[ QUOTE ]
Some are confused by the melee powers available to some sets thinking you should be blapper type. Some are confused of the control primary and think you should be a controller. some are confused with the damage secondary and think you should be focused on damage.
I look at all those options and instead of seeing confusion I see options. I can pick a set with melee attacks and try to make a blapper type. I can pick a set with few melee attacks or totally ignore the melee and work on ranged. I can focus on the primary or the secondary as I choose. I can try to be ranged or melee with both primary and secondary. I can go for a control heavy primary or one that is more damage intensive.
[/ QUOTE ]
The only problem I see is that whatever you choose, you won't be doing it that well.
Also, the need for definition, albeit vague even, would help the dom community to figure out what their problems are.
So far, the comparision with Controllers (fair or not) is natural because of the shared Primary Sets, however we control very poorly by comparison.
Then, the comparison to damages dealers is equally natural because our secondary focus almost entirely (usually all but one power) on damage (to include melee damage), but we pale in comparision to virtually every AT in the game, not just villains and damage specific ATs, in that regard too...
So I think it is natural to wonder what it is that we are supposed to be good at, to shine at? Its not control, its not damage, we don't get buffs/debuffs, so what?
(I noticed my previous post was deleted....probably for naming a name.)
I would really like to hear ANYTHING the devs have to say on ANY dominator issue...please!!!!
Dominators don't need mitigation from their secondaries. Even if they did, there's ice (slows), psi (-recharge), and fire and elec (death).
-Talen_Lee commenting on Energy Assault's Utility
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Tip: Don't team with MM's.
[/ QUOTE ]
I never ever invite MM's to my team. It might seem trite but their pets are always in the way. whether its blocking a doorway and I can't attack, or somehow Im in front of them and need to run. I just can't deal. Plus all the downtime for resummons and buffs is annoying, its detrimental to domination and fury.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think it is a very viable option to just say "don't team with MMs." For one thing, MMs are about 1/3 of the population of most servers at any given time. For another, when I am forming a team, I'm not going to turn down a VG member who I know is a good player just because his AT makes my inherent hard to use. If our inherent is structured in a way that it hinders us from teaming with the most popular AT in CoV, then there is something wrong with our inherent.
As I have noted many times, most of the people who like doms seem to prefer a solo or small-team playstyle. That's fine, but I don't think any AT should be structured so that they *have* to play solo or on small teams to be effective.
FivefifteenA
Being a Grav, I have no trouble teaming with MM's. Sure I can't build Domination worth a poo. But unless I know there is an EB or AV in the mission I generally don't worry.
Wormhole into the MM's henchmen is a lovely thing. 
Of course I always have to show the MM's what that really does before they let me take the lead.
[ QUOTE ]
That was a hot topic in the Defender forums back around I4 or so. People were confused and upset that there was a lack of definition to the Defender "role". I never understood why it was important really.
IIRC some were trying to figure out if Defenders should be protectors, team multipliers, or part-time damage dealers. To me the fact that you could do either was a bonus and not a crutch. The same could be said for Doms.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have played defenders since I3, and I don't recall any big debate about defender roles, except for the debate about Offenders -- and that was never really much of a debate because pretty much everyone agreed that Offenders were not as valuable to a team as a Defender. Nothing against Offenders -- I had one myself -- it's just that it was seen for what it was, which was a primarily solo build. The only other Defender role debate I recall had to do with Controllers having the Defender primaries at mostly full strength, but that had to do with comparison of ATs, not defenders themselves.
Defenders always knew what they were best at, and they have a very clear role -- team support with buffs and debuffs. The fact that someone could make a Defender with a different emphasis did not obscure what was their clear strength. Doms have no such clarity. Are doms supposed to be primarily team support? Then why do they have only 80% of controller primaries and a secondary that doesn't synergize with the primary? (Defender secondaries don't synergize with their primaries either, but defender primaries are so overwhelmingly good that they don't need any synergy.) Are doms supposed to be damage dealers? Then why do they have damage as a secondary, weak damage, and melee powers with no way to protect themselves in melee? Are doms supposed to be some sort of blend of the two? If so, then what exactly is their role on a team?
All of the CoV ATs seem to be blends of abilities, and all of them seem to be designed to have better soloability than most CoH ATs, which were more specialized. That makes me think that the devs probably conceived of doms as having a mixed role. But maybe not -- after all, doms are the only CoV AT that has a damage secondary.
FivefifteenA
[ QUOTE ]
As I have noted many times, most of the people who like doms seem to prefer a solo or small-team playstyle.
