Jade_Dragon

[ QUOTE ]
What I would suggest (and what I have been working on) is a macro or keybind that will cycle your pets through offensive and BG modes. The one I am working on accesses a text file every time I hit the key to get the next set of orders. Every set of orders takes one group of pets off of bodyguard mode and tells them to attack, simultaneously taking another group off of Attack and setting them to BG duty. This allows for semi effective use of all pets, in a civil war volley style mode of engagement.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like this idea. I have a more static set-up (and honestly, for Bots you probably want to keep your Protectors as the defense team) but this is a really cool concept. I'd like to see how it works out.

[ QUOTE ]
So basically you make a "petcom_all follow defensive" macro and hit it when you take damage, then go back to whatever setting you like when you stop taking damage? I could see that working.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is the intended use of Bodyguard. You don't have it up ALL THE TIME, you send your henchmen out to attack your foes like you always do. Once they are engaged in combat, though, you can set them back to Follow Defensive, and even if they have to break melee to "come back" to you, they will do everything they can to continue to fight, as long as they are already engaged.

Or even more likely, you can have part of your group (ranged fighters if you have them) set to Follow Defensive while the others go forward and attack. If you need the additional protection, you switch them all to Follow Defensive and then put your main force back on Attack Aggressive when the danger is past.

As Lunar Knight said, Defensive mode basically means that any time you or your henchmen are attacked, the henchmen will fight back to protect you. If they are already IN battle, then they are obviously being attacked, and Defensive won't stop them from fighting. In fact, I've tested the "two forces" tactic I described above, and I can confirm the Defensive force WILL fire in defense of the Aggressive force when it begins to draw fire. The only time I've ever had any problem with my Defenders not firing is if I wasn't close enough, and then taking a few steps forward was usually enough to get them to join in the fray.

Unfortunately, I've never played a melee Mastermind, so I can't be sure this technique will work for them. I just know it works with range. I would suggest, however, trying two things:

1) Set some of your Ninjas (or Zombies) to Aggressive and then tell them to goto a spot right on top of a foe. See if that causes them to aggro as they should.


2) Select a target and tell a Ninja to go Attack it, and then immediately put it back on Follow Defensive. If I understand Attack correctly, the Ninja should continue to attack that foe and no other foes until it is dead. He may try to return to you, but it's possible the Attack command overrides the Follow command. I do know it overrides all stances, you can tell a henchman to Attack while in either Aggressive, Defensive or Passive mode. All the stance does is effect his actions AFTER the foe is dead. (Aggressive he'll select another nearby foe, Defensive he'll look for a foe that has shot you, Passive he will do nothing until you specifically order him to Attack again)

I always leave my Tier 2 Henchmen behind while my Tier 1 Henchmen strike, so other than the fact that I normally leave them in Aggressive mode rather than Defensive, this shouldn't be much of a change for me. I'll just change my binds so the "Protector" pets stay in Defensive mode.

More MM players will simply have to learn how to control their henchmen individually, and divide them up into offensive and defensive teams. If I'm reading the way this works right, you can actually CHOOSE how much protection you get, as each Henchman in Defensive mode gets his own "share". So with two in Defensive mode you'll take 50% damage, but if you call back all 6 you only take 25%.

I'm also assuming this power will work at range, so if a Henchman is defending you he'll take his damage even if he charges to HTH range. As long as you're within the Supremacy radius.

If that's the way it works, this sounds like some of the suggestions for Tankers to take some of the damage for their allies. Not as good as Taunt, perhaps, but at least it's consistent while Taunt would probably be somewhat random.

[ QUOTE ]
What it really means is that FF needs more utility in its other powers rather than pretty much nothing but defense.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am in total agreement with that.

I just don't like One Trick Ponies. Even if they are overwhelmingly powerful in their one area.

[ QUOTE ]
The only way what you are graphing above could be avoided is if toHitDebuffs avoided the "purple rolloff". I'll bet you the engine can't support that currently. I'm not saying I don't think it *should*, but if it can't then we simply are screwed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly what I said, but you expressed it much better.

[ QUOTE ]
I've actually got a nice graph to show the extreme disparity between ToHit Debuffs and Defense as of I7.

[/ QUOTE ]

But according to Statesman's numbers, the change in ToHit Debuffs should be the OPPOSITE of that. The numbers are worse lower than +2, and become better higher than +3. It seems reasonable that that trend would continue.

