EvilGeko

[ QUOTE ]
Right then, looks like it's time for me to take a break from the forums again.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, you must really have a low tolerance for complaints. The nerfing hasn't even been announced yet!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Guys, can we wait until we know definatively what's in i7 before we complain, like once it's on test?

*smacks forehead*

Sorry about that, temporary lucidity or insanity, take your pick... carry on.



[/ QUOTE ]

Yes please.

[/ QUOTE ]

Heck no. This is entertaining.

You may continue folks!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Mayhem Missions (Villains only)
Take villainy to the streets of Paragon City with tense new timed missions among destructible environments, which also unlock multiple random events. Players harass citizens, rob stores, destroy property, plant bombs and battle the police in these exciting open-ended timed missions. Causing extra mayhem results in bonus rewards!

[/ QUOTE ]

Hopefully this will stop people whining about not being evil enough.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, this is what we asked for. You know...to do evil.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Since you said you'd listen to suggestions for improvement:
I have a problem with badges being awarded to only the team that does the most damage to the monster, or any other competitive scheme, because it favors AT's that do damage over many support AT's.

To be specific, my tank had to fight the Kraken 4 times before he got the badge for defeating the Kraken. Part of this is bad luck, but much of it is due to the fact that what I add to a team, that is "Aggro control" I am effectively adding to any other team that is competing with me for the badge. Effectivelty, I am a liability to a team as a member because if there were a team with me and 7 blasters and another team of 8 blasters, the team with 8 blasters would be doing more damage and would still benefit from my "tanking" for them, because the Kraken's aggro would be focused on me.

So, please consider changing the system to have everyone on a team that does damage awarded the badge.

[/ QUOTE ]

Kill Count badges (of which the Giant Monster badges are, just with a Kill Count of 1) require you/your team do 25% of the entity's HP in damage in order to get credit. So in theory 4 teams could all get credit (much more likely that 3 teams will get credit).

In your scenario of Tanker + 7 blasters vs. 8 blasters, I have to assume that both teams would get the badge, since both teams are going to contribute over 25% damage to the entity.

[/ QUOTE ]

So how about lowering that to 10%?

[ QUOTE ]
So far, I've found Jack Emmert to be the following things:
* Bearded white man with a large beer gut.
* Old bald black man.
* Old asian man.
* Old asian woman.
* A 5th Column Mekman.
* Some white guy.

This leads to some obvious questions. Who is the real Jack Emmert? As the most kidnapped man in the Rogue Islands, is he hiring random people off the streets to stand in for him? Ie he hugely into crossdressing? Some sort of shape shifting powers?

[/ QUOTE ]

You're thinking of Jake Emmet, the creator of Freedom Phalanx.

Jack Emmert is the creator of CoH.

[ QUOTE ]
If you wanted to justify people taking Hover, then give it a more significant Defense %. Like 7-12%. Then people would fall all over themselves to take it, even if it was slow.

Or if you really wanted to make a whole new power out of it, go for Glide.. an auto power that cannot be turned off, and just makes you fall at 50% slower, and take no damage when you touch ground. It could also provide the faster knockback recovery that Fly/Hover currently has, even while standing on the ground.

[/ QUOTE ]

WOW! That Glide Power is a really good idea. If you could get the physics of it right it would be a really fun power.

The defense buff though has no chance. The SR toggles only give 12.5%, there is no way a level 6 power pool will give that much (even 7%) to melee AND ranged. The defense lobby on these boards would go nuts.

An EvilGeko's wish for the Flight Power Pool

AIR SUPERIORITY - NO NERFS!

Justification - If it ain't broke; don't fix it!

HOVER - Base speed increased to base walking speed; flight speed enhancers moved to schedule C; protection to disorient

Justification - Slight speed increase, moving speed enhancers to C still only provides a bit more than now. The mez protection is just a balance with CJ immobilize protection. It would be nice if Hasten had Sleep protection for symmetry, but I won't push my luck.

FLIGHT - End the scaling. Power is as fast at level 14 as it is at level 50. Reduce endurance cost to that of SS.

Justification - As others have stated Flight at level 50 is more or less fine. The flight speed enhancer thing gives it a slight boost. Low level fliers no longer feel like a slow burden to their groups. Pre-Stamina; SOs flight doesn't drain you of endurance

GROUP FLIGHT - End any scaling. No additional cost for each teammate.

