Luminara

In an average day, Castle is looking at, creating and fixing numerous powers, designing one or more powersets for future use, attempting to address problems that he's uncovered by data mining ATs, reviewing power changes such as the I13 PvP revamp, collaborating with the other developers on changes, creations and reviews, managing his team and trying to keep up with the volume of PMs he receives from players.

So when you go to him and say, "It doesn't feel like my defender is as powerful as my controller", and give him nothing more than that vague opinion, what do you honestly expect him to do? Do you really think he's going to drop everything and go on a three month spree of brainstorming improvements for defenders, improvements which wouldn't be detrimental to the game, the AT or the balance between ATs?

Think about it. Seriously. If you want to make a point and show him that a problem really exists, you need to prove it with more than complaints and a five minute server population survey conducted with the /search tool (which excludes players using /hide or not currently logged in), rather than expecting him to clear his schedule and desk to placate a handful of players who insist that an entire AT should be buffed.

Doing the work beforehand saves him time and gives him a much, much clearer understanding of where you think the problem lies, and gives him an idea of how to proceed. It cuts the amount of work he has to do by half or more.

And there is also a great deal of objective evidence you can provide. Any evidence is better than none, which is the sum total of what has been given by anyone in this thread so far.

Vacuum balance logic. All ATs have powers and are required to use them in order to accomplish anything. If no AT is using powers, no AT is progressing at a rate any greater than zero. How any given character within any given AT is a measurable function of the sum of both the AT modifiers and the powers used. You cannot balance anything without accounting for everything.

Welcome to Co* AT balance.

Why would a defender's inherent be limited to only applying to the primary? And isn't the "role" of a defender to buff/debuff and deal damage? And wouldn't +Recharge benefit all defenders equally at least by allowing them to use their blasts more frequently (which actually makes sense in regard to the definition of "vigilance", with the vigilant defender fighting harder to defend him/herself and his/her teammates)?

I'm not pushing for +Recharge as the ideal solution, but I do find it to be the least... skewed answer to the defender inherent problem. It won't benefit all defenders equally, but it will benefit all defenders to some degree, it offers that improvement in damage output that some believe the AT needs (if you can use your attacks more frequently, you're dealing more damage overall) and it's "vigilant". Coupled with a +Recovery bonus to offset the increased endurance usage caused by the increased frequency of availability of powers and it should work almost as well as a straight damage buff while also benefiting the primaries (which a damage buff wouldn't do in most cases).

What do you think Castle is more likely to take seriously, a handful of people shouting and arguing over a completely unproven and utterly biased (admit it, everyone who plays defenders and comes to these threads to argue is biased) theory, or a spreadsheet showing a legitimate discrepancy?

Has nothing at all to do with me. As I previously said, I could do this myself, but I'm not going to because I'm not the one making statements with nothing substantial to back them up.

On the contrary, a detailed analysis which shows how every powerset combination performs and compares that performance to every other powerset combination across both ATs would indicate where the average is for both ATs, which AT achieves the highest points and where the low point for each AT lies, which would then permit you to pinpoint a real discrepancy, if it exists.

If, for example, it is proven that controllers deal, 12% more damage overall and maintain a 9% higher safety margin, then one could take that evidence to Castle and make a reasonable argument for buffing the defender AT to bring it to parity. Or if the analysis showed that the average is within 1-2% of equal for both ATs, and the highs for each AT are also similarly close, but the lows for controllers are more emphasized, then Castle would then be looking at low controller performance and looking for ways to improve it.

If all that any of you are willing to do is bicker pointlessly, conduct brief sojourns into the servers to take a quick sampling of the players who aren't in /hide and present base AT scale values as "evidence", then you're the ones fooling yourselves with the belief that Castle is going to jump to buff defenders based on your opinions and halfhearted "examinations".

And it is part and parcel of AT balance. That is why different ATs have different scales on the same powers. And those different scales do affect how similar ATs are balanced against one another.

You're welcome to PM Castle and ask him if he disregards power scales when he's looking at AT balance. You know he'll tell you the same thing.