[/ QUOTE ]
"All lies and jests, still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest." - Paul Simon
If I quote #'s, they're from City of Data.
Global: @Kazari
It was either Taunt or Purple Triangles of Doom. I stand by my decision!
-BackAlleyBrawler
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As I have noted many times, most of the people who like doms seem to prefer a solo or small-team playstyle.
[/ QUOTE ]
"All lies and jests, still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest." - Paul Simon
[/ QUOTE ]
agreed, I don't know how many times 40 people have to say they play in mostly large teams with their doms.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As I have noted many times, most of the people who like doms seem to prefer a solo or small-team playstyle.
[/ QUOTE ]
"All lies and jests, still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest." - Paul Simon
[/ QUOTE ]
agreed, I don't know how many times 40 people have to say they play in mostly large teams with their doms.
[/ QUOTE ]
I am going to reply to this politely and ignore the flames.
There was a survey on the dom board a while back that asked whether people soloed or teamed. About half of the people who responded said they excusively or almost exclusively soloed, and most of the rest said they soloed and teamed more or less equally. Very few said that they almost always teamed.
Now, is this statistically significant? Probably not -- but it does represent a cross-section of people who report their experiences. Take that as you will.
fivefifteenA
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That was a hot topic in the Defender forums back around I4 or so. People were confused and upset that there was a lack of definition to the Defender "role". I never understood why it was important really.
IIRC some were trying to figure out if Defenders should be protectors, team multipliers, or part-time damage dealers. To me the fact that you could do either was a bonus and not a crutch. The same could be said for Doms.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have played defenders since I3, and I don't recall any big debate about defender roles, except for the debate about Offenders -- and that was never really much of a debate because pretty much everyone agreed that Offenders were not as valuable to a team as a Defender. Nothing against Offenders -- I had one myself -- it's just that it was seen for what it was, which was a primarily solo build. The only other Defender role debate I recall had to do with Controllers having the Defender primaries at mostly full strength, but that had to do with comparison of ATs, not defenders themselves.
[/ QUOTE ]
Go and ask Pilcrow if you want. We debated the topic for a long while, along with a few others. He coined the phrase "force multipliers" from that topic. I'm sorry you don't recall that debate but I really have no reason to lie. If you think I am you can ask Pilcrow. To be honest I think similar debates can be constructed from posts in the tanker forum where they thought their "role" was totally replaced by Controllers and Defenders after I5. In that case I also think a dev response on role vision wouldn't have solved anything.
Comparisons drove the debate for tankers and defenders back then and they drive it today for Doms.
[ QUOTE ]
Defenders always knew what they were best at, and they have a very clear role -- team support with buffs and debuffs. The fact that someone could make a Defender with a different emphasis did not obscure what was their clear strength. Doms have no such clarity. Are doms supposed to be primarily team support? Then why do they have only 80% of controller primaries and a secondary that doesn't synergize with the primary? (Defender secondaries don't synergize with their primaries either, but defender primaries are so overwhelmingly good that they don't need any synergy.)
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually that's not true. Defenders are not even close to be overwhelming superior and that's the point. Have you seen the comparison of Def primary to Controller secondary? The values are 80-120% of effectiveness. That doesn't seem very clear to me.
[ QUOTE ]
Are doms supposed to be damage dealers? Then why do they have damage as a secondary, weak damage, and melee powers with no way to protect themselves in melee?
[/ QUOTE ]
Same as defenders except for the melee.
[ QUOTE ]
Are doms supposed to be some sort of blend of the two? If so, then what exactly is their role on a team?
[/ QUOTE ]
Which is very similar to the Defender role. Are they just defense or a mix of defense and offense? Should the defender even bother with his weak blasts or is he just a "healr"? The defender can't match the controller in team defense so why bother trying right? The defender can't match the blaster in offense so why try right?
The similarity between Defender ambiguity and Dom ambiguity seems pretty evident to me. Both aren't the "best" at anything and that leaves it open to the players to try and figure out what to do with them.
[ QUOTE ]
All of the CoV ATs seem to be blends of abilities, and all of them seem to be designed to have better soloability than most CoH ATs, which were more specialized.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not so sure all CoV ATs are better at soloing. Depends on you match them up.
[ QUOTE ]
That makes me think that the devs probably conceived of doms as having a mixed role. But maybe not -- after all, doms are the only CoV AT that has a damage secondary.
