[ QUOTE ]
Actually, this was Statesman not trying to confuse people with a *possible* implementation of ED when it hadn't been announced yet. He specifically stated that this is why he didn't mention it in his examples. He was aware that ED was possible and may have happened, but it had not gone "public" at that point.
[/ QUOTE ]
The problem with stating this is that in reality itÂ’s little more than an excuse for misleading the forum populace. Statesman "chose" to state that FF was now considered balanced due to the ability to six slot. He could instead have stated that they felt this change was needed and was working as intended. Would that have satisfied everyone, obviously not, however he would not have misled everyone.
While it may be true that ED was not "officially" approved yet, they did state that the I5 changes were balanced with ED in mind. From this it can only be concluded that it was never the intention of the developers to leave the amounts where they could get with 6 slotting. As such it stands to reason that had ED not gone through they would have done another global defense change in order to bring down to what they saw as "balanced".
[ QUOTE ]
No other Defender set provides the level of Defense as a Force Field Defender. The built in Status Protection is invaluable, especially with Scrapper and Tankers Status Protections reduced.
[/ QUOTE ]
As I believe was stated above, this statement isn't entirely accurate, Radiation and Dark Miasma can both give a higher defense by debuffing the enemies ability to hit. Both unlike FF's both of these sets can also heal. Now, I do agree that FF don't need to be given a heal, but their defensive numbers should be increased at least to equal that of radiation and dark miasma. The resistance to status effects may help, but not really enough to compensate for the lack luster defense.
I agree with DrObvious. While I am frankly horrified at the insight you've provided us into your decisionmaking processes, I do appreciate that you've taken the effort to do so. In the past we've simply been confused as to why decisions were being made; now we can be certain and depressed.
This is the most disheartening developer post I've ever seen. The lack of an apology, even while addressing the issue of a lack of an apology to the defenders who tested Enervating Field, is an appalling absence of manners. Explaining why you made a mistake does not excuse the fact that you flat out told prominent members of the community that they were lying. A simple "we're sorry we treated you poorly" would go a long way, and would cost you nothing - but it will probably never be voiced.
The doublespeak continues unabated.
~Gabriel
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But as I said, the rosetta stone is electric blast drain. If my view is correct, defenders should have higher end drain for electric blast than electric blast blasters. If yours is correct, then electric blast blasters should have higher end drain than electric blast defenders. Which one do you believe is proper, and which one do you believe best reflects the devs intentions?
[/ QUOTE ]
Defenders are supposed to be the best at buffing/debuffing, so it makes sense in that portion, but the -end in electric blast is a minor secondary effect when compared to the main purpose of the powers (damage).
Blasters do 1.5 times as much damage as defenders do, and their blasts cost a bit less. Overall, I'd say that more than balances out the higher endurance drain that defenders get.
What we're seeing here is when a power's primary function is control, and it's being done better by another AT's secondary.
[/ QUOTE ]
Primary function of a power is unimportant because then you get into philosophical type discussions about what a powers "purpose" is and you cant balance an entire game around that. For instance Electric blast is primarily about dmg, Ill buy that, but the damage in Short Circuit is not it's primary purpose, the endurance drain is. So then shouldnt Elec Blasters drain more endurance with it? The Defender version of Short Circuit outperforms the Blaster version, your secondary is better than my primary.
Well, like the others I appreciate the effort that went into providing the defenders an answer to many outstanding questions, but I am utterly flabergasted, and even more disillusioned by your comments regarding the relative effectiveness of many controller secondary versions of Defender primaries. I guess some thanks are in order for validating our concerns that in several significant situations that defenders are correct in feeling inferior to controllers and that for many teams they are better served by having a controller on team rather than a defender. Sure this is a subjective feeling, but it is a very legitmate concern since so many voiced it enough to make the list. It must have some validity for this reason alone.