And that effectively kills the entire rest of your post, because it's all founded on the assumption that powers don't matter, so I'm still waiting for someone to do a detailed comparison, combination by combination, of controllers and defenders to show what the average is for each AT, what the high end is for each AT and what the low end is for each AT, and prove conclusively, numerically, that defenders are not performing as well on average, at the high end and at the low end, as controllers.

Are you taking on that task?

Conserve Power is 149%.

Example: Dark Blast's base endurance cost is 5.2. With Conserve Power, that endurance cost is reduced to 5.2 / (1.00 (base 100% endurance cost) + 1.49 (Conserve Power's 149% discount)) = 2.0883534136546184738955823293173, or 2.09 endurance.

I recommend going over this chart and balancing the value(s) around the existing numbers. Any replacement which offers the same end result should be at least be comparable to what currently exists.

But I'll point out again that the ranges you've proposed would preclude the use of many powers because they would restrict or negate the bonus.

Force Bubble, for example, has a 50' radius, which puts it at twice your original proposed range and still 10' greater than your revised range. So any FF player using FB would lose any chance at having that endurance discount, likely just when he/she needed it most.

Another example, KB. Knocking enemies out of that short range would immediately reduce or remove the endurance discount, so players with access to KB would be less motivated to use it, potentially even being defeated because they gave up the use of powerful KB which could have saved them.

The point here is that tying the inherent to having enemies within a very limited range rewards specific powersets and play styles and excludes those who don't play in a specific way or who try to be more proactive in mitigating damage. That's not how inherents are designed.

If the numbers are worthwhile, then players will "game" it. If the numbers aren't worthwhile, then we're right back to having an inherent which is viewed as worthless or useless, but it's still possible to "game" it.

Look at the old version of Defiance for an example. The lower your HP, the higher the bonus, so players would do things like leap off of buildings or deliberately avoid heals in order to maximize the bonus. It wasn't a great inherent, but it was an exploitable inherent and players did just that, exploit it.

Critical hits, Gauntlet, Defiance, Containment, none of the other inherents are restricted to a specific play style or powerset, they apply equally to all powersets and play styles within each individual AT.

The Kheldian inherent was changed to allow all players, including those who preferred to stay in forms as frequently as possible, to benefit. It was changed to allow all play styles and powers within the ATs to benefit without requiring them to play in a specific way or use specific powers.

Then why bother having it at all?

It is different, because those ATs aren't restricted in the same way. That brute isn't prevented from gaining Fury if he/she uses something other than Brawl. The corruptor isn't limited to only achieving Scourge damage if he's within XX' of the target. The controller doesn't lose Containment once it's established (and maintained).

Your Vigilance would require more levels of restrictions on defenders than any other inherent does for the other ATs, restrictions which would prevent it from functioning at all if certain powers were used and which would require players to play the AT in a very specific way which may not reward the player at all. Don't use KB, don't use powers at ranges greater than XX', don't go up against lone enemies...

But there is also no benefit from it if the player doesn't meet specific play style conditions. Players will see that 40' range and ask, "Why do I have attacks with 80' ranges, why do I have a snipe with a 120' range, when my inherent requires me to be within 40' in order to function? Does that mean I can only play at ranges of 40', and if so, why do my powers have longer ranges? Why am I denied the use of my inherent for playing 50' away from the enemies?"

Because they aren't counter intuitive to the AT. Fury doesn't have a restriction which prevents it from generating a damage bonus if the enemy is X' away. Scourge doesn't stop functioning if the player uses a KB power. Et cetera.

Why should defenders, who all have primarily ranged powers, and in fact are penalized for using melee attacks (0.55 Melee Damage modifier, versus 0.65 Ranged Damage modifier), be required to experience greater risk in order to benefit from an inherent?

There's nothing "far fetched" or "suicidal" about using Flash Arrow to reduce a spawn's Perception, or using Oppressive Gloom and Dark Pit to Stun a spawn. It would actually be safer than a Rad using fully slotted RI, because the enemies aren't even attacking and thus don't have that 5% chance to hit.

Let me know when you find a way to use Vengeance with no teammates and no risk.

Prove it.

