NPrince

I'm not sure how I feel about villainous Khelds. I mean, I've wanted a Kheld for a while now, and my first 50 will definitly be a Villain, so that's kinda nice. But on the flip side, heroes get TWO Kheld ATs to choose from. I can only see how we'll get one (Nictus) unless the Nictus have some fancy new version you can also pick from *shrugs*

Also, it DOES sound like we'll be getting Wings soon, but does that mean we'll see Avilians? I always assumed the reason they wanted Avilians was to allow winged characters, but if they're just going to slap them on our costumes (are they animated? It would rock if they were... and if they are... can they animate our tails at last?), do we really need a whole AT for them?

This suggests to me that IF we see Avilians, it won't be for some time. Looks kinda like they did what they often do, which is scrap an idea and recycle the best bits for the game.

[ QUOTE ]
A minor point that's bugging the everloving [censored] out of me.

Stop saying a Dominator + X is better than just X as if it's some inherent boon to being a Dominator. ANYTHING is better with more numbers.

ANYTHING.

A Mastermind who doesn't spec in his pets and a Stalker is better than just a Stalker. [censored] Jenkins and a Stalker is better than just a Stalker. It's not a [censored] selling of Dominators that if you pair them up with another AT, things don't get worse.

Breathe. Two. Three. Four.

Okay, continue.

[/ QUOTE ]

At least from a PvE perspective, this isn't always true. Solo, I get spawns of three and LTs instead of bosses. Bring in one additional person, and I get spawns of 5 and full bosses. If that person can carry his weight, I'm fine. If he can't, I'm in trouble.

In particular, I've noticed Stalkers have a hard time carrying their weight PvE. I'd rather team with pretty much anything BUT a Stalker in PvE, as they do nothing to soak up the aggro, and either they die more quickly than I can protect them, or I do.

If I get a very skilled Stalker, this problem goes away, but I tend to play with poor-to-mediocre Stalkers, and they literally cause me more trouble than going it alone.

(which is why I think Stalkers are very overrated. They're good in PvP, but in PvE, where the ability to splatter 1 out of 5 guys before you need to retreat, they're less stellar...)

PvP, though, nothing changes if you take a teammate, but alot of the Dominator's problem is that a very good portion of his powers are dedicated to wide-radius AoE effects meant to lock down large spawns. This is completely useless against a single, high-powered Scrapper or Blaster.

We, like Masterminds, tend to be at our best when fighting large numbers of weak targets, rather than a single powerful target (though this can change once Domination fires off, and it seems the changes to Domination are making the necessary difference in PvP.)

I continue to hold out for Blaster-level HP.

[ QUOTE ]
weird that they'd bother then

[/ QUOTE ]

That's what I was wondering. I don't get it either

I guess I should just assume they mean "Melee ATs are getting a damage buff to PPP ranged powers."

Then I can sleep at night.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Regardless of whether or not the 1/3 buff to the SR passives was intentional, it was an improvement to a low-powered set, which for me at least made the game feel a touch more fun.

I don't go planning my set out perfectly in advance, I create on concept, but it seems to me that nobody who plans the perfect set wants to touch these powers.

*sigh* I'm way off topic, aren't I?

[/ QUOTE ]

I take them. I'm not a min/maxer, but I also advocate taking them as well. Although many SR scrappers would dispute my opinion on their worth, not many would call it an uninformed opinion. So you can add me to the nobody list if anyone asks.

Especially for stalkers that are often stacking both hide and stealth on their SR defenses, not taking the passives is bordering on insane.

Not that I don't think SR needs a buff, but I'm not going to lie about my opinion of the strength of the passives to try to get one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed, Removing those buffs will not result in me taking them out of my build. I have every intention of getting all three and keeping them. I like the scaling resistance and I like the "always on" Defense buff.

I still liked that buff though.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Of all the sets, SR was overpowered? *laughs*

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe the new Defense scaling balances it? *shrugs*

[/ QUOTE ]

The I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler balances Defense. SR is not quite balanced against the other sets even against even-level minion-class attackers (i.e. 50% base tohit and 1.0 accuracy), so the I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler doesn't balance SR. It just makes it less unbalanced against higher Rank/Level targets.

