CapnGeist
-
Posts
587 -
Joined
-
My top customization desire right now: Mastermind Pets.
-
I can't speak for Kheldians, but any change to Soldiers and Widows that makes them strictly better (via more options) is a bad idea. Why? Because they're already intensely overpowered in my experience, and they don't need to be any stronger.
That being said, I'd like to see the following allowed for the VEATs...
A Mu option, similar to Soldiers and Widows in execution but giving a combination of Elec Blast, Elec Armor, and Storm powers. The main issue here is, well... Mu costume doesn't lend itself well to certain animations... Like, most of them.
An Epic Mastermind Power Pool that gave you Arachnos minions and let you have a Spider or Widow costume in your first slot, but otherwise was just a Mastermind. (Yes, I get that Crab Spider gives you minions, but I want minion tree of Wolf Spider/Blood Widow/Mu Striker, Crab Spider/Fortunata, and Tarantula with the upgrades taking them each through tiers of their particular type.)
The option to make ANY costume slot a Spider/Widow costume slot. I love the Spider and Widow costumes and I'd like to be able to hold multiple versions at the same time... Especially as, like many, my Widow has one Fortunata build and one Night Widow build. -
Is it weird that this bothers me more the other way? I don't mind seeing the occasional +1 spawn in a mission, but every once in a while I see -1s and -2s running around an even spawn mission and I have to go "what the hell?" I generally play on +0/x8, because while I can handle higher, I am lazy, and +0/x8 is what my MM can steamroll without really losing minions. The occasional +1 spawn is tough, but nothing I can't handle. The -1s and -2s that sometimes show just... don't seem worth my time.
So yeah, fixed spawn level option. I don't see the harm in it, I'd vote for it.
On a side note: The "Vindication" arc could really use this. When set as a level 50 mission, Mynx spawns as a level 52 Hero, and this is one of the hardest fights in the game, in my experience, because it's taken on by a team who's set to fight level 50 AVs. And Mynx is prone to critting and insta-killing people. And she's surrounded by Longbow, the most competent enemy group at high levels*. Heaven help you if you're playing on higher than +0 for this arc. The only enemy I've suffered TPKs against more often is Romulus Nictus, and he's actually four AVs.
*This is not the thread to argue this. If you want to claim Malta or Nemesis or whatever, you're free to think that. Longbow gives me the most trouble, so I'm saying they're the most competent. -
Well that would work, TOO, but I think having a Malta Mastery option would make a lot of people very, very happy. We all know Malta gets all the coolest stuff.
-
I still say the villain answer is to introduce non-arachnos PPPs. Give us Freak Mastery, Demon Mastery, Gunslinger Mastery, and Nemesis Plot. (That last one's not a a Mastery. Nemesis is the master, not you.)
-
And the new idle emote: Invisible sandwhich.
-
You know, with flight emotes and emotes including items, we could really fake any vehicle travel power like this...
-
We're more likely to see new EATs than new sets for the old ones.
-
Quote:We HAD a Dev specifically focused on base stuff. For one issue. Base stuff was recosted and stacking was made easier. And then he got commandeered for GR and we haven't heard from him since.Originally Posted by Prof_Backfire
If the benefits are purely for your Supergroup- additional Prestige, base items etc- then I'd be all for this.
I don't know if the devs even acknowledge Supergroups and bases any more, though. -
I'll sign up a team as
Me
Garent
??? (we've got options, have to confirm)
But it's totally a team -
Right. I don't mean an on-the-market price cap, I mean an effective price cap in that the number of people willing to pay more than 10 million for a recipe that sells for 10 million from the vendors are slim.
-
I'd make it a prestige bonus above all else. Damage/inf bonuses would just make this overused by the farmers. Bonus base items, too, but balanced based on foes, methinks.
I really do like the idea. My Supergroup has been very against the Circle of Thorns since day one, so being able to introduce this mechanically would be amazing. I'm just not sure how to implement it.
How about adding the option to get missions to attack that group from your base? -
Merits as the proper currency is a joke. Merits were introduced, yes, but inf is still what we have most of and the only thing we're allowed to spend and trade. Merits are these crazy lottery tickets that we can use to win random prizes, or spend stupid amounts to ensure we get the good stuff. There are very few recipes that it's worth spending merits on because all merit prices are that high.
