It's stated that the changes listed in the I13 announcement are the major changes, but that there are still many minor changes to come. I really want to push for increased energy defense for EA at this point. Another 5% in kinetic shield sounds about right.
EA is missing good, strong protection to its themed damage type. Fire, ice, and electric armor get to be pretty much impervious to their themed damage type. EA gets protection equivalent to what an SR scrapper gets against everything. I know defense is a different ballgame than the resistances that other sets get, and EA does have some resistance to energy in its passive, which more people would be taking now because of the toxic resistance. So I think the suggestions to capping it would not really be necessary. But this would give a very prestigious 40% or so to energy with just SOs, which could then be capped by pool powers and set bonuses.
Does anyone else want to push with this? I think the heal and toxic resistance are great changes and fit with my desire to see the set made more consistent. But everyone is so happy with the listed changes to EA that I think the devs might call it good. But I think more energy defense fits thematically and would not overpower the set. I'd like the devs to at least tinker with some more energy defense during beta. Is anyone else on board with this?
I am still pushing for an extra 7.5% resistance to fire/cold in energy protection. Our combined energy defense/resistance IS good, (although not perfect) but I would rather get a little mitigation for the damage types that are 'almost' holes rather than making our strongest mitigation stronger.
Other than that I think the set is almost perfectly balanced, the only other changes I could see would involve IO sets having better typed defenses, and that's not just an /ea Issue. a taunt in ed would be NICE, but is not really a necessity, just as a slightly boosted heal % would potentially overbalance the set's mitigation. although 3% per target would (probably) not be out of line, if there were any error in the % it was definitely on the side of caution. The beta will definitely be able to tell if the % is enough, not enough, or even too much.
I do, in fact, understand the crowd that think that /ea should be as strong or stronger than wp due to it's lack of an aggro aura, I am just not sure I agree... I was around during the regen nerf-magnet, and frankly I'd rather they just rather get the balance slightly under where it should be rather than making it so powerful that round after round of nerfs start coming down the pipe.
You know, I think changing the taunt cap to 10 targets would polish out a lot of problems across all sets. but once again, that is not strictly an /EA problem.
I just did a little math, and did anyone realize that fully saturated, the heal will give 1.33 % health per second?
in comparison, Dull pain/earth's embrace/hoarfrost only gives .685% (accounting for boosted hp) per second,
rooted only gives .8% per second (for a total of 1.484 for stone out of granite)
and even fully-saturated RTTC only gives 2.85%/sec... That's only a little over twice the healing bonus
healing flames is 2.37%/sec. That's a little UNDER twice the healing bonus.
of course, at over 6%/sec, dark armor's healing blows away every set, including regen (if brutes had it) and willpower... if it weren't for that whole 'blue' thing.
but still... That healing is enough to make me start thinking of new /ea as a 'regen' set :P
edit- on thinking about it, I think that the heal should be 'curved' a little so that it's not quite so powerful at the high end, and a bit more powerful at the low end. say 6% heal, +1.2% per additional opponent. That would make it about a quarter as powerful as siphon life against a single opponent (14.4% heal every 30 seconds capped) and fully-saturated it won't turn /ea into as much of a heal set (18%, 36% every 30 seconds capped, or 1.2% hp/sec.)
I mean, just an idea.
Looking at those numbers the heal will definately be a major boon for /EA. I agree that raising the lower end benefit and then scaling it to the high end would work a bit better. I know solo my EM/EA brute has to pick and choose his battles.
these changes coming to /EA make me wanna dust that toon off and actually play him again well if it wasn't for the fact he's also EM (used to love the set now its kinda meh)
[ QUOTE ]
I just did a little math, and did anyone realize that fully saturated, the heal will give 1.33 % health per second?
in comparison, Dull pain/earth's embrace/hoarfrost only gives .685% (accounting for boosted hp) per second,
rooted only gives .8% per second (for a total of 1.484 for stone out of granite)
and even fully-saturated RTTC only gives 2.85%/sec... That's only a little over twice the healing bonus
healing flames is 2.37%/sec. That's a little UNDER twice the healing bonus.