[/ QUOTE ]
And Controllers are the only AT that have no damage set yet no one has a problem with them. Shouldn't no damage be more confusing than a damage secondary? Since Controllers have no damage set shouldn't we scold them for trying to do damage? Doesn't that mean they are breaking what appears to be the clear role of their AT (control and buff/debuff). Or maybe does it mean that the definition of the set is more than just a word like buff/debuff, control, or damage?
Heck, Defenders have a damage secondary and people STILL think you're a bad "healr" if you dare to 3dmg slot your blasts.
The same questions can be asked for Doms as Defenders if you really want. Why the so called weak damage secondary? Why the primary when someone gets it almost as good or better? So if these things confuse the role of the Dom then they also confuse the role of the Defender.
It all seems to start and end with comparisons. If you choose to compare the Defender to a Blaster or Controller you will feel inadequate and have role confusion. If you choose to compare the Dom to a Controller and Corrupter you will feel inadequate and have role confusion. Neither of those feelings addresses whether or not you contribute to a team and whether or not you solo at an acceptable rate. Instead they only tell you that one AT does your primary better and another AT does your secondary better. Trying to compare a single AT two the effectiveness of two ATs doesn't make a ton of sense to me but that's what often happens.
As with the defender role debate from around I4 I don't see dev clarification help with much. If the devs say that Doms are a team friendly AT that has control and damage sets people will still counter with the same complaints about "But our holds are inferior to Controllers" or "Our blasts are inferior to Corrupters" or "But what if I don't want to use melee attacks". I just don't see a dev reponse on Dom roles solving anything since pepole will still feel the same way on what they see as an inadequacy.
But ... this is a serious derail from I7 Dom changes.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Tip: Don't team with MM's.
[/ QUOTE ]
I never ever invite MM's to my team. It might seem trite but their pets are always in the way. whether its blocking a doorway and I can't attack, or somehow Im in front of them and need to run. I just can't deal. Plus all the downtime for resummons and buffs is annoying, its detrimental to domination and fury.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think it is a very viable option to just say "don't team with MMs." For one thing, MMs are about 1/3 of the population of most servers at any given time. For another, when I am forming a team, I'm not going to turn down a VG member who I know is a good player just because his AT makes my inherent hard to use. If our inherent is structured in a way that it hinders us from teaming with the most popular AT in CoV, then there is something wrong with our inherent.
[/ QUOTE ]
Then get ready to address one of the best inherents in the game ... Fury. Brutes and MMs do not mix well. The only melee that stands a chance is Stalkers but even then it's a pain. For Brutes it's infinitely worse since Fury drops like a rock if they can't swing or get hit. I can't tell you how many Brutes complain about this on the forums.
I think you're looking at this the wrong way. You think the problem is the inherent(s) but you're dismissing that the problem could be the MM / pets. Pets just make things a cluster for almost everyone. There are good things that go with that but there are bad as well. With pets you don't build Fury or Domination as well without but that is offset by the disposable nature of the pets and the abilities they provide.
It's a major pain to team with MMs but they are also a great asset. The problems arise when people are too selfish about their toon's performance. If the team succeeds does it really matter that my Brute hovers at 25% Fury? Maybe it stops me from KO Blow'ing a LT with 1-shot but why should I really care if the XP flows and no one dies?
[ QUOTE ]
As I have noted many times, most of the people who like doms seem to prefer a solo or small-team playstyle. That's fine, but I don't think any AT should be structured so that they *have* to play solo or on small teams to be effective.
[/ QUOTE ]
The survey you reference appears to have changed. What might have been valid then doesn't appear to be valid now since many people are discussing how effective their Doms are on large teams. Plus the word "effective" is subjective so it's not possible to say for sure that a Dom is not effective on a team without using the phrase "IMO". But the silent part of the entire "effective" statement is that someone else is more effective which goes back to the problem of comparisons to other ATs.
If you could not hold, stun, immob, confuse or whatever a mob on a large team, and you could not do any damage, then you would be in-effective. But if you can use those powers then the debate comes from being "as effective" as someone else. This leads to comparisons with Corrs and Controllers which really could be done with ALL ATs (compare them to multiple other ATs).
Seems like focusing on contributing is more important than focusing on who contributes more.
[ QUOTE ]
I am going to reply to this politely and ignore the flames.
There was a survey on the dom board a while back that asked whether people soloed or teamed. About half of the people who responded said they excusively or almost exclusively soloed, and most of the rest said they soloed and teamed more or less equally. Very few said that they almost always teamed.
