[ QUOTE ]
I'll discuss it further. It completely goes against 2/3rds of our set. Knockback, Repel, and "Phasing". It will cause FFers to NOT want to use MOST of our powers, because we won't be free to run around or reposition ourselves. We'll be firmly established as "buffbots". Dispersion Bubble will then be our new "aura" and we will be required to "rock" it just like our sisters the Empaths are. I say a very STRONG no to this. I am not and refuse to be a buffbot. And I am strongly opposed to anything that will solidify that as "The Way, The Truth, and The Light".
[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe I'm not understanding your point, but I fail to see how switching the values between the smaller shields and dispersion makes us anymore of a "buff bot" then we currently are or somehow causes us to have to keep "rocking the aura".
You still will have to keep casting Deflection and Insulation every 4 mins, the buff from Dispersion will still only work while teammates are within the radius and dispersion will still always have to be on.
Synergy Lvl 50 Def FF/Electric/Psy - Protector
Cimarron - Protector Mascot
My DA Page
[ QUOTE ]
You still will have to keep casting Deflection and Insulation every 4 mins, the buff from Dispersion will still only work while teammates are within the radius and dispersion will still always have to be on.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think what you just said explains it right there. You're talking about taking AWAY about 5% in Defense effectiveness from the "smaller" bubbles from all the teammates. The teammates now only get the bonus when they ARE inside the "big bubble". To respond to Dromio's post up there, that will encourage bubblers to "stay in the middle" of the team rather than "jump all over" using positioning to make their knockback more effective and useful. That's how I see it. And you're right, it's entirely opinion, not fact. I can see where a bubbler might feel more "safe" jumping around and aggroing everything with his other powers with the added person Defense (I certainly would), however, I think MOST people will just see the fact that they "have" to sit in the middle of the team so that most of the team gets the same bonus that they used to before the proposed change. Again, it's all opinion, and in my opinion, that's how most people will see it.
Can't you see where they might act that way?
Continuing on the placible Force Bomb idea; I think this is pretty realistic. It allows the devs to keep the basic animation, and most of the effect can be stolen from Bonfire.
Naturally, unlike fire it wouldn't do damage, but it could have a -Def or -Res component. That would make it similar to Liquify, Sonic Resonance's final power only with knockback instead of knockdown, and knockback is generally strictly worse so its not really overpowered. As mobs are unlikely to hang around in it this wouldn't matter much except in the case of AV fights - exactly the point where help is needed.
Another suggestion is to make Force Bomb a cone variant of Force Bolt. Not a bad idea either, but then the animation would have to change. Both Force Bomb and Force Bolt could have some debuff in this case; probably -Def again. Not as interesting as the Bonfire idea, but still better than what we have now.
In either case, the disorient would have to go; good riddance. A low magnitude, low probability disorient is of no value whatsoever.
[ QUOTE ]
I confess I'm not really sure how to respond to those posts. You shoot stuff down with statements like "I will not be a buffbot" and then say "What I DO want is for more bubblers to stop thinking of themselves as "buffbots"". So are you saying that you don't think of yourself as a buffbot but most other FFers do?
[/ QUOTE ]
That is what I'm saying, so we are in agreement.
[ QUOTE ]
The problem is that if you shoot down ideas from your seemingly almost unique point of view (even according to yourself) we're never going to get anywhere. The same thing happens if you're allowed to define absolutely what "fits" and "doesn't fit" into the set. I think you realize that, and that's why this second post is such a disclaimer.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have no power to "define" anything. All of my post are just simply my opinion. I have absolutely no influence with the devs whatsoever. Hell, they won't even return my calls. I'm no Arcanaville. I can't change anything about the sets, only the devs can. That's what this thread and this discussion is for. All I can do is give my opinion. And that's all that it is.
[ QUOTE ]
What has to happen is that we have to look for the more wide area good of the set. Something that would pull more people to FF (Defenders in particular). Something that would appeal to a larger audience than just you, or just me.
[/ QUOTE ]
True. (Though I'm still trying to figure out what "wide area good" means). 
[ QUOTE ]
The "feel" of a set is so purely objective that it shouldn't be a large part of the idea limitations.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think you mean subjective, but I get your point.
[ QUOTE ]
The ease of implementing said ideas is much more relevent. Obviously you and I have differing ideas about the "feel" of the set, and I'll bet there's a thousand other ideas about the "feel" of the set out there. Rejecting ideas based on "feel" isn't productive.
[/ QUOTE ]
I just think it's very important that the set not change into something that it's not. I don't want to be a Kineticist and debuff or buff damage. If I wanted to do that, I'd MAKE a Kineticist. That's just one example. I think you get my point there.
[ QUOTE ]
The defense the small bubbles would provide to the squishies would still be good, and you might be even BETTER at what you do because your self protection is higher. But right now the FF Defender is poorly protected, and that limits how some people perceive and play the set.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with this. But that's me.
[ QUOTE ]
My opinion is that this change would open up playstyles, not limit them.
[/ QUOTE ]
And here is where I disagree. I think it WILL limit how most people CHOOSE to play FFers because I think most people DO think of themselves as "buffbots". Because of this, I think most people will choose to sit in the middle of the team and not move, wasting all the rest of the powers in the set and making them dusty. That's why I think the "big three" powers should either be left alone, or actually REDUCED in Defensive capabilites as a sacrifice to the Gods of Powerset Balance to allow us more utility in the rest of the set.
[ QUOTE ]
Four out of nine is not one third.
