[ QUOTE ]
It all happened to start with the I4 regen nerfs and the devs claims of how overpowered Regen was. Their examples included Regen doing such amazing things as solo'ing large groups of +8 bosses. They even went as far as to provide demo "proof" of this feat, a post in which Statesman made a snide comment about us "conspiracy theorists". Well, low and behold, their test enviroment was completely borked.
Apologies were made and thanks given, of course it did nothing to change the course of the nerfs, but I guess that could be viewed as a seperate issue.
[/ QUOTE ]
What I take issue with (although I haven't kept up with the thread) is the fuzziness between "The developers are wrong in their assessment of the gameplay", "The developers are implementing a poor solution to a valid problem", and "the developers are lying." The first two I can accept wholeheartedly. As your example points out, they've been wrong. My opinion about the Phase Shift change and (to a lesser degree) movement power supression is that the changes are overkill for the PvE problems.
But lying? No. I don't accept that. I think what happens to a lot of people, myself included, is that we read statements by the developers, take away what we want to hear and ignore the caveats, and when those caveats kick in we turn around and state, "But you said...!"
I think this post by Positron is a perfect example. A search for Statesman's posts pre-I4 should turn up the "whenever possible" caveat. When supression came up there was some speculation that it was strictly a PvP issue, but posts by Statesman, FrostyBot, and Pilcrow -- the latter two going in and demonstrating the PvE problems with movement powers -- showed that there was a PvE problem. Now, whether supression is a satisfactory solution to the PvE problems...
As an aside, I'm going to quibble that Statesman ever called those who disliked the actual changes "conspiracy theorists." He did mention Conspiracy Theorists here, but in context I take that to mean "people who think the developers faked the Zapru-- er, test video. I also quibble that the revelation that the test environment was screwy didn't result in the developers rethinking particular nerfs. Sure, there's still been nerfs, but I suspect they weren't as severe as they were going to be had the playerbase not caught the problems with the developers' test environment.
[ QUOTE ]
Sure, there's still been nerfs, but I suspect they weren't as severe as they were going to be had the playerbase not caught the problems with the developers' test environment.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'll let you all take this where you will so I'll just point out that not a single thing changed after finding out their internal test server had a horrible bug on it.
Actually I take that back, they did end up nerfing MoG between that time and the Issue going Live.
[ QUOTE ]
I could have sworn they changed the degree of the nerfage
[/ QUOTE ]
You would be right. They included nerfing MoG as well.
They also stated that Regen was doing things others couldn't, such as taking on large herds of +4s and such. Then they ran tests not against regen without the change but with it. And it came in second amoung the scrapper sets using their kind of weird builds. Problem is they never showed anywhere that regen was doing anything others could not. Unfortunately every time they said regen could do this (say herd) regen players would say wait so can (list your build, though tanks, controllers, and defenders were often used). It was not a thread regen ever had a chance in. That was my biggest issue with I4. They asked for input but then I totally felt from their answers they never actually wanted to hear it.
You know funniest part is my Inv tank in I4 herded up 22 +7s including one boss and did so with Temp Inv off just to prove Invincibility was way over powered in my eyes. I ran a ton of tests on that and even invited people to see how crazy you could be with Invinc. All this was true while the devs were telling us regen herding 20 +4s was over powered and unequalled by others. Heck in I5 I have twice gather groups of 10+ +7s and been fine ten minutes later. (By the way actually arresting +7s is tedious work, takes my tank about 10 minutes per foe so generally I did not bother but I did once against a group of 11 still at the last one (I4) I have to run as without the defense bonus from Invinc I am meat. In I5 I get in serious trouble at about 4 left. I only do this for testing and I can't hold the aggro at all so when pals come to watch they need to keep back or I will loose aggro and they will have to run about a bit. Taunt works for about a 2 count on a +7.)
With I5 my issue is States statement about end issues being the reason for IH nerfage, I then look at CoV's regen and see that he lacks Quick Recovery. Scrapper Regen could pay for IH end cost but obviously Cov's regen would struggle mightily trying to. I do feel he should have been more honest about that, there was no need to call it anything but a nerf designed to make regen in CoV work. That wouldn't make me thrilled but at least it would feel more honest then what we got.