Now, is this statistically significant? Probably not -- but it does represent a cross-section of people who report their experiences. Take that as you will.
fivefifteenA
[/ QUOTE ]I can bet you would get very similar results for every other AT except Defenders.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Tip: Don't team with MM's.
[/ QUOTE ]
I never ever invite MM's to my team. It might seem trite but their pets are always in the way. whether its blocking a doorway and I can't attack, or somehow Im in front of them and need to run. I just can't deal. Plus all the downtime for resummons and buffs is annoying, its detrimental to domination and fury.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think it is a very viable option to just say "don't team with MMs." For one thing, MMs are about 1/3 of the population of most servers at any given time. For another, when I am forming a team, I'm not going to turn down a VG member who I know is a good player just because his AT makes my inherent hard to use. If our inherent is structured in a way that it hinders us from teaming with the most popular AT in CoV, then there is something wrong with our inherent.
As I have noted many times, most of the people who like doms seem to prefer a solo or small-team playstyle. That's fine, but I don't think any AT should be structured so that they *have* to play solo or on small teams to be effective.
FivefifteenA
[/ QUOTE ]
Most MMs dont control their pets. They don't use the goto command, they only cause confusion spinning back and forth running in circles. They take forever to equip. MMs should team with other MMs. Maybe you should try LARGE RELENTLESS TEAMS without MMs...
Ninja, I don't think the dom role confusion stems from comparing doms to other ATs -- at least, not for me. The role confusion stems from the fact that doms don't have one identifiable thing that they are good at. You seem to be arguing that this is a de facto comparison, since "good" must be defined relative to other ATs. Perhaps -- but the way I look at it is that an AT has to at least reach the threshhold of being good enough to contribute their fair share to a team -- i.e., not leeching. Above that, one may be uber and another not, I don't care, but a minimum level of team contribution should be available.
As for the debate you had with Pilcrow about Defenders, that was the Offender debate that I referred to -- yes, a def can be built (or could, back in I-3) that had blaster-level damage or even more. That truly is a case of embarrassment of riches, because you have an AT that can fulfill 2 jobs splendidly well. The dom problem is the opposite, because it cannot fill either job -- control or damage -- very well.
However, I fear that all of this talk is irrelevant. With so many people saying they are perfectly happy with their doms, and criticizing anyone who suggests otherwise, I doubt that the devs will feel any urgency to fix doms, in spite of the small number of people who play them.
FivefifteenA
[ QUOTE ]
Most MMs dont control their pets. They don't use the goto command, they only cause confusion spinning back and forth running in circles. They take forever to equip. MMs should team with other MMs. Maybe you should try LARGE RELENTLESS TEAMS without MMs...
[/ QUOTE ]
There are bad players in any AT. If your complaint is that MM setup time interferes with Domination buildup, then that is a problem with the nature of our inherent, because it makes it difficult to team with an entire class.
Brute Fury isn't the same thing, because there is no total lockdown in the game. A Brute can always find a mob that isn't held, except maybe in a very small team. In fact, the only time a Brute has ever asked my doms not hold was in duos.
FivefifteenA
Got a PM from castle. You will only generate 8 points of domination if you hit the player target in pvp.
************************************************** ***************
COMPLAINING ABOUT THE AT AS A WHOLE IS NOT THE PURPOSE OF THIS THREAD
************************************************** ***************
Like it or not, Doms are the way they are. Don't like it? Shut up and play a different AT. What we are here for, what this Thread is here for, is to pay attention to the changes Issue 7 is implementing. If you want to endlessly debate the pro's and cons of the AT and how you're not doing enough damage or our controls aren't as long as a controller's has absolutely NOTHING to do with finding bugs in the current changes and/or reporting on how they effect gameplay.
Things are how they are, now shut up and go to RV (assuming it doesn't crash for you -_-') and try out building Domination on a pvp team. Go try PvE and maybe push for 41 to start trying PPP's. But for God's sake do NOT turn this thread into the Domination section, leave it as the "Official Thread for Dominator Changes"
[ QUOTE ]
************************************************** ***************
COMPLAINING ABOUT THE AT AS A WHOLE IS NOT THE PURPOSE OF THIS THREAD
************************************************** ***************
Like it or not, Doms are the way they are. Don't like it? Shut up and play a different AT. What we are here for, what this Thread is here for, is to pay attention to the changes Issue 7 is implementing. If you want to endlessly debate the pro's and cons of the AT and how you're not doing enough damage or our controls aren't as long as a controller's has absolutely NOTHING to do with finding bugs in the current changes and/or reporting on how they effect gameplay.