You have basicaly confirmed to the defender community for all intents-and-purposes that the controller versions of many defender powers are in fact superior to the defender versions.
The way I see it, (and obviously many others do too) controllers do get the best of both worlds, they even have the capability to do superior damage when containment is considered.
So the only advantage defenders have is that they get their powers sooner than controllers. However, by the time we are all 50 this argument is immaterial.
I understand Arcana's point about primary/vs alpha but there is a good reason for seperating and differntiating their relative power and that is to make/provide a compelling reason to choose one over the other. Right now it is looking like there is no real compelling reason to be a defender over a controller. Sure defender debuffs are a little better (certainly not 20% better by most measures), but controllers have the ability to do better damage with containment, better versions of controllery defender powers, their holds can minimize the negative aspect of many of the defender powers, and have the same hit points.
Sure Defenders have more powers that inflict damage than a controller, but as most players will attest, being a defender is not about inflicting damage, its about augmenting/minimizing damage/defense of the team. Especialy after ED. ED eviscerated our damage dealing capability. While enhancing the secondary effects of our blasts has shown to be largely ineffectual over time. If had been worthwhile (ROI) to enhance these abilities we would have done so. Believe me I tried back in the day to enhance the acc debuff powers of my dark blasts. What a waste of enhancement space, it actualy slowed down my kill speed and increased my overall risk in fights.....but that is another complaint that has fell on deaf ears (heavy sigh).
Quite frankly you guys (the devs) seem to be very deluded on the relative power of many of the debuffs in this game compared to the relative power of things like holds and damage in the grand scheme of things.
It really seems and strongly suggests (through your actions) of being extraordinarly hypocritcal. It wasn't so long ago that you nerfed scrappers because optimized characters could approach tanker defense levels, and you nerfed them. You nerfed defenders that in certain optimal situations could approach blaster-like damage potential in limited situations by upping endurance costs of the blasts and reduced their damage potential. But yet this does not seem true for controllers. They are allowed to have secondary powers every bit as effective as another ATs primary set.
I am not advocating the nerfing of controllers, but I am seeing more and more reasons to play a controller over a defender for several significant reasons. They can hold (best dmg mitigation), they can now do very good damage with containment and thier pets are superior dmage dealers, and they have strong debuffs.
Gee what blastery thing can I do better than a blaster, where is my defender trade off? Oh I am sure my blast secondary effects are better than a blasters, but so what???
In fact I propose an experiment. I bet you could take away the secondary effects on all the blasts with the exception of KB and nobody would really notice a big difference in their encounters. I would bet dimes-to-donuts that overall risk would not be appreciably increased, and that you would see, as all experienced players know, its all about the damage, with emphasis on big frontloaded damage being much more effective than lower damage-over-time.
The question is now on the defender community. Is it time to revolt? Time to stop playing defenders and all of us role up controllers?
On Clear Mind...
[ QUOTE ]
I have a level 50 empath, and my experience with Clear Mind is quite consistent - using it to cure a mezzed teammate during a hot fight generally gets someone killed because I'm stuck in a 4 second animation. I usually just buff before fights and hope it doesn't run out.
The power should either have a fast animation and short duration for use on demand (increase density) or have a slower animation and be used between fights to provide a lasting buff. The buff duration and recharge should dictate whether the buff is usable in combat - giving it a 4 second animation practically eliminates the option.
[/ QUOTE ]
And don't forget to add to that 4 seconds the time it takes to realize someone is Mez'd and target them. This can average 2 more seconds, making it sometimes much easier to just let a 10 second Mez run it's duration.
For this reason, powers that are supposed to be "reactive" would be a lot better as area effects. This goes for Increase Density, too.
Can we not argue over what's fair and what's not?
I don't think the developer's base assumptions about this game will change overnight. Simply put, if you think people are really stupid, announcing it in bright bold letters doesn't tend to change things. If you're right, they won't notice. If you're wrong, well, they won't care.