of course, at over 6%/sec, dark armor's healing blows away every set, including regen (if brutes had it) and willpower... if it weren't for that whole 'blue' thing.
but still... That healing is enough to make me start thinking of new /ea as a 'regen' set :P
edit- on thinking about it, I think that the heal should be 'curved' a little so that it's not quite so powerful at the high end, and a bit more powerful at the low end. say 6% heal, +1.2% per additional opponent. That would make it about a quarter as powerful as siphon life against a single opponent (14.4% heal every 30 seconds capped) and fully-saturated it won't turn /ea into as much of a heal set (18%, 36% every 30 seconds capped, or 1.2% hp/sec.)
I mean, just an idea.
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't get too wrapped around the axle on this math. The fact that the heal is mob dependent and that players will choose healing versus endurance recovery (yeah I know there will be some genius method of maximizing both, but many players won't find it or want to take it - I may be the latter type) means that playstyle will be tremendously important for determining what the heal actually does. My brute fights with super speed on at all times, and I make heavy use of positioning myself on a map and fighting who I want to fight in order to keep people from stealing my aggro and my fury. I may build slower in some cases and utilize a little luring here and there, meaning a lot of time I am fighting fewer foes. Having a build with conserve power and overload up a lot (my recharge is 50% + hasten and I am planning a build with over 80%), I am often quite satisfied with end draining just one opponent. I just don't see myself getting huge gains from the heal. Not to say that another player is not going to try to make his EA tanker and get tons of benefit from the heal. Particularly those with electric and fire primaries - the so-called farm builds. EA wil gain a lot of footing to get built into brutes that play a lot differently than the stalker/brute soloer that EA was originally optimized for. But many of us are going to continue to play the old way.
I'm not saying the heal is not great. I am just saying that playstyle is going to be more important than math at guaging the overall effect. A lot of us are just not going to be 'fully saturated' that often. Castle himself stated in the announcement that the change was designed to give some 'minor healing' in order to boost survivability somewhat. I am sure he is aware of potential for the heal to be a lot more than 'minor healing' if someone wants to build a very specific type of brute and play it a very specific way.
Now as for the defense, a lot of it is based on concept, and some of it is just based on fairness. Gameplay is only one of the issues. There's the emotional factor. Fire, ice, and elec have situations where their toons just laugh at the enemy. EA is a themed toon like those others. Now in all honesty gameplay effects would not be terribly great, as we've been able to use pool powers and some IOs to get sick energy defense for a while now. The result of increased energy defense will be twofold. First, it will shut up those who whine about the lack of endurance drain protection, as the most common drainers do energy or partly energy damage (freaks and arachnos). Second, it will increase the utility of the build. It will lessen the pressure to dip into pool powers. The players will seek to cap their defense. No doubt about it. It's just too common of a standard. "Is your defense at cap like my SR scrapper/brute? No? You suck then." So the players are going to do it. Even if they have to sacrifice their build and diversity to do it. Now if you add some energy defense, then smashing can be capped with a couple of kinetic combats, combat jumping, maneuvers, and perfect zinger, and energy defense can be capped with very little help from pool powers as well. Basically, the urge to try to cap something is tremendous. Pushing the basic energy defense up to about 40% will allow players do do it without ruining their builds. Then when you talk about EA as a standard defense set, you'd wind up with SR having about 35% to everything (with just the set powers and SOs), which EA has a mere 25% to everything, a weakness to negative, but a whoppping 40% vs. energy. To me that doesn't look terribly out of balance. I'd like to reaction from possibly arcanaville or some of those really in-tune math types.