I've seen "under" statements thrown around a lot, but I have yet to see direct side by side comparisons of defender and controller capability, which is actually the only way anyone can say whether anything is "underpowered".

So prove it. If you're that certain of your conclusion, analyze the damage output of every controller combination with optimal attack chains and every defender combination with optimal attack chains, including relevant buffs and debuffs, and applicable enhancement values, and the extreme outliers for both (high and low), and prove that one or the other is "overpowered" or "underpowered".

This challenge is free for anyone to pick up, not just PK. If any of you are absolutely convinced that defenders are getting the short end of the stick and can do a proper analysis, then do it and post it. Get it up in print so the developers can see exactly what is really happening and consider making adjustments where applicable.

I know there are several posters who can do this kind of analysis. I could, if I wanted to, but I don't want to, and I'm not the one proclaiming the death of defenders or imbalance between one AT and another, so I'm not obligated to do it.

So this gives me practically no benefit as a TA defender, other than to spread around the little 12.5% -Recharge debuffs from Entangling and Ice?

I have to say, I'd find this even less useful than the current iteration of Vigilance. Vigilance now, at least, "rewards" TAs equally with all other defenders. This version wouldn't.

Disagreement with a suggestion does not equate to anger. Read it again without putting your own bias on it, you will note that I am not shouting, sniping or spazzing out. My reply was calm and reasonable. Try to mirror that example.

Until the server shuts down for maintenance or I get mapserved.

They couldn't. They're minions, not bosses EBs or AVs or GMs.

I should correct myself here, though. The number of minions I can keep Stunned isn't 32, it's 10 plus however many I can pack into my OG aura or keep tagging with my OG aura by moving around. 32 is a fair estimate, equal to two "normal" AoE stuns, which I already know I can simulate through combined use of DP and OG.

Oppressive Gloom is a toggle, it requires no action beyond turning it on.

Dark Pit, with my slotting and global +Recharge, has a duration of 24.4s and a recharge time of 17s.

The total amount of time I'm spending to keep those minions Stunned is 1.07s, the animation time of Dark Pit. And I can keep them Stunned perpetually, even if I miss one here and one there, for that 1.07s every 17s. The minions standing near me are Stunned without any interaction on my part.

You really do need to understand more about powers before you dismiss how they can be used. And I'm not saying that out of anger, I'm trying to help you understand how easily your version of Vigilance could be manipulated.

I wouldn't need to if there was a cap. I could simply Flash a spawn, stand next to it and pick up the discount that way.

Before you try to argue with me again, note that Flash Arrow has a 1.83s animation time, 60s duration and is auto-hit. And on my TA/Dark, it recharges in 4.68s. I can keep any spawn blinded for as long as I choose, up to when the server shuts down for maintenance or I mapserve. So with almost no effort, almost no time spent and not even dedicating one of my powers to exclusively maintaining this effect, I can exploit this version of Vigilance.

You're confusing distance from teammates/pets with distance from targets. How far away a teammate/pet is has nothing to do with how far away a target is in regard to ranged powers. The range of your power works in conjunction with the range of your inherent, so your effective range is increased. Your pets can stand 60' away from your mastermind and still shoot a target 80' away from them, and your Nova can be 300' away from your team and still shoot a target 80' away without sacrificing the team bonus.

What you propose works exactly opposite of that. You have attacks which range 80', but you can't benefit from your inherent unless you move closer to the target, effectively eliminating the majority of the range in that attack. It imposes an artificial limit, a penalty, for playing intuitively. "If you attack from your full range, you will lose your endurance discount." "If you play intelligently, you will not benefit from your inherent."

...

I can exploit your Vigilance with one power, as a level 1 character, for 0 inf.

If you can't understand how that's different from leveling a character up to 50 and assembling a multi-hundred million inf build in order to make a power recharge before it expires, you really shouldn't be dabbling in power design theory.

You need to understand, this would not be difficult to exploit. Every defender could do it, easily, with practically no investment in time or inf. It's wide open for exploitation.

I am not belittling you, I am attempting to draw your attention to the flaws in your suggestion by emphasizing how ridiculously easy it would be to manipulate it.