Things are how they are, now shut up and go to RV (assuming it doesn't crash for you -_-') and try out building Domination on a pvp team. Go try PvE and maybe push for 41 to start trying PPP's. But for God's sake do NOT turn this thread into the Domination section, leave it as the "Official Thread for Dominator Changes"
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't provoke him. He's been doing really well so far.
Fact of the matter is, if it's not one thing it's another. We're happy you like Dominators, but we honestly believe something needs to be done, either with us having 80% Controller Durations and lowish damage or our PPPs being gimptastic.
Our AT isn't as good as you seem to think.
EDIT: AND, as Shrike pointed out, our bonus Domination only working if something hits isn't a bug. If that's the case, why is the only thing that generates more Domination our SECONDARY? It's not like we were overpowered with toggle droppers.
[ QUOTE ]
************************************************** ***************
COMPLAINING ABOUT THE AT AS A WHOLE IS NOT THE PURPOSE OF THIS THREAD
************************************************** ***************
Like it or not, Doms are the way they are. Don't like it? Shut up and play a different AT. What we are here for, what this Thread is here for, is to pay attention to the changes Issue 7 is implementing. If you want to endlessly debate the pro's and cons of the AT and how you're not doing enough damage or our controls aren't as long as a controller's has absolutely NOTHING to do with finding bugs in the current changes and/or reporting on how they effect gameplay.
Things are how they are, now shut up and go to RV (assuming it doesn't crash for you -_-') and try out building Domination on a pvp team. Go try PvE and maybe push for 41 to start trying PPP's. But for God's sake do NOT turn this thread into the Domination section, leave it as the "Official Thread for Dominator Changes"
[/ QUOTE ]
You will only generate 8 points of domination if you hit the player target in pvp. AS DESIGNED, AAAAAAAAAAA. Why does no one care!?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
************************************************** ***************
COMPLAINING ABOUT THE AT AS A WHOLE IS NOT THE PURPOSE OF THIS THREAD
************************************************** ***************
Like it or not, Doms are the way they are. Don't like it? Shut up and play a different AT. What we are here for, what this Thread is here for, is to pay attention to the changes Issue 7 is implementing. If you want to endlessly debate the pro's and cons of the AT and how you're not doing enough damage or our controls aren't as long as a controller's has absolutely NOTHING to do with finding bugs in the current changes and/or reporting on how they effect gameplay.
Things are how they are, now shut up and go to RV (assuming it doesn't crash for you -_-') and try out building Domination on a pvp team. Go try PvE and maybe push for 41 to start trying PPP's. But for God's sake do NOT turn this thread into the Domination section, leave it as the "Official Thread for Dominator Changes"
[/ QUOTE ]
You will only generate 8 points of domination if you hit the player target in pvp. AS DESIGNED, AAAAAAAAAAA. Why does no one care!?
[/ QUOTE ]
This reminds me of when no one paid attention when i was posting about the impact of lessening the affect of toggle droppers for doms. This is real, not abstract. What do people think about this before I7 goes live? Our buff shouldn't be nerfed before it even gets live is my opinion.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
************************************************** ***************
COMPLAINING ABOUT THE AT AS A WHOLE IS NOT THE PURPOSE OF THIS THREAD
************************************************** ***************
Like it or not, Doms are the way they are. Don't like it? Shut up and play a different AT. What we are here for, what this Thread is here for, is to pay attention to the changes Issue 7 is implementing. If you want to endlessly debate the pro's and cons of the AT and how you're not doing enough damage or our controls aren't as long as a controller's has absolutely NOTHING to do with finding bugs in the current changes and/or reporting on how they effect gameplay.
Things are how they are, now shut up and go to RV (assuming it doesn't crash for you -_-') and try out building Domination on a pvp team. Go try PvE and maybe push for 41 to start trying PPP's. But for God's sake do NOT turn this thread into the Domination section, leave it as the "Official Thread for Dominator Changes"
[/ QUOTE ]
You will only generate 8 points of domination if you hit the player target in pvp. AS DESIGNED, AAAAAAAAAAA. Why does no one care!?
[/ QUOTE ]
I care. The ONLY ranged attack worth slotting in my secondary is Power Blast...now I have to waste a slot on Power Bolt too? And if I don't want to get owned do I have to take Power PUSH and slot it with an acc so I can have a ranged attack chain?