[ QUOTE ]
If ED affected everything than the other movement speeds should be slower as well, not just hover. Is that the case?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not exactly. Combat Jumping and Sprint when added to the Fitness pool powers Swift and Hurdle can become effective travel powers with only one or two slots. Hover gets no such help and is always onerous to use.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

It's a SHAME it took 4 issues to FINALLY deal with that TERRIBLE, risk vs reward exploit in PvE with the Travel Power Suppression compromise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Great post, but is this one sarcasm?

I never understood the claims that jousting gave an advantage in PvE. I did it a few times early on and noticed that they got a melee attack on me just as I got one on them, and they got to hit me at least once per pass with a ranged attack too.

When supression hit, someone said something about people soloing Countess Crey using jousting. What I didn't get was, jousting caused a MASSIVE hit in DPS, to the point that I don't believe anybody that claims they could beat the Countess' health regeneration while doing it. Meanwhile, I soloed her during this period while standing right in front of her, barely beating her health regen with a near constant attack chain.

Can someone explain to me how jousting could be used to give any significant advantage in PvE?

[/ QUOTE ]

It can't. Suppression was for PvP, and I wish the devs would just admit it.

I can design no less than ten builds that can exp with NO risk much faster than anything Supression can do. Jousting could not let you beat anything you couldn't beat with a few lucks. The mobs have a near instant reaction time and can easily get a return shot in often times. However, players don't and jousting was a MAJOR tactic during I4 test when Suppression was added.

PvP is also why they won't go back to -acc that they started with. That too easy to circumvent.

[ QUOTE ]
Hover: We might buff it some, at some point. However, it should never be an effective travel power.

Flight: I'll talk to geko about it. No promises. (I got spoiled by the Holiday Jet Pack, too!)

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks Castle. We know not to expect miracles, but perhaps you can get the lizard to do something. At least on the endurance cost.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I personally find it ridiculous that Super Leap is faster than Fly. How can someone hop up and down faster from point A to point B than someone flying in a straight line? Sad.

[/ QUOTE ]

The real issue in this question is balance. While logistically speaking yes you should be able to get from point A to point B faster when moving in a straight line. However, the balance supposedly comes from flight's safety (I'm not advocating what the devs have done in fact I find it just as deplorable as you, I'm just trying to reasonably explain it.) The risk when taking off from point A using SJ is in the fact that you inevitably must land, occasionally in a group of mobs. Whereas, using flight all mobs (save the high flying longbow versions of sky skiffs etc.,) are avoidable lowering the amount of risk you have. If flight were faster that SJ, SS, or TP, than what would be the point of anyone taking any of the other travel powers if they can get from point A to point B not only faster with flight, but also much, much more safely.

[/ QUOTE ]

Having extensively used both powers, I can say without a shadow of a doubt that Super Jump is MUCH safer than Fly unless you Fly at or near the ceiling. Fly is so slow that you can't always get away if you use it to escape. Whereas I've jumped right into a group of ten purple mobs and been 150 yds. away before they can react.

SJ is the most flexible and cheapest travel power. Thus it is selected at a rate that FAR outstrips its presence in the comics.

[ QUOTE ]
Neither are in I7 (fyi)...BUT Geko and I have talked a little about Shields. We're thinking that Shields would be a Primary AND a Secondary Power Set for Tankers - and a Primary Set for Scrappers...but this thinking might change. I'd imagine the set is mostly about Defense, but again, nothing has been designed yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Secondary for Scrappers PLEASE Statesman. Think of how cool a BS Scrapper will look with the whole Paladin thing going on!

Also, if you're still looking, wouldn't shields require a lot of animator time to work with things like Mace/Axe, even punching now that you mention it. Or will the defensive set be more in the way of metaphorical?

Cool necro of a thread.

Thanks devs for being open to reason. We don't always agree with you and vice versa, but you guys at least are open to what we say.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I say we give _castle_ an overload of pms on this subject he would respond to our cries for help hopefully.

[/ QUOTE ]

though castle is the man. such suggestions are more harmful that good. i know you say this in jest but some people are normal and might not understand. lets not punish a man for being helpful to us.

[/ QUOTE ]

/agree Castle goes above and beyond and heck Jonyu is the Brute rep. He's the one that should be catering to our incessant whining!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Gorrila is correct on the math and does make a good point.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he's not. He's either delusional, trolling, or lacks a basic understanding of math, while projecting these traits onto the rest of us who are not.

