EvilGeko
-
Posts
4227 -
Joined
-
Quote:It's true. I am grasping at straws. But here we have an AT that is mechanically fine, but literally has nothing unique. It's entire inherent is but a bullet point of the Stalker inherent. Everybody else asks for unnecessary things for their favorite AT.Originally Posted by EmperorSteele
Part of the problem lies with just how... intellectually intimidating Surveliance can be. Perhaps a dumbed-down version might get a better response. Like show just HP and any stats that are above or below baseline (like -10% psi resist, or +50 Hold mag). This way you're not looking at a window three times longer than your screen just to figure out if you'll have to hit the guy 10 times or 11 times to kill them.
Personally, I love the power as is and don't find it hard to use at all, but still, i gotta say, making it an inherent for scrappers comes across as grasping at straws =/
Why can't Scrappers have a minor utility added to the AT? I don't really care what. Just something that other ATs don't have. -
Quote:No, they aren't.Originally Posted by Xiang Shao
Scrappers are fine the way they are now.
-
Quote:1) It's not a buff so you are wrong.Originally Posted by DSorrow
1) Correct, makes this thread pointless.
2) See point 1.
3) See point 1.
4) We already have a temp power for this. I only ever change my attack chains if I'm fighting multiple enemies or if I'm recharge debuffed. Specific debuffs as in envenomed daggers or shivans? It takes me about 1 minute of fighting to find out if I need those.
5) I'll leave this to Arcanaville.
You mention AT lore, but I don't think this ability has anything to do with Scrappers. Thematically it would be far better fit for Stalkers.
2) see 1
3) see 1
4) Hence why it's not a buff; proving points 1-3, so thank you.
5) What kind of rogue will not defend a lady's honor against an evil reptile?
And no it fits Scrappers better. -
Topic du jour is Scrappers abilities next to their melee brothers. Here is my snowflake post because I would really like this, and I need another crusade (since the devs have done just about everything else I want).
Please give Scrappers the following:
Quote:This in addition to their current critical chance inherent in their attacks.Originally Posted by UberGuy
Now you're on to something I might buy into. Abilities that only affect teammates.
How about this, though. Instead of something so direct as hit-chance or damage buffs, how about something for the squishies? What if every Scrapper on the team gave them something like a decent chunk of mez resistance to holds, stuns and immobilizes? Say three Scrappers on the team cut mez durations in half? Think of it as a confidence boost of some sort.
It could be set to work on non-sqiuishies too, but they would probably rarely notice it.
That would be extremely unique, would not buff Scrappers themselves, and would be pretty desirable on teams. (Outright mez protection would be more desirable by far, but I can't see the devs giving that.)
--------------------------------------------
ANSWERS TO OBJECTIONS
1) Scrappers don't need a buff. - They most certainly don't. Need is irrelevant.
2) [INSERT AT] needs dev love more - Unless the "Insert AT" is Blasters, you're incorrect.
3) EvilGeko, you are a whiner. - Yes I am. What of it? You're also a jerk - Also true, but also irrelevant.
4) [Removed as it no longer applies to idea]
5) Any of Arcanaville's objections - Who has a better track record of getting what they want?
-
Quote:Just Banes. That's analogous to me of the fact that Illusion Controllers have better invis than Hide.Originally Posted by Darth_Khasei
Except SOA's right?
-
As I said above, I have no desire to see any of the melee ATs buffed. That said, I think offering Scrappers so form of utility boost would be fair. The Stalked AT now has: critical hit procs, automatic crits from hide, Assassin's focus, placate and 150 ft. zero endurance stealth. I don't think that near reasonable, since newer Stalked primaries don't even lose their AoEs.
Personally, I think the Scrapper AT should have utility on par with Stalker's stealth. I don't think it's needed, but likewise I don't think the Stalker changes were needed. But it would be fair.
I think a fun, but not ultimately unbalancing thing would be for all Scrappers to be able to see critter stats as if they were using Surveillance. As masters of combat it would make sense for the AT. It wouldn't increase Scrapper damage or survivability, except indirectly.