So let's thing of a workable change within the existing balance. Give mez-heavy powers a big enough debuff for there to at least be a tradeoff. To take the sample of Endurance Drain, the primary purpose of a Blast is to do ranged damage. Sure, it might not be the best range, and it might have some secondary effects, but it's almost always damage. Blasters give up a bit of end drain for a huge amount of damage. Well, let's have the primary effect of buff/debuff powers be buff/debuffs. A Controller better be giving up a lot of buff/debuff power to get spare control.
While I am glad many of these items are fixed I must also say that I am not happy to see all the "Well thats a controller power so its working as intended " remarks.
I mean come on, you say "defenders do slightly more damage with power X" but honestly with containment thats not true.
If a power resides in the Defender primary if should be better in all respects to the duplicate power sitting in a Controller secondary.
[ QUOTE ]
Can we not argue over what's fair and what's not?
I don't think the developer's base assumptions about this game will change overnight. Simply put, if you think people are really stupid, announcing it in bright bold letters doesn't tend to change things. If you're right, they won't notice. If you're wrong, well, they won't care.
So let's thing of a workable change within the existing balance. Give mez-heavy powers a big enough debuff for there to at least be a tradeoff. To take the sample of Endurance Drain, the primary purpose of a Blast is to do ranged damage. Sure, it might not be the best range, and it might have some secondary effects, but it's almost always damage. Blasters give up a bit of end drain for a huge amount of damage. Well, let's have the primary effect of buff/debuff powers be buff/debuffs. A Controller better be giving up a lot of buff/debuff power to get spare control.
[/ QUOTE ]
Good post. I know that it really is a kick in the pants for Defenders to hear it said that this is the way it's intended. But really, if this is way it's been designed to work from the beginning then good luck changing it.
I think a suggestion to increase the strength of the debuffs on all the Defender control powers and blasts is an excellent suggestion and one that would seem to fall much more in line with the Devs "vision". And it would hopefully give the Defender version of these powers a tradeoff that has value.
Blueeyed, that's a great new sig. I'm going to steal it 
. Doh, I was going to quote Alice's resturant here, but I see its got some objectional stuff. Anyway, yeah, that really is the crux of the problem. If there is going to be strong niche protection for one one class, it really must flow both ways.
It is very disheartening to see this. I hope that this opinion by the devs changes, but I'll be supprised if it does.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
* PvP: Trick Arrow/Archery proves very ineffective in PvP, unable to kill a detoggled and unmoving Regen scrapper.
[/ QUOTE ]
Regen Scrappers are very difficult to kill for low damage characters. I *was* able to kill one, but it took several minutes, which is a highly unlikely "real"-world situation. This is a more general concern than just with Archery, but it is most visible here. No solution I can discuss, yet.
[/ QUOTE ]
I so do not like the sound of that. I pray to all the gods of MMOdom that that's not some new lurking nerf for Regen.
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 ]
So lets take a look at debuffs in powers primarily debuffing in nature in controller primaries. Smoke, for example. Smoke is a controller primary: should its debuffing effects be larger in magnitude than all other debuffs in all other defender secondaries? Would you consider that a mandatory balancing requirement?
Ice control is loaded with slows. Should they be stronger than all other defender debuffs not in defender primaries?
[/ QUOTE ]
These two examples aren't the best ones because the answers to both are "they already are".
Smoke is better at to-hit debuffing than any one defender secondary power. It's auto-hit, and has a greater value than Dark Blast.
Nothing beats Ice Control at slows, nothing.
One thing I'd like to point out re storm.
The MOVEMENT slow is a control.
The RECHARGE slow is certainly a DEBUFF, and is not a control in any way.
If the -recharge are not currently greater for defenders on storm powers and lingering radiation, then they certainly should be.
I could also swear the movement slow is weaker on controller freezing rain than defender freezing rain, so the slow thing seems to be applied inconsistently across the board.