[/ QUOTE ]
But three out of nine IS a third. I don't count PFF as a "Defense" power because the Defense is SO high that it's basically a Detention Field for yourself, practically speaking. It doesn't help your team whatsoever except in keeping you alive. So I don't count it at all. I see three Defense giving powers in the set, three knockback powers, one repel power and TWO "phasing" powers. But that's just the way that I rationalize the set. Again, my opinion.
[ QUOTE ]
In my post the defense debuff was brought up to try and deal with the issue of FF defenders and AV's. Right now I think almost any defender is more effective against an AV than FF, and to try and add utility in that situation is, I think, going to require a little bit of a rewrite.
[/ QUOTE ]
I would be open to the idea of a "Defense Debuff" in the set, but what I was opposed to was the idea that "ForceFields is about manipulating Defense" as a JUSTIFICATION for that. I don't buy that justification, because adding Defense is not the same as making someone hold still better so they lose their Defense. Now with all of our "Force" powers you COULD justify adding some Defense DeBuffs in there and say thematically that the enemies are "easier to hit" because they have to "push through the force" (like Force Bubble). You could also justify adding -Slow to enemies with the same justification. I just didn't like that you tried to justify it by saying that FFers are "Defense Manipulators" when we are not really. That's all.
[ QUOTE ]
Continuing on the placible Force Bomb idea; I think this is pretty realistic. It allows the devs to keep the basic animation, and most of the effect can be stolen from Bonfire.
[/ QUOTE ]
You don't know how hard it would be to "steal" the code from Bonfire. Neither do I. It could be really hard, or it could be a simple cut and paste job. The fact is that we don't know what their code looks like. All we DO know is a basic law of programming: less change in concept = less change in code. Just try to keep that in mind, unless you can get a red name to come in here and say "it's easy and definately a viable option for the near future". This is why I'm trying to restrict the conversation to "tweaks" rather than total power changes. That's why there are "no cottages", because we simply don't KNOW how hard or easy it would be to make any change, all we do know is that the smaller the change, the easier it will be.
Changing a single variable is alot easier than stealing code from another power, I can tell you that for sure.
Hey, guys, we are all in the same force bubble here - and its getting cramped. No need to get all defensive.
Lets just agree to disagree on some things, ok?
[ QUOTE ]
Changing a single variable is alot easier than stealing code from another power, I can tell you that for sure.
[/ QUOTE ]
The problem is all variables are good; the powers that are lacking are lacking in function more than power. Thus, asking for changes that are not to some degree cottages is basically pointless. The task at hand is asking for reasonable, pre-packed cottages that are already available in the company catalog, not outrageous architect-planned condos with three garages and two swimming pools.
Sure, we could ask for a Force Bomb that is the same as it is now, only with a shorter animation. However, I think that would probably be just as difficult to code as a new power effect. This is just a guess, however; I might be terribly misguided in this. My suggestion is for a Force Bomb that could actually be viable with the current animation, but which would need a new power effect - which could be a much smaller/bigger change depending on how things are coded.
It also seems that animation time plays a very small role in the balance calculation for powers, so Force Bomb gains next to nothing from its current horribly long animation, and improving its current abilities (such as by increasing the chance to disorient) won't happen as long as this balancing formula is being used. To save the power, we need to either change its animation time or its function - I aim to change the later.
All we can do is speculate and brainstorm, and possibly try to interest a developer in what we do. I hope I didn't just go all defensive like I asked others too and remained constructive here.
[ QUOTE ]
I think you mean subjective, but I get your point.
[/ QUOTE ]
I did mean subjective. I get all a-typin' and funky things like "wide area good" and subjective/objective just sneak in there. 
[ QUOTE ]
I just think it's very important that the set not change into something that it's not. I don't want to be a Kineticist and debuff or buff damage. If I wanted to do that, I'd MAKE a Kineticist. That's just one example. I think you get my point there.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think I might need a better example. Of course no one is asking for FF to turn into Kinetics. Maybe a more subtle example? I think your objections are more subtle than the example, which is fine. My point though, is that "feel", especially on a subtle level, is extremely subjective (can't say I'm not a learner!), and thus not a tremendously good reason to toss away an idea.
[ QUOTE ]
And here is where I disagree. I think it WILL limit how most people CHOOSE to play FFers because I think most people DO think of themselves as "buffbots". Because of this, I think most people will choose to sit in the middle of the team and not move, wasting all the rest of the powers in the set and making them dusty. That's why I think the "big three" powers should either be left alone, or actually REDUCED in Defensive capabilites as a sacrifice to the Gods of Powerset Balance to allow us more utility in the rest of the set.
[/ QUOTE ]
What choice does the set really give them? As the least defended member of the team, any aggro can be death. Seems to me that "buffbot" is (even according to you) the status quo. If you want that to change, you're going to have to open up not only to changes, but to believing the playerbase can adjust in a positive way to those changes. You're argument seems to be that even if the proposed changes were made, players would still think of themselves as buffbots, or at least that's how I read "Because of this, I think most people will choose to sit in the middle of the team and not move, wasting all the rest of the powers in the set and making them dusty".
I disagree. I think given more self defense FF players will be able to (and apt to) move around and participate in combat, even attacking more because they don't fear getting aggro as much. As I said, this change would be inclusive of existing playstyles, including your own. People who wanted to be buffbots could concentrate on keeping Dispersion on the squishies, while people that wanted to use Repel or Bolt from the middle of combat could do so more effectively. Most likely people would do a combination of both based on the situation.