You'd probably say that with the heal and the passives, this would be too much. But I'd like to really hear why. I don't see it as too much. Perhaps we won't know more until we get to beta. But I kind of think of the resistance from the passives about like SR's scaling damage resists. In both cases, the mathematicians are telling me it's there and it's supposed to help, but I can't honestly say that I have felt them. Either I see a bun ch of avoids and deflecteds above my toon, or I see the health drop to nothing in no-time. I am honestly wondering if the mathematical tricks we are telling ourselves about the scaling resists and the EA passives are a bunch of hogwash that does not translate into real play. Now SR brutes have a taunt aura and better all around defense. The heal on EA, unlike tiny increases to passives, will definitely get felt. Exactly how much is going to be dependent on build and playstyle. But in any case, a higher energy defense I think would be acceptable in terms of gameplay and more true to concept and fairness. I'm really looking for a good reason why it would be too much. The math you post above is FAR too insensitive to the situational usefulness of the heal to be meaningful.
I also think that just raising overall defense is not the way to go. The heal should account for 'protection from all' kind of stuff. If someone wants to make an EA tanker, they can take a pool power or two to get maximum use of the shields and then rely heavily on the heal, which may be pretty impressive for that type of playing. If there were not going to be a heal, then raising ALL of the EA shields would be a valid argument. Raising energy is more about being true to theme and giving the player a comfort area where his toon is pretty freakin awesome (energy damage is quite common).
With the heal, the current shield levels are more than adequate. But EA just does not feel like a toon that is truly blessed against energy users, like electric feels. It's filling a psychological hole more than anything else.
Well thought out reply, thank you. Although I do have to say that the 'genius utility' of balancing all three important aspects is really simple... 6 slot level 50 IO's for 2 rech, 2 endmod, 2 heal gives you close to 90% of each 
until I frankenslot, that's going to be my gold standard.
I would like to address particularly one point of your post instead of addressing all of it, the concept of 'situational utility'. The closest comparison I can come with is RTTC.
RTTC is NOT a situational utility. It is going all the time, (and actually suffers in the # of mobs that affect your healing because it's only an 8 foot radius). I think one of the new alteration's greatest strengths is the fact that rather than providing a flat 1.33%/sec scaling down as you lose mobs, it IS bursty, which means that you can choose when to use the heal, repositioning yourself as neccessary to ensure the maximum number of mobs affected.
As a long time player of /ea, situational awareness has always been a BIG deal on my part. One has only to look at ice armor to see what a truly big deal properly positioning yourself for a mob-dependent self-buff to be maximised. that was kind of why I was comparing it strongly to electric armor, which used (until now) a lot of the same tricks.
While I agree, in theory, with the idea of greater energy defense, based on How I typically play and the damage frequency I am considerably worried about it stomping electric armor's toes. not just stomping them, grinding them into the ground. With this heal in place, electric armor will occasionally have higher protection from energy damage than I do... but since I tend to maximise overload, I often have a layer of energy mitigation that electric armor can never touch: resistance on top of massively-soft-capped defense in overload. my 'energy mitigation' is often at least 30% Higher that energy armor is never, ever going to be able to touch. and in fact, in normal, no-overload situations, it is easy enough to soft-cap energy defense that I STILL have greater energy mitigation than electric armor can ever hope to approach.
Energy aura's 'thing' is that it IS situational. It is random, like all defense sets. while I would not disagree with a greater degree of endurance drain protection (It IS the endurance/energy set, after all) I personally do not feel that higher energy defense or resist is neccessary to make it feel like tru energy protection. It would be nice, but like so many other things, not really 'necessary'
Another /EA idea. Turn conserve power into 'waste' power. The effect would be to triple endurance costs for opponents in the pbaoe toggles area.
Dark Bard, Zoobait, Debacle
jmsb
Por vezes d� vontade...
chucknorriss
speak american godamnit
[ QUOTE ]
It's stated that the changes listed in the I13 announcement are the major changes, but that there are still many minor changes to come. I really want to push for increased energy defense for EA at this point. Another 5% in kinetic shield sounds about right.
