Tier 1 Attacks: The Brawl treatment

I was initially skeptical, but Arcanaville puts things into a definitely more reasonable perspective. Plus, you're proposing an end discount, not a negation of end consumption. I'll /sign research for this.

Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow City of Heroes is a game about freedom of expression and variety of experiences far more so than it is about representing any one theme, topic or genre.

Compromise: Keep TOs and DOs as they are, where they are.

Remove the discrepancy in enhancement values between TOs, DOs and SOs; allow all to simply deliver SO-level enhancement.

Do away with level 15+ TOs and level 25+ DOs altogether to remove the problem of "cheap enhancement" this might create.

The problem with attempting to "fix the game" so that idleness is no longer a problem is that you're going to naturally do away with the fact that players have to make build compromises to do away with idleness already.

The only times in which you would really need access to some kind of idleness fix is in the extremely low levels before players have actually gotten the chance to get a respectable number of powers with which to saturate their animation time with. Once you get to your low-to-mid-20s, virtually all ATs are going to be able to saturate their animation time with actions and start having to make prioritization decisions with their powers.

As it stands, attempting to modify the dam/rech/end formula for low tier powers will only work if all powersets and ATs treat their tier 1/2 powers in the same manner. I can assure you that a Super Strength Tanker doesn't treat his tier 2 power in the same manner that a Martial Arts or Broadsword Scrapper does (Storm Kick and Hack are actually the recharge and endurance limiting powers for their respective optimal attack strings).

Honestly, if you're attempting to ameliorate the problem of combat inactivity at low levels (which it seems like this suggestion is aimed at) without attempting to completely rework how the game operates, it would be better to simply suggest that all low level characters receive some native global buff to recharge and endurance reduction in the same way that they receive a global buff to their tohit modifier that degrades as they get more powers.

Of course, I've never had a problem with the endurance or recharge issues at the low levels because I've always felt that it fits in line with the theme of a hero just starting out. Their powers aren't even moderately realized so they're going to get winded, run out of superpower juice, and find themselves without any actions to take place other than their inherent powers. Once you get to your 20s, it becomes less of an issue and that makes sense.

If I were to redesign the system completely, however, I would do one of two things: either the addition of auto-attacking that isn't influenced by power activation so that a baseline of performance is always present and power activation is designed to act in addition to that automatic performance (i.e. you're always punching/shooting/stabbing your target and your power activations are simply your special attacks that go beyond your normal attacks) or a larger number of power selections at level 1 to provide a more substantial stable of powers to draw from in the midst of combat (which is one of the big things that the vet powers does), possibly by simply frontloading power selection, especially since slotting before level 15 means so very little.

That's a great suggestion.

I, too, have never had a problem with the low levels.

However, seeing so many "complaints" about the low level endurance being terrible...I wanted to offer a suggestion that would not get rid of the Endurance Management mechanic. Which I love.

Not much of a compromise. Somehow, somewhere, there's a player that uses DO enhancements and doing away with them in the lvl 25+ game will infringe on them. For whatever reason (the cost jump to SOs, the availability or the concept/names), just dropping them (at a certain level) shouldn't be the way to go.

How about just leave all enhancements alone?

Do you support removing some endurance cost from low-level attacks, or implementing a universal recovery buff, or some other system to offset low-level endurance problems then?

Or are you just objecting to my idea to object to my idea?

I retain the option to withhold my opinion on low level endurance issues.

But regarding the alteration to enhancements, it isn't needed and will skew what tiny sense of progress we have in the game.

But that's the whole point of this thread.

I'm confused. Why refuse to comment on what the thread is about?

Which is why I'm specifically interested in the tier 1/2 powers on primaries and the tier 1 power on secondaries (not coincidentally, the three powers that are first available at character creation).


I don't think that is true. What I know for sure, with absolute certainty, is that every low level player has at least one of the first two primary powers and definitely has the first secondary power. These are the powers that, if they have long recharge or high endurance costs (relatively speaking) will have the greatest impact on a player's ability to actually do anything while playing the game.