Okay, that limits the exploit, but it doesn't remove it. Any Dark, Rad or Storm could still easily exploit this because they can all floor enemy hit chances. Any defender with sufficient inf could do it, too, by using Defense bonuses from IO sets.

Your suggestion is unique and interesting, but it is so blatantly and egregiously open for abuse that Castle would never even consider it as it stands. If you want it to be considered as a serious potential replacement, you need to learn more about the powers which could be used to exploit it, close the loopholes that you've left open to those powers and do so without rendering the inherent itself completely pointless (such as suggesting that the inherent wouldn't work on targets which were debuffed, or if the defender were using buffs on him/herself), then present it again without the attitude and hostility.

If the buffs are balanced so the defender neither benefits nor suffers, then the net effect is a loss due to the endurance cost and -recovery.

If the buffs are larger than the debuffs, then the net effect is an improvement, but it would either be a minute improvement for everyone, or an enormous improvement for teammates and minute improvement for the defender.

So the buffs would have to be very small, and the debuffs even smaller, in order to make it both useful and balanced, and at that point, it wouldn't be any different in final effect than Trick's suggestion, except that it wouldn't put a huge load on the servers.

Frankly, I wouldn't bother with a click buff power with a long, unenhanceable recharge and buffs which totaled up to 1-3% after accounting for the debuffs. It just wouldn't be enough to make any difference and it probably wouldn't even "pay for itself". We can easily acquire accolades which are much more powerful, have enhanceable recharges and don't penalize us right back into the Neolithic period.

You can't? I can Stun and Immobilize at least 32 minions, thus permitting me to keep them close to me without being attacked.

I can lead as many enemies as I can herd into an OSA + Glue patch, which would permit me to skirt the fringe of the powers' AoEs safely.

I can simply fire Flash Arrow at a spawn and just stand close to them, and they'll never see me, therefore also never attack me while I'm attacking a completely separate spawn.

I could find at least a dozen ways to exploit a PBAoE endurance discount aura power, and that's just with my TA/Dark. I have at least ten other defenders, I could come up with more ways to exploit it for each of them.

See my previous comment about encouraging defenders to skip key powers because they wouldn't be able to use them in that range (powers like Force Bubble, powers which deal KB, etc.).

Additionally, it would be counter intuitive when taking the ranges of many powers into consideration. Players look at powers, see that they have 60' or 80' ranges and try to play them at those ranges. Having an inherent which would essentially "not work" because the player was doing what he/she thought was the proper thing, playing at the appropriate ranges for their powers, would lead to a great deal of confusion and more than likely, a lot more complaints than the current Vigilance has caused.

Anything less than 60' would be unacceptable, and anything greater than melee range would be exploitable.

I'd rather see a power which works like Domination and applies a Break Free and/or instantly recharges all powers. Instead of tying it exclusively to attacking or buffing or debuffing, make each click attack, click buff and click debuff add a specific percentage to the power until it "pops", at which time it can be clicked. Additionally, scale the percentage according to team size. 1, the solo defender, would have the lowest scale, so the power would charge at the lowest rate. A full team of 8 would have the highest scale and charge up the power at the fastest rate, permitting the defender to use it sooner (because it is in teams when a defender is most likely to need such a thing sooner). This way it couldn't be significantly exploited by someone dual-boxing or spamming shields on pets, but it also wouldn't penalize the defender for not doing so.

It works solo, it offers something useful for all defenders regardless of primary/secondary/play style, it takes a huge step toward resolving some of the most serious problems defenders face in regard to "defending a team" (typically, being mezzed while the team is falling, or not having access to a power which could turn the tides because it was recharging) and it encourages defenders to use all of their powers, rather than simply turn on a toggle or putting a power on auto and going AFK with follow on the tank/leader.

And it doesn't require 33 attrib checks per defender per server tick, or reliance on team HP.

Anything less than 60' would be all but useless unless the defender skipped or forwent usage of key powers (cones, KB, Force Bubble, etc.). Anything greater than melee range could very easily be exploited. In either case, it's not a solution which is palatable from the developers' viewpoint.