Does anyone else want to push with this? I think the heal and toxic resistance are great changes and fit with my desire to see the set made more consistent. But everyone is so happy with the listed changes to EA that I think the devs might call it good. But I think more energy defense fits thematically and would not overpower the set. I'd like the devs to at least tinker with some more energy defense during beta. Is anyone else on board with this?
[/ QUOTE ]
I for one wasn't "Happy" the list of changes to /EA, but I wasn't unhappy either. I was just expecting more. I'd think seeing as how it's ENERGY Aura it should have more defense to energy based attacks, so yes I agree. But hey what do I know? I guess I don't know anything about /EA brutes or stalkers.
[ QUOTE ]
irst, it will shut up those who whine about the lack of endurance drain protection
[/ QUOTE ]
Why not just give it end drain protection?
[ QUOTE ]
while I would not disagree with a greater degree of endurance drain protection (It IS the endurance/energy set, after all)
[/ QUOTE ]
Yup, agreed.
[ QUOTE ]
as the most common drainers do energy or partly energy damage (freaks and arachnos).
[/ QUOTE ]
Freaks do -end? I thought major end drainers were Malta, carnies, and arachnos.
The most common energy drainers change across different levels.
freakshow stunners actually can drain a TON of end, as anyone who has ever played a resistance brute without end drain protection can tell you. They are usually a priority target when you first start encountering them, and if left alone can wind up making incredibly hefty inroads into your blue bar, nearly as much as Mu Minions. (although not as much as mu luts and bosses)
clockworks are hefty end drainers, as are outcasts, but they do not appear redside much.
the only end drains that are NOT energy-defended (aside from player powers) are the death cries from carnies. (I believe that they are actually negative energy)
mask of vit is negative energy, but doesn't actually drain end, it suppresses it and recovery.
I would much much prefer end drain protection over more energy defense.
[ QUOTE ]
I would much much prefer end drain protection over more energy defense.
[/ QUOTE ]
Am I a [censored] for asking for both? Does that make /EA overpowered? 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would much much prefer end drain protection over more energy defense.
[/ QUOTE ]
Am I a [censored] for asking for both? Does that make /EA overpowered?
[/ QUOTE ]
That depends. Would Electric Armor be overpowered with a cloak?
Deamus the Fallen - 50 DM/EA Brute - Lib
Dragos Bahtiam - 50 Fire/Ice Blaster - Lib
/facepalm - Apply Directly to the Forehead!
Formally Dragos_Bahtiam - Abbreviate to DSL - Warning, may contain sarcasm
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Shubbie
Im very good at taking a problem and making it worse.
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would much much prefer end drain protection over more energy defense.
[/ QUOTE ]
Am I a [censored] for asking for both? Does that make /EA overpowered?
[/ QUOTE ]
That depends. Would Electric Armor be overpowered with a cloak?
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think it's fair to compare Electric armor to Energy Aura.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would much much prefer end drain protection over more energy defense.
[/ QUOTE ]
Am I a [censored] for asking for both? Does that make /EA overpowered?
[/ QUOTE ]
That depends. Would Electric Armor be overpowered with a cloak?
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think it's fair to compare Electric armor to Energy Aura.
[/ QUOTE ]
Most if not all End drains are Energy Typed which is a defence that EA has in surplus. That is EAs priamary protection against end drains. 
[ QUOTE ]
Most if not all End drains are Energy Typed which is a defence that EA has in surplus. That is EAs priamary protection against end drains.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'd say most is too strong a word. Carnie death drains and their -recovery debuff (not strictly an end drain, but you get the idea) are not energy...
The cake is a lie! The cake is a lie!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would much much prefer end drain protection over more energy defense.
[/ QUOTE ]
Am I a [censored] for asking for both? Does that make /EA overpowered?
[/ QUOTE ]
That depends. Would Electric Armor be overpowered with a cloak?
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think it's fair to compare Electric armor to Energy Aura.
[/ QUOTE ]
Most if not all End drains are Energy Typed which is a defence that EA has in surplus. That is EAs priamary protection against end drains.