Two questions.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
* PvP: Slows and -recharge from Lingering Radiation and Snow Storm have been shown to be resistable in PvP. Conflicting evidence suggests that defense debuffs may be resisted in PvP, as well. Aren't defender debuffs supposed to be unresistable?
[/ QUOTE ] Looking at the power, your observation is correct. It seems to be by design, though I've added it to my list of things to be reviewed.
[ QUOTE ]
* Balance: Repulsion Field has the exact same effect for Controllers as Defenders.
[/ QUOTE ] Knockback is not a Debuff, and Controllers have the same modifier as Defenders for this.
[ QUOTE ]
* Balance: Snowstorm's recharge debuff is more effective for Controllers than Defenders. ( It appears the defender version is 80% as slowing as the controller version, seems they were reversed. Dark_Pyroblast)
[/ QUOTE ]
Controllers AT modifier for Slows is higher than Defenders. I'll talk to geko to make certain this is by design.
[/ QUOTE ]
Isn't slow a Debuff?
Aren't Defenders better at Debuff than Controllers?
Virture
[ QUOTE ]
Regen aura: This power was already considered situational and almost completely skippable. The recharge was way too long to make it worthwhile unless six-slotted with recharges and the HP regin was so low that it was a waste of time to pretty much use on almost anyone unless it is six-slotted with heals. At least in the past, we had the ability to choose to slot it one way or the other, but now with ED, it has become an even worse power.
[/ QUOTE ]
I am honestly shocked that a defender would complain about this. Slotted up, you have a 975% regen buff. That's equal to Instant Healing from the regen scrappers! You can make an entire team have better healing than most regen scrappers if you use your secondary right, Regen aura is a big part of that and you call it a waste of time?
maybe, just maybe, you're asking for too much
[ QUOTE ]
Heal Aura: Without the ability to six-slot or even five-slot it with heals, the heal numbers are so low that there is almost no noticeable difference between a defender and a controller using it. It also is too low to even serve a purpose using it on a scrapper or tank. Is there anyway that the devs could consider increasing the numbers some so it serves a purpose for anyone but a squishy. It may be AoE, however, it is also one of the only 3 powers an empathy can use solo. All of the others are just useless icons unless there is a teammate to cast them on (or pet if you are a controller) so it should not be too big of a balance problem since the class survives on the ground of balance mainly for the heals. Heal Other got hurt in the same way, but the numbers on this power is at least high enough to still have some effect on a scrapper/tank.
[/ QUOTE ]
same thing here. heal aura is a base 10% heal for a scrapper. Heal Other is a base 20% heal. (that's in scrapper hp, i know that it scales off your defender hp). enhanced, you can throw out a 20% and 40% heal within 10 seconds. That's huge! and that doesn't even count Absorb Pain, a base 50% heal in scrapper hps, another huge heal that's ready every ~20s. And even then you have Adrenaline Boost, a better, single target combo of both RAs with a big recharge buff. Empaths friggin rock, why don't you guys realize that?
[ QUOTE ]
Adrenaline Boost: This is a power that can only ever be used on ONE teammate at a time. With ED in the game now, it can not even be made perma on one person. Will you look at the recharge of the power and speed it up some so that we can at least use our 9th tier power as it was originally intended.
[/ QUOTE ]
perhaps their intention was that you would not be able to perma buff someone with it?
Level 50 is a journey, not a destination.
▲Scrapper Issues List - Going Rogue Edition▲
Let me get this straight.
There is officially now little to zero reason to play a Defender. (unless you want to be dark).
A controller does everything either almost as well, or EVEN BETTER???
What the hell Castle?
Easy fix. Give defender blasts 75%-85% of blaster damage instead of the silly 65% we have now. It's only fair. Controlers have about 85% defender powers.
For the love of god explain to the Defender community why we are so forsaken!!!