[/ QUOTE ]

I meant that, perhaps, they decided that the scaling change was more than sufficient. I dunno.

Alot of Stalkers seem to think that /Nin is better than /SR, and that the changes made to the SR passives was enought to make /SR as good as /Nin. I'm not a Stalker player, but a Scrapper player, but still, I can appreciate their logic.

[ QUOTE ]
the buff gave like 2% extra defense WITH 3 SO def slots in the passives, it was so little it was pointless to me so i specced out of the passives to get aid self (on test with the freespec). aid self is working great for me, and now that they've re-nerfed the passives i'll never consider using them again

seriously, /SR is all about evasion, it should do that better than the other classes by a fair margin, this nerf stinks. lucky the passives already sucked anyway

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not a nerf, it's a buff that never was.

But other than that nit-pick, I agree. With this change, I was finally able to go toe-to-toe with bosses and such the way I'm SUPPOSED to. I'm sure some of that was the scaling change, but some of it was definitly the passives I'd taken when I tested this.

I liked it.

I think it should stay.

[ QUOTE ]
Of all the sets, SR was overpowered? *laughs*

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe the new Defense scaling balances it? *shrugs*

This seems the best place to put it.

According to the latest (5-10) patchnotes, the SR passives buff has been removed.

o.O

I was pretty happy with the buff. I wonder what made them decide to remove it. Wasn't it there to better balance it with /Nin?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We get nice armor and another cool pet.

[/ QUOTE ]

The unrechargeable 4/15 pet is very debateable on coolness. Being a Grav, the last thing I really need is a 27% of the time pet.

Maybe the problem I have is how I see my role on a team. I compare myself in role to a Tanker. I am to control the agro then dish out enough damage to eliminate anything that has escaped. A Tanker does this by Taunt, Passive defenses/damage mitigation and high hit point. Obviously they need mez protection to do their job (Holds drop all toggles and prevent Taunting.) I do it by eliminating the incoming damage then mopping up what's left. Now I will admit that a held opponent is the best opponent. The issues that I have is that we have only pool power defenses/damage mitigation (taken care of in the PPP) but have low hit points, weak damage (which the devs have partially corrected) and no mez protection. We get held, we're done for (very evident in PvP.)

While getting Tanker damage on my ranged attacks isn't likely, I don't see a problem with getting 75% on ranged and 80% on melee. I face the same risks that Tankers, Scrappers, Brutes and Stalkers do without several of their benefits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, my PPP post is admitadly skeptical.

And you have me in a bind. I also think we need more HP (blaster-level, as how they fight and how we fight is similar), and I would much rather have my pets out all the time than dragging them out once in a while, even if that meant having our pets reduced.

(though it strikes me that they keep the pets on a limited timer to avoid the "Massive Swarm of pets" that people already hate about from Masterminds. Imagine a full team of villains with all their pets out all the time? I't s a freaking army...)

[ QUOTE ]
Or they are a bubbler and take Fire Epic and Get mez protection.

They do triple damage in PvP. Thats right Triple.

[/ QUOTE ]

That certainly explains why I'm seeing the huge numbers I do on the forums.

[ QUOTE ]
Its this simple. With containment and their Epic Blasts in PvP they do too much damage. I say let them keep their PvE value but they need to be toned down in PvP. Ive seen them out blast a blaster from range. (Fire Epic)

[/ QUOTE ]

First, as I understand it, Controllers get to pick between Fireball OR Mez protection from their EPPs (I could be wrong)

So they're either "overpowered" with damage or "overpowered" with Mez protection.

To be fair, we don't have our PPPs yet to compare. We also get fireballs (they just don't double in damage when hitting held targets which is, honestly, a big deal). We get nice armor and another cool pet. Maybe... it'll make the difference?

I'm kinda skeptical (especially after realizing how PPPs work and the fact that our AoE attack is built assuming we don't already have AoE attacks, which we do), but we'll see.