But it would be something that this AT wouldn't have to share with another AT. -
Quote:What other AT gets:Originally Posted by Aett_Thorn
I'm sorry, but WHAT? Tankers have as little unique to them as Scrappers do. Unless I'm missing something here.
1. Bruising ;
2. AoE taunts in every attack;
3. 1800 base Health at 50? -
Quote:Not sure if you're serious, but assuming you are, Stalkers have the same chance to critical out of Hide as Scrappers do on Lt. Or stronger critters and a higher percentage chance in teams and against minions and underlings.Originally Posted by KnightofKhonsu
Wait, what? Nothing unique about a Scrapper? Then what is 'Critical Hit' all about? No other melee AT has the chance to score a critical hit every time they throw a punch or kick. If that isn't a unique characteristic I don't know what one is.
So no, that's not unique at all. -
Not worried about Scrappers from a performance standpoint. But it is true and annoying that this is the only AT that has nothing unique. Every aspect of the Scrapper AT exists in another AT.
I do not want buffs (for any Melee AT), but some I would love it if Scrappers got an utility power that didn't directly buff damage or survivability. -
Sure, why not. We crossed the Pay to Win threshold a while ago, so why not?
I started a Dark/Time Controller when I22 went live. At level 1 she had over 150 million inf, from sales of super pack IOs. She had a set of Controller ATOs ready to slot at level 10. She has turned Fearsome Stare into a very decent cone attack via store bought procs.
I'm not angry about this. Heck, my sub doesn't run out until summer 2013. But the devs crossed the line a while ago and it doesn't do anyone any good to pretend they didn't. -
Quote:Chuck Norris is the generic version of the Blue Steel joke. Get it right!Originally Posted by PSLAnimal
Is this the Paragon City version of a Chuck Norris joke?
-
Quote:You have to remember that part of my willingness to pay is the stipend we get each month.Originally Posted by Creole Ned
The takeaway so far seems to be many people will pay for anything they want and that should be music to NCsoft's ears. It doesn't matter if you think it's 'crappy' if in the end you are willing to pay.
My answer is a firm no. Power customization started as something given to the players. It's good for the game, so it benefits the devs as much as the players. It should remain free. -
Going to use the same argument I have since the beginning. If SuperStrength is overpowered on Scrappers, it's overpowered period. Which is true.
Right now players are allowed to have an overpowered set if they're willing to play it as a Brute. I have a SS/Regen Brute. I like him a lot. But if he's OK, then it should be OK to proliferate SS to Scrappers. It is intended for Scrappers to self-buff damage more. Scrappers have a higher base damage mod for a reason. Those elements provide what little uniqueness the AT still has (since Stalkers have the entirety of the Scrapper inherent plus a whole lot besides).
I don't doubt that Rage would need to go if SS were ported. Or it would need to be nerfed. Both would be acceptable IMO. If rage lost its crash, but provided a significantly lower damage buff, that would be fine with me. -
I'd pay it, but I'd think it was a crappy thing for them to charge for.
-
Quote:The original design was for many missions to require a team to beat. Bosses were not intended to be solo content. That's why they eventually changed it so that you can remove them from most solo content.Originally Posted by Oedipus_Tex
BTW I didn't read all of the rest of the thread, but one thing CoX generally does not do that is rampant in the industry is place a team quest at the end of a chain of solo quests. The sister method of this is having a quest that provides a special reward within a dungeon only if you've completed a different chain before starting the dungeon.
Likewise, CoH did and still does end many story arcs with an EB/AV fight. Whether that fight is soloable as an EB is in the eyes of the beholder. I took a lot of heat from other posters by declaring (and proving) that the Mender Ramiel quest could be soloed with any combo using SOs. Many folks, some polite, some less so took me to task in PMs and on the boards for suggesting that. -
Quote:An artifact of MMORPGs. I could mention several dozen like scenarios in CoH. Just as one example, I walk up to a Hellion with my Dual Pistols Defender. I point my gun at his head and shoot him from 6 feet away. The joker then takes out his sledgehammer and hits me square in the jaw. I just stand there and shoot him again.Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
(The other issue over THERE, to me, is one that has to be there for gameplay. In the IP, lightsabers pretty much cut through anything but another lightsaber, at least in the movies - yes, the books mention resistant metals, but you don't see that unless it's a three foot thick door. In the game - even though it has to be this way, obviously - it's like you have to hack away for several minutes at a piece of paper to cut with one. Part of that lack of feeling of power at times, I suppose.)