I'm a bit puzzled by this apparent swap in defender/controller shared abilities. Initially we were told that Controler Secondaries were 80% as effective as the corresponding defender primaries. There was nothing about differentiating debuffs and controls. Now that whatever system of balance was set up determined that actually controllers have equal effectivness in most areas and even more effectiveness in some.
I share the sentiments on questioning the need for defenders in light of controllers effectiveness. Why not just eliminate all the defender sets save for dark?
[ QUOTE ]
Archery has long animations so that it looksas good as possible while trying to keep the set playable.
I did a pass on all the End Costs of the Archery Powers and reduced the cost of Snap Shot, Aimed Shot, Fistful of Arrows and Blazing Arrow.
[/ QUOTE ]
This doesn't address the fact that Archery is a terrible powerset. Sure, we won't use as much endurance as we do now, but we still have a horrible damage type, and very little to make up for it.
Between this and the general apathy and procrastination towards Trick Arrow, it looks like my Defender's going to remain on the shelf for a long time.
"She started dancin' to that fine, fine music,
Y'know, her life was saved by rock 'n' roll."
--The Velvet Underground
[ QUOTE ]
But as I said, the rosetta stone is electric blast drain. If my view is correct, defenders should have higher end drain for electric blast than electric blast blasters. If yours is correct, then electric blast blasters should have higher end drain than electric blast defenders. Which one do you believe is proper, and which one do you believe best reflects the devs intentions?
[/ QUOTE ]
OK, set aside for a moment the question of electricity's end drain for blasters and defenders. Now look at the larger picture. For almost two years many Defenders have been trying to get across that in quite a few ways Controllers outperform them. They've tested and posted values, they've argued till they're blue in the face.
Finally after almost two years a Dev has given numbers and made statements that show that in some cases its true. Yes Blaster/Defender comparisons don't hold to the primary>secondary standard... but generally that doesn't affect Defenders nearly as much as Controllers near matching and often outperforming them in the use of their AT defining sets.
Exactly, A controller is far better equiped to defend a team than a defender. With containment, even the defenders damage advantage is reduced.
I would aggree with Controllers having a better duration on a power like Thunder Clap as far as the disorentation goes, IF the power also had a debuff effect that functioned far better for defenders. Making it so that over all the power functioned better in the hands of the defender (for whom it takes up the spot of a primary power).
Should a power from a secondary set perform its primary function better than the same power from a primary set? I would say No.
In the case of Electical blast the primary function of the blast powers is damage. How ever Short Curcuit's primary function is end drain. A blaster should drain more endurance than a defender just because its a primary power for the blaster and a secondary for the defender.
So many defender primary powers are forms of control or "soft control". So by the current system that puts them functioning better for controllers (who have them as secondary powers) than Defender (who they are primary powers for).
If you dont want Defenders to have controller powers that function at a level that Primary powers should function at then remove them and give them Buff/Debuff powers that do function as primary power and not watered down controller powers!
This would not be that big of an issue IF the defender primaries sets did not rely so heavely on control type powers to fill out their 9 power tiers.
I've tested force bolt's damage; it's exactly equal to one half the damage from an unslotted brawl.
Repulsion bomb's damage is around the same level.
The amount of damage is so low, I doubt either power could dent a white minion's regen rate. "Slightly more damage" in this case is probably 4 or 5 points of damage ... that's hardly a difference worth acknowledging. FWIW, RB on a -30 minion will blow it half-way across a zone, but will only remove about 1/3 of the mob's HPs.
It's impossible to taunt mobs around the circumference of force bubble. Force bubble can affect an unlimited number of mobs; taunt can hit five in a relatively small AoE. Mobs naturally spread out one deep along the circumference of FB effectively rendering any AoE into a 2 or 3 target attack. The second point is that some mobs will resist the effect, remaining inside force bubble, but will still aggro onto the bubbler. Effectively, this creates a situation where the battle is happening on two fronts with piles of minions on the outside and the more dangerous mob(s) on the inside. For a set that's all about providing damage mitigation, it seems ... odd that using a set's top power can make things more dangerous.