Tankers can't toss off Domination every four minutes and nearly double their damage like we can. Asking for 80% is probably too much.

[ QUOTE ]
I'd much rather see Dominators (and Defenders for that matter) buffed than Controllers nerfed. There's no logical reason why any class who doesn't even have somuch as a [censored] attack set should be approaching the damage of a class which does. It's blows away the whole notion of even HAVING sets dedicated to damage if you don't need one to deal signifigant amounts of damage.

[/ QUOTE ]

We've had this argument before. I've seen numbers like 300-400 tossed around for Controllers by posters. They approach, by your own calculations, unbuffed Corrupters. Defenders complain about Controllers (They offer better damage, nearly as good buffs, and Control). We complain about Controllers (They offer better damage, as good control, and buffs). Corruptors haven't, but what do you bet when people change sides... (They offer nearly as good damage, just as good buffs, and Control), and you never really did say what you thought about it, except to say you felt Controller damage was exaggerated.

Because our melee now matches unbuffed Corruptor ranged damage. If Controllers aren't reaching that point, then we do more damage than them in general, and far more when we hit Domination.

IF they're doing more damage than us at this point, they're overpowered. To have us consistently hitting 300-400 damage is PROBABLY too much. It's certainly too much for Controllers.

So I see it as FAR more likely that, in this balancing game, Controllers will get nerfed. If we get buffed to the point where we exceed their damage by enough to compensate for the fact that they can also buff, we'll be better in damage then Corruptors with Holds to boot, and then Corruptors will need buffing to remain the premiere damage dealers, at which point they overpower Stalkers and Brutes so we have to buff them and...

Well, you get the idea. Nerf Controllers in abstentia, because everyone gets buffed but them.

So, again, which is it? Are controllers too powerful, or is their damage levels exaggerated? You continue to compare them to Dominators, continue to say that Controllers shouldn't be nerfed, and then shut your trap as soon as someone brings up Defenders or Corruptors as though they don't matter in this little game, but they do. They're just as affected as Controllers as we are.

You can't have it both ways. They either do too much damage (which includes in comparison to us), or they don't.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm very pleased with the change. I'm kinda with Conrad on the whole "Why do they keep pushing us into Melee?"

But I don't mind too much, as both of my Doms are melee specialists, so *shrugs*

Most of the best tricks I have (Hotfeet, Drain Psyche) all work best in melee anyway. Now I do more melee damage to boot.

Wouldn't turn down a boost to ranged damage or to HP, but I'm still skeptical about Mez protection.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're not a melee specialist, you're a melee range specialist. Psionic Assault has a grand total of one melee attack of any servicable use as such; Telekinetic Thrust is a kick of knockback, but it's not exactly the crux of anybody's damage scheme.

Once again, it really seems like somebody made a change without fully understanding (or at least considering) the entirety of how a Dominator works. Boosting Melee Damage when some sets have a grand total of two melee attacks and expecting a class-wide increase in damage isn't going to get you much.

It's sort of like 'the rich get richer, the poor get poorer'.

[/ QUOTE ]

More like the rich get richer and the poor stay just where they are.

There's kind of an edge to your comments, and I'm not really sure where it's coming from. This is the second buff we've gotten in I7. Clearly, the Devs ARE paying attention and agree that we need some help. If this isn't enough, they'll likely notice.

I'm not so worried about PvP, though between the quicker Domination build and the higher damage (which translates to EVEN MORE damage when Domination goes off), I suspect it'll be noticable there (though I STILL think we need Blaster-level HP).

But really, the big boost to this is PvE. Mobs will go down faster, which means I'm less likely to die. This is a good change, and I don't think we need MORE Melee damage than this. Ranged? I think good arguments can be made for it, but I suspect (pending testing) that 75% melee is fine.

I'm very pleased with the change. I'm kinda with Conrad on the whole "Why do they keep pushing us into Melee?"

But I don't mind too much, as both of my Doms are melee specialists, so *shrugs*

Most of the best tricks I have (Hotfeet, Drain Psyche) all work best in melee anyway. Now I do more melee damage to boot.