I don't think States lied per-say but he did dodge the truth as much as he could. I don't think he would lie but he has to be as vague as possible when they aren't really ready to present the whole picture and sometimes that can come off as dishonest I guess is my point. It does tend to forester the "don't trust him" feelings and its like politicians.
But all that said and all my feelings about thing aside calling him a liar isn't right. It never is. He says something outright very rarely so I tend to take him at his word when he does. If later some proof comes out otherwise well that's that but that proof can't be conjecture and happenstance it's not fair to do that.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The changes in I5 had very little to do with PvP and a lot to do with boring PvE. It's that simple. No conspiracy there - I think I've stated this several times.
[/ QUOTE ]
If this was your goal, you should take a second look. CoH had very fun and exciting PvE for more than a year. People could try and do a wide variety of things to face enemies. They could invent fun new ways to play, rather than the predictable and boring formula of 1 hero = 3 minions. Things that were fun in CoH before are now not possible, or possible only with a precise mix of powers spanning multiple archetypes.
Let's face it: People gathered huge herds of mobs because it was FUN! It may not have been balanced vis-a-vis risk versus reward (though nobody posts the herding attempts that end in horrible defeat), but it was fun and entertaining, and CoH was the only game where it was possible. It made people feel like super heroes!
People attempted to solo Arch-Villains because it was fun! It was not easy, and for many not possible. The forums didn't receive many tales of how an arch-villain stomped a lone hero into the ground three times before the hero gave up. But for people who were bored with the standard 3-mob spawns, an Arch-Villain presented a fun and exciting challenge. For those who found a way to triumph, it provided immense pride and satisfaction, with a feeling of heroism: "I have done the impossible."
People mezzed huge spawns of mobs because it was fun! It was a ticking time-bomb of aggro, and they were racing against the clock to defuse it. Each time they succeeded, they would consider tackling a larger group the next time. It made them feel heroic: "I can put an army to sleep."
How many can we gather?
How much can we withstand?
How far can we push the limits?
These things were fun. But they were not balanced. They were not formulaic.
I5 was not targeting boring PvE. It was targeting imbalance. Balance is important for PvP, but it is rarely fun and even less rarely achievable.
You may even believe that fun was your goal. But look again: You've removed many kinds of fun, and bolstered a very narrow form. There is fun in challenge, and in balance, but these are not the only kinds of fun... Or rather, they weren't the only kinds until I5.
The fun has gone out for me. Perhaps that's why I've gone from 20 hours a week to 2 since I5 hit. I thank you for that: I have my life back. And I thank you for how fun it used to be: It was very entertaining. But the fun is gone and my friends have already left. I'm just hanging on for nostalgia, but even nostalgia isn't what it used to be...
[/ QUOTE ]
Say what you will about balanced and formulaic but most of us asked ourselves "whats the point of playing If I have to herd 20 mobs in order to have it present a challenge."
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sure, there's still been nerfs, but I suspect they weren't as severe as they were going to be had the playerbase not caught the problems with the developers' test environment.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'll let you all take this where you will so I'll just point out that not a single thing changed after finding out their internal test server had a horrible bug on it.
Actually I take that back, they did end up nerfing MoG between that time and the Issue going Live.
[/ QUOTE ]
And yet just because the test enviroment when they did the initial tests was borked, does not mean that when they re-tested with a fixed enviroment Regen still wasn't bad.
I realized I did not address the points made in the original post, which is something that irks me when others do it in favor of discussing whatever sub-argument has started in the thread. That said, regarding the OP:
costumes - Yes, there are some *horrible* clipping issues and nasty pop-up with a lot of the new costume pieces. The re-organization of costume pieces has also taken away options from players. All of these are bad things. But we have been told that fixes are coming, so I am not too concerned here, apart from timeframe (I suspect Issue 6 at the earliest for any fixes to this stuff).
sonic powers - this one bothers me a bit more. The artists who work on CoH are very talented people. Some of the audio and visual effects are truly dazzling, clever and amusing. But when they muck up, they do it in a way that is utterly baffling. How could *anyone* on the dev team think the looping sound on Fortitude was a good idea? Why does super speed need a looping sound at all when it has a huge and obvious visual effect, even when the player is standing still? These are QoL issues, but they are ones that aren't tucked away in a part of the interface you only see occasionally, they are front and center.
