[ QUOTE ]
2. We'll be putting in a check that prevents "one shotting"; if anything occurs within a fraction of second that brings a player from 100% Hit Points down to 0, we instead give the player 1% Hit Points.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't see this helping at all. 1% of Controller/Defender/MM HP is nothing. A follow up attack with brawl would practically kill them. This won't buy someone enough time to pop multiple greens or receive a healing buff. Very poorly thought out solution.
Shard Warrior - 50 MA/Regen/BM Scrapper
Founding Member and Leader : Shadow-Force
Co-Leader: Council of Heroes
"Whatever evils come this way... we will be there to stop them."
[ QUOTE ]
2. We'll be putting in a check that prevents "one shotting"; if anything occurs within a fraction of second that brings a player from 100% Hit Points down to 0, we instead give the player 1% Hit Points.
[/ QUOTE ]
And then there was two shotting....
I mean seriously a stalker only needs two shots to take out my scrapper.
Post deleted by Alexa
[ QUOTE ]
We'll be putting in a check that prevents "one shotting"; if anything occurs within a fraction of second that brings a player from 100% Hit Points down to 0, we instead give the player 1% Hit Points. That's all for now.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh dear God I can't wait to see the bugs this brings us. Because the whole lvl 43s vs my little 22 mission had joy written all over it.
[ QUOTE ]
You indicate that i'm somehow magically dead on and psychic, about them not considering the bugs worthy of re-designing the change.
[/ QUOTE ]
Or rather that it wasn't worth pulling it out of the pipeline. If it wasn't worthy of consideration of re-design, we probably wouldn't have seen point 1 (or was it 2?) to begin with.
[ QUOTE ]
OK. So.... NOW they are? Nope, sorry. Blow me. Oh, and let me know when you've been around as long as I have, yo know the difference between a few minor oversights, and an UNACCEPTABLE level of "oversights".
[/ QUOTE ]
The difference is very simple. Do you have access to the servers? Then these are acceptable oversights, because everything that you are paying for is being provided. And it's nice that you're able to dismiss all of my knowledge and background without even knowing what it is. I guess you are psychic! 
[ QUOTE ]
You see, I was a staunch supporter, and anti-exploit/cheat PL guy for the bulk of my game time. All of the others are still solidly applying. The staunch supporter, on the other hand.... well, fool me once shame on you.... after a dozen times, ah, heck, screw ya.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think I said you had to support them. But that doesn't give you the right to demand things not owed to you as though they were.
[ QUOTE ]
FACT: It IS a nerf to a collection of powers hit hard already.
FACT: It IS by description, another change, that makes almost ZERO difference in PVP.
I don't PVP. I have exactly ONE END draining character. Even that is a side effect of pulling END for me and my team, not the goal usually.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure if these facts were in dispute. And I'm also not sure what this has to do with not making a difference in PvP? I'm not sure why it's relevant if you don't PvP. Color me confused. 
[ QUOTE ]
Dude. Seriously. Eat it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe you could show me where I called you names or insulted your intelligence, but I'm not sure I've done anything to deserve such hostility.
Instead of off topic remarks about how much you've earned the right to be demanding, maybe you could address my point that none of what you appear to think you're owed is actually owed to you?
[ QUOTE ]
Or rather that it wasn't worth pulling it out of the pipeline. If it wasn't worthy of consideration of re-design, we probably wouldn't have seen point 1 (or was it 2?) to begin with.
[/ QUOTE ]
Clearly it was, hence the retraction and apology that you're so insistent we use as proof his Jack's good faith, regardless of the fact that this dev team is rapidly becoming famous for their bait and switch routines.
[ QUOTE ]
The difference is very simple. Do you have access to the servers? Then these are acceptable oversights, because everything that you are paying for is being provided. And it's nice that you're able to dismiss all of my knowledge and background without even knowing what it is. I guess you are psychic!
[/ QUOTE ]
Little miscalculation there, Matey. If what you're saying is true then why does the dev team say they care so much about what we think and say? The two things are incongruous. So, either they don't care, in which case they should tell us that and do as they please, or they do care, in which case they're the sloppiest dev team I've ever met. Tell ya what, you can pick.