[ QUOTE ]
I would be open to the idea of a "Defense Debuff" in the set, but what I was opposed to was the idea that "ForceFields is about manipulating Defense" as a JUSTIFICATION for that. I don't buy that justification, because adding Defense is not the same as making someone hold still better so they lose their Defense. Now with all of our "Force" powers you COULD justify adding some Defense DeBuffs in there and say thematically that the enemies are "easier to hit" because they have to "push through the force" (like Force Bubble). You could also justify adding -Slow to enemies with the same justification. I just didn't like that you tried to justify it by saying that FFers are "Defense Manipulators" when we are not really. That's all.
[/ QUOTE ]
Judge the idea, not the justification. Justification is easy.
[ QUOTE ]
All we can do is speculate and brainstorm, and possibly try to interest a developer in what we do. I hope I didn't just go all defensive like I asked others too and remained constructive here.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. I think we're better off brainstorming, trying to improve and refine ideas, and letting the developers do the rejecting.
Better example? Okay, I don't WANT people to see Dispersion Bubble AS an "aura" and I fear that if the numbers were swapped, they WOULD see it as more of an aura, which means we'll be more like second-rate Empaths that can't heal at all. That's what I'm afraid of. I don't want to have ForceFields become something other than ForceFields. I don't want people to be able to compare it to another set and say that it does the same thing as that set only worse. Right now the set does something UNIQUE that other Defenders don't really do (even if alot of people don't want to "do" that thing), and I don't want to lose that.
[ QUOTE ]
If you want that to change, you're going to have to open up not only to changes, but to believing the playerbase can adjust in a positive way to those changes.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'll TRY to change my cynicism about my fellow players and trust them to change as well, but you'll have to give me some time. I don't exactly have the highest opinion of the playerbase, which is why I've been trying to "father" them into slow changes over time. I DID spend the last three years running entirely in pick-up-groups in Freedumb.
[ QUOTE ]
I agree. I think we're better off brainstorming, trying to improve and refine ideas, and letting the developers do the rejecting.
[/ QUOTE ]
No.
...Just kidding.
I'm trying to keep myself open, it's just hard when you've become so jaded. Dammit now I have that song stuck in my head.... DAMN YOU AEROSMITH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 
[ QUOTE ]
The problem is all variables are good; the powers that are lacking are lacking in function more than power. Thus, asking for changes that are not to some degree cottages is basically pointless. The task at hand is asking for reasonable, pre-packed cottages that are already available in the company catalog, not outrageous architect-planned condos with three garages and two swimming pools.
[/ QUOTE ]
I lawled. 
Thanks for the analogy and the laugh, I needed that. I'll try to be more open to pre-packaged condos. I REALLY wish a redname would come in here and at least say something like: "We'll look at these ideas and consider them for sometime in the future" or even "We like where the set is, don't expect any changes anytime soon."
It would be nice to know if I am wasting my breath here or not.
First of all, I'd like to say that I do like the idea of Repulsion Bomb (or something else) acting like Bonfire. What I am reminded of is the recent post by Castle in which he says that Burn was originally intended to be a "Wall of Flame" type power. It was meant to prevent foes from walking through it, which would then herd them into an area where you wanted them. A couple of posts down, someone even mentioned that this would be a good concept for force field, as well.
The irony here is that it is obvious that this is what Force Bubble was INTENDED to be. It is a wall, clearly, a demarkation that your foes cannot, under any circumstances, cross. The problem is that that wall is CENTERED on you, and that it must, in order to be useful, be so large as to detain the foes outside of your range.
Secondly, as usual, I agree with BurningChick. FF is a one trick pony, or at best a two trick pony, while Dark has a number of tools at its disposal to mitigate damage. Just looking at the chance to hit and damage dealt alone, Dark already performs better than Force Field because both can give you that 5% cap to be hit, but Dark ALSO reduces the actual damage of that 5% that DOES hit you.
I agree that Force Field's knockback is something that can be useful IN SOME PEOPLE'S OPINION, but it is an opinion that is very much based on playing styles and expectation. Not everyone can handle knockback like an expert. More importantly, though, Dark has similar control abilities in Fearsome Stare, Parylizing Gaze, and most especially the Dark Servant. It's not like Force Field's ability to mitigate damage with knockback magically prevents all subsequent damage that the Defense misses, putting them way ahead of Dark. Knocking back foes, slowing them, and other "soft" controls are powers nearly ALL Defenders have, so you can't say that this somehow "balances" that Dark has damage debuffs, and Force Field doesn't.
The fact is, if we assume Force Field is supposed to be *the* defensive set, then there should be no QUESTION about whether or not it is the best defense. It does not provide a heal, Dark does. It does not provide a damage boost, Dark does. It does not provide a rez, Dark does. If Dark provides X damage mitigation, then FF should provide so much more damage mitigation than X that it is the OBVIOUS choice as a defense.
Force Field provides Defense, and Knockback. Plus a little disorient. If Dark provided ONLY -Acc, and Fear, then maybe it would be an even comparison. But since it doesn't, then FF should have more tools as well. And that's not "cottages" any more than adding -Res to Tar Patch was.
(BTW, for the record, when PFF first came out, it provided ONLY 95% defense. The resistance was added long after release, mainly because, more than likely, too many Defenders were dropping dead to the lucky 5% of shots)
Now, that having been said, I don't want Force Field to have Healing because I don't believe that's in concept. I don't want it to have Resistance because that's Sonic's area. I don't think any control powers are any more in concept (or even better) than Knockback. That leaves offense. I don't want to step on Sonic's toes, again, with -Res. But I do believe that FF DOES need a damage boost simply because that's innate to the Archetype. Defenders are balanced around being able to boost their damage from 65% to, I would estimate, 85% or so, and without that ability, Force Field and only Force Field is unfairly penalized.
