Luminara

Good or bad, it probably wouldn't happen. Grav already has Wormhole, which would result in the set having two AoE Stuns, so it's unlikely that the developers would do it. /FF already has RB, too, so that would give Grav/FF three AoE Stuns, and I can't see the developers ever considering that.

EMP Arrow.

Unnecessary. You can already stack 40% -Res with Acid and Disruption, or up to 80% -Res with Acid, double-stacked Disruption and the Achilles' Heel proc. Throwing perma -Regen into the mix is overkill.

Only TA/Elec could leverage it before level 33 (EMP Arrow with slots), and TA/Elec can apply -Recovery without having it added to PGA. Other TA/* builds couldn't leverage it at all prior to level 41 (for Power Build Up) or level 47 (Power Sink), at which point any TA/* defender worth his/her salt should not need yet another way to disable or debilitate foes.

In other words, it would be useful only for highly specialized builds, entirely dependent on secondary or ancillary powers and, frankly, not very useful in light of the plethora of other controls and debuffs available in TA.

And TA has higher -Res, -Def and isn't dependent on having enemies or allies to target (which is not even close to an exhaustive list). Apples versus bananas versus watermelons.

Patience.

Vigilance discounts endurance for all powers used, not specifically primary powers or specifically secondary powers. Any replacement should do no less. It's all or nothing, not "let's reward defenders who buff/debuff and screw those who blast" any more than "let's give defenders a damage buff and screw those stupid jerks who use their buffs/debuffs". A defender is a combination of two powersets, a sum which is greater than the parts, and both of those parts have to be considered, not one specific part to the point of ignoring the other.

Furthermore, restricting the inherent to only being functionally "built up" by primary powers would artificially penalize some primaries and artificially reward others. A TA with no targets would be incapable of building up Vigilance prior to level 26 (at which point he/she could exploit OSTarget to do it), whereas an Emp with HA on auto would easily build up Vigilance. A FF could build up a full Vigilance bar just by playing normally on a team, but find it extremely difficult to leverage it solo. Et cetera.

It's not balanced, it doesn't reward all defenders equally and it's wide open for exploitative behavior. Try something else.

OSTarget has -1000% or -10,000% Defense, I forget which. If you're debuffed to the hit chance floor, you still have a 95% chance to hit it, regardless of global Acc, global +ToHit, how your attack is slotted or even if the attack is slotted at all.

That said, it is possible to miss it more than once, but it's a highly conditional. If you use AoEs frequently, OSTarget counts as a random target and as such can be missed two or more times in a row because the streak breaker doesn't account for individual targets when AoEs are used (meaning, it doesn't keep track of your last hit chance for every foe on a case by case basis, it only tracks the last foe).

The other situation where you could miss two or more times in a row would be if you're running a PBAoE power which affects enemies and have one or more enemies in range of the PBAoE, which would then skew the streak breaker's checks and possibly cause you to miss OSTarget more than once.

So it is possible to miss OSTarget two or more times in a row or generate a false appearance of lower than standard accuracy with an origin power, but only in those situations, and even then it should be an extremely rare occurrence which one can easily work around.

I have no advice for you. I'm a two time college drop-out (school, of any kind, does not mix well with fear of people).

But wanted to say that I believe in you. I believe in your tenacity, intellect and ability to succeed in this. You are smart enough, and you can hack it.

No, it's "not non-powered" for your characters, which doesn't mean others can't explain things for their characters to their satisfaction. All of the existing APPs can be reasoned as fitting for all of the origins in any way the player chooses, with a little imagination and creativity. If you can't think of a way, that's not a game problem.

It would also make it impossible to discern when it was night, and thus impossible to determine when the masks were spawning (they spawn much, much more frequently at night than during the day), which would then make it much more difficult to hunt down and defeat the required number of masks for the BP defeat badge.

Lights off during the day, thank you.