[/ QUOTE ]

What he said. Not to mention he(the monkeyboy) managed to almost derail a conversation calling out the joke called Unyielding's -5% DEF by arguing some cornpipe clownshoes semantic spin on whether 75% of blah was really blah when blah was blah'ing the 75% of blah blah blah.

What's more sad than anything is that the conversation got boatanchored by it in the first place.

/rant

[/ QUOTE ]

That's why after it became clear that he was working from an incorrect starting point, I didn't even bother to correct him. It's just not worth arguing.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How can you complain that Brutes have to wait 8 more levels to get an inferior version of Unyielding when they're getting powers like Knockout Blow at level 8 compared to a Tanker at level 20?


[/ QUOTE ]

Because it's a double penalty. No one is complaining about Scrapper/Brute Unyielding having lower resists. What people are complaining about is the fact that the debuff isn't in proportion to the reduced resists. I can't speak for everyone, but I would ask why the debuff isn't 3.75% since the resists are 75% of the Tanker numbers.

And if this is balanced, how is it balanced? Is it balanced because we can still do missions on Heroic? Or is there some formula that tells you this is balanced? If so, please tell us. The forum population here will understand it.

[/ QUOTE ]


Ok basic math so you can understand


brute is 75% as effective as a Tanker.


if a number is a negative like -5% 75% as effective is 6.5% not 3.5%

3.5% would infact be 125% as effective... BECAUSE THIS IS A NEGATIVE NUMBER... THE CLOSER TO ZERO THE BETTER IT GETTS, MEANING THE MORE EFFECTIVE.

EXAMPLE:

30% defence - 25% = 22.5% which is 75% as effective.


-5% defense - - (minus a negative is a +) 25% = 6.25 which is 75% as effective (you minus a negative because the original number is a negative)


when you take away from a negative you go more negative.



For a postive you can go 30 x .75 to get 75% as effective
For a negative you must go - 5 - - (+) 25 % to get 75% as effective as -5.


Actaully I hope the devs fix this "gift" to us and make INV. -6.25% as effective, just so you whiners get a taste of what you are whining about.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you weren't trying so hard to be smart, you might have realized a couple of things to wit:

.75 X -5 = -3.75

You outthought yourself. Let's talk about the basic math that you forgot. Tanker resist powers are multiplied by .75 to arrive at the Scrapper/Brute numbers. No one (other than you) said anything about them being 75% as effective. What we are arguing for is to assign the multiplier to all aspect of the power not just the positive aspects.

Can you get your brain around that.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Brutes are more than fine as they are.

[/ QUOTE ]

Am i the only one that just had shivers up his spine?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope. With all the whining over EM I expect to be nerfed. Who the heck knows what else they have up their sleeves though.

[ QUOTE ]
How can you complain that Brutes have to wait 8 more levels to get an inferior version of Unyielding when they're getting powers like Knockout Blow at level 8 compared to a Tanker at level 20?


[/ QUOTE ]

Because it's a double penalty. No one is complaining about Scrapper/Brute Unyielding having lower resists. What people are complaining about is the fact that the debuff isn't in proportion to the reduced resists. I can't speak for everyone, but I would ask why the debuff isn't 3.75% since the resists are 75% of the Tanker numbers.

And if this is balanced, how is it balanced? Is it balanced because we can still do missions on Heroic? Or is there some formula that tells you this is balanced? If so, please tell us. The forum population here will understand it.

[ QUOTE ]
A Tankers job is do soak up damage so they get a bonus to their resistances. Scrappers and Brutes make up for this by dealing more damage.

How can you complain that Brutes have to wait 8 more levels to get an inferior version of Unyielding when they're getting powers like Knockout Blow at level 8 compared to a Tanker at level 20?

Powers are balanced by the grand scheme of the archetype, not via individual powers so it's not fair to compare power for power versus the various archetypes. Brutes are more than fine as they are.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, but why the debuff in the first place? Since it works out to a de facto debuff to SM, LE why not just take the debuff and resists off of Unyielding?

And as for balancing powers in the grand scheme of the AT, how can that be? Except for the first power in a secondary, you can't be sure of what combination of powers that a person will pick. Powers need to be balanced on BOTH the individual power level and the AT level. Another way to say it is that even if the MACRO balancing of Invul is ok, the MICRO level is off.

If the debuff is balanced in the grand scheme, and I can't see how that could be the case, it still makes Unyielding a faustian bargain.