If this is how things are going to be, either we should generate extra points from our Primary and pool powers as well, or we should be able to get at least a 75% chance to drop toggles with both our TD powers. So far I'm not liking the changes at all.
[ QUOTE ]
Got a PM from castle. You will only generate 8 points of domination if you hit the player target in pvp.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wait. We build Domination in PvP by scoring a HIT, not just by attacking?
VERY IMPORTANT QUESTION: does this mean that if we fire off an AoE, we get 8 points per hit, or just eight points if we hit at least one target? In fact, since PBAoEs don't even HAVE selected targets, player OR mob, how does THAT work?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Got a PM from castle. You will only generate 8 points of domination if you hit the player target in pvp.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wait. We build Domination in PvP by scoring a HIT, not just by attacking?
VERY IMPORTANT QUESTION: does this mean that if we fire off an AoE, we get 8 points per hit, or just eight points if we hit at least one target? In fact, since PBAoEs don't even HAVE selected targets, player OR mob, how does THAT work?
[/ QUOTE ]
Well I would think we get bonus points for every hit but for the sets that don't have meaningful AoEs...
>.>
I fear the code is all or nothing but I'd be happy with getting 8 for a hit and 4 for a miss.
I really do think we need to build Domination even off of misses, though. Dominators tend to be the weakest AT in PvP, we need something to offset that.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Got a PM from castle. You will only generate 8 points of domination if you hit the player target in pvp.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wait. We build Domination in PvP by scoring a HIT, not just by attacking?
VERY IMPORTANT QUESTION: does this mean that if we fire off an AoE, we get 8 points per hit, or just eight points if we hit at least one target? In fact, since PBAoEs don't even HAVE selected targets, player OR mob, how does THAT work?
[/ QUOTE ]
I am sure we would get the short end of the stick in both respects. It's nice that scrappers and stalkers are so "balanced" is pvp compared to dominators. Idiots.
My Apologies ShrikeX, I had not intended that as a direct comment at you but at this thread on a whole.
Anyways, I tend to agree with the issue of it being a Secondaries only thing. In PvP especially I depend a LOT on Levitate from MC to deal my damage. If I actually want to kill someone my cycle is Terrify->Dominate->Levitate->Dominate->Mind Probe->Levitate->Dominate and continue as needed. I've only been PVP'ing in Siren's up til now so Psychic Shockwave hasn't been too important PvP wise but in RV it's going to be incredible important, given it's a PBAOE 65% toggle dropper.
As for my Secondary, Psionic Assault, this ONLY coming from Secondaries hurts, my primary damage dealer isn't even part of my Secondary. And then there are people who slot the Fire holds for damage. I agree, the 8pt thing should really be all powers that do damage. I don't want to be earning it for each tick of TK (though that's a fun idea in and of itself ) but for those who intentionally do damage with their primaries this is unfair.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The only real change for doms in PvE is the reduction in the timer. The only people I see this as helping are those who solo or play on small teams. On large teams, with MM set up time and the inevitable afks you have with 8 people, the Domination timer is not a problem. Some people advocate that, during team afks, doms should find a minion and beat up on it to keep Domination up. This is both kind of pathetic and, on a big team, dangerous. I personally would kick anyone who attacked mobs while the team was afk on a large team, because with improved mob AI there is always a change of unintended aggro in this situation.
I think that doms need help on large teams, and so I was very disappointed in a change that only helps doms that are constantly attacking -- because doms on a large team are not going to be constantly attacking.
I would prefer to see a change to the acc and duration of holds as mob level increases. As it is now, there is a very sharp drop-off in the duration of holds and their chance to hit with harder mobs. Since a large team on Relentless will generally have +2 and +3 mobs to the highest person on the team, it becomes very difficult for a dom to add much control. When I started my first corr after playing doms for a while, it was really noticable to me how much better the corr soft controls hit and last on harder mobs. The falloff in dom abilities against harder mobs needs to be addressed.
I'm sure some people will reply that they hold higher level mobs just fine, and I'm glad that they are happy with their performance, but really, when you get maybe 10 seconds duration against +2s from an aoe hold that is three-slotted for hold duration with SOs, that's not too hot.
FivefifteenA
[/ QUOTE ]
Tip: Don't team with MM's.
[/ QUOTE ]
I never ever invite MM's to my team. It might seem trite but their pets are always in the way. whether its blocking a doorway and I can't attack, or somehow Im in front of them and need to run. I just can't deal. Plus all the downtime for resummons and buffs is annoying, its detrimental to domination and fury.