The reason why this isn't better is two-fold. First, it would affect all powers and not just a focused few. That *would* start to create problems for powersets that are designed in different ways or are used in different ways. Every powerset is designed on the assumption that those three powers are special: every player is going to get at least two of them, if not all three. A player has to be able to solo with just two of them, because at one point two is all we have. There's a certain dependability to targeting those powers. To the extent that they are different from powerset to powerset, archetype to archetype, those differences tend to be deliberate, and not accidental, and generally in keeping with the archetype's priorities.

Blanket recharge and endurance buffs would affect things like the early Build Up that Energy Manipulation gets.

Second: blanket buffs would be extremely difficult to balance. The side effects and unintended consequences of doing something as drastic as cutting the recharge of a tier 1 attack in half is relatively minor, and the benefit descales exactly the way you want it to: as the player takes more and better powers, the benefit of that one power's discounts gets diluted. This actually makes the buff do something closer to what I want than a blanket buff across all archetypes. In particular, it dissipates when the player has a lot of attacks - whenever that is, which is different for every player and archetype - and not by an arbitrary linear scale.


Those are actually much more drastic changes than the one you are suggesting is drastic ("changing the formula"). And I should point out that the formula is a balance formula, which doesn't preclude buffs beyond the formula when they are explicitly called for: Claws was designed with specific discounts relative to the formula (prior to its revamp) specifically to implement a conceptual goal of speed and "lightness" to the set (which is debatable if they accomplished correctly, but still). I could argue that the early powers are specifically intended to be, conceptually, the abilities we are most familiar with and thus most competent in exercising, and should have a discount that represents that fact.

This happens in reverse: powers like the tier-9 Nova-class powers are actually *more* expensive than the formulas would suggest, because they are intended to reflect the fact that at those levels of power, the formula doesn't really apply because the effort required is more than normal (conceptually: game-design-wise the reason is that by formula those powers would be ridiculously too strong).

First, I can, definitively, say that anyone that knows anything about the game is going to treat Hack and Storm Kick different than Jab. Messing with the dam/rech/end formula for Jab would do almost nothing to the fundamental balance of Super Strength because it's a bad attack: no matter how much you tweak the endurance or recharge, it's going to remain a bad attack due to the horrible DPA. Messing with the dam/rech/end formula for Hack or Storm Kick would make BS and MA a helluva lot stronger: those are great attacks and the primary limiter on them, if not their high EPS (thanks to high DPA), is the fact that they have high recharge requirements for animation time saturation. Reducing the recharge on Storm Kick by 33% would reduce the required recharge redux needed to attain the optimal Storm>CAK>Storm>CK attack string to a paltry 152% (within the confines of an SO build), and the restricting attack would no longer be Storm Kick but rather CAK (Storm Kick would only need 116% +rech).

Not all tier 1 and 2 blasts are treated the same by all powersets so you can simply assume that reducing the base recharge and endurance of all of them is going to have a negligible effect upon them once they obtain a decent number of powers. Some sets abandon their tier 1/2 powers as soon as possible, and others use them constantly.

The more important question is whether applying these changes in a global manner would have a more positive effect than a negative effect. Not all sets would be affected in even a roughly even manner. Sets that don't use their tier 1/2 powers (which you seem to be considering the vast majority to such an extent that you can probably ignore those sets that do) are going to get virtually no benefit beyond the first few levels whereas those sets that do are going to get an inordinate benefit.

Allowing everyone to have actions to choose from all the time is a great thing to aim for but it's not going to be much of a fix if you assume that every set operates in the same way. If anything, if you provide preferential capabilities for specific powers based simply upon their power order, you're going to simply make other sets more powerful all the time while only providing a pittance of usefulness to others.

How is that any different than what you're attempting to do? The solution I suggested applies the benefit to all powers universally for the levels in which players do not have a substantial number of options in combat. The players would only receive the "fix" for those levels in which they are forced to not have much in the way of action choice thanks to limited power selection. Your "fix" simply assumes that all sets operate by removing their tier 1/2 powers to lower positions in the priority list and provides a substantially greater benefit to those sets that already place their tier 1/2 activated powers for all levels rather than those in which they are forced, by design, to be short on powers.

The question of limited activity isn't due to some powers not recharging fast enough. It's due to not having enough powers at low levels.