Even if you assume that your base curve for the ToHit Debuff is correct, and it was my understanding that Defense and ToHit Debuff were essentially the same thing, a direct subtraction from to hit, then the difference is innate to the higher level foe resistance to debuffs.

You might as well say that FF is superior to debuff sets RIGHT NOW. Because that's what your graph shows. So why doesn't FF already replace all the Dark and Rads?

Okay, my question is, if this is the explanation, then why aren't Defense Debuff Enhancements not changing? Is it because they are applied to Defense Buffs and not to to hit directly? In other words, if you have a 50% Defense and someone hits you with a 50% Defense Debuff, does that mean to hit is adjusted by -25% (50%*50%) or -0%? (50%-50%)

As for FF Defenders replacing Dark and Rad Defenders, I'm sorry, but it's not gonna happen. All this change really means is that Dark and Rad defenses will Enhance AT THE SAME RATE as FF. And they can still 1) heal, 2) buff damage and 3) rez, not to mention hold and slow and in the case of Rad even boost attack rate and Endurance, none of which FF is capable of. And if you bring up Aid Self, that's a slot that can't be used for the FFers Primary or Secondary, three if he wants to be able to rez.

Nobody's going to give up Accelerate Metabolism for an FF Defender. At best, this means FFers might be able to compete, instead of obviously being weaker than all other Sets but Trick Arrow. It's not what I wanted, I would rather the defense ratio stay where it is, and FF get some offense. But neither this nor the Accuracy rebalance are going to suddenly make FF popular. FF will be no more useful against reds and purples than it is against whites right now, and saying that an FF is better against whites than 300 Darks is certainly not true.

[ QUOTE ]
The obvious reference point these days is Green Arrow in the recent JLU cartoon. And he ain't exactly quick on the draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know, he was pretty fast when he was fighting those robbers in the store in his first appearance. And firing while moving. It's only when he stops to aim that he slows down a bit.

If he had to hit three targets in a row really fast, I'm sure Ollie could do it. Then again, he'd probably use Fistful of Arrows. But I'm sure he knows many tricks to help him speed up his shots, including the one I suggested.

Well, I think I see the problem. The issue here is that not only do you have a draw time on the weapon, you also have a draw time on the AMMO. Which is pretty much unique to Archery. It's probably the reason why it stopped being a military weapon after the development of machine guns.

But this is a superhero. Why can't we have a character like the one from Hawk the Slayer? (And yeah, I thought he was cool too) You don't have to go that fast with every attack, just make it for Snap Shot and a few others, so if you don't want to look that "silly", you can skip it.

Another suggestion would be to draw more than one arrow at a time, and fire them one by one. It would be more complicated to animate, but closer to modern "trick shot" archers in movies like Robin Hood. Or just have a couple of extra arrows in the hand holding the bow, next to the grip.

I don't know if it would be possible to change animation time like that, but it might actually be interesting, and give Archery a unique feel, if you could fire a succession of shots quickly, and then pause a second to "reload". Then again, if you just added a couple of arrows near the grip of the bow you might not need to animate them, their presence would be enough of a suggestion.

Failing that, since Archery is more about marksmanship than other Ranged sets, instead of more damage, how about a chance to Critical? It may step on Scrapper toes, but it's only one set, and would be the same for all levels of foes. (Thus not stepping on WHY the Scrapper has the ability to Critical)

[ QUOTE ]
So a single use of Clear Mind makes a hero virtually immune to dominators, AND gives them perception bonuses for the duration of the buff....but a single use of Grant Invis only grants -perception until you attack, and after that you never get the bonus again until it is re-allplied? Even if we attack and then avoid being hit long enough to re-establish hide, we don't get the -perception benefit of GI again?

Does this seem unfair to anyone else?

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, this is the way I understood Suppression acted since it was added to the game, and _Castle_ says that GI is acting since it has always acted, in accordance with Suppression.

So which is it? When a person with GI on him attacks a foe, is the -perception suppressed for 10 seconds until the suppression ends, and then restored to its original value? Or is it permanently lowered until GI is cast again, once it recharges?

I also notice that the graphic returns to its original transparency after 10 seconds. If this graphic does not correspond to the actual behavior of the power, then this is a bug, and should be fixed.

Some post-beta "did you know?"

- Confuse used to give you no XP for any foe damaged by a confused target. This was changed so the damage was proportional to the amount done. There were still many complaints about Confuse until it was finally changed to give 75% of the XP for the damage your confused target did.