That's incorrect. I'd been using Firefox 3.0.whatever from the time just after I replaced my main system (which was just before i had to go to the hospital for the lung thing) until last night, almost exactly six months total, and I never had a problem with pages defaulting to the top when I refreshed them. It was an issue exclusive to this site with the new forum software. The old forums never failed to retain page position when I refreshed pages, nor did any other site I frequent.

The developers aren't going to create an APP exclusively for players who use one specific powerset, nor are they going to create an APP which inappropriately rewards all other powersets above and beyond any assistance they may need simply to fulfill a handful of players' desires to "fill out" their repertoire with a "healing arrow" for their TA characters.

Furthermore, lack of heals or buffs does not, in any way, hinder TA, so there is no actual reason to create a bow-based buffing APP, except to placate those few players who can't stand the thought of not playing buff-bots. If TA does need improvement, that improvement is best achieved within the powerset itself, not by creating a band-aid APP for it.

APPs do not equal additions to powersets.

You just listed four choices, all valid and all available right now.

No player is restricted from accessing APPs if they're playing TA characters. I've personally investigated that, all of the APPs are accessible as soon as a TA character hits 41, just like they are for everyone else.

If you're experiencing difficulty finding a way to conceptually pair an APP with your TA characters, drop by the defender or RP forums and ask for assistance. There are almost unlimited explanations for why TA characters could use any of the APP powers. You won't be getting a TA-specific, or TA-exclusive, APP, though, or an APP which focuses on team buffs.

All pets with continuing effects, such as Ice Storm, Glue Arrow, Bonfire or anything similar is treated like a toggle for the purpose of procs. All procs will have a chance to trigger when the pet spawns and activates its power(s) and every 10s thereafter until the pet despawns.

You miss the point because you're convinced that you know what the developers think and how they approach design issues. They do balance around the existence of force multipliers, even if you wouldn't.

There's nothing proven there, except that the developers have a maximum level of performance set for those ATs, and specific builds within those ATs can achieve that level. That is in no way at all indicative that the developers don't consider +Dam/-Res when balancing ATs.

No, I'm pointing out the fact that the defender AT has access to powers of that nature and therefore the entire AT is balanced with that in mind.

Let me put it another way. In order for the developers to disregard powers like AM or EF, they would have to balance every potential combination of powersets individually, with individual modifiers applied to every one of those powerset combinations, throwing away the AT modifiers completely. Every defender build would be an entire AT unto itself, with its own scalars.

Before you make another laughable attempt to call my credibility into question, PM Castle and ask him whether or not he takes force multiplier powers into consideration when balancing an AT. I already know he'll tell you that he does, but you apparently need him to tell you directly.

There is, but it's only found on the tiny number of critters with Leadership, or which have specifically been granted Placate resistance.

You are misremembering. They unambiguously stated that the defender and controller values were swapped. The developer comment was made when I7 was on the test server, the change was made with I7 and went live with that update.

Only because the developers screwed up. They flat out said that the defender and controller modifiers were reversed. Not that they considered the two ATs to be equal in regard to Slow, not that they consider Slow to be a combination of status effect and debuff, but because they made a mistake.

And the only reason controllers didn't have their modifier reduced when the defender modifier was increased to the correct value was that the developers didn't think it was important enough for the complaints it would generate.

There is no technicality here. Slows are debuffs.

You might argue that, but you'd be wrong.

Because the power values for individual Slows were intended to match the correct defender Slow modifier. They were performing below the desired level with the controller modifier, they performed at the desired level with the defender modifier, no reason at all to increase the modifier any higher than that. If they had increased the Slow modifier even more, they also would've had to go back and review every single power with a Slow effect to maintain them at that desired level of performance.

You'll have to ask Castle about KB.

As for corruptor Slows, that should be obvious. The developers didn't repeat their mistake when they set the scale for corruptor Slow, so the AT is using the intended, correct number. Yes, it's lower. It's intended to be lower.

Check any Placate power in-game. It will show as a percentage, not a magnitude. That, and the fact that there is no Placate protection, very clearly prove that it's a debuff, not a status effect.

