[ QUOTE ]
I don't know if this is all-PvP experiance you're coming from or what but you're about 180 degrees out of phase.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hehehe AC-electricity joke 
If the Devs wind up reducing the recharge & time-to-live for the Auto Turret, can they do the same with the freakin' Malta turrets, as well? Those things are annoying, and aren't worth destroying because there's no reward for doing so.
Maybe we can get an outcome where everyone wins! 
Well, its official now, the only powers truly worth it in /devices are web grenate and caltrops.
TD is okay, but is better used stacked with Tactics.
Taser is okay, but is better used stacked with any other stun effect power.
Sad really.
One more thing on solo versus team play. Planting and getting some use out of turret is tough because the mobs often go down quick or the team is not patient to let a */dev plant his/her tricks. The device is left behind once the team moves along.
I have to agree with some previous posters about blaster secondaries need a look .. in a positive way.
David
Tech Smith - AR/Dev victory
[ QUOTE ]
Gadgets is the internal name of Devices. It's a Legacy issue and it was my mistake when adding the patch note.
.
As for the change itself, there was an exploit involving TFoe and various stationary entities (like Auto Turret.) In fixing this, the player versions of these entities were locked down as well. I do realise this impacts one of the tactics Devices players used to bypass the limitations of the set. I'll be keeping an eye on this to see if the change hampers the gameplay too severely.
[/ QUOTE ]
Teleport Foe is pretty much just an open can of worms. It pretty much defeats the whole purpose of adventure: "I teleport the villain straight to jail! Justice is served! / I teleport the hero straight to my interrogatotron! Bha hahaha!" Ever consider just removing Teleport Foe from the game entirely and replace it with some other power?
It really is a ridiculous power, and not one that you ever see in comic books, except as a plot hook, such as when a group of heroes are teleported up to an alien space ship to be used as pawns in a intergalactic gladiator game.
[ QUOTE ]
Gadgets is the internal name of Devices. It's a Legacy issue and it was my mistake when adding the patch note.
As for the change itself, there was an exploit involving TFoe and various stationary entities (like Auto Turret.) In fixing this, the player versions of these entities were locked down as well. I do realise this impacts one of the tactics Devices players used to bypass the limitations of the set. I'll be keeping an eye on this to see if the change hampers the gameplay too severely.
[/ QUOTE ]
In the meantime, can you fix the problem with Smoke Grenade suppressing stealth powers? That change "hampers the gameplay" much more than the Auto Turret change.
To be specific, the problem is that to use Smoke Grenade, you have to be close enough to a spawn that suppressing stealth causes you to be spotted if SG misses on any of the mobs.
[ QUOTE ]
I do realise this impacts one of the tactics Devices players used to bypass the limitations of the set. I'll be keeping an eye on this to see if the change hampers the gameplay too severely.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hey, in case you haven't noticed, the turret is not exactly well liked by blasters. Exactly what makes you think this power is balanced right now, or fun to play with right now? Alot of devices blasters that feel as though team members don't need to give them time to set up their "gadgets" would like to know.
[ QUOTE ]
Although, I was wandering around in the university this morning, and it took a *long* time for me to remember just exactly what a "snare" enhancement was.
Lots of things are called lots of things in different places. Even experienced players will sometimes refer to the actual set they are playing as the Trick Archery set, or the Energy Armor set. I still occasionally hear about this set called "Storm Control."
For that matter, and I understand the precident, it still drives me a little nuts when someone asks me about Super Reflexes' "shields."
[/ QUOTE ]
Then there's that "Healer" AT that some players really rave about....
[ QUOTE ]
Just confirmed it on test: Auto-Turret can no longer be teleported.
[/ QUOTE ]
Though you confirmed it, I had sent an PM to Castle last night. He didn't respond to it before I left for work and first thing I saw when I got back was this:
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, it applies to Auto Turret.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yet another pointless nerf for a sub par power. I am so angry about this (and I don't have AT!) I am wishing that Thunderstrike, Total Focus/Conserve Power/Boost Range, and BU in every powerset get nerfed to the effectiveness of /Dev. Thanks Devs! Waited 6 [censored] months to see a positive change for /Device. [censored] IT! He is retired from here on out.
Perhaps we should PM the red names as to when blasters are going to get a real look at and not a nerf to an already underperforming set.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'll be keeping an eye on this to see if the change hampers the gameplay too severely.
[/ QUOTE ]
Castle, I'm afraid the blaster community has likely heard "we'll keep an eye on it" or "we're looking at it" with no subsequent action to take any such statements very seriously.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's a game. You shouldn't take anything about it seriously.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wow! Incredibly unhelpful! Do you often have trouble with taking other sayings literally? Are you still waiting on an actual horse to look in the mouth of?