[/ QUOTE ]
With 3 level 50 Defense IOs in the shields /EA has 26.7% defense to Energy and 16.6% to negative energy.
With no toxic or psi defense.
While with electric if you slot the shields with 3 level 50 IOs, you're looking at capped Energy resistance, 31.3% resistance to negative energy, and 41.6% res to Psi. And you've got resistance to end drain and recovery debuff in Static shield. And some more end drain res in Grounded.
I still don't think it'd be overpowered to give /EA a bit more defense to Energy and similar end drain resistance as elec.
For electric armor, it needs end drain and -recovery resistance. As a resistance set, it is susceptible to all kinds of secondary effects. It needs a bit more protection than resistance alone, as long as it is thematic.
For energy aura, the request for end drain and -recovery resistance is mostly for thematic reason in my opinion. As mentioned, attacks with such effects have an energy component for a lot of cases.
[ QUOTE ]
Am I a [censored] for asking for both? Does that make /EA overpowered?
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, this is a question that the dev has to answer. From the improvements that the dev have proposed, I have the feeling that they are trying to keep the changes to a minimum. Basically, the main complaints about EA is the protection holes and the lack of survival tricks. So, they just patch a hole and give us a trick, which is a heal. In principle, players will now lack the main thrust for complaining.
It seems like changes for thematic reasons is just something extra beyond the minimum. For example, capping energy defense and end drain/-recovery resist don't really overpower the set, but on the other hand, they are also not something responsible for gimping the powerset.
they don't really overpower the set but they do make perfect sense considering they were given to the other set which is primarily strong with Energy.
Look at it the other way, would it really matter if Electric Armor had its Energy resists lowered from 90+ in the set to only 60%? Ultimately, with the percentage of Energy damage in the game? Maybe it would, maybe it wouldn't.
Considering the mitigation that Fire gets to Fire, Ice to Cold, Invuln to Smash/Lethal, well, it sure would be a major slap in the face to Electric if that happened. The only Elemental set that doesn't have capped mitigation to its element is Dark Armor. Which has the most massive health recovery power in the game. And a stun aura. And a Fear aura.
Even in the face of this rather more tame heal being added, Capped E def is still something that should be done.
That's why capped Energy Def is something we ask for.
Level 50 is a journey, not a destination.
▲Scrapper Issues List - Going Rogue Edition▲
I wonder... do you think the devs were/are hesitant to give EA capped energy defense because of how the defense intrinsically works? Think about it, unlike energy resistance (a la Electric Armor), capped energy defense would provide capped mitigation against all energy and dual typed attacks, not just part of it.
So, a Chief Soldier's melee attack deals (roughly) 2/3 lethal and 1/3 energy damage. An Electric Brute (w/o pools) would have 41% lethal res and 90% energy res, mitigating ~57.3% of the hit. EA would have 90% mitigation.
The specifics change depending on the balance of the attack, so something like Total Focus (28% smash, 72% energy) would be ~76% mitigated by Electric. (Still 90% by EA.)
That's just a guess, of course.
Very good point.
I'll settle for slotted 35% def and at least 25% E resists.
Level 50 is a journey, not a destination.
▲Scrapper Issues List - Going Rogue Edition▲
[ QUOTE ]
With 3 level 50 Defense IOs in the shields /EA has 26.7% defense to Energy and 16.6% to negative energy.
With no toxic or psi defense.
While with electric if you slot the shields with 3 level 50 IOs, you're looking at capped Energy resistance, 31.3% resistance to negative energy, and 41.6% res to Psi. And you've got resistance to end drain and recovery debuff in Static shield. And some more end drain res in Grounded.
I still don't think it'd be overpowered to give /EA a bit more defense to Energy and similar end drain resistance as elec.
[/ QUOTE ]
actually, with energy cloak slotted you have 32.2% defense to energy + 14.6% resistance.