And how is that particularly out of order? These are the exceptionally low levels we're talking about, pre-SOs. Just look at the natural imbalance of Super Strength's performance at pre-Rage levels compared to everything else. Pre-SOs, choice based balance means almost nothing because those levels fly by so quickly. You might as well make the argument that Blasters have an unfair advantage for the first 6 levels because they get more attacks rather than unenhanced and largely useless toggles.

The question that both of us are attempting to address isn't the ability to perform at low levels. The question is how do you properly address the ability for characters to maintain the ability to act while simultaneously providing a reason to actually take powers that provide that benefit while causing a minimum of harm outside of the times in which that penalty is acceptable.

The question that you continually dodge is whether the recharge and endurance costs of that tier 1 power are actually the functional limiters on that power's performance and whether that power is actually useful beyond the first few levels. If all tier 1 and 2 powers did fulfill those conditions, I'd agree with you. The simple fact is that they don't all fulfill those conditions.

The global buff that I would prefer to have is justifiably more appropriate unless you're going to argue that players beyond a certain level have a problem saturating their animation time because I'm limiting the difference to the specific levels in which the problem exists rather than assuming the powers I'm changing in a very drastic manner are somehow going to universally find less use specifically because you say so, no matter how the game actually gets played.

Changing 3 powers for all sets throughout every level isn't more drastic than providing a global buff to a specific subset of levels wherein the problem exists. If anything, your change is the more drastic one. When players complained of low chances to hit at low levels because they were incapable of slotting the enhancements that would actually supply them with a decent chance to hit, the devs could have either increased the accuracy of those powers the players had available at those low levels and left the changes or provided a specific global buff to accuracy for the levels in question.

It's the exact same situation. Rather than complaining about not having access to accuracy enhancements which would allow them to hit at the desired rate, players are complaining about not having access to recharge reduction and endurance enhancements along with the larger suite of powers that would, together, allow them to saturate their animation time in an effective manner.

The problem doesn't exist across all levels unless someone specifically builds to have that problem. The problem exists in a specific area of levels in which the power structure of the game forces them to both not have access to a sufficient number of powers and not have access to the means by which to make efficient use of the small set of powers that they have available. Attempting to apply a change to any specific subset of powers across all levels simply on the justification that the low level problem will be addressed is going to cause problems in all of the other level ranges which is the more drastic change.

TLR version

The problem exists only in the low level game. Changing just the low level game to address the problem is better than changing the powers that everyone has in the low level game, regardless of what level the person is.

I slot both Trainings and DOs. Training enhancement costs are trivial - 500 to 1000 per enhancement. With the advent of the Market, this cost no longer has meaning at ANY level. Even if you don't play the market, uncommon Salvage sells for 1000 at the vendors. And even with just a token visit to the Market, you can sell ONE Luck Charm or other high-value piece of salvage for, say, 40 000, and that will buy you practically all the Trainings you're going to use until you grow into Dual Origins. DOs, themselves, aren't very expensive. Selling what sells on the Market will usually earn you just about about enough to buy a full set at level 12, possibly short one or two. At this point, my question is why NOT use them? Would you prefer to go around with nothing in your slots?

Additionally, you talk about a massive discrepancy in enhancement numbers, but if you look at it objectively, it's not nearly as massive. The basic rule of thumb is that DOs are twice as good as Trainings and SOs are twice as good as DOs. Well, ALMOST, because SOs run up against ED diminishing returns while neither Trainings nor DOs do. The difference is definitely meaningful, but it doesn't mean anything other than SOs sucks. Trainings suck, that much I'll admit, but they help. DOs most decidedly do NOT however. They're not very strong, but they're strong enough.

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

Good idea. The non-degrading, non-expiring basic IOs work the way Enhancements should have all along. Just have them ready-made at vendors instead of the TO/DO/SOs.

I can't say I actually agree with you here, if for one reason above all others - sets that have low-damage, low-recharge, low-cost low-tier powers are a LOT more fun to play in the lower levels. For instance, Blast sets like Fire Blast and Archery basically give you almost a complete attack chain at level 2, and more than that, almost a complete attack chain from out of a hold. By comparison, Blast sets like Electrical Blast or Assault Rifle basically have oodles of dead air that make me feel like I'm enacting a bad Final Fantasy VII fight. With Hellions having one attack and, like, 5-10 seconds of dead air and me having two attacks and a good long while of waiting and wobbling, it just looks bad. I can deal with it, sure, but it looks bad.