The devs have done some good work here to fix problems and are doing more. I give them full credit for that. But some of these issues should never have happened in the first place.
repetitive content - New maps and missions (not just reworking the occasional existing one) should be top priority, in my opinion, above new zones, new powersets, graphics improvements or anything else. There is a small group of "tilesets" we play through and it doesn't take long for even a new player to start seeing the repetition. Getting more variety into the game's environments is critical to its longevity.
I don't know how difficult it is to create new maps (with attendant new art, sound, critter placement, etc.) and I've no doubt it's time-consuming. Still, the base game shipped with a small number and we've only seen a handful added since to the regular missions. We need more. Please. 
On the PvP vs. PvE issue, I think some changes - like the alteration of phase shift - were done primarily with PvP in mind and then some PvE reasons were tossed in (the PvE reasons for the PS change are, in my opinion, laughable). Overall, I do think the global defense reduction in Issue 5 was about the PvE game, with the object to make it more challenging, since it was too easy before. I have no problem with that, having played I5 for over a month now.
I am still satisfied with the game and have a lot of fun with it, despite all that I've said here. That is a testament to its overall design and the talent of those who made it.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sure, there's still been nerfs, but I suspect they weren't as severe as they were going to be had the playerbase not caught the problems with the developers' test environment.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'll let you all take this where you will so I'll just point out that not a single thing changed after finding out their internal test server had a horrible bug on it.
Actually I take that back, they did end up nerfing MoG between that time and the Issue going Live.
[/ QUOTE ]
And yet just because the test enviroment when they did the initial tests was borked, does not mean that when they re-tested with a fixed enviroment Regen still wasn't bad.
[/ QUOTE ]
But after the first test proved to be done in a bork enviroment only after finally posting a vid to prove their point wouldn't a vid to show the enviroment was fine in the second tests have been fair?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you have a link to that because last I hcecked states was prety set on the rule of 3when it comes to soloing (3 white con mobs to a hero*
[/ QUOTE ]
Last I checked, States retracted that, largely because of SOs. Now it's "more like" three red minions to a hero at higher levels when soloing.
I have to add "more like" because I remember that's what he said, and I know that some people will point out all the various combinations that are not exactly three minions.
[/ QUOTE ]
well in either case that is still a far cry from "plowing through a dozen +8 bosses" I don't think ANY AT should be capable of that
[/ QUOTE ]
Sigh.
The devs posted an internal balance testing video where they were one-shotting super purple foes. This was literally used as defense of recent balance changes to Scrappers. People were like "uh, no player anywhere can ever do that." The devs were like "oh, yeah, you're right. Turns out our testbed was a code branch with a huge damage bug in it." No more was mentioned of it as defense of the "balance" changes but they went live.
THAT is what Noizy's talking about.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You answered most of your questions yourself. The writing is on the wall, all their eggs in one basket as you put it. I5 was the beginning of the transition of turning CoH from a PvE based experience into one focused on the PvP aspects to be introduced with CoV.
A majority of future content, I would wager especially end game content, is meant to be player generated...ie:PvP.
[/ QUOTE ]
Erm. No. PvP will be an optional part of gameplay. Always.
The changes in I5 had very little to do with PvP and a lot to do with boring PvE. It's that simple. No conspiracy there - I think I've stated this several times.
As for the supposed "emphasis" on PvP - I think you'll see that it's just ONE part of City of Villains. It has PvE content levels 1 to 50.
We'll continue to add new PvE content (which I5 did exclusively, I might add) in the future.
[/ QUOTE ]
No matter how many times you say this, people will always be calling you a liar and saying every change made was to make the arenas better.
*sigh*
Formerly "Back Alley Brawler"
I haven't really minded any nerfage yet (that stayed nerfed). My worst was the suppression on Snowstorm or Radiation Infection, and it's been reversed.
