EvilGeko

Fantastic Statesman!

Question though, when you say lessened by 10.8% does that mean:

A def debuff of 10% is eliminated or;

A def debuff of 10% is reduced to 8.92%?

Dr_Turgenev says: Level 50 Thread Necro LFT, PST!

So why the Stealth Nerf? Seriously, you keep saying that this stuff isn't intentional but it happens far too often. Furthermore, if it was part of the balancing and it was pointed out at length on these boards, I can't see why this didn't hit the patch notes.

[ QUOTE ]
I wonder how long I have before Cuppa gets mad at me.

or madder...

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you might find yourself one-shot by the java master.

[ QUOTE ]
I bet this one gets me shot.

[/ QUOTE ]

/em Goldfinger pose

/say "Now the shuu-tings begin!"

[ QUOTE ]
Hmmm. "The Big Book of Necro-Posting"

I wonder what this page does.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is "burn at the stake" thread necromancy here my friend.

[ QUOTE ]
Let me start off by saying, I have an Ice/Ice Tank, and he's fun. I have no real problems with him on Live or Test. Now that that is over with...

No offense to anyone...but now I know why the Devs would rather Not give out numbers. This forum has turned into a [censored] math debate. Are we playing a game, or taking a [censored] test? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for having fun, but to debate over +/- 1% is re-damned-diculous. If you were to show me, in-game, that you Always fell to a group of 5 +1 Carnie Minions, then I could see your point. If you could prove that you Always fell to a pair of +0 Banished Pantheon Bosses, I could see your point. If you can prove to me that you Always fall to a group of 10 +4 Malta Lieutenants, then good, you should be able to do that. To argue over a single percentile of a chance of being hit is just asinine. I don't play City of Heroes to practice differential equasions, I play to kick villainous [censored].

As for Chilling Embrace, (possible) cool beans.

Cyclone Jack

[/ QUOTE ]

No offense, but if the math isn't your thing, then just ignore it. Play how you like and don't berate others for their style of play. For many of us the numbers are important. They show in this case that Wet Ice is quite clearly useless as a defensive power. They show that EA is a hard sell.

People are debating the numbers because the numbers are more important in this context than what you can solo. In fact, that's irrelevant because we're talking about relative balance among the tanker sets. You can't do that using subjective tests like you state because they might be survivable for all tanks.

Using math to argue for balancing has much more use than anecdotes. It does in nearly every field of human endeavor. Many of the people posting these numbers have subjected their characters to rigorous analytical testing. Instead of berating that, you should be thankful because they are doing the work that will ensure you a better character to play.

The changes to Stealth and it's like powers make absolutely no sense. Stealth provided for Blasters, Defenders and Controllers the best and often only defense they could muster. The old number was reported at 7.5% or 5% which six-slotted amounted to 16.5% at most.

So now even minions would hit 1/3 of the time instead of 1/2. Sure combined with CJ and Hasten that became a bit too much, but Hasten's defense is gone and CJ is reduced. Taking away Stealth's bonus hit a power that many people liked.

As for the suppression, you're moving toward the standard MMO invisibility system whereby you drop your invis when you attack or are hit. I implore you not to do this. Stealth provided a number of tactical advantages that make it an attractive option for melee sets and ranged sets alike.

Stealth allowed you to split groups. It's very often in a mission that you will have two groups so close to each other than aggroing one will aggro the other. Even in solo missions where groups can be huddled near intersections or "hostage guards" can be near a standard group. Stealth allows you to manage that aggro.

I've long been a proponent of Stealth as opposed to the min-max standard of Tough/Weave for melee sets. It's because of the above tactic. That tactic is more fun to me than herding, but I fear that now the game is going to be more about taking all damage in an encounter.

Please don't take this away. Stealth suppression should only be for the mob (and that mob's group) and not any other mobs. That's how it works on live and it works well.

As for the defense, I would offer that 5% base defense with no suppression is fair. I know you're trying to reign in defense, but you've went too far (esp. against Ice Tanks).

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's the real numbers (that's what I get for doing stuff from memory).

Wet Ice
0.5% base
1.265% Defence from Wet Ice with ++ SO's.

17.71% Max Defence from Energy Absorbtion (not what I had earlier).

[/ QUOTE ]

why should I slot these powers now?

[/ QUOTE ]

Reasons:

1. You're a "casual" gamer and don't know any better.
2. You're stubborn and still insist on playing an Ice Tank instead of reclaiming the slot.
3. You still want to tank, but want to save your FF defender buddy one slot in his little bubbles.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Honest question here though Statesman. Ice Tanks are now demonstrably weaker than SR scrapper who at least don't have any holes in their meager defense. And SR Scrapper suck. So are you honestly saying that Ice tanks have any ability to tank?