- Fear used to make foes flee. It was considered essentially useless until changed to the current implementation.

- Aim originally only boosted accuracy. Build Up only boosted damage. They were changed to be more "even" since Tankers and Scrappers only got Build Up, and Defenders only got Aim.

Some pre-beta "Did you know?"

- The most popular rallying cry of the pessimistic board members pre-beta was "This is going to be Everquest in tights", particularly after the archetype system was announced. You can still get a rise with that statement.

- The original seven Origins of the "open" system were (please correct this if it's wrong) Mutant, Magic, Talisman, Superior Human, Gadgetter, Cybernetics, and Science. Cybernetics and Gadgetter were folded together into Technology, (although I personally think part of Gadgeteer also went into Natural) while Talisman was combined with Magic. Note that Gadgets and Relics survive as Enhancements, which implies that Inventions, Focusing Devices, and Genetic Enhancement could be thought of as "sub-origins" as well.

- The original system divided abilities into two groups, "Powers" and "Skills". Mutants had the most Powers, while Superior Humans had the most Skills. The different origins could reach different maximum levels with their abilities, too, IIRC Mutants could reach the highest level but were limited in the number of Powers they could have, while Superior Humans had a broader range of abilities, but lower maximums with their skills and powers.

- Statesman's original list of "classes" for CoH, when he was developing the Archetype system, included such things as the Brick, the Martial Artist, the Detective, the Dark Knight, the Shaman, the Animal Totem, the Speedster and the Flier.

- Originally, the Blaster secondary was Melee. Blaster Melee sets had exactly the same powers as Scrappers and Tankers, but Taunt was replaced with the current first Secondary power, a single target immobilize. (like Ring of Fire)

- Blasters had access to the different weapon sets for their Secondary, like Broadsword, Battle Axe, and Mace. Those sets were eventually dropped and replaced with Devices. The first attack in all these sets was a Crossbow. (largely useless since the Blaster had plenty of ranged attacks)

- Originally, all melee weapon sets were actually united into two sets, Medieval Weapons, and Oriental Weapons. They were split up into separate sets with it was realized that constantly drawing different weapons was slowing down gameplay. Oriental Weapons was probably never implemented, since Katana was just a copy of Broadsword at release.

- Likewise, the all-in-one "Super Soaker" of Assault Rifle was originally a number of different weapons, each of which had to be drawn separately. (Note the power description for Sniper Rifle still implies it is a different weapon)

- Originally Assault Weapons was called Heavy Ordinance. There was a Light Ordinance set planned which never came to be. (Although it may become Pistols)

- The original names for Fiery Melee, Ice Melee and Dark Melee were Fiery Fray, Icy Onslaught, and Shadow Fighting.

- Claws' power Follow Up was originally named Feint, although it had the same basic effect. Fire and Ice had a "Follow Up". I don't know if it was similar to the current Follow Up or more like Build Up. It could also have increased accuracy like Aim. Feint was always a to hit/damage buff, even when Build Up only boosted damage.

- As mentioned previously, Force Field's Deflection and Insulation Shield were originally three bubbles, Refraction Shield getting the Energy portion of Insulation Shield, and Insulation just getting Elements. Refraction Shield was replaced with Detention Shield. However, I believe it still has the original icon.

- You could originally take Pool Powers in any order. Invisibility, Fly and Super Speed used to be the first power in their sets.

- Aim was originally called Build Up. (And boosted damage) So Blasters had access to Build Up twice. Electric Blasters didn't have Build Up (in their Primary), but had a second AoE attack called Lightning Field, which summoned a massive lightning bolt from the sky.

- There was a Power Pool called Tactics. It was not the same as Leadership. I have no idea what was in it.

[ QUOTE ]
-that the name Rikti came from a conversation where I said "Rikki Tikki Tavi is a cool name. How can we get that into the game?"

[/ QUOTE ]

Rikki Tikki Tavi is one of my favorite stories. Never would have guessed it inspired the Rikti.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Simply increasing the base damage is dangerous, and we can't make it exempt from ED.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait... you guys can make powers exemp from ED?!?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope. That's why I said "Can't." Well, actually, we could ask for new code to do that, but it isn't really something we want currently.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure what you were really saying, actually. If anything, sniper attacks seem like some of the MOST applicable to ED. You can slot them with Interrupt, Endurance, Range (proportionally more range means proportionally more enhancement) Accuracy (despite the Acc bonus, it still misses often enough to merit a slot for Acc) or Recharge, and get something out of any of them.