If a random merit roll is 20 merits, then one needs to assume that for every recipe worth MORE than 20 merits there is at least one worth less. This is true, but the cheapest for sale is still what, 150 merits? Consider those claw machines of 'a winner every time' but it's 25 cents a play and sometimes you just win a piece of penny candy. The current merit system says if you want to buy that piece of candy individually from the vendor, it's a dollar. Merits are still just random rewards. They're not currency, they're bonuses, and you can play a lot without getting any. I did most of the arc content on my main before merits were introduced, and so my only merit source is Flashbacks and Taskforces. Sure, I do these sometimes, but most of what I do is team with my friends. And because merits are non-transferable, if I want to use merits to get level 50 recipes for that character, I need to run arcs on my other characters and /wait until they're level 50./ So that character I have with over 200 merits can't spend them on my main optimally for another 15 levels.
Back to the point: Inf is the economy. Merits are not. We need to be able to spend inf on things. Putting things at "expensive" in vendors will not stem inflation in itself, but it will do the following things.
-Ensure that recipes are ALWAYS available. Certain recipes are incredibly rare, and I'm not talking about purples or PVP IOs here. I'm talking about gold and silver rolls below level 50. There's no serious farming at lower levels, and thus Kinetic Combat and Gaze of the Basilisk pieces rarely show up on the market, for example.
-Give a place for lots of inf to drain from the economy. Right now, inf decreases as it moves through the market, but at a much slower rate than it's being produced. Selling recipes for inf would give an option for sudden removal of inf from the system. This will, long term, help reduce inflation by preventing the devaluation of Inf.
-Put a price cap on some recipes on the market. This isn't as big a deal as the second issue, but it will prevent a few things from getting really stupid expensive. Price for recipes, of course, would vary based on how good they are and how hard they are to find the 'normal' way.
And as said: No purple or PVP IOs for this as those aren't currently accessible via the merit system. This isn't about getting IOs with no effort, this is about ensuring that there is enough supply to FILL the demand, even if expense means people still aren't buying, and it's about getting inf out of the market to stem inflation. -
Vigilance or not, defenders are already a solid AT. If their inherent was to be changed, it would have to be a change in cool factor without significantly increasing power level, and what you're suggesting here is clearly a major power level boost.
-
/Signed
Not major, just a nice little Quality of Life improvement.
What would also be nice is if they offered a set of binds for pet control, rather than making players hunt the boards for them and work that way. A pre-built set of numpad binds, for example, with an option to turn them on or off. -
So very, very signed.
-
There IS a clean way to do an inherent like you want with the coding there is, but it would require a very different feel for the AT. Specifically, it would require a duality in the primary. We can buff damage by DAMAGE type, not by delivery method, so if you were to split the melee and ranged types, it would work. For example, one set might mix Gun attacks (lethal) with unarmed strikes (Smashing.) Another might give dark melee attacks while throwing fire. This would probably lock players a bit tighter into a concept, but if done right, it would allow something that would force you to switch back and forth between the two. Every Dark attack in your set would boost Fire damage and your Fire attacks would boost Dark damage, thus encouraging you to switch back and forth for maximum output. Starting sets could be...
"Gun Kata"- Lethal Ranged, Smashing Melee (Martial Arts)
"Netherworld Combat"-Fire Ranged, Dark Melee
"Storm Combat"- Elec Ranged, Energy Melee
"Frost Combat" -Lethal Ranged (throwing icicles), Cold Melee (using freezing touches)
The problem with this setup, of course, is that it pigeonholes you pretty fast. This would have the bonus in that a Netherworld Combat/Fire Survival character would also gain bonuses to, say, Hot Feet or whatever he gets when he uses his ranged attacks. -
The problem with using EBs is the issue of a level 50 hero flying in and taking out the guy in one hit. It's just... not fun and it'd bug the people who want to fight it. You'd need to use GM coding.
-
The pet set blasts wouldn't be replaced, though they'd be buffed for higher damage mod. So, for example, a Fire/Thugs Commander would run around punching things with fire and shooting fire and have a few Pistols attacks as backup, similar to how a Pistols/Fire Blaster has Primarily pistols attacks and then a few Fire attacks. This is especially relevant as each Minions set includes one AoE and Assault sets are generally AoE light.
I'm not sure how painful targeting through pets would be, but I admit that on my Mastermind I do it as often as not. My general strategy is follow around whichever one of my pets has the lowest HP and switch between Twilight Grasp and my attacks, switching pets if injury levels change, or following allies instead of they need the HP.
That being said, the inherent I'm really wanting here is an Assist/Flanking/Teamwork sort of deal. If targeting through is too much of a hassle, I'd love to hear other methods of doing it.
An Inverse supremacy could be nice, buffing your damage based on how many of your Henchmen are nearby. I would like one that would also let you work with allies though. -
My comment about the inherents wasn't that the inherent doesn't make the AT good. It was that many of the ATs could be just as good just by boosting the base damage. Scrapper, Corruptor, Blaster, and Controller would all have comparable effects if the base damage was boosted and the inherent was gone.
