Inherent Fitness

I hate to be this harsh, but that's what your threads strongly suggest.

When I can read your threads, then end up in game chatting with other people who I think are skilled/experienced and find myself in a discussion about your posts where we mutually scratch our heads wondering where you're coming from, I think that suggests you're missing something.

You're entitled to your opinions about how things should work, and while people might state their disagreement, you can't be faulted for having your own opinions. Where I think you show very poor understanding of the game is in your claims about how things do work, and then the implications of those mechanics in actual play.

I hope you understand that, fair or not, when your presented understanding of actual mechanics appears flawed or incomplete, other posters are going to take a dim view of your opinions on how the game could be improved. The perception will be that your opinions have been formed based on an invalid factual foundation, and that therefore the proposed changes/improvements will not have the desired effect.

When anyone likes something, they're going to be wary of or resistant to changes in it - we see that on the forums every day. When they see suggestions on how to "improve" it that they feel are based on misunderstanding or misinformation, they are likely to be even more rabid in opposing the proposed changes. I feel like you very frequently end up in this latter situation.

I disagree. I would definitely like to see us get three more slots. I have been saying this is what we should be getting at level 50. The ability to actually SLOT the level 49 power decently.

I could get behind reworking the leveling up phase so that you'd get your last power at 48. Three more slots are, IMO, not needed. A casual player (no set IOs) already has enough slots to worry about (3 slotting passives etc) and the high-end builds are powerful enough without them.

I am in favor of three more slots as well for the last power.

Not in those exact words, no.

No, i'm not saying you don't know anything, but i am saying you don't know how to play this game well, and apparently something about its mechanics makes it so that you can't easily learn.

And in my opinion you're wrong. And that's speaking as someone whose current projects include levelling up a KM/DA Scrapper.

And yes, my opinion of your opinions is colored by your past assertions and threads where your supporting evidence involved scenarios that simply were not possible in this game being offered as proof of your correctness. So i tend to distrust any of your assertions on their face. Past behavior is generally a good barometer of present and future behavior unless something suggests that there's been a change. And in the past some of your assertions about endurance use have been so far from correct that they weren't even wrong.

i also agreed during your last crusade to have the game remade in your image of it that Defenders could use slightly better DPE, especially solo, as have many others, and that has been increased, but really it seems more like you simply don't want endurance to function as a limiting and balancing mechanism in the game at all. On that point i disagree.

I don't agree that powers are balanced. All characters are expected to overcome the same challenges, but some ATs and power sets are at a disadvantage when doing so. To continue the example of Defenders vs Blasters, that the Defender does roughly half the damage of the Blaster means he has to attack twice as often to defeat the same foe. That means he uses twice the endurance. If a Blaster uses his whole endurance bar defeating three minions (for instance), the Defender will defeat ONE and be out of endurance before defeating the second. The discrepancy exists between power sets, too, though it's far less pronounced.

Now, I realize that some sets are expected to do less damage because they have additional effects (such as the accuracy debuff of Dark powers), but that's fine as long as the difference isn't overly extreme. Damage is, after all, the only metric that matters in the final analysis since it's the only way to defeat the enemy.



I'll readily admit, I haven't proven there's a problem, I've only percieved it. However, I think comparing damage/endurance levels of the ATs shows there's a discrepancy. Personally, I think the discrepancy is a problem. Others may disagree.


There are many ways of dealing with endurance issues in the game, that's true. However, it's my opinion that these methods are insufficient. We should be fighting the enemy, not a game mechanic, if you see what I mean.

You ask for an example, so I refer you back to the Blaster/Defender. If they both slot their attacks the same way, the Defender will still run out of endurance before the Blaster. If the Defender uses some of these methods you mention, he will be at an even greater disadvantage relative to the Blaster. If he slots more endurance reduction, he loses damage or accuracy. If he slows his attacks, he reduces his damage output even further, and becomes exposed to more damage. Having less health in addition to everything else, he faces greater chance of defeat.



See above.

How much would I change the recovery rate? I don't have a number to give you, but I'd put it somewhere between the current level and the level Stamina provides. I'd see how that works and adjust it up or down as neccessary. Honestly, I really dislike the endurance mechanic in general, but I accept that it's meant to balance gameplay and so should remain in the game. I once considered suggesting that powers have more or less effect depending on endurance level (so if you were at 50% endurance, your attack would do only 50% damage), but I'm not sure that would be better.



I'm not sure how to answer this. "What would happen to powerset balance?" Nothing, with a global change. The balance would still be discrepant. The difference would be that disadvantaged sets would be somewhat more capable. The Defender would now use a full bar to defeat three minions, while the Blaster would use half. At least the Defender would now be better able to defeat the same threat. Again, I don't think a global boost is the best way, but it's better than nothing.

How, or if, this would affect the balance relative to our foes is another question, though.



Sorry for the delay, I have a case study due that needed working on.

Perhaps the thing to do is modify endurance by the damage scalar AS WELL as the damage itself.

I hope that answers you adequately, I appreciate the considered and polite response.

It's funny, you know. If my "past crusades" were so off target, why did so many of them result in changes and additions to the game?

I said Defenders needed help with damage output (and was vigorously flamed for saying so).
Defenders recieved a boost to damage output.

I suggested street sweeping should generate missions (there was little resistance to this idea)
We now have Tip missions.

I (and others) argued Invulnerability needed a revamp (and was vigorously flamed for saying so).
They modified the Invulnerability autopowers.