It is a debuff applied to a foe. It appears to be binary because there is no protection from the debuff and only a very scant few critters in the entire game have Placate resistance (critters which use the hybrid Leadership power, such as certain Longbow).

City of Data is wrong. So is Mids'. And Paragonwiki. The information from all of those sources was put in place before "Real Numbers" was implemented in the game and the effect was assumed to be a status effect by all of the people involved.

Log into the game and check it for yourself. It's a debuff, with a percentage listed, not a magnitude.

Missed that.

-Perception is a debuff.



The developers never referred to Slows as control. The only developer statement ever made on the "debuff or control" debate was a conclusive post in which the developer said, "Slows are debuffs".

The misconception that -RunSpeed is a control comes partially from the players believing that it must be a status effect if it "controls" movement speed; and partially because the developers mistakenly had the defender and controller Ranged Slow modifiers swapped. When the developers realized their mistake with the modifiers, they made a public statement that they were increasing the defender value to the proper number, but not decreasing the controller value specifically because they felt that it would be disruptive while providing little or no actual benefit to the game.

Furthermore, the mechanics for status effects and debuffs are different. All status effects are measured in magnitude, whereas all debuffs are measured in percentages. You cannot 84% Immobilize a target, you cannot 49% Stun a target, etc. Status effects are binary. If a status effect has a high enough magnitude to affect a target, it affects that target immediately. Debuffs are not binary, they affect targets on a scale, and even if the target partially resists the debuff, they can still be affected.

And while I'm on the subject, Paragonwiki is incorrectly referring to Slow and Placate as status effects. Both are debuffs. Someone edit the information, please.

Or one could look at it from the viewpoint of other sets having -Res which doesn't shut down if the defender gets mezzed or have a continuing endurance cost.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

Slows are debuffs.

Four (technically three, because PGA is debuff with a chance for control (Sleep), not a reproducible control) out of nine is not "most".

AT mods. Sorry, didn't have time to proofread and clarify.

And it is then hideously disrupted by the wide range of different types of powers available to defenders (and controllers), including -Res, +Damage, -Defense, +ToHit, etc. Other ATs can be balanced against each other reasonably well because they don't typically vary much in what they do. A scrapper is a scrapper, for instance, regardless of primary or secondary. What that scrapper does won't change much, if at all, using different builds, it's still a damage dealer with personal mitigation tools.

Defenders don't follow that kind of design rule, though. Within the defender AT, there are many completely different approaches to the game, all valid while being distinct and unique. An FF/* is a master at providing team security, while a Dark/* is a master at providing control, and a TA/* is a master at improving team damage output, and an Emp/* is a master at buffing individual teammates to tankmage status... every primary offers a different approach, and every secondary offers yet another approach. No two defender combinations are quite like each other, despite both being defenders. You don't see that with, say, blasters, because regardless of primary or secondary, blasters generally do one thing, they deal damage. The same is true of scrappers and tanks. These ATs don't have the incredible variety of tools that are available to the defender AT, so the main differences within those ATs are more easily balanced against each other and the ATs themselves more easily balanced against the other ATs.

It's that diversity of tools within the defender AT that makes something as simple as a modifier increase a poor solution to any problem. An AT mod change doesn't, can't account for all of the myriad differences between builds.

Or when an AT has access to powers which can increase the net effect of other powers, such as the interaction between attacks and +Damage/-Res.

All of the other ATs are part of the game. The defender and controller ATs themselves are part of the metagame, because they can alter the results of the AT modifiers significantly.

*nod* That's why I said a complete analysis of every combination would be necessary to come to any kind of conclusion.

Oh wow, Jeffrey Combs is on Cold Case. I have to watch this! O_O

*bounce bounce bounce*

Which is precisely why a unilateral buff won't be very likely. The diversity of defenders is both the greatest strength of the AT and the greatest weakness of the AT.

It's really easy to say "FF/Elec isn't a damage powerhouse, buff defenders", but it's not so easy to apply the same logic to, say, Kin/Sonic.