[ QUOTE ]
Knockback is not a Debuff, and Controllers have the same modifier as Defenders for this.
[/ QUOTE ]
For this, I will nitpick.
Technically, knockback and repel are debuffs since, according to Statesman, a group under force bubble "will be subject only to the lesser damaging Ranged attacks." There's the distinct impression from the honcho himself that RF and rorce bubble are "always out" powers on squishy-heavy teams.
*shrugs*
Your responses aren't unexpected since I've been telling defenders that we're only better at buffing / debuffing than 'trollers, and most of FF is neither. But to find out that FF is superior in some ways on a controller is disheartening.
Let me repeat a question I've asked before: if you folks had significantly changed a tanker primary or scrapper secondary as you did repulsion bomb, would you have initiated a dialogue with them? Further, would you even consider making a power in scrapper Invuln superior to the same power in tanker invuln because the power just seems more ... scrappy?
Look, _Castle_, you're coming awfully close to saying that bubblers should suck it up and become buffbots because, by design, a big chunk of the powers beyond the buffs are situational. Well fine ... but Statesman has said, over and over, that he wants players to be actively involved in combat. OK, so I can blast with my bubbler ... but I respecced out of her AoE blasts simply because my bubbler can't deal with incoming aggro as well as her bubbled teammates. Essentially, I can walk away from my PC with neutrino bolt on auto, aiming at the tanker, and grab a snack and be as effective as I would be mashing buttons. That just isn't right. My bubbler isn't an active part of combat any more; she's much less so than in I4 (or previous issues) simply because she can't rely on dispersion bubble to be a decent amount of defense. Previously, I used to charge into melee and light off irradiate, then line up electron haze to help pile some mobs onto melee. That just doesn't work anymore. Bubblers have become duller to play since I5, even if the buffs are more desirable.
There's a reason why FF defender are rare as hens' teeth: if you want to play an offender (a blast-heavy defender), you're better off picking any set other than empathy or sonic. You can do so more safely with debuffs and heals. You can do more damage with buffs and debuffs. Fine, my bubbler can put a bunch of slots into attacks ... but can she safely and effectively use those blasts?
FF is still borked.
Hang on people - chill on the doom and gloom.
What this does is give us very specific areas to open discussions on. We've got more information that we've had in the past - so USE IT.
Start discussions in various threads on these points and actively try to get the devs involved in those discussions with us. Castle gave us quick points because that's all he had time for. Work to get those more detailed explanations and see where that goes.
This isn't the end - it's the start of better discussions.
-- War
[ QUOTE ]
How ever Short Curcuit's primary function is end drain.
[/ QUOTE ]
It largely depends on whose hands it's in, really. For defenders, the endurance drain is enough to make it it's primary function. For blasters, the end drain is smaller, but it doesn't do bad damage at all. It does quite a bit of damage, actually.
First things first: Thanks for looking at everything on the list. A few things, I can agree on, even the ones that didn't 'properly' resolve, and a few things I can't. Absolutely can't. Not to shoot the messenger, but I think something in the overall game setup is broken.
If I have a Defender Primary like, say, Storm or Froce Field that ends up offering less bang for the buck than a Controller Secondary, all in all, then I'm sorry, but it's just not right. Situationally, I can understand the approach. If, say, a Mez is just one aspect of a multi-layered power accessible to both Defenders and Controllers, then I can live with Controllers having a bit more control and Defenders having a bit more of everything else in that power. One example you gave, and I'll take your word on that, was Tornado. Controllers get a bit more Disorient, Defenders get a bit more damage. I still don't think it's appropriate for a Secondary to be superior to its parallel Primary in any form or fashion, but I'll accept it.