I've thought about doubling both the damage and the Endurance cost of a Sniper attack (just to be more even with the casting time) but as you said, that would likely to be overkill. Not just in PvP, but in PvE as well, I wouldn't want to waste that kind of energy on one shotting Minions when half as much damage would do as well. Then again, Blasters don't really have anything that is between the Sniper damage and the basic attacks, except Burst. Just to make this one attack do that much more damage doesn't seem like it'd help.

Maybe you could reduce the Endurance cost? Really, I figured the long windup time and interrupt was to compensate the lower End cost, but then I really don't think sniper is all that efficient, it is just it takes so long to go off you regen End during that time. Or maybe a recharge reduction, although I kind of like it the way it is.

Maybe a "Sniper Critical" that randomly does double damage? I don't want to step on any Scrapper toes, here, but there are individual Blaster attacks that Critical, just like there were individual Scrapper attacks that Criticalled, before they were all given a chance for it.

Maybe it's just that I like Sniper. I use it often enough, I guess because I ignore it's drawbacks. Personally, I think Burst could use more work than Sniper.

[ QUOTE ]
Here's the current numbers in testing (subject to change):

Base Entry Room: Free
Workshop Room (2x2): 100,000p
Lowest Power Empowerment Station (requires 0 Energy, 0 Control): 15,000p
Salvage Rack (requires 0 Energy, 0 Control): 15,000p

Total Cost for working Salvage storage and a working Empowerment Station: 130,000 Prestige

[/ QUOTE ]

Hm. Takes a Workshop, huh? I was kind of hoping it would be placable anywhere. Going on the assumption that power and control requirements are what neccessitate the other rooms, and without that you could make do with just the entry.

It does make sense, though. Everything that uses Salvage, plus a storage bin for Salvage, all in one room. And maybe some of the other storage bins, like Enhancements, CAN be placed in the entry room...

Anyway, I can afford 130,000 prestige, even with a one-person SG made up of just my character and my alts on the same server. (I'm running about that right now) So I'm sure any reasonable SG can afford that.

[ QUOTE ]
Making the buffs be Inspiration or Click-power like is just ASKING for abuse. Besides, that's the type of stuff the Invention System should deal with.

Empowerment stations are instant buffs. You are bathed in radiation/magic/etc. on the spot and get a bonus to your travel speed/lethal resistance/attack speed/endurance recovery/knockback protection/whatever you need at the time, right then and there.

[/ QUOTE ]

But doesn't it make sense that the uniquely long duration is a sign that perhaps there is a flaw in the implementation? You are obviously trying to make the duration appropriate, so that's not the problem. The problem is having to factor in travel time, random location of missions, progress into the mission (will you have to go through four elevators to get back to where you were) whether or not the base has teleporters and medical equipment, and include enough time to compensate for all of that, and yet not include too much in case the travel time is NOT that long. You can compute about how much time you'll need the buff. The question is how much time that more random factor will add on top of that.

The point is, you are NOT providing "whatever you need at the time, right then and there". The only Powers for which that is true would be travel powers, all others are applied before you need them, with a duration you hope covers the period in which they are needed.

Of course, another way to look at Empowerment Stations is that they are NOT intended to be used for a single encounter, but instead are for a specific mission that may be proving too difficult, or even a whole session of play. In that case, though, you certainly want the duration to be longer, even if you have to reduce the EFFECT. In other words, it's a semi-auto Power, just with a duration.

It may be that fifteen or thirty minutes is enough time for a "session". And I'm guessing that it will be easier to implement if the duration is a constant, although that's by no means a given. Travel powers you would certainly want a long duration, but the other types of power, no matter the duration, will probably only be USED for a short time.

Quite frankly, I really feel that travel powers are really going to be the most usable, and everything else will just turn out too situational. It may turn out that players craft a Power on the spur of the moment (I've got the resources for an X, might as well make one) more often than they plan it out.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

When some who has ben in the CoH Beta, the CoV Beta and been a loyal costomer for 2 years is balnced tothe point THEY can die on heroic. yes i think thats imbalanced. Cause that mena the gues with less experiewnce wont even makr it out of OUTBREAK.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doing something for 2ish years does not mean that you are particularly good at it. The only times I've died at the basic level have been when I have done something risky and I knew there was a good chance I was going to get myself leveled because of it. Losing because you tried to push things too far even on the "easy" level doesn't mean the game is unbalanced.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's my opinion that the devs have intentionally balanced this game for regular "defeats" which, at least in missions, give reduced debt. It's frustrating, I agree, however, I think it's incorrect to say that it is a severe liability. Coming from other MMORPGs where the "death rate" is much lower, it may be seen as somewhat of a concern. However, since the death penalty is so small in this game, it is not really an issue.