Of course, this becomes a question of whether high-level attacks can get better DPA than low-level attacks, and I'm sure you'd know more about that than I do, at least offhand. But the point is that even if those early attacks are fast and cheap, they SHOULD fall out of primary use in the later levels when higher DPA attacks become available, thus keeping the benefit to the lower levels based on power use, not specific overt level-dependent buff.

To be honest, I'm against any low-level buff that peters out as you progress. For one, it kills the actual sense of progress, and for another, it actually sucks to get WEAKER as you level up.

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

This isn't really something that you can logically address with the kind of reductions that Arcanaville is suggesting, however. Attacks that have longer recharges are fundamentally balanced by dealing more damage. With the Blaster attacks, this translates to those very same attacks being more useful at high levels because all of the first two attacks in the Blaster primaries have better DPAs thanks to doing more damage in the same animation time. A reduction in base recharge time and endurance cost benefit the higher damage powers because they're paying less for the greater benefit. An 8 second recharge power with a 1.67 second animation that gets a 33% reduction in recharge time shifts from a 9.848 cycle to a 7.848 second base cycle time whereas a 4 second recharge power with the same animation time would shift from a 5.848 to a 4.848 second cycle. The changes naturally benefit those powers that are already good without making those powers that are mediocre any better (because the ratio of recharge time to animation time is already high and any improvement is marginal at best and oftentimes largely redundant thanks to alternating animations generating clash between activation times). The assumption that all powers would behave in the same manner is fundamentally flawed because of this.

Whether low level powers should fall out of use doesn't really matter. The more important question is whether those powers do fall out of use. The simple answer is that some do and some don't. In general, 1 tier 1/2 power always remains in use even at the highest levels. In some cases, this is because the power in question is better than any other attack in the set (Storm Kick). In others, it's because the power recharges quickly and has an animation time that fits nicely in with the other powers in the attack string (Hack). Still others will be functionally useless and only be used whenever there isn't anything else to be used for an extended period of time and the animation time of the power won't interfere with the use of powers that can actually do something respectable with their animation time(Jab). In the first case, Arcanaville's suggested changes would make the set substantially more powerful because it's reducing the requirements needed to access the attack string by a gigantic margin (224% +rech compared to 152% +rech) while simultaneously providing a large reduction in the EPS of the attack string (roughly 15%). In the second case, the attack string doesn't become any more powerful because the tier 1 power isn't the fundamental limiter to access for the attack string but, because the attack does fulfill a significant portion of the attack string, the set spends less EPS (15% less in the case of the BS attack string) for the exact same DPS. In the final case, there is virtually no benefit because the power simply doesn't get used.

The only set that I can think of (and I have done attack string calculation for virtually every set in the game that this change would reasonably affect) that wouldn't receive a substantial benefit from a change like this would be Super Strength and that's explicitly because the tier 1 and 2 powers in the set are so tremendously bad that pool powers are better to use. Even then, it's not like a reduction in the recharge time or endurance cost of the powers would make them any more intelligent to use because the costs on those are already laughably low (which, according to the dam/rech/end formula, would explain why they're not used in the first place).

The simple fact of the matter remains that, although some powers do fall to the wayside, the sets are not designed to do away completely with their lower tier attack powers in favor of their higher tier ones. At best, you'd be reducing the endurance costs of attack sets without reducing their commensurate DPS (if Arcanaville argues that it wouldn't, it's blatant and mathematical falsehood that she should know better about; a power's individual cycle time and EPS/DPS doesn't mean anything within the confines of actual power use) and at worst you'd be making some sets more powerful without providing commensurate increase to the performance of others.

This is one of the reasons why I've yet to assign any numbers to anything I'd do. My suggestion was simply a suggestion to counter the suggestion of Arcanaville (one that I disagree with rather vehemently for reasons I've already let be known). Personally, I could do without it since, as I similarly stated, I have no problem with the current state of things as they apply to always having some attack or other applicable power to use.