Ignore Defiance, you'll be much happier. Behave as if Blasters don't have an inherent.

[ QUOTE ]
We're tweaking with toggle dropping...mostly decreasing its overall effect.

We just received tech that will allow players to pass buffs onto certain powers (such as Blizzard).

[/ QUOTE ]

Wherever you took Statesman and crew, please do not tell the authorities or Taser or anyone else for that matter. Good Job, whoever you nice people are!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
in this case, i'm gonna have to say yes, it does mean there wasn't a problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, that's not your call to make.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct it's Statesman's. But Statesman has been far from consistent on this point. Statesman refuses to see that there is no difference between:

No risk

and

No appreciable risk

Statesman is trying to stamp out the former while leaving the latter alone. That's just not rational. For instance, a Defender or Controller or MM using PFF to click glowies is at NO appreciable risk in any standard mission. Certainly there is the theorhetical risk that all the mobs will roll natural 20s and kill the character but the chances of that happening are so low as to be non-existent. In fact, over time, there is no risk so even if the improbable occurs once, the person still gets no-risk exp.

There are dozens of examples I could give.

But the point remains is that stealthing glowies while Statesman believed that to be a problem, given the design goals he has announced it is not a problem.

And before you say that PFF could also be on the chopping block (it probably will be at some point), there are other no-risk exp examples, that I decline to mention for a variety of reasons, but will in PM if you like.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
First...I confirm that we're working on right now (as in pohsyb in the next room) to add CoV costume parts into CoH if you own both games....

Then we repeal the hated stealth nerf. The reason why: many well reasoned posts. It's that simple. You guys pointed out the problems.

AND now...we're changing the way Archvillains spawn. A ton of forum goers disliked adding so many AV's into missions a while back...so we've come up with a solution. If the team size and mission difficulty are ABOVE a certain level, an Archvillain spawns. Below that, players will face only an Elite Boss. If the mission is set on the first two levels of difficulty, it takes 4 heroes or more to spawn an Arch Villain. On the third level, 3 heroes or more. On the fourth level, 2 heroes. On the highest (Invincible), a solo hero will spawn an AV. Note this works in BOTH City of Heroes and Villains.

In order to incentivize larger teams, Positron is going to add a bonus to AV rewards!

[/ QUOTE ]

That sounds like a smart implementation, but when you say an Elite Boss, I hope you don't mean that the AV will spawn as an Elite Boss.

AVs are supposed to be special. I would prefer that when my group size is too small, etc. that they AV not be in the mission, but at least I got one of the factiosn bosses.

[/ QUOTE ]

AVs are a fiction. Only the fact that the devs defined it that way makes an EB inferior to an AV. There is no reason that say Mynx, can't be an Elite Boss, or a Lt. or even a minion. It's the encounter with a unique character that makes it special, not some silly rank that amounts to a 2000% HP buff and a 100% damage buff to the mob.

[ QUOTE ]

AND now...we're changing the way Archvillains spawn. A ton of forum goers disliked adding so many AV's into missions a while back...so we've come up with a solution. If the team size and mission difficulty are ABOVE a certain level, an Archvillain spawns. Below that, players will face only an Elite Boss. If the mission is set on the first two levels of difficulty, it takes 4 heroes or more to spawn an Arch Villain. On the third level, 3 heroes or more. On the fourth level, 2 heroes. On the highest (Invincible), a solo hero will spawn an AV. Note this works in BOTH City of Heroes and Villains.

In order to incentivize larger teams, Positron is going to add a bonus to AV rewards!

[/ QUOTE ]

OMG!

[ QUOTE ]
you don't have to worry about them using one of our ideas. Everything they've done so far has been far and away worse than anything our twisted little minds could fathom.

though, i still like my idea of making FH and QR exclusive.

[/ QUOTE ]

SF not joking guys. In the original Regen Lounge circa I4-I5 we thought up what we thought were some really crazy nerfs, stuff the trolls told us we were being stupid and paranoid for even thinking they would do.

I5 was much worse than anything said. Don't believe me. The Regen Lounge is in the Dev Corner under the Regeneration changes thread I started.

At that point we were simply in shock. I didn't think there was a nerf that could top I5. I actually thought that the major changes "must" be done.

Then in CoV beta, Positron described ED.

Trust me folks, nothing we say here could be worse than what the devs will think up.