Now, if the original quote had said that he had trouble COMPLETING a mission, or gaining a particular level, then that would be a problem. But you can die a dozen times in Outbreak and still complete it. As long as you continue to take out foes, even if you die, you will eventually clear out a mission. (Plus, mission difficulty only effects door missions, and there is only one door mission in Outbreak and Breakout, the others are all street sweeping)

I'm not happy with the constant deaths, but I've learned to accept it, and I have to admit, there is really no appreciable debt unless you die SEVERAL times. A single death in a mission can be paid off before the mission ends. So while it is frustrating, it no longer restricts levelling progress. (And I know from experience that in the early days of the game, a build that was weak enough to earn substantial debt levelled MUCH slower than a build that wasn't)

Outside of the assumptions about what Mayhem Missions will be like based on one screenshot, the irony here is that fighting the same foes from level 1 to level 50 was designed into the game from the very start. "We don't want to start out a player by giving them a stick and a wooden shield and sending them out to kill rats," was a common refrain back when the game was being designed. "We want you to start out feeling like a SUPERHERO. So we give you villains to beat and crimes to stop right from the very beginning."

As living proof that people will find a way to complain about anything, then, we have this thread. Apparently since the devs didn't want you to start with rats and work your way up to monsters, then in CoH EVERYTHING is a rat. Instead of everything being a monster. I suppose it's all in the way you look at it.

Of course, I can understand people getting tired of individual villain groups, but that's why there are other villain groups. I just find it amusing that something that was originally concieved as being a positive for players new to MMOs is so obviously being considered negative by a long time player of other MMOs.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not against Targetting Drone getting damage, particularly if the perception love gets spread around somehow, but please think about what you're asking for in the right frame of mind and be reasonable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, after testing of Follow Up I found it to be far different than what I expected. It wasn't 25%, but it was far closer to 40% than 100%. I still suspect my figures because it was an odd number, not a multiple of 10, but I have to reach the conclusion that Follow Up, as it can be used as part of an attack chain without interrupting it, has been adjusted to be lower accordingly.

By that logic, the proper value for Targetting Drone would be closer to 30% than 50%. As I said, I was taking Rage as my comparison, and not Follow Up or Assault, which might actually be a better foundation. So consider "what I'm asking for reduced to a more reasonable level".

I will also add that such an addition, particularly without a reduction in Acc would obviously mean more Endurance. So a bonus aroudn 15-20% would probably be easier to add with no other significant changes. I kind of suspect that's all the devs would consider adding anyway.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If nothing else, remove some of the To Hit and transfer it over to Damage. It that's what it takes to keep the damage boost around 50%, I think that would be fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh... a constant 50% damage boost would be overpowered compared to what anyone else gets. The existing equivalent to build up-as-a-perma-able-power is claws/' follow up, which gives +33% damage and some accuracy.

The +acc on targetting drone is already pretty low, lowering it further would kind of suck.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't care what the numbers are. I was just throwing out 50% as a suggestion because it compared well with Rage. If you feel like 30% is better, then that's fine too. But again as I said that should be the MINUMUM.

Pre-ED one of the advantages given was that you could shift the Accuracy Enhancements in your attacks over to Damage. Thus at the very least the benefit should be that one one SO Enhancement, which is 33%. Do you believe that the benefit should be less than the effect of one Enhancement?

And AFAIK Follow Up has exactly the same damage bonus as all other Build Up-type powers, or 100%. As I play a Claws Scrapper, I'm pretty sure that I'm seeing double base damage.

As for Targetting Drone's To Hit bonus being low, I'm not too sure about that, either. It is at least high enough that it was considered to be the equal of an Accuracy Enhancement. And unlike damage, it can be Enhanced. I can see an obvious difference (I hit with it on, I don't with it off) so it must be significant, and that's without enhancement.

Maybe I'm overestimating it, but whatever it is, cut it in half, and put that half on +DMG. I'm sure that'll work out.