If I were to place a number on it, I'd definitely start conservatively, probably something like 20% recharge redux (and no end redux unless it was deemed necessary) at level 1. Large enough to be noticeable, but not so much that it becomes something that you miss once you hit the SO levels (since it's less than a single SO). At level 10, I would probably pare it down to roughly 10% (so that you're still getting less than a single DO). Optimally, I'd make the value of the buff tied to the number of primary, secondary, and pool powers you currently have access to (i.e. if you exemp down, those extra powers you have are going to count against the size of the buff) because, as I see it, the problem that is being addressed is the availability of powers to use rather than any specific problem with the potency of the powers at that level and having access to 2-3 more powers should generate a similar reduction in the benefit that makes up for the problem.

I think it is time to do away with origins on any of the enhancements. They are purely cosmetic and only serve to complicate the system.

If they want to make origins play any sort of lasting role then there are much better ways of doing it than forcing me to figure out what the heck a "Portacio Ind Internal Munitions" or "Nectanebo's Brooch" is.

I think most of us just go by the color coding of each ie. red= dam, dark blue = end mod. But it gets messy looking for tohit debuffs, or jumps, or other such ones that all blend together.

Meaningless convoluted origin names attached to enhancements could happily go the way of the dodo and I wouldn't complain. Invention: damage, that is about the complexity required.
new names:
Training can stay as training
DO = practiced
SO = focused

As for the changes being discussed regarding early game I'll toss my vote in saying I loathe anything that makes my powers get weaker as I progress. I hate the early game accuracy bonus with a passion, but at least it isn't obvious or intrusive. Something that made my powers tangible faster and cheaper for however long until I'm strong enough not to need the crutch is something I strongly oppose.

At the same time I see a standardized permanent reduction to the 3 starting powers greatly benefiting some sets and doing next to nothing for others.

Rather than reinventing the wheel I think they already have the solution implemented, but it is not being utilized. The origin powers could easily be buffed to actually not suck by boosting their damage, lower end cost, and high inherent acc. Easily explained by being inherently good with the power of your origination.

They could even grant two origin attacks if necessary (but I don't think it is). As long as they are a bit worse DPA than existing powers they will be phased out as better powers open up.

I dunno, I just see that they have already put the powers into the game that can largely solve the complaints being raised, but for whatever reason they haven't been utilized. It is also a lot more KISS friendly than anything else being discussed.

Most attack cost nothing as a stand alone if I get what you are saying.

ie. Flares:
3.69 end
2.18 rech, 1.188 cast
=3.368 sec cycle time.

Base recovery = 1.67 end/sec
3.368*1.67= 5.62 end recovered - 3.69 end spent = 1.93 net endurance gained.

ie. Thunder Kick
4.37 end
3 rech, 1.056 cast
=4.056 sec cycle time
4.056*1.67 = 6.77 - 4.37= 2.4 net end gained.

ie KO blow:
18.5 end
25 rech, 2.376 cast
=27.376 cycle time
27.376*1.67 = 45.7 - 18.5 = 27.2 net endurance gained.

Because I have a differing opinion that opposes the common direction of the thread and I don't feel like coming back to defend my positions constantly.

But changing the very foundation of enhancements miffs with way too many other things besides the issues this thread is concerned with.

This sounds decent. Mutation and Magic SOs especially have always been more long winded than they should be, due to having obscuring icons that tend to block the back colour of the SO. Yes, I can right click to check the type. But being able to mouse over them (which you can in AE, incidentally) would be much easier. And having to go to the correct store haflway across the zone is a pain.

Originally Posted by Zwillinger GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.

Originally Posted by Captain_Photon NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.

Actually, I don't make that assumption. What I said, in fact, is that the change does basically what I want it to do. For example, take one of the more extreme cases of Storm Kick, one of the best tier 2 melee attacks around. In cutting the recharge and endurance of that power, you're assuming that I think that will have no effect at all on an MA past level 20. I'm not assuming that. Rather I believe that, for every powerset that I've examined (and I haven't looked at them all yet, which is what I meant when I said I hadn't fully done all the legwork yet), the change is something whose effects I can live with.

Storm Kick doesn't actually follow the rules *now*. It costs too much endurance for its base damage, and conversely it does more critical damage than any other tier 2 scrapper attack. Its allowed to break the rules for a reason. Before you conclude that my change would break Storm Kick unacceptably, you should consider why Storm Kick is allowed to break the rules now.