>.>

With the damage it already deals, the other effects built into it and its existence in a powerset with -Res debuffs and a significant amount of control, any kind of damage buff, including Scourge, is highly unlikely.

3s for one application of Acid plus one application of Disruption. The second application of Disruption is the recharge time of the power plus 1.17s animation, so it's determined by the +Recharge available (globally or slotted in that power). The Achilles' Heel proc is part and parcel of Acid's animation and adds nothing to the total animation time.

EF has a 1.5s cast time and applies 30% -Res. TA spends twice that long and applies 10-30% more (dependent on Achilles' Heel proc in Acid) if it uses both Acid and Disruption, or 20-40% with a single application of Acid w/Achilles' Heel proc and 1.83s animation.

And /Sonic's time to stack is exactly the same for both primaries, presuming identical +Recharge in the attacks.

The difference doesn't really favor Rad unless Fallout is factored in, and that power is limited to team usage and a base recharge time of 300s with a 38s duration, giving it less than ideal up time ratio even presuming a willing victim is present and high +Recharge is available.

etc, and again, it applies only to the highlighted text, so you don't have to worry about your entire post coming out yellow or bold or really big.

Also, it doesn't matter if you capitalize your tags or leave them lowercase. They work both ways.

Ctrl+A selects all text in a window.

Ctrl+C copies all highlighted text.

Ctrl+X cuts all highlighted text. This text is not deleted, it is saved just like copied text is.

Ctrl+V pastes text into a window. If you have highlighted text, Ctrl+V will paste it over that highlighted text, not at the bottom or top of the text field.

Ctrl+Z is the "undo" shortcut. If you make a mistake and paste or type over something, or delete text accidentally, you can use Ctrl+Z to restore it. It has multiple "undo levels" so you can restore quite a bit of text.

Note, however, that "undo" does not store text which you have copied or cut. That is stored in your clipboard, which is the operating system's little scratch pad specifically designed to store copied or cut things (text, pictures, hyperlinks, etc.). So if you copy or cut one paragraph, then copy or cut a second paragraph without pasting the first paragraph, that first paragraph will be lost. Always remember to paste what you've copied or cut before copying or cutting something else, or use an enhanced clipboard application, so you don't make a mistake and overwrite something that you were only trying to move around or change a little.

All emoticons (smilies) have keyboard shortcuts, too, so you can make a simply by typing : and ) together, for example.

Well, that's sort of why I asked how it could be done without moving.

Irradiate has a 20s base recharge and deals 36.1 base damage. Neutron Bomb has a 16s base recharge and deals 32.5 base damage.

NF has a base 10s recharge and deals 39.8 base damage. TT has a base 10s recharge and deals 33.8 base damage.

So you've got two powers with slower recharge times and lower base damage in /Rad. If all other things are equal (primary, +Damage, +Recharge, -Res, procs, accuracy, etc.), the /Rad just isn't going to be dealing as much damage or dealing it as quickly as /Dark. The numbers just don't permit it. In order to surpass /Dark's damage output, the /Rad has to use Electron Haze.

Which requires moving.

Unless the /Rad is using Electron Haze and Neutron Bomb... but even then, the difference in recharge times (2x 10s versus 2x 16s) indicates that /Dark is still capable of matching or exceeding /Rad.

/Rad does have the advantage of all of its damage being delivered more quickly, though, even instantly if Irradiate is not used, which, as BlackSly noted, is the weak point in /Dark's damage output (and the reason i started playing around with procs in that power).

To expand on this, both +Damage and -Res will permit you to achieve 4x damage in their distinct ways, but the 4x for +Damage is base damage, whereas -Res is total damage.

Defenders have a damage cap of 400%. 100% base damage, the unenhanced, unbuffed damage that any power can deal, and the sum of all +Damage applied to the power individually or globally up to 300%. Slotting with three damage SOs adds ~95%, so by default, just by slotting your attacks properly you're halfway to the damage cap.

-Res also has a cap, 300%, but -Res is applied to the enemy, not the player, and therefore is not additive. -Res is multiplicative, meaning it multiplies the total damage dealt.