What I can't accept is a power in a Secondary being plain more effective than the same power in a Primary. Point in case Thunderclap. Longer duration and chance to Crit for Controllers? Point in case Snow Storm. More powerful for Controllers? Point in case, for the sake of completeness, Tornado. Due to the nature of Tornado, the Disorient is often more useful than the damage part (unless you're dealing with a single tough opponent), so I'll file this as more useful for Controllers, too. That's a third of a Primary Powerset that is actually more powerful when used as a Secondary Powerset.
I refuse to believe that this is, in any form or fashion by design.
If any three Energy Blasts did more damage for Defenders than they did for Blasters, it surely would not be by design. If any three Invulnerability powers were numerically superior for Scrappers over Tankers, it surely would not be by design.
Especially since -SPD and -REC are obviously DeBuffs (I'll cede the floor on KB/KU and Repel -- they're really neither meat nor fish, neither DeBuff nor Mez) and Statesman himself said that Defenders should be the best (De)Buffers in the game. Yet now I learn that Controllers actually are better than Defenders at this? Sure, it's only one particular type of DeBuff -- which just so happens to make up about a third of my Storm Defender's DeBuffing capability.
I'll keep this civil. I'm formally requesting that this be looked again and changed. Basically telling any and all Storm Defenders that they would have been better off as Storm Controllers does not work. And it's too late to pull Storm from the list of Defender Primaries. I'm not asking for an 'Instant Win' button, I'm merely asking for my favourite COH Primary to be properly balanced as such, and not act as a Secondary in all the aspects that are vital to my personal playstyle. For all I care Controllers can get triple the effect from O2 Boost instead.
Thank you.
"If you're going through hell, keep going."
Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill
[ QUOTE ]
Not true. Defenders do slightly more damage, unless the controllers Containment is in effect. Knockback is not a Debuff, and Controllers have the same modifier as Defenders for this.
[/ QUOTE ]
First, thank you _Castle_ for taking the time to review the list.
Can you elaborate on what is "slightly more damage"? Can we get the modifier number for that? We know controllers get 25% more for status effects duration (and crits) and that blasters do 50% with their attacks.
Knockback is not a debuff? There are two primary defenders sets dedicated to that secondary effect. I would call that a debuff.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
* Bug: When an attack misses its target, aggro is generated when the attack begins. This is problematic when using a power with a long activation time (such as Ice Arrow); aggro is generated and you are subject to "return" fire before the attack is actually launched. The character is rooted in place until the animation finishes. (If the attack actually hits, no aggro is generated until the attack lands; this is when a miss should generate aggro as well). This bug is not limited to the Trick Arrow set, but impacts the set more than others due to its many powers with long animation times. (Concern, Goofy_Parrot)
[/ QUOTE ]
This is the way the combat engine works. Fixing this would require rewriting the whole thing. This is not likely to change.
[/ QUOTE ]
Successful mechanics repair faulty engines. It's a shame you're unwilling/unable to get your hands dirty.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
* Balance: Single target ressurection powers should not be expended and the associated endurance used unless the target accepts the resurrect. (LadyMage)
[/ QUOTE ]
This is an odd one. Endurance is paid as part of the casting of the power, which is calculated before any attributes of that power take effect. So, the power system has to pay for the power to go off then the target gets to choose whether or not to accept the Rez attribute. We can't do this without a lot of changes to the system. Well, technically we could, but then you would not be able to slot for Endurance Reduction.
[/ QUOTE ]
Then lower the endurance cost accordingly, remove the ability to slot for endurance reduction, and open the hood on this one too. It's a stupid problem that ignorance isn't going solve.
_Castle_, thank you for taking the time to address these issues, but frankly, there were too many "low priority - not gonna change soon" answers for my taste. I suspect the reason for this is because both geko and statesman have control issues that you can't outrank. A pity. Your post this evening was quite possibly the best dev-to-player communication exhibited on these boards. You'll do very well wherever you go after CoH/CoV.