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps we should PM the red names as to when blasters are going to get a real look at and not a nerf to an already underperforming set.
[/ QUOTE ]
At this point, I would be careful wishing for blasters to get looked at. I remember my excitement when the developers started looking at controllers. I even got one of my wishes when they changed Wormhole into an AoE. Then they killed multiple pets and whacked the snot out of the usefulness of GDF. While I am not opposed to those changes and think they were good in the long run, and I would welcome changes to the blaster AT even though I expect changes would mean some nerfs as well, I doubt most people really would be willing to handle the negative changes that would come with any positive changes.
Blaster's Fire Manipulation secondary is quite excellent. It doesn't need any looking into. I'd much rather Devices continues to get the attention it needs.
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps we should PM the red names as to when blasters are going to get a real loo
[/ QUOTE ] I tried something vuagely like that rather a while ago. I got a couple read recipts and that was it really.
MA Arcs: Yarmouth 1509 and 58812
[ QUOTE ]
Blaster's Fire Manipulation secondary is quite excellent. It doesn't need any looking into.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're joking, right?
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps we should PM the red names as to when blasters are going to get a real look at and not a nerf to an already underperforming set.
[/ QUOTE ]
Personally, I'd just prefer if they'd start taking a look at whats fun and not OMG I CAN'T BELIEVE THEY DO THAT I DON'T WANT THEM TO DO THAT!!!!!!!!!!!
I mean, recalling a turret is an exploit? The word has become so water downed that it's near meaningless.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps we should PM the red names as to when blasters are going to get a real look at and not a nerf to an already underperforming set.
[/ QUOTE ]
Personally, I'd just prefer if they'd start taking a look at whats fun and not OMG I CAN'T BELIEVE THEY DO THAT I DON'T WANT THEM TO DO THAT!!!!!!!!!!!
I mean, recalling a turret is an exploit? The word has become so water downed that it's near meaningless.
[/ QUOTE ]
Technicaly, the developers were seeing some people TP Foe NPC turrets and other spawned objects of similar class type. They evidently didn't like that players could do that, and thus made that class type no longer TPable. It just so happens that players also have objects of the same type and it gets /Dev blasters right in the balls.
You would think someone would consider whether or not it was more important to screw with powersets that players have or to find a different work around to a problem that is probably not game breaking. Anyone know if they were breaking the game with some exploit? I sure haven't seen it or heard it yet.
I dont think this is fair to /devs at all, other non-ARblasters still get build up and aim to deal with paticularly tough enemies.
Apparently BU+AIM+tp foe blaster kills and tp foe AS+attack
kills remain perfectly reasonable.
and having to stand still to set up tripmines for 20 seconds and then waiting for someone come along and stand next to you is reasonable....
And /signed on the tp drone thing
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I8 Test Server Notes:
[ QUOTE ]
Many objects in the game which were meant to be immune to Teleportation have been made so. This affects several powers in the Traps Secondary and Gadgets secondary for players.
[/ QUOTE ]
Emphasis added.
Last time I checked, there is no Gadgets secondary. There is, however, one called Devices. Freudian slips like this and folks wonder why some hold the belief that the devs don't seem to know the Blaster AT all that much.
[/ QUOTE ]
Devices is still called Gadgets in the powers database. Once the name of a power or powerset is set in the database, it never changes; there's a seperate entry in the database to change the name that gets displayed in game. Whoever wrote up the original patch note probably just forgot to use the display name, rather than the database name. Reminds me of when _Castle_ kept calling the brute inherent power "Rage" even months after it was changed to "Fury."
[/ QUOTE ]
That explains the bugs I've seen with the new stacking buff feature. Looks like Fury and Rage stack as well as a /Fire brute's Fire/Plasma Shield and my Thermal's Fire/Plasma Shields.
As for the rest of this thread... nevermind me.
Currently roleplaying, badgehunting, and laughing at the PvPers of CoX. lol, PvP.
Truedusk - Human Rogue
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Last time I checked, there is no Gadgets secondary. There is, however, one called Devices. Freudian slips like this and folks wonder why some hold the belief that the devs don't seem to know the Blaster AT all that much.
[/ QUOTE ]
Gadgets is the internal name of Devices. It's a Legacy issue and it was my mistake when adding the patch note.
As for the change itself, there was an exploit involving TFoe and various stationary entities (like Auto Turret.) In fixing this, the player versions of these entities were locked down as well. I do realise this impacts one of the tactics Devices players used to bypass the limitations of the set. I'll be keeping an eye on this to see if the change hampers the gameplay too severely.
[/ QUOTE ]
Frankly, I think the dev staff is overusing the term and concept "exploit" here the same way the playerbase tends to overuse "nerf".