With no enhancements slotted, a defender with 95% -Res will deal precisely the same damage as a defender with 95% +Damage. After accounting for slotting (presuming three Damage SOs), -Res increases damage output by nearly twice as much, point for point, as +Damage.

Example: I take Dark Blast and slot it with three Damage SOs. My base damage is 36.1, my damage after slotting is 36.1 * 1.95 = 70.395.

If I apply 40% -Res (one application of Acid, one application of Disruption), the damage I deal increases to 70.395 * 1.4 = 98.553.

In order to achieve the same final damage output using +Damage, I would need 78% +Damage. 36.1 * (1.00 [color:yellow]base[/color] + 0.95 [color:yellow]enhancements[/color] + 0.785 [color:yellow]additional +Damage[/color]) = 98.553.

Fulcrum Shift is actually only as good as ~100% -Res (again, unless the defender has no Damage enhancements slotted) when looking at the base effect.

Now, these two independent mechanics function in conjunction with each other, so any */Sonic defender with +Damage is going to see improved results. But does that mean Kin/Sonic is the "winner" in terms of damage output?

No, because all defenders can cap their own damage. All defenders have access to Assault, Soul Drain, Rage inspirations, IO set bonuses or other existing sources of +Damage. A Kin/Sonic will saturate his/her total damage output with FS and the stacked -Res from /Sonic blasts and then be limited by the total amount of -Res he/she is acquiring from those /Sonic blasts.

Presuming both the Kin/Sonic and TA/Sonic can stack 80% -Res from /Sonic, and the TA/Sonic is using Acid Arrow, Disruption Arrow (double-stacked) and the Achilles' Heel proc, the TA/Sonic needs only an additional 40% +Damage to match the total damage output of the Kin/Sonic. That's roughly the equivalent of Assault and one Rage inspiration (43.75%), and it still leaves the TA/Sonic 161.25% below the damage cap.

If both the Kin/Sonic and TA/Sonic are damage capped and achieving the same 80% -Res from stacked Sonic blasts, the Kin/Sonic would deal 218.88 with Shriek, whereas the TA/Sonic would deal 316.16, indicating an almost 30% increase over the Kin/Sonic's damage output.

A Kin/Sonic can "do it faster" and relies less heavily on +Recharge to reach saturation. TA/Sonic has "ramp up" time, the time it takes to apply one application of Acid, one application of Disruption and the recharge time before a second application of Disruption can be used. The TA/Sonic can work around this and alleviate the majority of the "ramp up" time by simply adding another ~40% +Damage to compensate for not waiting for Disruption to recharge for its second application, reducing the effective difference to less than one second (animation time for Acid + Disruption, 3s. animation time for FS, 2.17s), but without that additional +Damage, the TA/Sonic will fall slightly behind the Kin/Sonic. This is relevant in real game play, because in the time it would take for the TA/Sonic to stack that second Disruption, let's say ~15s, the Kin/Sonic may very well be moving on to the next spawn if the TA/Sonic has not acquired that additional ~40% +Damage to replace the second use of Disruption.

In any "hard target" fight, even accounting for the reapplication of Acid and Disruption frequently, the TA/Sonic will pull ahead in total damage output and time to defeat.

And the TA/Sonic has more AoE damage potential than Kin/Sonic, as Turbo_Ski noted, due to OSA.

They're both fantastic builds for damage output, but the numbers show TA/Sonic as being one of the most devastating damage dealing builds available to defenders, if the player is "doing it right".

Bottom line, the instant enhancements are factored in, -Res becomes superior to +Damage. Optimally, both used together is the best route, but in solo situations, TA/Sonic will always be capable of outperforming all other builds in terms of damage output because TA has the highest potential -Res stacking capability. In team situations, Rad/Sonic is the only build which can achieve higher total -Res, and then only if a teammate is used for Fallout.

The status resistance cap was increased to 10,001.01% in I13.

-Res is capped at 300%.