Wouldn't turn down a boost to ranged damage or to HP, but I'm still skeptical about Mez protection.

[ QUOTE ]
doms should be better at control (or at LEAST equal), since we get no buffs/debuffs

our secondary is purely dmg, and the other 4 at's in CoV do damage far better than we do, i'd rather focus on control and actually be good at it

[/ QUOTE ]

Control should be equal, as we both have it as Primaries. They get longer durations, but we get Domination (even longer durations and buffed Mag) and some sets get Powerboost, so this looks even to me (but it might not be)

We should be the better damage dealers, though between containment and self-buffing, some argue Controllers are better, or at least match us. THAT bothers me a bit. The damage dealing holders should be more damaging than the buffing holders.

But if you raise us up to be more damaging than Controllers, do we overpower the othersets? If you "fix it" by nerfing Containment instead, do Controllers UTTERLY SUCK at Solo play/

*shrugs*

I wish I knew the answer.

I like the suggestion of early pets, but that makes Controllers a little too much "chibi masterminds" for my tastes.

[ QUOTE ]
I do have to say that I'm not seeing them be anything I would consider "more powerful". Scarlet's analysis indicated for one power that it was 5% more damaging, proportionally, but that's pretty meaningless, IMO, even if that holds true across the board. Among other things, Heroes tend to have higher base damage than comparable Villain ATs, so that's going to be a net loss.

I bascially have chosen to ignore that statement about "more powerful," because I think it represents an idea of the utility for these powers that isn't likely to be considered useful by the general gaming population.

Assume for a second that the pets really rock (and they might). They still are going to have, at best, around a 50% downtime. Lots of people are going to dislike that compared to something less flashy that's more utilitarian and less conditional. Such as an anti-mez toggle on a Dominator.

[/ QUOTE ]

But the PPPs ARE demonstrably better. Scarlet proved it (in at least one case). You might want it to be EVEN better, and I won't claim that such a desire is irrational, but you can't say they're NOT better. They are.

Further, whether Villains are powerful enough at level 50 is a seperate issue. If we're not, we don't need overcharged PPPs, but a more profound, base change to our characters.

And as a Dominator, I can tell you not to underestimate the power of a pocket nuke. Having a pet that you sit on and only summon when you need (like, say, the end fight or against a large group of Heroes) is quite an advantage. Don't dismiss it.

Though PERSONALLY, I'd rather have the pets reduced in power and made permanent, like any other pet. I suppose the reason they chose not to do this was to avoid the much-complained-about nightmare scenario of EVERYONE being a mastermind and a team of 8 fielding something like 8- 20 additional pets O.O Can you imagine trying to navigate that swarm?

So the long recharge prevents everyone from dragging their pet through the whole mission at least, so I can see the benefit of that, even if I'd prefer having my Fortunata with me at all times *nods*

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Dominators are a one-trick pony.
Domination is all they have. Without it they're inferior to everything else. Everything.

Three white-con minions? Yeah, they can kick your butt. Seriously. I wish I was joking.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. Even I think this is a little extreme, lol. When you can't kill three white-con minions it's time to ask questions about your build.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah. My original Dominator, a Fire/Fire, was unable to solo because white con minions killed him continually. I ended up giving up.

Currently my level 14 Plant/Ice barely can manage three white cons, and up against the mission Lt? He gets owned.

Whereas with Domination he has soloed spawns for an 8-man party.

Thus why I feel Domination needs to be redone. It currently is horrible.

[/ QUOTE ]


It's tough being a Dominator pre-SOs (though, really, that's true of everyone), but my Plant/Psi managed it. He played the Lockdown game, making sure everyone was either held or knocked down before he seriously started to lay in the damage. It's a hectic, tense playstyle, but that's part of the appeal of Dominators for me.

I find my Fire/Thorns has less trouble. He has the damage to simply stand up to a spawn of 3 whites and his Hotfeet keeps them from Meleeing him. The occassional hold just adds to my survival.