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think I said you had to support them. But that doesn't give you the right to demand things not owed to you as though they were.
[/ QUOTE ]
If we're not allowed to say what is owed to us then you're not allowed to say what isn't.
Brother of Markus
The Lord of Fire and Pain
The Legendary Living Hellfire
Fight my brute!
Would rather of seen AS have to be a positional attack: ie You can only use it if you line yourself up behind the target.
Also if you Devs are keeping track I would like to bring out the number of Energy Melee Stalkers that are starting to increase. Every other Villain is an Energy Melee Stalker and near 8 out of 10 Villains are a Stalker. What the hell are you guys doing up there in your office?
Are you even noticing the fact that almost every Hero is either lvling a Hero to deal with Stalkers or that Heroes are having to bring in at least 2-3 peeps to deal with one Stalker?
What the hell were you smoking when you decided to give an AT the ability to be:
1) Undetecable unless the opponent is able to either stack 2+ perception powers, or has an autohit aura. And even in the case of autohit auras, stalkers will still get off the first attack, every time.
2) Able to one-shot many classes, and two shot anything but tanks.
3) Able to escape batlle with extreme ease in most circumstances. With their extreme stealth, they don't have to get very far from you for you to loose target on them completely.
4) They can use placate to make you unable to attack or even target them for a period. Basically single target phase shift that breaks after 10 seconds or when they choose to attack for a free critical hit.
5) Level 38 defense power that gives them extremly difficult to hit for 3 minutes.
6) SR and Ninja both have perception built in.
7) Mez protection.
8) EM stuns.
(Thank you Forum Troll for the list)
You made an entire AT that is game breaking and isn't fun to fight against. Do you even realise this? You think that by making it so that they can't one shot you that they won't follow up with a brawl like attack and finish you off?
I've fought with every Hero AT in this game, fought against every AT in this game, and there is only one right now that isn't fun to fight against. It's fun for Stalkers but it isn't fun for those who go up against them.
Be Uber make an Energy Melee Stalker.
Sorry- don't play forum games- The facts stand.
They made a change against outcry and sensibility.
They later intend to "alter it". Not remove, just alter. This means they are STILL NERFING a weak secondary effect FURTHER. This bait and switch has happened numerous times, and again, in spite of your apparent predisposition to posting abundantly, you haven't read enough to notice.
They threw a half-hearted fix to one- shots. A fix that changes it to 1 shot +brawl for pretty much all previously one shotted folks......
They are deceptive or inept. That is my take after observing for near 2 years now. I choose deceptive, based upon their knowing facts, and using spin tactics to quell protests over changes.
EF changes.
Regen changes.
END drain changes.
A few others I dont recall right away....
You either know, it but are stubborn, or arguing from ignorance.
[ QUOTE ]
This bait and switch has happened numerous times, and again, in spite of your apparent predisposition to posting abundantly, you haven't read enough to notice.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've been reading the dev digest since around issue 2's release. I've never had a problem with any dev conduct that I have seen.
[ QUOTE ]
You either know, it but are stubborn, or arguing from ignorance.
[/ QUOTE ]
Or, I agree with the changes made?
I have personally found it to be the case that with nearly every change this game has seen, the end result has been a more fun play experience for me. Therefore, when States says they're looking into it, I trust him.
Keep in mind, for your examples of underhanded-ness, I'd like to point out defense debuff resistance, defense scaling, and passive resistance in SR, as proof that when Statesman said they were looking at what was wrong with defense sets, they took the time to find what I have come to believe are good solutions.
I'm not stubborn, and I'm not ignorant. I'm just not upset.
I understand you are, but again, that doesn't mean you should be making ludicrous demands.
[ QUOTE ]
Clearly it was, hence the retraction and apology that you're so insistent we use as proof his Jack's good faith, regardless of the fact that this dev team is rapidly becoming famous for their bait and switch routines.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, that's not what I'm insisting at all. Let's establish a difference here. Something worth re-evaluating? Yes. Something worth pulling out of the pipeline? No.