Is that a "cottage"? Well, for all existing concepts of the FF powers, maybe. That didn't stop -Res from being added to Tar Patch, though, as I mentioned above. And personally, since the defining characteristic of Force Fields is "Force", I don't think that a +Dmg boost is out of concept. You could think of it as the Defender transferring energy to his allies to "build up" their attacks, or just simply getting behind their attacks and "pushing" them harder.
I'm also going to address the idea that a Force Field Defender must for some reason be "weaker" than the rest of his team so they have to "defend" him. That seems logical on the surface, and in fact, I think from a SOLO standpoint, the personal defense is just fine, he just needs more offense. However, a Dark Defender is not less protected than his teammates, and does not need additional protection from them. A Radiation Defender is not less protected than his teammates, and does not need additional protection from them. The discrepancy between the defense the Defender can generate for himself and what he can generate for his team exists ONLY for buff-type Defenders. And I'm not sure that's fair.
I do kind of like the idea of Personal Force Field "suppressing" when you attack, and it might not even suppress all the way, giving the FF some more survivability compared to his teammates. However, if you change PFF for Defenders, you must change it for everyone, Controllers, Masterminds, and even Blasters who get it in the EPPs. And if I had my way, I might suggest dropping Repulsion Bomb or Repulsion Field altogether, and adding a totally new, independent damage buff power. Perhaps something like an PBAoE Build Up. But that really does get back to "cottages".
So, here's my suggestions:
1) Change Detention Field to a timed toggle power that automatically shuts off after a certain amount of time. This is no more a change to the concept of the power than it was a change to the concept of Phase Shift, and the code is already in place. Nothing even needs to be changed about the power, just allow it to be turned off at will.
2) Use the previous poster's suggestion to make Force Bubble's radius less, but give a Slow component to prevent foes from pushing as far into it. This isn't a change in the concept of the power, you've just made it smaller. And you CAN make it smaller if foes can't "push" as far into it before they get flung out.
3) Add a +Dmg to all allies inside the Force Bubble. There's no reason for this other than to give a damage boost. However, it doesn't actually change the essential nature of the power, merely adds something else to it. (Like the -Res to Tar Patch)
Now, personally I feel that the only problem with this arrangement is that Repulsion Field and Force Bubble are redundant. One thing I MIGHT suggest is to make Repulsion Field the large radius Slow with the +Dmg, and Force Bubble the smaller Repel. That way you take both of them to get the full effect. However, that would definately be a change in the behavior of Repulsion Field. One advantage would be that the +Dmg would come at an earlier level.
[ QUOTE ]
I REALLY wish a redname would come in here and at least say something like: "We'll look at these ideas and consider them for sometime in the future" or even "We like where the set is, don't expect any changes anytime soon."
It would be nice to know if I am wasting my breath here or not.
[/ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately, I'm afraid that ultimately nothing will be done. It's certainly logical to believe that if the devs were going to add a damage boost to Force Field (and Empathy, for that matter, although at least they can boost their allies with Fortitude) they would have done it with they gave the boost to Dark. They probably didn't because, like us, they couldn't think of a way to do with without breaking the concept of seriously changing powers.
I've also mentioned how telling I find it that Force Field and Empathy are specifically excluded from Corruptors. TA is as well, and Empathy wasn't given to villains at all, but I think the absense of Force Field to Corruptors is a definately sign of dev thinking. Corruptors, with damage dealing as their Primary, need an offensive boost, and thus Force Field isn't appropriate to them.
This does seem to suggest at least some of the devs are aware of the issue.
You have alot of valid points there Jade, and I won't argue most of them, except this:
[ QUOTE ]
Now, personally I feel that the only problem with this arrangement is that Repulsion Field and Force Bubble are redundant.
[/ QUOTE ]
The powers are certainly NOT redundant. Not at all. One does Repel and one does knockback. One only knocks enemies that are near you and one can aggro the entire ROOM. Let me post here another post that I made in my guide's thread:
[ QUOTE ]
Force Bubble is good, but in most cases, Repulsion Field is better. Like I said in another thread a long time ago, where Force Bubble is a sledgehammer, Repulsion Field is a chisel. They both have their places, but I've personally found RF to be more useful in more situations because of the FINESSE that the power provides. You only knock back what you want to knock back, and at the same time, it gives you some small degree of protection of melee attacks. Some melee attacks still get through, but with RF on, you'll never be surrounded by giant grunt breathing down your neck. The endurance cost is minimal when no one's on you, and the effect is very nice.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think Repulsion Field is a VERY good power. I'm sorry that you don't seem to think so. Everything else you said is more or less valid, this comment just stuck in my craw. That doesn't mean the powers can't be tweaked. Like I said though, no cottages, I REALLY don't want to completely lose ANY of these powers.
[ QUOTE ]
And here is where I disagree. I think it WILL limit how most people CHOOSE to play FFers because I think most people DO think of themselves as "buffbots". Because of this, I think most people will choose to sit in the middle of the team and not move, wasting all the rest of the powers in the set and making them dusty. That's why I think the "big three" powers should either be left alone, or actually REDUCED in Defensive capabilites as a sacrifice to the Gods of Powerset Balance to allow us more utility in the rest of the set.
[/ QUOTE ]
Forcefields is an interesting set; when I am on my Mind/Bubbler namesake I am as close to feeling invincible as I can get without having to log in the Ill/Rad.
It has always seemed to me that Forcefields worked better as a secondary than as a Primary. As a Controller secondary, you have, well, control and the added defense and tricks of your secondary.
FF players in general don't seem to see themselves as 'buffbots' to be fair. I think that...those such as yourself and myself (well...I am nowhere near as experienced as yourself, but I've grown to love my Bubbler) realize that we are more of a medium-level mitigation set.