Kewl.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's this simple

Invuln= high res, low def
Ice= low res high def.

what gives?


[/ QUOTE ]

In reality it is more like:

Invuln: low resits high def
Ice: no resits low def

Certainly not balanced, and not really working concept wise either. *shrug*

[/ QUOTE ]

Too elementary lads, it's more like:

Invul:

Sm, Le resist =
Defense =
Other resists =

Ice

Sm, Le resists =
Defense =
Other resists=

Fire

Sm, Le resists =
Defense =
Other resists =

Stone

Sm, Le resists =
Defense =
Other resists =

BUT

speed, recharge debuff =

--------------------

Not sure how balanced that is.

[ QUOTE ]
Wet Ice - six slotted with Defense SO's - provides about 3% defense.

Energy Absorption similarly slotted provides 3% per target (so a maximum of 42%).

*caveat - I'm doing this stuff from memory, so I'll doublecheck it and repost later if I'm wrong.*

[/ QUOTE ]

3/2.2= 1.36% Defense Base

I'm now officially confused.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We really could use that number on EA as well. Since you feel like sharing data.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Energy Absorption provides the same buff for every foe within melee range.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm. That's not the way I read it, but ok. Assuming that it is also either .005 or .05 then:

6 slotted as before (even con SOs)

.011*14 = 15.4%

.11*14 = 154% !?!?!?

Soooo 15.4% + 11% = 26.4% Just for those! Nice!

Ok I dig. lol. That makes alot of sense then.

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming Statesman was using that semi-colon correctly, the clause "Energy Absorption provides the same buff for every foe within melee range" must relate back to the previous clause. Otherwise, Statesman should have used two sentences.

/em EvilGeko is a geek.

[ QUOTE ]
One shotting by AV's. In a word, you are ALL correct. It's not a good thing for an Ice Tanker to be leveled by a single blow. So we're going back and changing the damage done by AV's so that it's no longer possible for a Tanker to be one shotted.


[/ QUOTE ]

woot!

By the way did you mean to put that decimal point before the 5%?

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, Wet Ice and Energy Absorption provide relatively small DEF buffs. This is not a bug and by design. Wet Ice provides a base defense of +.5%;

[/ QUOTE ]

Because with both the % and the . that equates to .005 not .05.

[ QUOTE ]
Is it just me or has this post not appeared on the dev digest?

[/ QUOTE ]

It takes a few minutes.

[ QUOTE ]
Gang,
Sorry that I've been out of touch for the past week. I spent most of the time with my family back East. My brother is set to deploy in Iraq in just a few days so I wanted to make sure that I saw him off right! He's a hero of mine, and one of the game's most committed players. I can't speak highly enough of my brother and all that he's done for this country.

OK - now back to work stuff. I'm going through my PM's (287 of them at last count) slowly but surely. I at least read, if not respond, to every one of them. Positron and I will also be reading all of the threads over this week and we HOPE to post updates or responses on every single one.

Now, I'll wax philosophic for a moment. Before I left, I posted a couple of things that a few posters thought were "flippant" or "snarky." I certainly didn't intend either...but here's the reality. I do NOT pass my posts through PR, community relations or anyone. I post, well, exactly as I think. So sometimes I won't sound polished like a snake oil salesman. Sometimes, I'll sound just like any other gamer out there. I could have someone edit everything I post - but that would inevitably delay responses and cut back on communication. I think, though I could be wrong, that the majority of you would prefer my honest thoughts, rather than sales talk. It's probably pretty different than the game developer norm, but it's what feels right for me to say. I'm not going to always write the best responses, but you'll at least have truthful ones.

[/ QUOTE ]

Statesman it's your off the cuff honest responses that are usually the best. Your controller comments for example were simple, honest and to the point. The explanation given with the update notes was BS and that's what got people mad.

You've been very blunt in your recent postings and PMs and I greatly appreciate that. Although I reserve the right to remind you of "Concern = Small Tweak. Don't worry Regen Scrappers," I think that you have a great handle on what the community likes. This post is testament of that.

Now if you could just get that Geko chap to stop being so stingy with the power info, we'll be in heaven.


*Good Luck and my best wishes to your brother. I hope he's safe on his tour.*

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

No they actually said they will give respecs after I5. Read this post ---> Exchange between Statesman and me.

Where he again confirms that respecs are coming after I5.

-----------
Please don't argue this point anymore guys. It just spreads disinformation. The devs have stated several time that respecs are coming with I5. I could find some more posts for you, but I'm late meeting my wife as it is.

[/ QUOTE ]

Myabe you got the wrong post from statesman quoted but this is what I see:

"We might giving out more respecs in the future, though I can’t make any definitive comment on that."