[ QUOTE ]
Little miscalculation there, Matey. If what you're saying is true then why does the dev team say they care so much about what we think and say? The two things are incongruous. So, either they don't care, in which case they should tell us that and do as they please, or they do care, in which case they're the sloppiest dev team I've ever met. Tell ya what, you can pick.
[/ QUOTE ]
The issue isn't black and white.
They can care what we think. That means they ask for our opinions, and give us info, and then a place to respond to said info (like this thread for instance). They can even prioritize their development schedules based on what we say.
But, that doesn't mean they're bound to act upon our opinions. In the end, they are the one's who make the decisions, they are privy to information we aren't, and they're the one's whose work is on the line. That means that they're still free from reprisal, no matter how unpopular a decision, as long as they're meeting their contractual obligation. Their only contractual obligation is server access.
[ QUOTE ]
If we're not allowed to say what is owed to us then you're not allowed to say what isn't.
[/ QUOTE ]
I leave that to the EULA you agree to every time you log into the servers.
[ QUOTE ]
No, that's not what I'm insisting at all. Let's establish a difference here. Something worth re-evaluating? Yes. Something worth pulling out of the pipeline? No.
[/ QUOTE ]
Why? Are you saying that pissing off your client base is less significant than removing a portion of a small patch that is currently being tested on test? I'm glad you're not running the show.
[ QUOTE ]
The issue isn't black and white.
They can care what we think. That means they ask for our opinions, and give us info, and then a place to respond to said info (like this thread for instance). They can even prioritize their development schedules based on what we say.
But, that doesn't mean they're bound to act upon our opinions. In the end, they are the one's who make the decisions, they are privy to information we aren't, and they're the one's whose work is on the line. That means that they're still free from reprisal, no matter how unpopular a decision, as long as they're meeting their contractual obligation. Their only contractual obligation is server access.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying any of this. I find it interesting that the immediate response from people who share your poitn of view is to assume that what we're saying is that the dev team should do as their told. Of course it sounds ludicrous when you put that level of spin on it.
Unfortunately, it doesn't change the fact that this dev team misleads it's client base on a regular basis, and I'm saying that this is yet another case of that. They increased mob end to reduce the end drain effectiveness, they will now "look into" fixing the end reducer power and will implement something that goes somewhere around half way. Hence... nerf.
[ QUOTE ]
I leave that to the EULA you agree to every time you log into the servers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Please do.
Brother of Markus
The Lord of Fire and Pain
The Legendary Living Hellfire
Fight my brute!
[ QUOTE ]
Why? Are you saying that pissing off your client base is less significant than removing a portion of a small patch that is currently being tested on test? I'm glad you're not running the show.
[/ QUOTE ]
All the other builds that are in the pipeline after that patch are based on that build. That means if they remove that patch, everything else that they have in the pipeline has to be removed, and then re-added to a different base of code. Depending on how many builds that may bump, you're darn right I'll risk pissiing off the client base. What if fixing this issue meant a 3 week delay on I7. I'd say then you'd make more people happy by delaying the end drain issue than by delaying issue 7.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying any of this. I find it interesting that the immediate response from people who share your poitn of view is to assume that what we're saying is that the dev team should do as their told. Of course it sounds ludicrous when you put that level of spin on it.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, I'm saying it. You said I had a choice, but I didn't believe either of those to be the case, so I explained to you what I actually think, instead of allowing you to dictate it to me:
[ QUOTE ]
If what you're saying is true then why does the dev team say they care so much about what we think and say? The two things are incongruous. So, either they don't care, in which case they should tell us that and do as they please, or they do care, in which case they're the sloppiest dev team I've ever met. Tell ya what, you can pick.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately, it doesn't change the fact that this dev team misleads it's client base on a regular basis, and I'm saying that this is yet another case of that. They increased mob end to reduce the end drain effectiveness, they will now "look into" fixing the end reducer power and will implement something that goes somewhere around half way. Hence... nerf.