I (and others) suggested allowing weapon customization (and was vigorously flamed for doing so).
We got weapon customization.

I (and others) suggested power customization (and was vigorously flamed for doing so).
We got new animations and colour customization.

I suggested Secret IDs (and was vigorously flamed for doing so).
We got Day Jobs (not quite what I was after).

I suggested getting rid of the Rep system on the Forums (and was vigorously flamed for doing so).
It's gone.

I could go on.


Of course, some things I've suggested haven't appeared yet, but one never knows.

Is this hypothetical defender not using his primary, or what? You know, that entire powerset that does that fancy buff/debuff thing? Combat in this game is not as simple as "burn end, emit damage, win." Even you know that.

on preview: Are you really suggesting that your "crusades" are why the game experienced some changes? Do you think the devs look at your posts specifically as a barometer for balance issues?

If you were flamed, I suspect it was due to the way you wanted it done. I find it hard to imagine people not wanting to be able to customize powers or weapons.

i would like to ask everyone to post their best facepalm to this post i have quoted. maybe if we post enough of them, ultimo will maybe get it in his head that he is doing something wrong and should take the advice that people are trying ti give him.

Angel Red
"We're heroes. Fighting injustice is the thing we do." ~Rebel Scum

Huh ????

go through ultimo's post history. if anything you will get a really good laugh and an understanding of why we answer him the way we do.

Yes, despite several threads, hundreds of posts, and some thread locks, Ultimo still cannot grasp the most basic game concept that a Defender's primary role is team support and a Blaster's is damage.

And despite another lengthy thread (that also resulted in a lock), he still insists that endurance use is unmanageable, despite dozens of posters giving him examples of ways to deal with it, even on builds that skip Stamina entirely.

I'm sure this thread is destined to be locked as well...

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

yeah, i'm sure it was because you suggested these things... get your head out of your...

defenders got a boost because the devs saw fit for solo and on groups of no more then 4 people. after 4 there is no more bonus.

you can also drop tips in missions. that was part of GR, not cause you suggested it.

invuln was changed because castle said so, not because you suggested it.

both types of customization were wanted by the devs before any suggestions and they just didn't have the man power to do so. we were never told we would not get it. you had nothing to do with it.

day jobs were brought about for something extra to do. not because you suggested it.

the rep was removed from the forums because it was abused. well, i guess the abusee had something to do with it in this case, but not because you suggested it.

i could keep going and going, but my fingers would get tired.

Only the old fashioned clocks with mechanical displays. Most other types of clocks show no time at all when broken and are are never right when broken.

Still, i do get where you're coming from with that somewhat archaic analogy.

Ultimo_ gets flamed at least as much because he frequently exaggerates, lies and distorts when attempting to support his positions even when there is some validity to his complaints. Although it does almost seem as though he's actually posting from a parallel reality when he's presented some of his "facts" in the past, so sincerely he seems to believe them. Though the odd thing has been that when his assertions have been tested and disproven in game he's then backpedaled and attempted to claim he posted something other than what the record clearly showed. Maybe his parallel reality is more of a quantum shadow that is collapsed into congruency with ours when closely observed? The implications if this is true would be fascinating.

No, I'm not saying my "crusades" were responsible for the changes, I'm saying that I was obviously not as wrong as some suggest.

The Blaster has a secondary set, too. Both ATs use both sets and the Defender still suffers the endurance problems I described. The same is true for Tankers, though to somewhat less of a degree. In the end, the game does boil down to damage output since that's the only way to defeat your enemies. I can debuff a foe all day and night and it will never defeat him. I can have Temporary Invulnerability running forever, and it will never defeat a foe. Only damage will do that, and some ATs are disadvantaged as I've described.


I was flamed, as others were, with the adminishment that customization and the like would never happen, the devs wouldn't waste resources on it and so forth. Not the usual vilification, but flaming all the same.


I didn't realize a facepalm was adequate argument for something.


Yes, because the disparity isn't in output, it's in performance and efficiency. Further, because it's the damage set, it's the most fundamental set for each class (as mentioned, damage is the only way to defeat foes).


You're saying Defenders have no need to do damage?
I didn't say endurance was unmanageable. I didn't say it there, and I didn't say it here. I said the game should be about fighting villans, not managing endurance. Endurance concerns are excessive.


Interesting, I counted 7 times (and more).
People just can't admit that things I bring up are actually things that need looking at. If I was wrong, why did the devs address ALL those things, hm?


As I said, I'm not taking credit for the changes, but obviously I was right about them or they wouldn't have happened.

I said Defenders needed a boost and was told I was wrong. Who will be first to tell the devs they were wrong too?

I suggested something similar to tips years ago, long before GR.

When I (and Johhny_Butane) said Invulnerability needed a tweak and suggested changes to the autopowers, we were attacked and laughed at. You want to start laughing at Castle for having the same opinion we did?

The customization thing came up for years and we recieved a variety of responses from the devs. From the community we recieved hostility and antagonism for daring to discuss the idea again. Again, I'm not taking credit, I'm pointing out the hostility I dealt with despite being RIGHT AGAIN.

Day Jobs were a response to many requests for Secret IDs. When some of us asked for Secret IDs were attacked and told this isn't City of Sims. Of course, Day Jobs are not quite what we were after, but it shows again that we weren't far off base.

I said, repeatedly, that rep and tags would be abused. Once again I was right.

I could keep going too, but I see no point.

I will say I have a tendency to exaggerate sometimes, and I have been wrong on occasion. However, I never lie or deliberately present false information.