Which is FAR from what you say: "The devs have stated several time that respecs are coming with I5"

[/ QUOTE ]

That's why I called it an exchange. Read a few posts down.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
... a free respec have both been annouced for Issue 5.

[/ QUOTE ]
Cool. Another respec my characters won't need.

Just curious, do you have a link to a redname saying this?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure do!

CuppaJo quoting Statesman after she deleted his post in one of the 143, 678 Hami threads!

[/ QUOTE ]
Please note, however, that the post to which EvilGeko so kindly provided a link does NOT technically say that a respec will be given for Issue 5.

It says: "Yes, players will get respecs (probably after I5).... "

That's similar, but not exactly the same thing, and it is certainly not definite as to the time frame. I think it is likely that a free respec will come around the time of Issue 5, but we haven't been given an official "announcement" that is will. I think it will all depend on the extent of the changes they make to blasters (and possible to controllers and defenders).

[/ QUOTE ]

No they actually said they will give respecs after I5. Read this post ---> Exchange between Statesman and me.

Where he again confirms that respecs are coming after I5.

-----------
Please don't argue this point anymore guys. It just spreads disinformation. The devs have stated several time that respecs are coming with I5. I could find some more posts for you, but I'm late meeting my wife as it is.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
... a free respec have both been annouced for Issue 5.

[/ QUOTE ]
Cool. Another respec my characters won't need.

Just curious, do you have a link to a redname saying this?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure do!

CuppaJo quoting Statesman after she deleted his post in one of the 143, 678 Hami threads!

[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't hold your breath for this one. Unless there are MAJOR, classwide changes, I doubt we'll see respecs

[/ QUOTE ]

Major classwide changes and a free respec have both been annouced for Issue 5.

FYI: CuppaJo just created a thread in the Blaster Forums about Desperation which is set for I5. So the OP was right on target with that one.

Good Job!

[ QUOTE ]
Well, I'm glad someone was taking notes!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The post 50’s blues: Mr. Emmert mentioned several different possibilities for post the 50’s game. Going back and doing missions with a sidekick so that the sidekick gets more xp.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to clarify: I didn't say this. No plans.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I remember it, Mr. E. was discussing a few ideas in the context of animal or pet sidekicks, i.e., an animal sidekick would start out at level 1, and the character would fight alongside said sidekick to raise that level. I think he may have also mentioned auto-exemplaring down to the animal sidekick's level, but don't quote me on that.

Mr. E. also mentioned, as I recall, that they were considering implementing ways of acquiring temporary powers outside of missions and the arena. I wouldn't be surprised if this became an alternate use for the universities.

Good summation overall, ZB. If I remember anything else important or interesting to add, I'll pop back in.

--VB

[/ QUOTE ]

That would kick butt as a pool power.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The post 50’s blues: Mr. Emmert mentioned several different possibilities for post the 50’s game. Going back and doing missions with a sidekick so that the sidekick gets more xp.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to clarify: I didn't say this. No plans.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh goodness, the rest of it's true then? So you really intend to weaken every set that can handle Invincible solo missions with ease?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hopefully, States will post tonight about just what their plans are. They really need to at this point.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think they should. But I really get the sense that they are going to spring it on us when I5 goes to test.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And don't worry about us level 50s. We'll just find another game to tinker with until the dev team decides to wake up over there and get a clue. I enjoyed that whole, "...sidekicking with 50s will give the sidekick extra XP..." like it has anything to do with end game content. That's helping the lower levels, not the level 50s. Again. Genius. /sarcasm


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think that's all he has planned for us. That's just an idea he stole from EQ II. But since EQ II stole exemplaring in the first place it's ok.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hm. So, does the XP boost of an exemplar change marginally or radically depending
on the level difference?

It's actually kind of a nifty idea, that your higher level (40, 50, whatever) translates
into "better teaching" for your buddy.

So now when some noob says "PL me plz!" you say "Ok, I'll exemplar to you,
we'll do your missions, and you'll level X % faster than if you duo'ed with any
hero your own level, plus build up your contacts."

Not bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

The way EQII does it is the more high-level buddies you have, the higher the exp boost you get. It can get rather extreme. It's designed so that guilds with casual players can get them up quickly if the rest of the guilds outlevels them. Since raids occur from the late teens in EQ II, mentoring (that's what they call it) has usefulness beyond simply power-leveling.

This is all academic, of course, since States said they aren't doing it.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The post 50’s blues: Mr. Emmert mentioned several different possibilities for post the 50’s game. Going back and doing missions with a sidekick so that the sidekick gets more xp.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to clarify: I didn't say this. No plans.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh goodness, the rest of it's true then? So you really intend to weaken every set that can handle Invincible solo missions with ease?