[/ QUOTE ]
Or they increased mob endurance to account for the new AV->EB code, because Elite Bosses were running out of end, and by design they're not supposed to do that. However, since changing the base endurance for EBs meant changing the base endurance for bosses and lt's, this resulted in the end drain problem that they are looking into. However, the EB issue was more important to them then the effect on Bosses and Lts. So they went ahead and made the change, and will attempt to rectify the situation with Bosses and Lts. at a later point in time.
I know my explanation appears very far fetched, but seeing as it's based on reports I saw that EBs were running out of endurance, and not on an unbacked supposition that the devs are trying to reduce end drain effectiveness, I think it might be a little bit closer to the truth.
But feel free to disagree with me.
>_>
well...guess there will be a lot of two shotting then
I think the one-shot solution will work fine honestly.
Here's why: In PVE; the big problem seemed to be with a squishy, regen, or Defense based character just plain *dying*. No chance at anything.
Now, they'll last hopefully long enough for a respite. I know some people are saying "Thats not enough time!" but I think you'll be surprised how long that is. It doesn't matter how *much* hp 1% is; 1% of tanker HP with Dull Pain active is still pretty much 1shot and you are dead.
But thats not the point; it gives you the ability to do something. And I believe we'll be able to react with a respite or such in time. Also; for Ice Tanks, SR scrappers, and Regen scrappers; that'll be enough time that maybe the defenses will actually work on the second swing (or in Regen's case... use Reconstruction: The better respite).
PVP it will help to; though I think Assassin Strike's toggle dropping was a bigger problem honestly. Most 1shottings from AS seemed to be the result of inspiration chewing en-masse; tons of reds. I know my SG leader who is a blaster can't be one shotted from just a Build Up + AS as is. (Admittedly, blasters have more health than some squishies, but they still lack any defense).
This also means that A) The second strike may miss; because of the higher miss rate in PVP. B) Means the stalker still has that fearsome "OH CRAP" aspect; but without the un-fun "I'm dead before I knew they were there" aspect. There's still an extremely good chance you are dead if you meet a stalker alone in a dark alley. Thats the idea. But its not guaranteed; and they can't use inspiration spam to take you out without giving you a chance.
I think most people gripe about stalkers because they are difficult 1v1 (they are meant to be). They *do* have every advantage when you're alone. Thats the point. If you happen to be with even one other person (or better yet; 3 or 4); the stalker is probably going to look for easier prey. So; basically; PVP is designed in a group on group scenario. Stalkers being able to 1shot by ODing on red pills wasn't meant to be (nor were AVs 1 shotting heroes/villains in missions either for that matter); but stalkers *ARE* meant to cut you apart alone.
Keep the whole group thing in mind.
Well, surviving the Psychic Clockwork King's alpha strike just got a lot easier.
one shotting does not need a solution as it was never a problem.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1. We're looking into the tweak to Endurance for mobs that's affected Endurance Drain abilities. Sorry about that!
[/ QUOTE ]
Gee. Thanks. Now unpimpslap my Electro-Blapper and the debt he's built up thanks to this "tweek" of yours.
[ QUOTE ]
2. We'll be putting in a check that prevents "one shotting"; if anything occurs within a fraction of second that brings a player from 100% Hit Points down to 0, we instead give the player 1% Hit Points.
[/ QUOTE ]
As an experianced Blaster, the difference between being one-shotted and one-volleyed isn't all that much. So I'm not exactly sure how much of a big whoop a 1% HP post-[censored]ing"bonus" will be. I guess that's to be seen.
[/ QUOTE ]Especially since most stalkers que up another attack as Assasin's strike activates. Honestly I don't know why people are [censored] about being one shotted. As a blaster I got used to it back i2. Don't like one shotting? don't pvp.
I look forward to testing this solution to one shotting.
For those of you who dislike it, I suggest that a lot could be one with tweaking the numbers once the code is in place and working.
Don't like the fact that the fix only kicks in at 100% hp? Well what about 80% or above? 50% or above? 10% or above?