And I think the PvP will be kinda fun when I bother with it, which I suspect will be seldom. But I do think they should've just spent that time making more fun into the PvE and forget PvP altogether. I think in the long run they would've sold more games, and I think kept more players playing longer if they'd done that. They dont have infinite resources to implement content, and PvP has taken far too much of their work compared to the value of the result to the game.
But, that's a lesson to be learned or not, and maybe someone will learn it if not Cryptic
I do think it's important to balance every powerset for PvE. Even if a powerset is UBAH-EST OF ALL in pvp, if it is subpar in PvE, it needs a PvE boost.
[ QUOTE ]
I just find it impossible to believe that only 8% of the playerbase has a 50.
Just doesn't jive with logic.
[/ QUOTE ]
I suspect it's because our definition of playerbase is "people who play the game for X hours a week", and their definition is "people who pay 15 bucks a month".
Another thing is, I noticed that they never ask WHY people don't have 50s. Maybe it's because at around level 35, people notice that the time to get from 30-40 is the same as the time it took to get from 1-30, but you only have two city zones and two hazard zones to do it in.
As you gain in level, in this game, you spend MORE time in LESS areas. At level 50 there is one city zone, a hazard zone that nobody goes to, another hazard zone with the most horribly boring and laggy experience the entire game has to offer, and 4 connected, nearly identical hazard zones that have repetitive missions with no storylines, insanely repetitive TFs that require 8 people and blocks of 4-12 (!!) hours to complete, and to top it off the zones punish you for not taking flight or teleport.
So basically, when you split up zones that have meaningful content that don't require a full team for several hours to experience, and you split them by comparable time spent, rather than by equal level spans, you get the following:
1) 1-29: Atlas, Galaxy, King's, The Hollows, Skyway, Steel Canyon, Talos, Independence Port, Striga, Croatoa
2) 30-39: Croatoa (to 35), Brickstown, Founder's Falls
3) 40-50: Peregrine
This just might be why only 8% of the playerbase has level 50s. Everyone I know started serious alts once their main hit about 35, because there just isn't much that's interesting to do from that point on.
Please try my custom mission arcs!
Legacy of a Rogue (ID 459586, Entry for Dr. Aeon's Third Challenge)
Death for Dollars! (ID 1050)
Dr. Duplicate's Dastardly Dare (ID 1218)
Win the Past, Own the Future (ID 1429)
I play X hours a week for over a year, and I don't have a level 50.
And it's for the reasons outlined above.
Though, 40-50 isn't just Peregrine Island. There's also Shadow Shard. And Rikti Crash Site. And all the other dimensions you go to.
But the distance between getting new powers gets MUCH longer. I have to space out my playing my higher level heroes with a lot of playing low levels. And my value of X is around... 15-20? I'd estimate my graph of characters/level is something like:
level 1-10: 20? no idea.
level 10-20: 7 (current) + 3 (deleted) = 10
level 20-30: 5
level 30-40: 3
level 40-50: 1
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
8% of the player base has a level 50
A smaller proportion has multiple 50's
[/ QUOTE ]
Ya know.... I remember when this number came out. I didn't buy it then, and I still don't buy it.
It only took me 4 months to get Bill to 50. Without powerleveling. (Mind you for the most of that four months I was on an extended vacation so I played 12 hours a day)
Celmor got to 50 in like 6 months. Maybe less.. can't remember when I-3 came out. Again, no powerleveling beyond less than a level. (Had to find out what was so wonderful about wolf-herding. Bored me to tears.)
If I can get 2 50s in under a year, working now 40 hrs a week, with a son and wife, taking care of dogs, only getting long game time runs when everyone's crashed or I take a day off....
I just find it impossible to believe that only 8% of the playerbase has a 50.
Just doesn't jive with logic.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree.. this number seems like B-S
I've played for almost 17 months...and I don't have a 50 
Of course, we have no idea what the 50's spread is among servers. I assume that the high pop. servers have more 50's, which are then more visible....I don't see a lot of 50's on my low pop server, although I know we have plenty.....
[ QUOTE ]
40-50: Peregrine
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't forget RCS and the Shadow Shard....which are pretty empty though....
