975). This means that each defense and resist SO is gaining a 9.167% boost each level, as opposed to the accepted (and dev quoted from long ago) 5% boost each level.
Invul max on passives should be 17.85 = ((1 + (6 * (.2 * 1.15))) * 7.5)
[/ QUOTE ]
7.5% base * (1+ (6 Enhancements * .2 Enhancement increase)) * 1.15 for +3 Enhancements = 18.975.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hm. This seems off to me. Is the +/- level enhancement modifier really applied to the base percentage as well? All powers I've tested seem to show that the modifier applies only to the enhancements: (different brackets used to denote nesting levels for easier comprehensibility)
buff = base percentage * (1 + [{# enh} * {enh %age} * {enh modifier}]),
rather than
buff = base percentage * (1 + [{# enh} * {enh %age}]) * (enh modifier)
Kam
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Circeus, there is something you (and many others) have glossed over about Statesman's numbers...they are off...WAY off.
As stated, invul passives are 7.5% (which has been tested and everyone agrees on that number) but where the error comes is in the enhancements. Statesman said that max with +3 level SO resists you would get 18.975% from the invul passives. Think that through everyone. To get 18.975% from +3 level enhancements each enhancement would need to provide 25.5% buff (((1 + (6 * .255)) * 7.5) = 18.975). This means that each defense and resist SO is gaining a 9.167% boost each level, as opposed to the accepted (and dev quoted from long ago) 5% boost each level.
Invul max on passives should be 17.85 = ((1 + (6 * (.2 * 1.15))) * 7.5)
[/ QUOTE ]
7.5% base * (1+ (6 Enhancements * .2 Enhancement increase)) * 1.15 for +3 Enhancements = 18.975.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm gonna have to pay more attention in math class just to understand what all that means for me. 
[ QUOTE ]
Oh - one other change coming soon to the Training Room...
This was an idea taken right from this forum. Since Ice Armor has no Resistance, it's a zero sum sort of power set. In other words, you're hit or your not. Well, someone (I've forgotten who) suggested adding a Damage Debuff to one of the powers - and we did! Chilling Embrace gains the ability to debuff mob damage (though it's Recharge debuff is slightly slower now).
[/ QUOTE ]
Slower to affect targets? Or more slowing? The bolded part really isn't terribly clear!!!