I'm actually more concerned about Blind than Storm Kick, but as I said, I haven't closed the loop on all of the special cases yet.

An inherent problem I see with your suggestion here is that it seems to over-complicate itself quickly, which doesn't bode well for it as a solid solution. As much as I hate the general dev methodology of blanket solutions to problems, this is a valid place for it. Just a couple of ideas I idly suggest would be some sort of "momentum" endurance discount (more actions taken over time, the larger endurance discount granted) or "breather" end. recovery bonus (more time idle, the faster your recovery). Neither are really viable but suffer less issues with needing special exceptions thrown in all over to yours and the thread's suggestions. Of course, this is all under the assumption there is a problem.

Suppose we discover, after very careful analysis and testing, that the blanket solution does different and undesirable things to controllers relative to defenders, say, or dominators relative to masterminds. Or even energy manipulation relative to devices. The problem with "blanket" solutions is that its virtually *never* true that you ever get lucky enough that the blanket just happens to cover exactly what you want to cover, and nothing you don't. It just never happens.

You use blanket solutions not to find a solution to a set of problems, but rather to *impose* a rule that resolves a problem by fiat.

When pervasive criticals were given to scrapper primaries, that didn't precisely affect all of those primaries in exactly the same way. Some got better burst damage than others for example. Some had different issues with AoE than others. But criticals were not specifically intended to produce the exact, precise, absolutely numerically identical effect across all scrapper primaries. Criticals became the new paradigm for scrapper primaries, and under that new paradigm different sets behaved in slightly different ways, but ways that the new paradigm endorsed as intentional.

In a sense, my idea (I wouldn't quite call it a proposal yet, because it isn't fully formed yet) is also a blanket solution in that it declares a global change within a specific domain: it suggests applying a discount (and not "changing the formula" which is something else entirely: Widows and Claws change the formula) to all of the first three available powers. But the difference between that idea and the idea to apply global endurance and/or recharge discounts across the board is that its tweakable between archetypes and between powersets if it turns out that is necessary. Global level-based buffs are not. But separate from that, I believe (but can't prove) that, perhaps with minor adjustments, the low tier power change I mention could be the new paradigm for powerset design. A global low level buff could also be one, but in that case its a paradigm I don't endorse. Because I don't, from my perspective it does not have less issues: it has a lot more - because it creates consequences I don't always agree with. You may disagree, of course.

You bring up the separate issue of whether there actually is a problem to solve. I'm not certain there is one either. But I'm not thinking about this in terms of whether there is a literal problem to solve. I'm thinking about it more in terms of whether the current game design, after taking a step back and seeing where it is now verses where it was at launch, makes more sense with the discounts I'm proposing than not.


There are lots of things in the game for which its difficult to prove there is a "problem" in the strict sense of the word, but clearly there is a sense that something somewhere is wrong. Take DPE. At one time, prior to ED, the different archetypes had different DPE factors in scale damage per endurance point built into the attack power balance formulas. Now they all have the same one: 5.2 end per damage scale point. Was it wrong before, and correct now? Was it correct before, and wrong now? Is it even possible that it doesn't actually matter? That seems unlikely.

Besides this low-tier idea, there's another one that I've been kicking around for a very long time that I think is related to it, although independent of it. When the devs want something to have "more offense" they increase its damage modifiers. Doing so increases the dps output of that archetype. If they want it to have less, they reduce that modifier. That reduces the dps output of that archetype. But it *also* increases the *cost* of that offense in endurance. A conjecture I believe to be true but cannot prove is that the reduction of DPE that is coupled with the reduction in DPS is unintentional relative to the balance guidelines the game attempts to follow (even if it is otherwise intended by the dev that makes the change).

Does that mean there is a problem? That's harder to prove. But I believe the game would function better if that issue was untangled, since I believe its a hidden inconsistency in the game.

I think the low tier powers contain a separate, but much more subtle design inconsistency. But I'm not fully prepared to make an air-tight case for that yet. I'm just mentioning that I'm thinking about it.

That would explain a LOT why I run out of End on my MA/SR scrapper, I would guess =S

Originally Posted by Zwillinger GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.

Originally Posted by Captain_Photon NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.