I see Sonics as being the 'fixed' Forcefields. It has Clarity, Debuffs, +Res shields and a cage as well.
Where Forcefields falls apart is twofold:
i)Very little resistance to Defense Debuffs. Not so prevalent ingame as in PvP, but boy do Rularuu suck among others. I wouldn't mind if PFF or Disperion had some kind of such resistance. Also, in PvP you can just laugh away the Defense buffs because of bloatrous Defense debuffs or ToHit Buffs.
ii) The higher-tier powers are more skill intensive. If you just turn on Force Bubble you'll likely overaggro and run the risk of getting your team killed. Detention Field just doesn't seem good to some players. Repulsion Bomb isn't too bad but Sonics seems to do that a little better as well.
While we aren't necessarily Defense manipulators we are, to an extend, Defense [/i] enablers[/i].
One of the best things the Devs did was add the "Deflected" messages to Forcefields and such, to show we are actualy DOING something.
By adding some sort of Defense Debuff to either Repulsion Bomb or Force Bubble, we aren't breaking the set thematically. Hell, we would be adding more tools to our arsenal. We don't need the debuffs to be to the level of Darkest Night or Radiation Infection either.
The big problem is, does Castle WANT us to be better or does he see us as "underperforming". The latter seems to be his metric in these cases...
I'm afraid to say that outside of PvP, my Forcefielder doesn't underpeform, at all. 
Questions about the game, either side? /t @Neuronia or @Neuronium, with your queries!
168760: A Death in the Gish. 3 missions, 1-14. Easy to solo.
Infinity Villains
Champion, Pinnacle, Virtue Heroes
[ QUOTE ]
You have alot of valid points there Jade, and I won't argue most of them, except this:
[ QUOTE ]
Now, personally I feel that the only problem with this arrangement is that Repulsion Field and Force Bubble are redundant.
[/ QUOTE ]
The powers are certainly NOT redundant. Not at all. One does Repel and one does knockback. One only knocks enemies that are near you and one can aggro the entire ROOM.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, we are talking about concept, and in concept, the two powers are essentially the same. Just, as you said, one is REALLY LARGE RADIUS, and the other is REALLY SMALL RADIUS. Honestly, I think the problem is that you have two great extremes here, when what you really need is something in between. To be truly useful, the "wall" should be somewhere in between.
I've said this before, and you've said much the same thing when you said Force Bubble wouldn't work if it was smaller radius. Its radius is really determined by how far a foe can move in the time between "pulses". That's a constant, as long as we don't change the laws of physics. (Adding a slow is my suggestion to change the laws of physics )
As for the difference between Repel and Knockback, well, that is a technicality which is really only appropriate when speaking of foes that are resistant to one or the other. And adding Slow to the equation would, I think, cover a lot of those "holes". Anything resistant to both Slow and Repel can be dealt with by Force Bolt.
[ QUOTE ]
I think Repulsion Field is a VERY good power. I'm sorry that you don't seem to think so.
[/ QUOTE ]
On the contrary, I respec'ed OUT of Force Bubble and INTO Repulsion Field. It was more appropriate to the style of play that I have, I solo most of the time, and so I need my foes in range, and not pushed up against some wall. That does not mean that I hate Repulsion Field or that I hate Force Bubble, but it does mean that I find the two redundant enough that I can take either one or the other, but not both.
[ QUOTE ]
Like I said though, no cottages, I REALLY don't want to completely lose ANY of these powers.
[/ QUOTE ]
I can certainly understand that. I think my issue with Repulsion Field is:
1) It is too much like Hurricane, and exactly like Repel.
2) I wouldn't need it if Force Bubble were more of a compromise.
3) Force Bolt serves the purpose of pinpoint knockback control, and Repulsion Field (if it had a faster animation) would serve to keep larger numbers away from me. And as I mentioned above, it covers the status resistance hole of foes that are vulnerable to Knockback but not Repel.
The circumstances under which BOTH Force Bubble AND Repulsion Field would effect the same target should not exist. If Force Bubble is working, the target should be held out of range of Repulsion Field, unless you force him into the radius by pushing against a wall. You're really only going to get use out of both powers if your foe is resistant to Repel and not Knockback.
Jade, I loved your post! Very intelligent but I have an issue with this:
[ QUOTE ]
1) Change Detention Field to a timed toggle power that automatically shuts off after a certain amount of time. This is no more a change to the concept of the power than it was a change to the concept of Phase Shift, and the code is already in place. Nothing even needs to be changed about the power, just allow it to be turned off at will.
[/ QUOTE ]
This would be great...in pve! In PvP, a Toggle PHASE on another player would be insane, especially since toggles are autohit! The last thing we need is someone toggling out a Defender, Blaster and just putting them on follow. The end cost would need to go up a LOT if this would be changed into a Toggle.
[ QUOTE ]
2) Use the previous poster's suggestion to make Force Bubble's radius less, but give a Slow component to prevent foes from pushing as far into it. This isn't a change in the concept of the power, you've just made it smaller. And you CAN make it smaller if foes can't "push" as far into it before they get flung out.
[/ QUOTE ]
We like this! I would prefer a Defense Debuff component instead of a Slow, but good idea!
[ QUOTE ]
3) Add a +Dmg to all allies inside the Force Bubble. There's no reason for this other than to give a damage boost. However, it doesn't actually change the essential nature of the power, merely adds something else to it. (Like the -Res to Tar Patch)
[/ QUOTE ]
This, I don't like as much. Force Bubble is pretty perfect as is to be honest. It's a great mitigation tool. The +damage doesn't fit thematically either.