The thing is, and here is the sticker, that energy's 'potential' energy mitigation is actually higher than electric armor could ever hope to get.
With overload, energy defense can become 102%. That will floor even a +3 AV's to-hit chances, providing 95% mitigation to energy damage. Add in resistance and that becomes almost 96% of all energy damage shunted aside or ignored. The same AV (if it doesn't have defense debuff... much worse if it does) will have a 25% miss-chance (I could be wrong on that) against the electric brute, which makes their energy mitigation only about 92%.... Which means, situationally, /ea can have almost twice the energy mitigation that electric armor has. (against enemies
it's a weird question, but considering that AV's are pretty much the only energy damage that can really threaten an /ea brute consistently, I consider the 'situational' mitigation more valuable than the all-the-time 90%.
there's also the fact that defense debuffs (Like shivans) will likely drop them down to the 5% defense floor, and like someone else said, energy defense blocks ALL of an energy attack, not just the energy portion. It blocks the bashing and lethal and toxic parts of an attack if it has typed energy in it as well.
[ QUOTE ]
I wonder... do you think the devs were/are hesitant to give EA capped energy defense because of how the defense intrinsically works? Think about it, unlike energy resistance (a la Electric Armor), capped energy defense would provide capped mitigation against all energy and dual typed attacks, not just part of it.
So, a Chief Soldier's melee attack deals (roughly) 2/3 lethal and 1/3 energy damage. An Electric Brute (w/o pools) would have 41% lethal res and 90% energy res, mitigating ~57.3% of the hit. EA would have 90% mitigation.
The specifics change depending on the balance of the attack, so something like Total Focus (28% smash, 72% energy) would be ~76% mitigated by Electric. (Still 90% by EA.)
That's just a guess, of course.
[/ QUOTE ]
I can promise you that's exactly what the devs were thinking. And they have done more playtesting than I have. But I am wondering if the set can get away with more defense just for the purposes of feel. To make the set feel like the themed toon it is supposed to be. And yes, I think capped is too much. But 40% might not be. At least I am assuming. But with the accuracy bonuses that things get, I think 40% defense might not be too much. It really depends on exactly how much two-typed energy damage there is out there. If there is a ton of it, then it would overpower the toon. If there is not, then it won't overpower the toon. The devs know this stuff more than I. The defenses against non-energy damage are quite low. So I was just posing the possibility of increasing energy some. As it stands right now, EA's defense against its major type is only at the level of what SR has to everything. This strikes me as too low. Maybe only a couple more percentage points? Maybe my recommendation of an extra 5% that could be slotted to give the toon 40%? Who knows the exact details. But I want the devs to at least consider the possibility of tweaking it up some. It's been a long time since EA has come out. In I7 they changed the defense formula so that higher level mobs give accuracy bonuses. So the net tohit number has become less important than it was before. So I think after all this time and after all these changes, the actual defense values of EA should be looked at, rather than just ignored and take the heal. Maybe the energy defense stat of EA could accept a little upward adjustment.
As it is, the set really does not do much to make the toon feel like it has a decisive advantage against energy, its supposed theme damage type.
The other option is to leave the defense as is but give some real energy resistance. I would prefer not to use this option, but if defense really cannot stand to be increased, it is an option worth looking at.
I am more interested in seeing the player feel like he is really protected from energy by taking he energy aura secondary. This just isn't the case as is. And while the heal may do much to help survivability, and while I do not think the heal is contrary to EA's concept, the heal definitely does not contribute to the concept. EA is still a set that doesn't give you much more vs energy than it does against the other damage types.
I mean the devs will do what they will do after tons of datamining and beta testing. So if it doesn't happen, I am not going to lose sleep over it. But I want them to take a serious look at how to make the set have a stronger theme of being tough against energy. Adding some energy defense seem logical to me. If the game does not allow it, they should look into something else. The heal is good, but does not enhance the theme. Not having endruance drain protection or a respectable amount of energy defense or resistance has been a complaint from players for a long time, not just about gameplay, but about concept.