Players look at the "worst" and work from there. Developers look at the "worst", average and "best" and work from there, and have to consider the possibility that issuing a general buff to defender damage would result in the "best" suddenly outperforming blasters in damage output and tanks in survivability. They can't do that. They won't do that.

Also, all defender primaries can be paired with secondaries containing one or more damage improvement tools, and with the Dark Mastery APP which offers Soul Drain. Those choices are available and they do affect the way the developers look at the performance of the primaries, even if players are prone to saying, "It didn't fit my concept to take those powers". The whole package is what is examined, not the primaries in a vacuum. No buffs can be made with only the primaries in mind because the addition of the secondaries and APPs changes the final result.

It has been noted that controllers aren't really as incredible as they're made out to be until 41+, when they have access to actual attacks to supplement their low damage controls and pets and have acquired and slotted all of their secondary powers well, but that point tends to be glossed over when defender players are clamoring for buffs. The developers don't forget that, though, and neither should anyone else. Everything a defender can access and which offers potential improvement to damage output and/or survivability matters (even pool powers, temp powers and inspirations, but one can generally disregard those and focus on the primary, secondary and APP because the other tools provide a relatively equal level of performance improvement for defenders and controllers).

I apologize for making it appear as though I were belittling your effort. It's more than anyone else has done.

I am compelled, however, to note once more that despite the work you put into it, it's not accurate because you don't have access to a method of seeing hidden characters, or characters which are actively played but not logged in at the time of your survey. I mean, what does it prove, that defenders are less popular, or that more defenders use /hide than any other AT, or that defenders are played more frequently by players who aren't on at peak times? It could be any of those, it could be something else entirely, or it could be an actual, real representation of a sharp decline in defender creation and play time since the last time the developers posted the results of data mining. In the end, only they can see whatever trends exist, if any.

And even if it were accurate, it wouldn't be sufficient to call for buffs, nerfs or changes of any sort without much more detailed examinations of the cause of the decline. If it were found that defenders were being played less, then the data mining would indicate which AT was being played more (something a 30 minute snapshot can't tell you). Then one would need to examine why the other AT or ATs were being played more. Could it be, for example, that the AE has caused a shift away from defenders, toward something else, or is it instead a result of some change to another AT which has made it more accessible and therefore capturing the interest of players for a while, or might it instead be caused by I15's new content, or perhaps it's possible that the farming phenomenon has grown to such a degree that players are creating tried and true "farm friendly" characters (which would, in turn, indicate that IO recipes may be the source of a shift)... it could be any of a hundred things, but the only real way to find out exactly what might turn players away from one AT and toward another would be much more data mining, with more powerful tools (meaning, capable of seeing even hidden characters and monitoring at all times) over a long period of time, something only the developers can do.

You did try to provide some evidence, though, which I applaud. As I said, it's more than anyone else in this thread has done.

Leaving for work in a moment, but I wanted to emphasize this point.

Defenders have lower AT damage scalars than blasters because they also have access to tools which improve their damage output more than the tools improve blaster damage output. Defenders have access to multiple +Damage buffs and even more -Res debuffs, as well as high -Def and +ToHit tools, all of which can be used to improve their overall damage output. That some of the primaries trade off some of these tools for others is not relevant to the AT as a whole because the AT itself is a collection of all of the powers available to it.

The entire design of the defender AT is balanced around the availability of certain types of powers, and thus, any discussion of defender balance must account for the powers used. Ignoring those powers is not possible when balancing the AT against any other AT because they are part and parcel of the AT as a whole. So in order to show that the AT as a whole is performing below a predetermined level, one must provide evidence that the majority of the parts which collectively comprise that AT are performing under that level. And that means doing a complete rundown of the bottom, mid and top levels of performance for every combination of powersets and making an unbiased comparison to whatever that predetermined performance level is (in this case, controllers, again on a powerset combination by powerset combination appraisal which displays the lowest, mean and highest levels of performance).

Anything else is just opinion and theorycrafting, minus the crafting.