Questions about the game, either side? /t @Neuronia or @Neuronium, with your queries!
168760: A Death in the Gish. 3 missions, 1-14. Easy to solo.
Infinity Villains
Champion, Pinnacle, Virtue Heroes
[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately, I'm afraid that ultimately nothing will be done. It's certainly logical to believe that if the devs were going to add a damage boost to Force Field (and Empathy, for that matter, although at least they can boost their allies with Fortitude) they would have done it with they gave the boost to Dark. They probably didn't because, like us, they couldn't think of a way to do with without breaking the concept of seriously changing powers.
I've also mentioned how telling I find it that Force Field and Empathy are specifically excluded from Corruptors. TA is as well, and Empathy wasn't given to villains at all, but I think the absense of Force Field to Corruptors is a definately sign of dev thinking. Corruptors, with damage dealing as their Primary, need an offensive boost, and thus Force Field isn't appropriate to them.
This does seem to suggest at least some of the devs are aware of the issue.
[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed totally. It's no coincidence that FF is only found in CoV as a secondary. It's been a better secondary than primary since release.
I think the major problem with changing FF is that all the changes tend to be considered as spreading across Defenders, Controllers, and Masterminds. The problem is that the latter two need no power boosts, they are already at the top of the power pile. The FF defender however is way at the bottom of that power pile. How can the defender be boosted without pushing the Controllers and Masterminds into the atmosphere? They can't, as long as they are considered as a group.
The solution of course is for changes to be made to just the FF Defenders, but I just don't think the developers look at FF Defenders solely when they consider changes.
[ QUOTE ]
I REALLY wish a redname would come in here and at least say something like: "We'll look at these ideas and consider them for sometime in the future" or even "We like where the set is, don't expect any changes anytime soon."
It would be nice to know if I am wasting my breath here or not.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think this is a very good thread, and well timed. Sometimes things pop up, like this sale to NCSoft and the expansion of the dev team, that give me a little hope. So I don't think this thread is a bad idea at this time. You never know, and it can't hurt to discuss and try.
[ QUOTE ]
It has always seemed to me that Forcefields worked better as a secondary than as a Primary. As a Controller secondary, you have, well, control and the added defense and tricks of your secondary.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm afraid to say that outside of PvP, my Forcefielder doesn't underpeform, at all.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure the first quotation explains the second.
[ QUOTE ]
1) Change Detention Field to a timed toggle power that automatically shuts off after a certain amount of time. This is no more a change to the concept of the power than it was a change to the concept of Phase Shift, and the code is already in place. Nothing even needs to be changed about the power, just allow it to be turned off at will.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wasn't there a technical reason they couldn't do this? I'm spacing on it now, but I'm pretty sure that at some point they said there was a technical limitation that made it impossible for Detention to be a toggle. I'll have to see if I can dig that up.
[ QUOTE ]
The +damage doesn't fit thematically either.
[/ QUOTE ]
Jade's point was that the -RES wasn't thematic either, but it was still added to make the Dark set more effective. I'm not arguing in favor of a +DAM, personally I'd rather see something a little more related (like a big DEF debuff), but thematic has been seen in the past to not be a hurdle for changes to a set.
As I mentioned above, thematic is subjective, and thematic justification is easy.
[ QUOTE ]
I see Sonics as being the 'fixed' Forcefields. It has Clarity, Debuffs, +Res shields and a cage as well.
[/ QUOTE ]
I hate to say this, because it's really demeaning to Force Field, and also, I don't really think Sonic is all that powerful. It works well, but not quite up to the standard of Rad and Dark. In the end, though, with a few minor exceptions like not having any knockback early on, I have found Sonic to be more soloable than Force Field.
Some of the "fixes" for Sonic could make good examples of how to "tweak" Force Field. The final power, Liquify, for instance, has some debuff effects in addition to its primary purpose, which is in effect to knock around everyone inside the radius, instead of push them out like Force Bubble does.
Of course, a lot of Force Bubble's problem is that in pushing its targets out, it removes them from any potential debuff effects. This is probably why the -Acc effect was removed, and pretty much makes it impossible to add any other debuffs. Even Slow, if we make it only on the inside of the bubble, would only serve the effect of making the bubble work with a smaller radius, not slow the foes outside of it. (But of course we could make the slow radius larger, to prevent foes from getting a "running start" as well)
Anyway, Sonic does sacrifice some damage mitigation for its offensive boost. The +Res it offers isn't exactly equivalent to FF's +Def. Then again, FF doesn't need as much of an offense boost as Sonic, it could be only occasional, like Dark's is. And Sonic does have some additional "tools", it has Clarity, and its own version of Repulsion Field.
[ QUOTE ]
You're really only going to get use out of both powers if your foe is resistant to Repel and not Knockback.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've found this to be true on quite a LOT of mobs. I don't know why, but there are alot of mobs that can just walk through Force Bubble like it's not even there, but when they get close enough, Repulsion Field knocks them back like it was nothing. Yes, I do use them both, all the time, and sometimes at the SAME time.
So no, I REALLY don't think that they are redundant, I think they are completely different powers that have a similar final goal: to keep enemies away from you. The fact that they do it in two ENTIRELY different ways I see as a BENEFIT. In this case, I WOULD say that the powers are redundant, in the same way that a backup generator is redundant to the power grid. If something is Repel resistant, at least half the time it's NOT knockback resistant. The only exception to this being AVs and some Elite Bosses.
So again, I don't think that the powers work against each other, or that one makes the other useless. I think they both have their places on my toolbelt. I think we will have to agree to disagree on this point Jade.