One thing to keep in mind about the number of 50s is many people, like me have one and then about 8 alts on each server. So yes I have a 50 but I have a ton of non-50s that make 8% actually seem likely to me. Even on my home server I only have one post 40 and that's my 50. Everyone else is all over level wise. I come up with a story for a hero and I make him. I don't always play him far but I do have like 4 or 5 servers filled with sub level 10 guys.
[ QUOTE ]
One thing to keep in mind about the number of 50s is many people, like me have one and then about 8 alts on each server. So yes I have a 50 but I have a ton of non-50s that make 8% actually seem likely to me. Even on my home server I only have one post 40 and that's my 50. Everyone else is all over level wise. I come up with a story for a hero and I make him. I don't always play him far but I do have like 4 or 5 servers filled with sub level 10 guys.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ditto here. I have plenty of alts along with my main, and the one I play depends on my mood. We're not all power gamers.
Level 50: Furlon the Grim, BS/Regen Scrapper, Virtue
Current creations:
Slaughterface, DB/Elec Brute
Captain Warhead, Rad/Rad Defender, Virtue
Capt. Scar, Arch/Ice Blaster
Global @ Capt. Scar
there is an epidemic of altidis in this game.. moreso then in I've seen in other games So it wouldnt surprise me if there is fewer 50s then you think.
[ QUOTE ]
there is an epidemic of altidis in this game.. moreso then in I've seen in other games So it wouldnt surprise me if there is fewer 50s then you think.
[/ QUOTE ]
Because the uniqueness of the Character creation is the #1 feature of the game. It feeds the creative drive in many of us. I don't play alts because I get "bored" with my higher characters. I play them because I get an idea for a character or storyline or I read something on the forums that makes me want to try a certain AT or powerset.
Level 50: Furlon the Grim, BS/Regen Scrapper, Virtue
Current creations:
Slaughterface, DB/Elec Brute
Captain Warhead, Rad/Rad Defender, Virtue
Capt. Scar, Arch/Ice Blaster
Global @ Capt. Scar
Yeah that's me. I just think wouldn't it be cool if a hero did this... and then I go try and make a hero that can. Or my pal will call and say "What do you think of a Cold based SuperGroup?" And off we go to try and make one. Actually sad about Croatoa being so perfect for me 50, Celtic Blade would fit there so well. And I think my saddest day was when I out leveled running the Streets of DA to fight the evil magic all around. I only made 50 because my SG stayed so tight and we just had such a ball playing together.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You answered most of your questions yourself. The writing is on the wall, all their eggs in one basket as you put it. I5 was the beginning of the transition of turning CoH from a PvE based experience into one focused on the PvP aspects to be introduced with CoV.
A majority of future content, I would wager especially end game content, is meant to be player generated...ie:PvP.
[/ QUOTE ]
Erm. No. PvP will be an optional part of gameplay. Always.
The changes in I5 had very little to do with PvP and a lot to do with boring PvE. It's that simple. No conspiracy there - I think I've stated this several times.
As for the supposed "emphasis" on PvP - I think you'll see that it's just ONE part of City of Villains. It has PvE content levels 1 to 50.
We'll continue to add new PvE content (which I5 did exclusively, I might add) in the future.
[/ QUOTE ]
You know I have never commented on much of what you say States, but I dont agree that I5 didnt have much to do with PVP. I think the majority of power changes were in fact made because of PVP. None of the pets for example were a problem for anyone including Devs, UNTIL other people had to face them in PVP and then everone said that Trollers and the like were overpowered.
You say you made these changes all in the name of gameplay and making it more fun and adding new content. Well what if we were alreadying having fun in the first place! You said well we added more PVE content, and you did...But were is the above 50 content. You can only do a Hamidon raid so many times you know.
I would deal with these changes better if there was a level cap Increase which doesnt seem to be coming anywhere in the near future. I Love my 50's and Im sick of making New toons everytime I reach 50 because there is nothing more to do. I like to have a goal to strive for I like to "Level Up" and there is no content for that. There are ALOT of 50's now and Im sure Im not the only one who would like to see more content for us.
Anyway my point is what is "Boring gameplay" to you doesnt always mean its boring to us. Here's an Idea instead of nerfing everyone every Issue, why not make more fierce High level foes and I dont mean Uping already known bosses, Make new ones that are smarter, Maybe ones that like in other games when they are hurt bad enuff will run and aggro get help. Instead of just running away hoping we chase them to aggro a mob.