[ QUOTE ]
+50% base damage continuously would be overpowered even when compared to stacking BU and Aim together. BU and Aim simply don't add that much damage over time: its all burst, but with a cost people ignore: they both have activation times large compared to recharge.

[/ QUOTE ]

Rage has an 80% damage bonus, and no one says it's overpowered. Or maybe they do, but the proof is in the pudding, so to speak, and SS+Rage Tankers and Brutes are not all levelling twice as fast as everyone else.

The main aspect of this is that Aim/BU do not HAVE to be up all the time. Typically you are not constantly in combat, so in the time it takes the two powers to recharge, you can be back in combat again. Also typically you will not use the Powers unless your most powerful attacks are recharged, and so the period of time in which Aim/BU are active will almost invariably include those attacks. So to merely compute how long you can keep Aim/BU going over time and divide that by the amount of time it takes it to recharge, to determine the average damage boost, is somewhat misleading.

(I would also like to see a calculation in which BU is not used every possible time it recharges, but every time the most powerful attack in the chain is recharged. I would make a guess that the overall damage would actually be higher than what you calculated above, because you will not be interrupting the DPS of the chain all the time)

Now, part of Rage's 80% damage is that it comes with a 10 second forced downtime in which you CANNOT attack. And so a toggle power that does not have a downtime would probably have to be much weaker than that. However, 30-50% would probably seem to be about the right level, given that you may have to take away some of the to hit bonus in order to get the damage bonus that high.

By way of comparison, a Sonic or Dark Defender can get a 30% damage boost which lasts a short period of time, while Rad can actually maintain a damage boost (I don't know what it is for certain, but I'm sure it's within the same range) as a toggle. So I think we could say that 30% would be the MINIMUM. A 30% boost in damage is really not that much, it is only twice the boost of Assault.

Remember, that's 30% even when you are NOT attacking. The low level of the boost I think compensates for the fact that it is available, even when you aren't making use of it. (And I can attest to the fast that Assault is a VERY low level boost. I use it because I have no other choices to boost my damage, but it certainly doesn't give me more damage than Aim or Build Up, and remember you computed Build Up as being a 15% boost)

[ QUOTE ]
I think it's key for Blasters to be able to pump out significantly more damage when they close to melee than when at range. I'd just like to move the ranged chan up a bit so the difference between melee and ranged chains is a bit less than it is today.

[/ QUOTE ]

If that's what you are saying, then I definately agree with it. The truth is, many of the powerful attacks that Scrappers are able to build their chains with are the ones Blasters get in their Secondary. But they cannot be used in a chain at range. A Blapper currently has the advantage because it is easier to build stronger chains with melee attacks in the mix.

There should be a choice, but not a choice between "I can close to melee" and "I can use Blast, Bolt, and Ring of Fire". And really, the damage doesn't have to be THAT much damage. You do no more damage with an attack that hits harder, but takes longer to recharge. But you FEEL more effective. (And more importantly, you can do something else instead of having to spam your weak attack all the time)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(I also agree that Targetting Drone needs +DMG)

[/ QUOTE ]

A great number of people agree with you. I'm not one of them (I think Targetting Drone is a great power as it is and that there are other powers in /DEV that need buffs or tweaks instead), but it does seem to be a commonly proposed solution to the /DEV problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would buy that if Build Up got +perception, which is something only devices currently gets. Except, I really think its Aim that deserves +perception, and I'm not sure if BU/Aim blasters should be getting two +perception powers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since Targetting Drone is a toggle power, the +DMG would be much lower that 100% anyway. I would say that it needs to be lower even than Rage's 80%. Cut it down to 50% or lower and I doubt it'll be greatly overpowered with the inclusion of +perception in the comparison.

If nothing else, remove some of the To Hit and transfer it over to Damage. It that's what it takes to keep the damage boost around 50%, I think that would be fine.