[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, Sonic does sacrifice some damage mitigation for its offensive boost. The +Res it offers isn't exactly equivalent to FF's +Def.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'll say this over and over again. Defense is OVER two times better than Resistance. The simple reason why? Status Effects. Sure, Sonic has Clarity to wake people up from status effects, but Defense means that you don't get HIT by the power, which means that the status effect doesn't take effect in the FIRST place.
Defense > Resistance. All the time.
I'm playing a Sonic now, and it's fun, but my team feels ALOT squishier and less safe then when I'm playing my FFer. And I really don't like that.
I found the thing about Detention, sort of. In another one of Phil's threads someone says:
[ QUOTE ]
The devs long ago discussed why this couldn't happen, even if they were inclined to implement it. My recollection is it went something like - toggles work by pulsing every XX seconds, but det field makes the target unaffected by all powers so when it pulsed, the target would either not be affected by the Det pulse or they would have to be made tangible before the pulse, which would mean they could attack you before the next pulse.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's pretty much how I remember it too. It's not a dev post though, so grain of salt and all that.
[ QUOTE ]
I've found this to be true on quite a LOT of mobs. I don't know why, but there are alot of mobs that can just walk through Force Bubble like it's not even there, but when they get close enough, Repulsion Field knocks them back like it was nothing. Yes, I do use them both, all the time, and sometimes at the SAME time.
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't they stack? I remember at some point getting knockback with Force Bolt on a mob normally resistant because the mob was standing on an Ice Slick. I always thought KB stacked, it's just really hard to time it right without a constant power as one of the stackers.
Off topic: I just discovered I am completely uncomfortable with referring to Philotic Knight as Phil, and will, in the future, do PK if I have to abbreviate.
[ QUOTE ]
Jade, I loved your post! Very intelligent but I have an issue with this:
[ QUOTE ]
1) Change Detention Field to a timed toggle power that automatically shuts off after a certain amount of time. This is no more a change to the concept of the power than it was a change to the concept of Phase Shift, and the code is already in place. Nothing even needs to be changed about the power, just allow it to be turned off at will.
[/ QUOTE ]
This would be great...in pve! In PvP, a Toggle PHASE on another player would be insane, especially since toggles are autohit! The last thing we need is someone toggling out a Defender, Blaster and just putting them on follow. The end cost would need to go up a LOT if this would be changed into a Toggle.
[/ QUOTE ]
It works like Phase Shift. After the duration of the Detention Field expires, whether you toggle it off or not, it drops.
Also, I'm not sure if you were saying this, but Detention Field only works on your ENEMIES. You wouldn't be able to Detention an ally.
[ QUOTE ]
We like this! I would prefer a Defense Debuff component instead of a Slow, but good idea!
[/ QUOTE ]
I think Force Field really needs a Slow. Slow is a lot like an offense buff, just about every Defender has one. You'd think the master of pushing foes around and detentioning them would have one too, but no, it doesn't.
Defense debuffs are nice, but quite frankly, they don't adequately compensate for the lack of a damage buff. Back in the days before ED you might have been able to 6 slot for damage, not needing a slot of accuracy, but nowadays that's not possible any more. So when I say "offense boost", I mean either +Dmg or -Res.
I play a FF/Rad, so I wish the -Def from Rad Blast could compensate me for the lower damage. My experience is, it doesn't.
Mind you, a +Recharge or Endurance boost MIGHT be an alternate form of offense boost. This MAY be why so many people report that Empathy is unusually soloable. (Recovery Aura may boost Endurance high enough that you can use Hasten or something like that to get more DPS)
[ QUOTE ]
This, I don't like as much. Force Bubble is pretty perfect as is to be honest. It's a great mitigation tool. The +damage doesn't fit thematically either.
[/ QUOTE ]
The problem is, there's nowhere else to put it.
Put it in the ally bubbles, and you'll have to add it to Sonic as well, plus the Defender himself gets no boost.
Put it in PFF and it's pretty much useless. Unless you use the suppression idea.
Put it in Force Bolt... well, I'd rather mess with Force Bubble than mess with Force Bolt. Having it debuff its target would add to its End cost or worse.
Put it in Repulsion Field - that's a possiblity, but it will only effect those foes you run up to and knock around. The debuff would have to persist for some time, but it would still encourage you to overuse the power. Conversely, if it gave +Dmg it would only effect you.
Put it in Repulsion Bomb - Actually, this would be closest to Sonic's ally targetted power, which does have the ability to debuff Res. But that would also make it too much like Sonic. Plus, Repulsion Bomb has already undergone a lot of changes to add disorient, I'm not sure I want to touch it now.
Put it in Detention Field - Actually, this is an idea I have had in the past. Detention Field restrains the foe that it is targetted on, and then has a -Res effect on all foes around the targetted foe. You could even extend the effect to a -Slow and -Def, and say that it is a "wade through" type field around the detention bubble that slows down the foes around it.
This would certainly make the power more acceptable to a team. However, it's a major change to its functionality, and is a bit too much like Sonic's Disruption Field. I think the change I suggested to Detention is all that's needed.
Finally, Dispersion Field - Although that's the one place you could put an AoE +Dmg centered on the caster, other than Force Bubble - or conversely, a -Res - I think Dispersion Field is fine as it is. It's Defense is obviously very good, and it already has a secondary effect, status protection, on top of that. I think adding +Dmg to it would make it TOO good.
OTOH, it would allow the Defender access to that damage boost a lot sooner, making levelling to 32 easier. I think in the end I want to put it in Force Bubble only because I think Force Bubble really should be a "great power", but I'm certainly open to coming up with a better place to put it if anyone can think of one.