No, not much. Even if the third tier power were allowed, TA still wouldn't gain any appreciable improvement, and Sonic would have absolutely nothing. If something like this were implemented, it would have to apply to specific powers in each powerset, not be generally applied to tiers.

Maybe they should just rework Self Destruct, add a "teleport to nearest group of enemies even when affected by status effect" function and let us pop into a spawn and blow ourselves to bits when the poo hits the fan. Heck, if nothing else, it'd at least be more fun and noticeable than an endurance discount reliant on teammates getting beaten down, and probably a lot more popular.

I like it, but I suspect it would be a point of contention. Only two other ATs have "free" endurance management in the form of +Recovery (Kheldians in Nova/Dwarf form and Soldiers of Arachnos), and both of them are restricted to players who have leveled an appropriate character to 50. If defenders received "free" +Recovery, it would almost certainly result in some very long and angry debates.

I do think the status resistance is appropriate, thematic and worth considering. It's not outright status protection, so it wouldn't leave the other "squishy" ATs feeling slighted and it also wouldn't remove the element of risk from playing a defender. However, I also think it could be argued that, since status resistance already exists for defenders (Accelerate Metabolism), the argument could be made to "just roll a Rad", perhaps justifiably.

Also, one would have to consider how this would empower Rads, since they already have such strong status resistance with AM (216.25% Hold, Stun, Immob, Sleep). Stacking even more status resistance on top of that, in conjunction with the change which ended toggle drops (for toggles which do not affect enemies), may be too much of a balance shift.

+Regen would be useful for some primaries/secondaries, but is it "vigilant" in a team scenario? How does recovering HP faster reflect a defender's attention to the team? Or, for that matter, him/herself? If he/she is taking damage, wouldn't that imply that he/she is not being properly vigilant?

Again, I do like the idea, but as much as I'd like to see all of these things, I have a feeling that they're not what the developers would consider if they were to do a pass on Vigilance.

I honestly have no clue what would be useful for all primaries, thematically appropriate and usable without being overpowered. A Power Boost type effect wouldn't be useful to "cast and forget" sets like FF or Sonic. Status resistance wouldn't be useful for Rads. The ability to use tier 1/2 powers while Held/Slept/Stunned wouldn't be useful for TAs or Stormies. A damage increase tool like the old Defiance wouldn't be useful for players who don't attack (as much as it pains me, i have to consider those types of players as well). A recharge booster... not helping FF or Sonic, again.

I think Vigilance has lasted in its current form for as long as it has simply because there may be no single solution which is applicable to all primaries. It may be that the only way to create an effective and universally satisfactory Vigilance is by giving each primary some kind of additional thematic bonus, like the secondary effects in the blast sets, and simply referring to it globally as "Vigilance".

I don't know, maybe something as simple as a charging power like Domination, but which acts as a Break Free or offers a combination Hasten/Conserve Power effect, would be enough. Base it on the amount of damage prevented and/or alleviated (i don't think code exists for this, but it couldn't be based on frequency of power usage or FF and Sonic defenders would either gain no benefit, or all defenders would be able to exploit it simply by spamming powers with fast recharge times, so it would require new code), make it account for the solo defender, not just teammates, and call it a day. There may be nothing that all defenders benefit from, or we may be overlooking something. *shrug*

We have the developers' data mining showing that PvP is not something the majority of players engage in.

We have PvP zones and Arenas which are empty or nearly empty all of the time, and even at their peak populations in the past never represented a significant portion of the player base, corroborating the data mining and directly visible to players.

We have developer posts stating that they are aware of the majority's preference not to engage in PvP, and that they do not intend to force players to do so.

We have changes to the game, such as removing PvP "talk to" contacts from PvP zones as a direct response to player outcry over being "forced into PvP".

We don't have to open a dialog with every individual player. The facts speak for themselves.

We have evidence indicating that there is a strong negative sentiment in and extreme lack of interest toward PvP in this game's player base.

You have exactly what you accuse us of, nothing but your argument and the attitude of speaking for everyone as though they were you.

Ball's back in your court. We have our head count, per the developers' data mines, statements and changes to the game. You're going to have to come up with something better than opinions, theory and demands if you want this discussion to continue productively.