Remember also that Targetting Drone cannot be compared to Aim/Build Up COMBINED, only against one or the other. (Comparison to Build Up would be more appropriate, since it's the one it is replacing, but it is also the one it is least like)

I'd also like to add (although it's converse to the discussion about +perception in Drone) that while I do agree that -perception doesn't help the Blaster deal with aggro that he already has, Placate was a rather powerful tool developed for Stalkers to deal with that very issue. Again, this is just a suggestion and the devs will have to be very careful that Placate is not too powerful an effect for Blasters to use, but it is something that could be considered. Or a -aggro effect could be implemented, although Placate doesn't work that way, and its possible there's a reason for that. (CoH doesn't seem to want you to be able to get rid of aggro once you have it, merely avoid it or surpress it for a moment)

[ QUOTE ]
Again, I worry about the chaos of a solution that moves that many powers around and have moved away from it. I toned that down as the thread went on. But the mechanics aren't where I really differ from you so much as the goals. If you're looking to improve Blasters, shouldn't it expand upon their specialty (dealing premium ranged damage)?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I have not followed the thread, as my primary reason for replying was _Castle_'s response. If we assume that the concensus here is that moving powers around is a Bad Thing (TM) and that _Castle_ gets that, then I have no argument. My comments were mostly about NOT moving powers around, although I might have expressed it that way.

For instance, while I might have said that Burst and Control may be more appropriate in the Secondary, I recommended a SOLUTION that left them were they were. I increased the range of Burst, and the damage of the Control power to make it a combination control/damage Power like Crippling Axe Kick.

Likewise, my suggestion to adapt the existing Secondary Powers are designed around changing them as little as possible. We do not need to change the purpose of the powers, their effects, or even their names. All my suggestion entails is increasing the range.

As for your primary point, I am with Arcanaville in insisting that the design philosphy of the Blaster is offensive punch at all ranges. You cannot give a Defender or Corruptor a melee attack, because it would violate the design philosophy, that Defenders and Corruptors have attacks and debuffs at range. Their weakness is that their powers aren't built for close in fighting. (Quite frankly, they're too well defended for it to be an adequate risk)

You may be afraid of making Defenders (I doubt that) or Corruptors more powerful by raising their damage, (and ironically your alternative of including melee attacks would do that as well) but the characteristics are the same for all three ATs. If a Blaster is forced to build an attack chain from his weakest three attacks then the other Ranged fighters are as well. You've got to take the bad with the good, if you are afraid of too much damage overall, the perhaps a damage boost (maybe raising Defiance sooner) would be more appropriate.

I'll let the devs determine whether Corruptors would need to be rebalanced after getting a damage boost. I'm pointing out where the damage discrepancy IS, I'll leave it to the devs to decide to take my suggestion or go with something else.

Okay, since _Castle_ has replied, I'd better stick my two cents worth since it looks like some of this might be implemented. This is not to say that I disagree, merely that I would make a minor adjustment to Pilcrow's suggestions before implementing them.

First of all, I disagree with the assertion that Blasters must have ranged attacks in their Secondary, to produce usable attack chains on a par with Scrappers and Tankers. Defenders and Corruptors have the same problem as well, and adding more attacks to the Blaster Secondary wouldn't fix that. What the Ranged Power Set needs is more usability from the attacks it DOES have.

The Ranged Power Set has three limitations that are not shared by Scrappers, and which are at the root of the Blaster damage problems. A Scrapper is able to build an attack chain easily with the three most damaging attacks in the Set, but a Blaster (or Defender or Corruptor) cannot for the following reasons:

1) The most powerful single target attack in every Ranged Set is always a Sniper attack. This essentially disqualifies it as a chain attack as it can be interrupted. It is possible to use it in combat under certain circumstances, such as if you are a Defender with high Def or a Acc debuff, but that reduces your DPS as the attack takes around three times as long as more typical attacks.

Like Assassin Strike, Sniper attacks are meant to be used as an opening attack in a chain, but while Stalkers get their highest damage attack IN ADDITION TO Assassin Strike, Blasters only get the one Sniper. The damage of AS and a Sniper is about the same, as AS is 6x damage, but has a lower base than a Sniper.

2) The second most powerful attack in a Ranged Set is always a Burst. The extremely limited range of a Burst limits its usefulness when chained with Bolt and Blast, and limits it to chains including melee attacks, or as a situational attack in which you dart forward if given an opportunity. While to a point Burst makes sense, it is a modification of range just as Sniper is, and it balances Sniper's long range by having a short range instead, in fact the limitation just encourages Blasters not to take it.

3) Blasters usually have a third attack which is minimal damage, but which has a control component in some way. For instance, Energy has Power Push, and Electric has Tesla Cage. While these are effective for keeping the Blaster alive, they are too low damage to be used constantly as part of a chain. Rather, it is used situationally, either to begin a chain like a Sniper, or in emergencies when a foe gets too close.