As for the +Dmg not fitting, well, if you can think of a way to get a FFer's damage above 65% with something else, by all means suggest it. Honestly, an End boost or the like because you are "filled with power" by the Force Fielder might be more conceptual.
As I've said, though, this is "Force" Field. We are supposed to be the masters of Force. Talk of "if I wanted an offense boost I'd play a Kin" aside, Force and Kinetics are closely related. (We do share Repulsion Field, y'know)
[ QUOTE ]
Don't they stack? I remember at some point getting knockback with Force Bolt on a mob normally resistant because the mob was standing on an Ice Slick. I always thought KB stacked, it's just really hard to time it right without a constant power as one of the stackers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, they stack, I make a point of this in my guide specifically. Even most knockback resistant mobs (like CoT ghosts and Rularuu warriors) get knocked back after several "pulses" of the Repulsion Field. Even WITHOUT using Force Bolt. Force Bolt chaining just makes it work faster.
[ QUOTE ]
Off topic: I just discovered I am completely uncomfortable with referring to Philotic Knight as Phil, and will, in the future, do PK if I have to abbreviate.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well since Philotic comes from "Philos" which is the Greek word for the form of love shared between friends, it's more of a title than a name. When I think of "Phil" I think of a NON-Italian New York plumber, not a superhero. But people ingame call me whatever they want, and I don't make a hassle about it. I prefer PK, but I don't care. As a side-side note, click the link there to see where the origin of "philotic" comes from and a basic idea of where the Knight gets his powers.
I confess I'm not really sure how to respond to those posts. You shoot stuff down with statements like "I will not be a buffbot" and then say "What I DO want is for more bubblers to stop thinking of themselves as "buffbots"". So are you saying that you don't think of yourself as a buffbot but most other FFers do? I would agree if that's the case. But then how does that change your point?
The problem is that if you shoot down ideas from your seemingly almost unique point of view (even according to yourself) we're never going to get anywhere. The same thing happens if you're allowed to define absolutely what "fits" and "doesn't fit" into the set. I think you realize that, and that's why this second post is such a disclaimer.
What has to happen is that we have to look for the more wide area good of the set. Something that would pull more people to FF (Defenders in particular). Something that would appeal to a larger audience than just you, or just me.
The "feel" of a set is so purely objective that it shouldn't be a large part of the idea limitations. The ease of implementing said ideas is much more relevent. Obviously you and I have differing ideas about the "feel" of the set, and I'll bet there's a thousand other ideas about the "feel" of the set out there. Rejecting ideas based on "feel" isn't productive.
Again, I think you realize that, and that's why you posted your disclaimer post.
That said...
[ QUOTE ]
I'll discuss it further. It completely goes against 2/3rds of our set. Knockback, Repel, and "Phasing". It will cause FFers to NOT want to use MOST of our powers, because we won't be free to run around or reposition ourselves. We'll be firmly established as "buffbots". Dispersion Bubble will then be our new "aura" and we will be required to "rock" it just like our sisters the Empaths are. I say a very STRONG no to this. I am not and refuse to be a buffbot. And I am strongly opposed to anything that will solidify that as "The Way, The Truth, and The Light".
[/ QUOTE ]
Opinion, not fact. It could be that the larger self defense values mean that the FFer can be much more in the thick of things. It could mean that the FFer can take the aggro of FB more effectively. It could mean that the FFer can be an island of defense for the squishies to cuddle up to. I guess to me, I think having more self defense would open up MORE playstyles. Could you play your playstyle if we swapped those numbers? Moving around and knocking people back etc? Absolutely. The defense the small bubbles would provide to the squishies would still be good, and you might be even BETTER at what you do because your self protection is higher. But right now the FF Defender is poorly protected, and that limits how some people perceive and play the set. My opinion is that this change would open up playstyles, not limit them.
[ QUOTE ]
Again, FF is NOT "all about Defense". At least not with a capital D. FF is all about defense, with a lowercase D. What's the difference? Defense is just one number, whereas defense is ANYTHING that you can do to stop your enemies from hitting your allies, with capital Defense being included as a PART of that. Lets take a look one more time at this supposition that "FF is all about Defense".
Personal Force Field - Defense to the bubbler only, turns OFF the Defense from Dispersion Bubble while it's up.
Force Bolt - No Defense, but provides plenty of defense.
Deflection, Insulation and Dispersion - Defense all the way.
Detention Field - No Defense, provides defense.
Repulsion Field - No Defense, provides defense.
Repulsion Bomb - No Defense, provides defense.
Force Bubble - No Defense, provides defense.
FIVE powers do NOT provide Defense. ONE power provides Defense to the bubbler and turns OFF other Defense to the rest of the team. Only THREE powers in the set provide Defense. That's ONE-THIRD of the set. Which means that the other two-thirds aren't primarily about providing team Defense. Instead, they are all about defending your team in other ways.
So once again, is FF really "all about Defense"? I don't think so.
[/ QUOTE ]
Four out of nine is not one third. Quite honestly, if I took those four and stacked them up against the other five in terms of how set defining they are, those four would win hands down. Again, this is opinion, and it's valid as such, but from the outside people see FF as three or four powers, and only the fourth one might vary. Perception is important.
That said I think arguing about Defense vs. defense in this context is kind of pointless.
In my post the defense debuff was brought up to try and deal with the issue of FF defenders and AV's. Right now I think almost any defender is more effective against an AV than FF, and to try and add utility in that situation is, I think, going to require a little bit of a rewrite. A set that is about (and I'm going to try and get this "right") Defense, Knockback, Repel, and "Phasing" is going to have problems affecting an AV fight. So something else might need to be added in there.
It was a concern brought up, and I tried to address it.