This smells like the teleport powers being out of favor with staff because it makes their job harder to design challenges after two years. What's the word I'm looking for... ah yes...
WAAAAAAAAAH!
It's illogical to not be able to teleport emanators, small turrets, mortars, etc. Truth be told, it's odd and breaks immersion to not be able to tp glowies, but I can at least understand that glowies are a different class of object that wasn't built to be moved. Removing functionality that already penalizes characters by making them take a power pool to enjoy is silly, narrow thinking - especially after two years of it not breaking the game! Whose radar was this on? It's so out of left field. Next thing you know the dev staff will be locking down the ability to teleport mobile pets.
It's not exploitative. It makes perfect sense. This solution is, respectfully, a kludgey hammer of expediency. Ugh. "Legacy issue"? For who?
File this under fussy tweaking of code for tweaking's sake. I guess it was easier to do this than fix the CoP definitively.
*chuckle-sigh*
I swear, some of the things that get "fixed" nowadays just make you shake your head.
[ QUOTE ]
It's not exploitative. It makes perfect sense. This solution is, respectfully, a kludgey hammer of expediency. Ugh. "Legacy issue"? For who?
[/ QUOTE ]
When Castle said "Legacy issue" I think he was referring to calling Devices "Gadgets".
I think the change probably increased in importance when more people started taking TP Foe. It is more popular than it used to be.
Frankly I don't see the problem with making Auto Turret similar to a Controller pet - more or less permanent until you respawn it. If it's stationary, it can't stay useful for very long because you're moving through the map and you'll either have to move it (as we were able to do) or resummon it.
To be honest, I don't have much of a problem with the change itself since you can't TP most of the other objects like Auto Turret around either (Ice and Burn Patches, Caltrops, Tar Patch, etc.) You can, however, get a lot more use out of those powers, partly but not entirely due to their recharge rates.
The only negative about the change is that it indicates the oft-mentioned "looking at Blaster secondaries" clearly hasn't taken place, since if it had, the fixes that Auto Turret actually needs would be going in as we speak.
[ QUOTE ]
As for the change itself, there was an exploit involving TFoe and various stationary entities (like Auto Turret.) In fixing this, the player versions of these entities were locked down as well. I do realise this impacts one of the tactics Devices players used to bypass the limitations of the set. I'll be keeping an eye on this to see if the change hampers the gameplay too severely.
[/ QUOTE ]
What the heck? Are auto turrets planted by AoE enemies meant to be some hugely dangerous thing? I remember when Malta turrets were altered to not despawn when the engineers died, which didn't make them tougher, it simply meant you had to spend more time battering the damned things down. So, using TP Foe on them is somehow a bad thing as well? Or is this somehow related to using TP Foe on the bunker turrets in RV?
I don't get it.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
[ QUOTE ]
Or is this somehow related to using TP Foe on the bunker turrets in RV?
[/ QUOTE ]
If this is the case, then Thorizdan may have to eat his words about it not being a PvP issue. Man would players howl, for just cause too.
[ QUOTE ]
Wait a second here ... <shakes head in disbelief 
> ... let me get this straight. So not only did Devices not get the help it needs (which every */Dev has been asking for since I3 or so)
[/ QUOTE ]
Before ED, /dev was unparalleled as a blaster secondary. WHo in their right mind thought it needed help?! ED hurt it, but now it's about average. Definately not sorely in need of help.
Virtue Server
Avatar art by Daggerpoint
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wait a second here ... <shakes head in disbelief > ... let me get this straight. So not only did Devices not get the help it needs (which every */Dev has been asking for since I3 or so)
[/ QUOTE ]
Before ED, /dev was unparalleled as a blaster secondary. WHo in their right mind thought it needed help?! ED hurt it, but now it's about average. Definately not sorely in need of help.
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you serious?
Heroes
Dysmal
Lumynous
Sam Steele
Pluck
Wile
Slagheap
Pressure Wave
Rhiannon Bel
Verified
Stellaric
Syd Mallorn
Villains
Jotunheim Skald
Saer Maen
Jen Corbae
Illuminance
Venator Arawn
Taiga Dryad
Tarranos
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, it applies to Auto Turret.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yet another pointless nerf for a sub par power.
[/ QUOTE ]
People keep talking about this as a nerf to AT specifically. Nevermind all the other powers it effects. I imagine the case was that there was no way to exempt specific 'droppables' from this change and not that the horrible, evil devs just wanted to kick AT while it was down...
Virtue Server
Avatar art by Daggerpoint
[ QUOTE ]
Castle, I'm afraid the blaster community has likely heard "we'll keep an eye on it" or "we're looking at it" with no subsequent action to take any such statements very seriously.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah for real. By this point I'd say leave blasters as is. This is the exact opposite change I expected coming to blasters.