One of my biggest problems with the complaints about this MMORPG or SWTOR is that people fight against the genre. There's no Star Wars game, of any genre, where lightsabers have worked like they do in the movies. There's likewise few weapons and powers in City of Heroes that truly operate as advertised. The reason is obvious, because these are games. For SWTOR to be realistic, Jedi and Sith should be approximately 10x more powerful than Smugglers. There should never even be a question of who is going to win that fight. Even if the Smuggler is cheating since Jedi and Sith can see the future. But, of course, there has to be some semblance of balance or you might as well not even have a Smuggler class.
Likewise here, Johnny Butane and other commentators have rightly pointed out that Tankers should, given the LORE of comics, never be at any risk against most enemies and should be able to do as much, if not more damage than Blasters or Scrappers. They can't and never will because that's not right for the game.
Arcanaville's OP strikes me as similar to the many WoW fans who expect SWTOR to have all the bells and whistles of an 7 1/2 year old game at launch. For example, her anecdote about the travel time to help a person with a quest. And the fact that she could not get any progress for helping the person like you can here. But then, that's not how it was in Issue 0. I know, because I did it. I remember being in Founder's Falls and being asked to help someone in King's Row. Even with Travel powers I had to:
1) Zone into Talos through the gate since there was no tram then;
2) Take the tram to Steel Canyon's North Tram;
3) Fly to the end of Steel Canyon to the South Tram;
4) Fly to the person I was helping in a corner of the zone.
When I got there, I SKed them and neither they nor I got any exp for killing the boss they needed help with. And I don't remember how long it took, but it took awhile. Even with Flight. In SWTOR today, I can Fleet pass to the Fleet and be on any other planet within a few minutes. Then take the speeder and I'm there. The only problem is where the zone is too high for my character, but then, I have no business being there then anyway.
Given time, SWTOR will eliminate all the downtime too. Everything will be instant travel, because all MMORPGs eventually do that. Sidekicking, which in my opinion is not and never has been a good idea (with no limit on level ranges) will probably never make it in. Thank goodness for that.
I like both games. I take CoH for what it is, I take SWTOR for what it is. I like MMORPGs with all their warts. -
Quote:What EvilGeko wrote:Originally Posted by Bionic_Flea
If they changed stamina not to accept Performance Shifters (regulars, I don't have SBEs), I will hop on an airplane, take a cab to your house, knock on the door, ask for EvilGeko, then slap you silly for giving them such an idea.
Given that Geckos eat insects, I wouldn't start something you couldn't finish!Quote:Originally Posted by MeBetter IMO, to just disallow the SBE procs in Stamina.
-
Quote:For me, I would have taken the opportunity that the players practically begged them for when SBE procs were devised. I.e. make all procs work that way. If they did that, then they could deal with how passives and outlying powers work in a way that doesn't need to balance standard and SBE procs.Originally Posted by Kosmos
Because of the potential for abuse in passives, toggles and pseudo-pets, I wouldn't have even considered anything much less than 10s. Maybe 8s at the lowest. That puts an SBE proc at 25% better than the equivalent IO when slotted in a passive.
As for leveling off near 100%, consider the OP: The PS +END SBE outperforms it's IO brother by 2.5-to-1 at a mere 50% proc rate.
For those reasons my thinking was just the opposite of yours: I would have picked 12s (just above the 10s that makes SBEs and IOs perform the same in passives, toggles and such and also a value that produces a tidy 1 PPM rating for the 20% chance proc) and then used a non-linear, probably hyperbolic, element to cause the function to level off as it neared (a relative term) a floor of 5%. That 5% also had something to do with AoE performance for me.