What i'm really talking about is "If this inherent wasn't around and the numbers were compensated, would the AT play the same?" And I think that yes, Scrapper, Corruptor, Blaster, and Controller would all play mostly the same if they just did more damage instead of having various bonuses to damage. The only ATs for whom the inherent is really thought about much in Gameplay is Stalker, Brute, and Dominator. I'm not saying that we should dismiss the idea of an inherent making the AT workable, I'm saying we need to build the AT with the inherent in mind if we're planning on focusing on it. Brute doesn't feel different than Scrapper without Fury, and Dominator just doesn't seem as fun without Domination. Blaster's Defiance is something that's helpful, but it's not the sort of thing most people (in my experience) think about when playing: they just let it be there.
As far as the MM, yes, Supremacy a solid buff, but it doesn't really have the cognitive impact that Domination, Fury, and Hide have.
As far as describing Brute in a way that covers my criteria... I can't. After playing a Dark Melee Brute and Dark Melee Scrapper both to 50, along with various other scrappers and brutes, I can honestly say that the Scrapper feels weak in comparison and I see Brutes becoming the standard Melee class when GR comes out due to their ability to Tank as well as a tank needs to (not as well as a tank CAN, mind you, but as well as a tank needs to in any reasonable circumstance) and outdamage a scrapper. This may change if Scrappers get access to Soul Mastery in GR because Gloom is /that/ good, but I can't be certain. The only reasons 'balance' may be assumed is because, from what I hear, it's not easy to keep fury high and I'm just spoiled by Dark Melee.
(And on the topic of Tank inherent: I can tank well enough to handle pretty much anything in the game with a Brute that doesn't have Taunt. Gauntlet is necessary at low levels, but once you get your taunt aura you can generally keep anyone you'd hit with Gauntlet aggro'd on you anyway by aura alone)
The Manipulation/Assault issue there... Alright, I give on the topic of manipulation. Manipulation sets are weird. Assault is pretty much pure damage, though. I was including Build Up in the count of DPS powers, because it does nothing but boost DPS, even if it's not an attack.
So back on the topic of how brutes are balanced to scrappers... If we're really thinking of balancing this AT based on the inherent, let's get some serious discussion of how the inherent will work.
Once again: An Assault/'Survival' AT seems like it would be a bad idea if it doesn't have an inherent that makes it viable. If discussion is to continue, it should include serious suggestions on the inherent. -
I totally want in on this. **Grabs Garent** YOINK!
-
Quote:Originally Posted by Leo_G
It's basically saying Assault sets are some strange congregation of like-theme powers with no type of consistency or direction meant to only go with a specific type of primary. In context, do you disagree that Assault is just a damage set? Would an Assault set not 'function' if coupled with an armor set? Or a support set?
I think Assault would be underperform when coupled with an armor set when compared to melee sets (Remember: if you're not in melee, your armor set's probably not pulling its weight, and if you ARE in melee, your ranged attacks aren't pulling their weight) and would be suicidal when combined with a Support set. The reason corruptors and defenders use ranged as their pairing is that they generally can't survive melee.
But I think at this point we should stop combining Assault and Manipulation. Looking them over repeatedly they're /very/ different sets. Assault is designed to be paired with Control: It gives you melee attacks for when it's safe and ranged for when it's not, and it's your primary that determines safety or not. Manipulation has a lot more damage mitigation and other weird effects than Assault. Manipulation as a primary and a non-damaging secondary would result in a character with less DPS than many Controllers, wheras Assault as a primary is plausible, but just weird and really needs a reason to be in and out of melee to compare with Blaster/Scrapper. -
True, but is it any less survivable than Blaster is the question? I think the distraction of pets would still give you more survivability than what Blasters tend to have.
-
Blah blah blah, yes, I know, unlikely to see any new archtypes, this is for fun, blah blah.
Okay, now that that's out of the way, I've noticed that, EATs aside, the only AT to have any truly "Unique" powers is the Mastermind. And it makes sense because it's powers are so interesting, but I was wondering what it would take to make an AT like the MM that didn't step on the MM's toes.
I was thinking an AT called "Leader" or "Commander." Rather than the MM's 'lead from the rear' policy, the commander would be an Assault/Minions Archetype, focusing on mixing it up along with his minions.
He would have higher HP and damage mods than the current MM, a tradeoff for not having any real form of mitigation. Also, he would not be able to use Bodyguard mode.