I am confused.
/ea has more combined defense and resistance to energy damage than most tankers, and all other brutes except electric armor and stone in granite. _I_ feel protected from energy damage, and pretty much laugh at Mu, freakshow shockers, wailers, most arachnos, and if redside had katie hannon I would probably be running it constantly... what is it about energy aura that makes you feel weak to energy? Comparisons to electric armor?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would much much prefer end drain protection over more energy defense.
[/ QUOTE ]
Am I a [censored] for asking for both? Does that make /EA overpowered?
[/ QUOTE ]
That depends. Would Electric Armor be overpowered with a cloak?
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think it's fair to compare Electric armor to Energy Aura.
[/ QUOTE ]
Most if not all End drains are Energy Typed which is a defence that EA has in surplus. That is EAs priamary protection against end drains.
[/ QUOTE ]
With 3 level 50 Defense IOs in the shields /EA has 26.7% defense to Energy and 16.6% to negative energy.
With no toxic or psi defense.
While with electric if you slot the shields with 3 level 50 IOs, you're looking at capped Energy resistance, 31.3% resistance to negative energy, and 41.6% res to Psi. And you've got resistance to end drain and recovery debuff in Static shield. And some more end drain res in Grounded.
I still don't think it'd be overpowered to give /EA a bit more defense to Energy and similar end drain resistance as elec.
[/ QUOTE ]
Power Shield Slotted with SOs is 23.4% Cold, Fire and Energy Defence. Negative energy is ment to be a weak point of EA thus why it only gets 16.4% Defence.
Add Kinetic Shields 2.9% Energy Defence which makes Energys defence hit 26.3% which is pretty good from 2 shields.
Add energy cloak 5.85% ontop and that takes Energy defence to 32.2%
Then you might like to get Fighting so Weaves 5.8% gets popped ontop for a total of 38%. not to mention the awesome bonus to your S/L resists along the way from tough.
Then you need a travel power, hey why not ill get Combat Jumping and SJ. so add 2.93% and we got 41% there abouts.
So heres where we ar sitting after all that,
P/T 14.6% (P only) Def 0%Res
N 31% Def 11.7% Res
F/C 38% Def 0% Res
E 41% Def 14.6% Res
S/L 34.5% Def 29.3% Res
Not bad for SOs and 5 pool powers. Take another 3 pools into Medicine for aid self and you still for 16 primary and secondary powers to choose. 13 if you take fitness.
Most is accurate to my knowledge as you only list one. Where the majority is all Electical attacks (as in to many to be bothers listing) and Sappers from malta. All are energy Typed attacks and are easily avoided.
Also your missing the difference between Resistance and Defence. EA is made assuming you wont get hit as much. Elec Aura is made because you WILL get hit. Thats the main reason elec has i higher Drain reisist, not to mention its more thematic for elec. Grounded only works when you are touching the ground, thats an inherent weakness to counter its abilitys.
You run an EA and an Elec into a mob of Mus and tell me who survives longer, even without Weave and CJ. 
[ QUOTE ]
You run an EA and an Elec into a mob of Mus and tell me who survives longer, even without Weave and CJ.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have, it was the /EA. But not for the reasons you are thinking.
It was the mez. The mu luts were easily able to stack holds and stuns to massive toggle-drop proportions in a matter of seconds, causing toggle drop on the /ela while most of it missed the /ea (although she was struggling a little more for end, but not that much)
then again, it's the same reason that 15 tsoo green ink men can make an /ela cry despite their incredible energy protection while an /ea sorta shrugs and keeps on killing. It's an inherent weakness of resistance-based sets to make up for their far more stable performance. Honestly I think that's one of the best reasons to choose a stone-out-of-granite brute... a damage shield plus an almost total lack of weakness to stacked mez from herds.
[ QUOTE ]
i still expect more changes for EA than just these. we'll have to wait and see.
[/ QUOTE ]