When you add in the AoE complications for SBEs, this whole balancing a plane on a single point act they've done with the mechanical Proc% -> SBE PPM rate formulae becomes rather tricky. It's quite possible they chose the extremely low 4s midline for the cycle time to offset the AoE penalties SBEs suffer from. Whatever the thinking it results in any SBE that goes into medium-to-long cycle time single target power being MUCH better than it's IO counterpart for such use (up to 6.67x for a 15% proc in a 24s cycle time ST power). On the flip side, any SBE in a short cycle AoE is going to be notably worse than the IO version. Though usually not to the same extent, as the AoE factors don't seem to reach that 6.67 value and because AoEs rarely have a cycle time under 8s (for example, I'm seeing about a 1.4:1 advantage for the Trap of the Hunter proc IO over the SBE in Fire Cages in limited testing).
The bottom line is that the "provides the same value in all powers" concept seems to have trumped any desire to make the SBEs and IOs perform similarly. The result is that some SBEs (those with a high value effects when applied to a single target - usually the caster) have been provided with very long levers that players can use to boost performance.
I still think that the proper fix for the performance shifter issue the OP talks about is to change Stamina, not the proc. I look at it like this, most endurance modification powers have SIGNIFICANTLY longer cycles than Stamina's 10 second window. It's why placing a proc in Energy Drain or Power Sink is a waste of a slot. But with the SBE enhancements, you can be sure the proc is going to go off and so that changes the evaluation.
I think that's completely fair for longer cycle powers. Where a fast power might get 3-5 procs per minute, a long recharge power only gets to check once, maybe twice a minute under high recharge. Why should those powers continue to have no legitimate option for procs? Better IMO, to just disallow the SBE procs in Stamina. The performance shifter set isn't made for passives as a rule anyway. -
Quote:I never expected it to work this way. Probably because I've seen this done (frankly better) in Everquest II. Almost all procs there are normalized by cast and recharge time. But the math over there is more complicated than I was able to figure out.Originally Posted by Kosmos
It seems what Arcanaville expected (and so did I, though I have no idea where I got that idea) was that the PPM was the maximum the IOs would produce. And for all practical purposes they chose a formula for deciding the PPM of SBEs that makes that value pretty much the minimum they will produce in a single target power.
Here, the PPM idea is the right one, but the standard needs to go up. I think 12 seconds is too high if the formula is going to remain linear. But if it got progressively harder to reach 100% as you approached 100%, that would be cool. I still think it should be possible to reach 100% for powers that recharge in the 45s+ range. -
Quote:The only issues I'm aware of that didn't get a free respec were 1 and 2. In 1 they hadn't created them yet, and 2 was when they added respecs to the game.Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
Depends. Occasionally they are late, sometimes the devs give two a week or so apart and sometimes they don't give any.
-
Quote:That ship sailed a long time ago.Originally Posted by DarkSideLeague
Pay to win concerns would go away - Power Creep concerns would not.
-
You are now ebil! Congrats!
-
Quote:It wasn't OK. It was just how it was.Originally Posted by Lucky666
Ok that makes sense some but, it was OK for every proc up until now but now it's not O.o.
The real problem is how they have procs check in passives. The every 10 sec. rule was intended to address that passives don't require action on the players' part and activate every time they refresh.
What they need is some kind of limit on the procs fire rate, but I'm not sure if that's possible. -
Quote:Because that presents an unfair advantage to some powers. A flat proc rate is ridiculous. Faster sets have enough advantages, they don't need that one too.Originally Posted by Lucky666
I don't get it why did they change procs to proc per minute? why couldn't they just leave them like 20% to fire or whatever?
-
My understanding of the Market proc IOs is that they are normalized around an average recharge power. I don't know what they are using as a baseline, but the idea as I understand it, is that powers with long recharge and perhaps activation times won't be punished vis a vis quicker recharging powers.
The set proc rate makes standard procs significantly better in faster powersets. For example, it has long been know that one of Katanas many advantages over Broadsword is that procs fire more often.
My suspicion is that the listed PPM rate is based around a 4 second recharge Tier 1 attack. I also suspect that it's a straight ratio increase in chance to proc based on recharge. Because the passives check every 10 seconds, that's the baseline recharge the proc is using.
10/4=2.5
2.5*20=50%
Now while that's probably too good against the standard version, I don't necessarily think the idea itself is flawed. Just that it's flawed in this instance. I will note, that you can use this to make certain procs have a 100% chance to fire.