Now, unlike the previous two examples, Scrappers usually get a Power like this that is essentially identical to the Blaster version. For instance, Cobra Strike in MA, or Stun in EM. However, given that a Blaster cannot use his most powerful attack OR his second most powerful attack in most attack chains, the lack of a third choice becomes even more of a limitation. In addition, some Sets such as Battle Axe do not share a "control only" power and instead have a combination damage and control attack.

4) To counter the three limitations above, Blasters have their Ultimate, which is not shared by any Scrapper. The Ultimate does the most damage of any attack, including the Sniper. However, like the Sniper, the limitations of the Ultimate make it unusable in an attack chain. And most importantly, it takes up a slot that would be normally taken by a chainable attack.

I disagree with Pilcrow's assertion that more ranged attacks should be included in the Secondary, because as I see it, there are at least two attacks in the Primary which more properly belong in the Secondary. The Blaster Secondary (Devices excepted) is equally derived of melee attacks and control powers, and so the short range (point blank actually) Burst attack and the single target Control (2 and 3) would seem to more properly belong in the Secondary. In fact, the single target Control is in some cases redundant with Defender Primary Powers. The best example of this is Power Push and Force Bolt, only one of which needs to be taken.

The only issue with putting the ranged Control powers in the Secondary seems to be that Secondary Powers, even Control based ones, are either melee or PBAoE. (Again, Devices is the exception) This, I believe, is the other issue with Blasters. Their Secondary control powers, while useful, require them to move into melee to use them. Thus they are encouraged to be Blappers in order to use their holds as defenses. While I can see the logic behind this, there is a greater risk in stunning a foe and moving into melee, and thus greater reward, the fact that a Blaster has NO DEFENSES AT ALL, while at range, proves to be the largest issue after level 30.

Thus, my suggestion is that instead of adding ranged attacks to the Secondary, make more of the current Control powers ranged. This would bring the other Secondaries more in line with Devices, which is already longer ranged. I believe it is the ATTACKS that should remain melee, and the Secondaries should be a combination of melee attacks, and ranged Controls.

With enough ranged Control powers in the secondary to replace Power Push and Tesla Cage, those powers could be reduced in effectiveness in their control element (a process which has already started, to make them less effective compared to Controllers) and increase their damage. I would make the damage less than Burst, but more than Blast, about the equivalent of mixed damage/control powers from Scrapper or Tanker sets such as Crippling Axe Kick and Swoop/Jawbreaker.

This would eliminate the redundancy between Power Push and Force Bolt since Power Push would do more damage but have less knockback. (maybe doing only knockdown if unenhanced) Tesla Cage likewise could be moved into the electric Secondary and a more damaging minor hold, or even a sleep or stun substituted for it. Tesla Cage could also be left where it is, and the damage increased by turning it into a DoT. Freeze Ray could be modified in a similar way.

My other suggestion would be to increase Burst range by at least a factor of two. It doesn't have to be increased to the same range as Blast/Bolt, but should be enhanceable to be in that range. As it is, the incredibly short range of Burst makes it unenhanceable in terms of range, as the increase is so slight as to make no real difference in strategy. Increasing the base range will increase the effect that enhancement has, as well.

Sniper attacks can be left as-is, since although they cannot be used in a chain, with both Burst and the psuedo-Control Power being more useable additional damage should not be needed. If it seems like Blasters need even more damage, Burst can be increased to do Sniper damage, and the Control increased to Burst. I think that if many of the ranged Secondaries have a combination damage/control ability, however, like Ring of Fire et al., there should be enough damage to help Blasters, without making the Primary damage so high that Corruptors become overpowered. (Of course, Defenders can just use the additional damage in any case)

The first melee attack of a Blaster Secondary could be changed to a point blank Burst-like power (thus preserving that functionality) but as that would require animation changes, I think I would prefer to see that added to one of the more powerful melee attacks, particularly when there are a lot of them, as in Fire Manipulation. For the most part, however, I think the melee attacks can be left as-is, increasing the range of the control powers, and adding more damage in the Primary should make it unneccessary to eliminate or even weaken the Blapper strategy.

(I also agree that Targetting Drone needs +DMG)

[ QUOTE ]
*cough*

Well, considering there is a decimal error in their AoE Defense (250% instead of 25%), I'm not surprised the Rain of Arrows missed a ton. I'll fix it today.

[/ QUOTE ]

Heheheh. Ah, reminds me of the old, "Whoops, Personal Force Field defense is 9.5% instead of 95%" error back in Beta.

Durn decimal points. Got a mind of their own, they do.