His Inherent would be called "Flanking." The Commander would gain a bonus to hit and damage as long as he was not targeting any opponents. How would this work? It would mean that you would be encouraged to attack via "assists," attacking your ally's target or attacking the target of a pet. (Perhaps more for choosing the target of a human rather than the target of a minion.) Alternatively, give him a bonus to damage against foes that allies are also targeting, though this might be a bit more complex. I was thinking giving all attacks, say, +25% damage if your current target cannot be the target of the attack would be cleaner, but I'm not sure how the system works.
An Assault primary coupled with a Minions secondary would give the Commander about 10 attacks total, depending on his primary, with a fair mix of melee and ranged. Obviously, damage mods would have to be balanced with the assumption of pets, though pets would come later than for a Mastermind. The first two powers of Mastermind would be reversed, allowing the Commander to take a pet at level 1 rather than having to start with two attacks.
Overall, the Commander would be focused on using his own attacks coupled with his pets to inflict damage, and while he'd be less survivable than the Mastermind and would spend a lot of endurance re-summoning pets often, he'd be able to easily switch between AoE or Single Target damage, Melee or Ranged, depending on how he orders his pets. -
Quote:"The Brute's purpose is to deal heavy enough melee damage to make a scrapper cry itself to sleep. A defense secondary allows it to remain in melee indefinitely, survive long enough to build up its fury and gain more damage, and handle enough incoming aggro to make tanks wonder if they'll be obsolete when Going Rogue comes out."Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I'd be interested to see what description you'd give to a Brute.
Now, I respect the "whatever inherent it gets should make it work" idea... sort of. But then again, no, no I don't. Let's look at the ATs.
Tanker: Tanker's inherent is Gauntlet. It lets it gain aggro double plus good, but it's not entirely necesarry for aggro gathering. If it was, the Brute's half-gauntlet would not be sufficient, and experience tells me it is.
Scrapper: Critical hits deal MOAR DAMAGE. A Scrapper would still be a scrapper without crits, it'd just need a 15% higher base damage to stay competitive.
Controller: Controller's inherent is... more damage to mezzed targets. I'm told this is helpful, but my controllers are Illusion and Mind. The bonus damage certainly isn't what makes the set. And overpower, well... It's a joke. It's just not reliable enough to be counted on.
Defender: Vigilance kicks in when things are going bad. Many defenders forget they have it. I'm not calling it bad, I'm just saying that Defender is a fine concept before the Inherent is even considered.
Blaster: Blaster inherent is more damage. And the cool ability to attack through mezzes. The former is just more damage, like a stalker's crits, and the latter, while cool, really isn't what makes the AT.
Corruptor: Like Scrapper, chance of crits.
Mastermind: Supremacy just gives a buff to your pets. This could easily be replicated by making pets stronger. As someone with multiple MMs, I've honestly never noticed my inherent doing anything at all.
Kheldians: The inherent varies wildly. It's cool, but doesn't really make the AT.
Spiders: Free Stamina! Woot! ...Yeah, what?
Really, the only ATs that are "made" by their Inherent are Brute, Stalker, and Dominator. And Stalker's Inherent is a Psuedo-inherent: The power is in the attacks, not the stalker itself.
If you're going to say that the Inherent will be what makes or breaks the AT, then the AT needs to be built around the inherent.
So all right, you've got your idea: An AT with an Assault primary (and let's just reuse the Dominator assault sets for the sake of ease? They've got a nice mix of attacks) and a secondary that's a blend of random survivability things. Explain the inherent in such a way that
a) This class is not made obsolete by the scrapper or blaster
and
2) This class does not make the scrapper or blaster obsolete.
As for my opinion of what an Assault/Manipulation set is... This comes from using the ATs and looking at the numbers, I admit it's all personal interpretation as I'm not sure what the Devs have said. My Dom is Ice/Ice, and Ice Assault has two powers that aren't attack, and one of them's Power Boost. Similarly, my time with /Ice and /Elec blasters has taught me that most of my secondary is more attacks. Yes, there's a few non-attack powers in the secondaries, and there's a heavier focus on your attacks' secondary effects, but Assault sets are almost all attacks and Manipulations are still mostly attacks. Using Fire, the set with no secondary, as an example, Fiery Assault has one power that isn't about more DPS (Consume) and Fire Manipulation has Two (Consume and Ring of Fire). Now yes, the count goes up for other sets, and Ice Manipulation only has 3 DPS powers, so it can vary wildly, but this raises the question: If Manipulation/Assault exists to fill in your primary and make you better at what it is your primary does, what do we do with a set that's Assault primary?