Don't like the fact that you are left with 1% hp? What about 5%? 10%?
Don't like being one-shotted or two shotted? Fine. What is the minimum number of shots it should take to take down a player? Remember that this applies to teleporting someone into trip mines, aim+bu+snipe, headsplitter crits and all other near one-shots.
By making this announcement and then monitoring the thread, they are effectively asking us for a solution to the problem here. If it is a problem.
And don't forget one of the most important aspects: What is fair to the Stalkers? And Blasters. And Buffer Overrun. And Brutes. And...
Story Arcs I created:
Every Rose: (#17702) Villainous vs Legacy Chain. Forget Arachnos, join the CoT!
Cosplay Madness!: (#3643) Neutral vs Custom Foes. Heroes at a pop culture convention!
Kiss Hello Goodbye: (#156389) Heroic vs Custom Foes. Film Noir/Hardboiled detective adventure!
One shots were only a problem because of COV.
This area brought in open pvp and folks realised that they could be one shot. They always could be one shot but only those of us who had played arena knew this. When the general public learned of this issue they freaked out and kept freaking out.
I say those folks don't need to be in pvp to begin with!
We have caused most of our own nerfs on these forums!
The player pve mob rules here.
[ QUOTE ]
Especially since most stalkers que up another attack as Assasin's strike activates. Honestly I don't know why people are [censored] about being one shotted. As a blaster I got used to it back i2. Don't like one shotting? don't pvp.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm curious to see what sort of unintended consequence this brings.
[ QUOTE ]
2. We'll be putting in a check that prevents "one shotting"; if anything occurs within a fraction of second that brings a player from 100% Hit Points down to 0, we instead give the player 1% Hit Points.
[/ QUOTE ]
Isn't this going to have an adverse effect of hamidon raids? I.E. No one dies during the mito phase.
For PvE:
This will help a lot. For me: When my Ice Tanker get hit by a lucky alpha, he will not die, but go into Hibernate (when my reactions are fast enough...). So I have a chance.
For PvP:
It will help with the "AS at range" effect you get when you move near a Stalker.
They like to tell you, that you just have to keep moving to avoid being AS'ed, which does not really help when you do not break LOS.
Now keeping moving finally helps (a bit).
The AS is initiated in the moment you are near... it will connect some time later. But when you are moving you will not easily be hit a second time (except with ranged Stalker attacks like Throw Spines or Focus or such, but thats okey.) So you can react with Respites or the like.
Sounds interesting.
Virtue: Alter Mann Controller Ill/Rad/Psi, Eisstahl Tanker Ice/Ice/Arctic
Justice: Lord Proton Brute EM/Elec/SM, ADAM-3 Mastermind Robot/FF/Charge
Liberty: Captain Transylvania Tanker Dark/Dark/SM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2. We'll be putting in a check that prevents "one shotting"; if anything occurs within a fraction of second that brings a player from 100% Hit Points down to 0, we instead give the player 1% Hit Points.
[/ QUOTE ]
Isn't this going to have an adverse effect of hamidon raids? I.E. No one dies during the mito phase.
[/ QUOTE ]
Heh, alread said that (yay me!) and yeah, I'm kind of interested in how that will work. I'm personally reall interested in how Blasters will jump from 0 Defiance to 500 in one shot of a taunted AV now (AoE while standing near the tank, then backing off and letting loose).
"Oh, the drama! It kills me. Again." -- Xiu Juan.
[ QUOTE ]
We'll be putting in a check that prevents "one shotting"; if anything occurs within a fraction of second that brings a player from 100% Hit Points down to 0, we instead give the player 1% Hit Points.
[/ QUOTE ]
This may be the "1-shotting fix," but I don't believe it will fix the real reason why 1-shotting is unfair and disliked: lack of reaction time.
I'd really like to seem some data from the Devs on this tweak, specifically the percentage of people who died 3 seconds, 5 seconds, and 10 seconds after their 1-shot death was prevented. Given that data, I think we'd see whether this was a true fix, or one to placate players while leaving something the Devs see as okay in the game.