I know most of these arguments have been brought forth before I5 was released, But Im really tired of hearing excuses as to why these changes were made. Everytime I read the reasons it just grates on me more and more. Anyway thats my rant Just needed to get that off my chest
/end Rant
[ QUOTE ]
Im sick of making New toons everytime I reach 50 because there is nothing more to do.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Anyway my point is what is "Boring gameplay" to you doesnt always mean its boring to us.
[/ QUOTE ]
Quoted for non-irony.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Im sick of making New toons everytime I reach 50 because there is nothing more to do.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Anyway my point is what is "Boring gameplay" to you doesnt always mean its boring to us.
[/ QUOTE ]
Quoted for non-irony.
[/ QUOTE ]
Im refering to the fact they add nothing more at 50 to keep it challanging . I like the before 50 content for the most part the way it was.
So you dont think for example phase shift was put on a timer as people could stealth through entire series of missons with not thought or or risk.
That People have 15-20 Fire imps out wasnt overpowerring the PvE game, and making it too easy.
That I5 as a whole was a rebalancing of the dynamic, which reduces the ability of a single charcater to solo an entire mission set for 8. Which may have been fun for one person, but 7 people /em boomboxing werent being challanged one bit.
the gloabl defence chnage orineted for PvP - hah dont make me laugh, take the poorest perfoming sets (+def based), reduce their capabilities, rescue PvE mobs accuracy a bit, but not touch player accuracy. yes sooooo PvP based that one.
@Catwhoorg "Rule of Three - Finale" Arc# 1984
@Mr Falkland Islands"A Nation Goes Rogue" Arc# 2369 "Toasters and Pop Tarts" Arc#116617
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As for the supposed "emphasis" on PvP - I think you'll see that it's just ONE part of City of Villains. It has PvE content levels 1 to 50.
[/ QUOTE ]
... 1 to 50? At launch? 
[/ QUOTE ]
PWNED
[/ QUOTE ]
Er, no, not "pwned". Where in the quote does Statesman say the game will have level 40+ content when it ships? The devs have already confirmed CoV will ship with level 1-40 content. They'll add 40-50 in the first issue, much as they did with CoH. That content simply won't be finished at the time CoV gets released.
[/ QUOTE ]
I still say... PWNED
[/ QUOTE ]
user constantly complaining and whining about the game and heckling the devs..... then posting as to the puzzling question as to why he hasn't gotten into CoV beta.....
PWNED!
[ QUOTE ]
LOL way to completely miss the point gang.
I was making a bit of commentary on the many uses of the term "Conspiracy Theorists" I've seen in this thread and where that all started.
It all happened to start with the I4 regen nerfs and the devs claims of how overpowered Regen was. Their examples included Regen doing such amazing things as solo'ing large groups of +8 bosses. They even went as far as to provide demo "proof" of this feat, a post in which Statesman made a snide comment about us "conspiracy theorists". Well, low and behold, their test enviroment was completely borked.
Apologies were made and thanks given, of course it did nothing to change the course of the nerfs, but I guess that could be viewed as a seperate issue.
[/ QUOTE ]
I could have sworn they changed the degree of the nerfage, but even if they didn't playing a Regen Scrapper is "easy" mode in CoH when all other things are equal (difficulty slider, soloing or same team, etc) for me and many others. Now part of that may be our play style.
Now, I will join the crowd who chants "But my regen scrapper is fun, don't mess with it." But that doesn't change that I don't have to work as hard in missions with my 2 regen scrappers as I do even with my Invulnerable and Super Reflex scrappers.
I sympathize with the devs needing to make sure Regen isn't overly unfair in PvP, but I at the same time do not care about PvP and do not want it to ruin my fun in PvE.
None of this = conspiracy by the devs to force me to PvP or that all of these changes are due to PvP. The flip side is, though they are not due to PvP, PvP makes some of them necessary or necessary to address in some form or fashion.
Did I mention I hate the change to Phase Shift?
total kick to the gut
This is like having Ra's Al Ghul show up at your birthday party.