I have a hard time imagining a fire/fire build that can't survive three white-cons, considering how well my Fire/Thorns is doing (though part of that, I'm sure, is my experience, as I've done this before).

We're less of a one-trick pony than Stalkers are, and nobody's asking for Stalker buffs.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As far as magnitude goes, expect it to be exactly the same as Tanker APPs such as Block of Ice, Stone Prison, etc..

Those have a hold magnitude that is able to work on LTs but not Bosses, making it Mag2 I believe. Recharge will likely be 30+ seconds, and duration will be around 8-10 seconds.

Ranged holds are possibly the most nerfed APP crossover skill, and I think that it will be the same for PPPs.

If I'm wrong about mag and recharge/durtation then GW's hold will indeed be an amazing skill for stalkers. Otherwise, the holds are a bit of a let down.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds about right, actually.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whatever happened to "The Patron Powers are stronger and more powerful than the “equivalent” powers in City of Heroes (the Ancillary Power Pools)..." I don't have a level 40 villian to test with but from everything described on the boards and Castle's quote directly they are intended to have the same power.

Here's the question: How are the Villian Patron Pool Powers more "powerful" than Hero Ancillary Pool Powers?

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? Didn't you just read that post? He says "Expect the hold to be similar in power to the holds from the EPPs."

Yeah, those holds are weak, but you're treading into foreign territory. That seems to be the norm.

And actually, if you check out the Ghost Widow PPP thread, one guy ran the numbers, did the math, and found her ranged Gloom-like attack IS more powerful than the exact same EPP on the Hero side. It's got a 5% boost to damage. A Defender with Gloom is better off, but a Brute is better with Gloom than a Tanker (or whatever it was), albeit by a very small margin.

Don't expect us to be blowing the heroes out of the water, but most of the numbers I'm seeing suggests we do, in fact, have an advantage.

[ QUOTE ]

8. Would it kill you to throw in some randomized women as well as men? I mean, is there some guild rule among thugs that they all have to be guys?


[/ QUOTE ]

Feh. I think they should do this with everyone, or spread around some options of choosing male/female characters. Can you imagine a wraithly, beautiful, furious female Liche? Or a tough, tom-boy Commando? Or a hot girl-ninja?

I'd just like to see some ladies among MM pets REGARDLESS.

Huh. So that's why I didn't generate crap for Domination the two seconds I was standing in RV. I didn't hit anything.

Hmmm... I am curious if Psychic Shockwave might do crazy things in PvP though.

And AreEss, Fishw0rk knows what he's talking about when it comes to PvP. He's one of the few dominators I know that seriously hangs out and fights in PvP zones. I wouldn't dismiss him out of hand like that.

EDIT: Oh, and I agree about the testing. We should probably turn our attention to that. The debate here is 11 pages (by my count) without Dev comment. We've had months of this very debate in the Dom forums without Dev comment. If they haven't said anything by now, more of the same won't change it. If they don't agree with us by now, more of the same won't change it.

Better to tackle the change, play with it, test it out, and report results.

And put extra special care to make sure you don't come across as saying "Oh, well, I knew it wouldn't work anyway." That just diminishes any argument you make. Tell us why it works so great. Tell us where it's weakened. Some people are already reporting an uptick in how often Domination is available in PvE, and that's good. Some people report that getting Dom up in PvP is easier too.

Yeah, we die fast in RV, but did you look at the Pillboxes? Straight Heroes. It's 2-1 hero vs Villain, with level 40 villains vs level 50 heroes. Everyone's being 2 shot out there. So go to Warburg or whatever. RV won't be a "fair match" for a few months yet, regardless of your AT.

Less whine! More productivity! That doesn't mean criticism should stop, just make it constructive!

Thugs/Poison here. My only wish is that it had a few more buffs in it, so I could run around giving my fellow villains "their fix" hehehehe.

I think the Punks look fine. Yeah, they look wussy when you first drag them out, but most minions do. Once you Equip them, they look pretty tough though.

Oh, and sign me up for picking what my minions look like. It's hard being Yakuza with a bunch of black dudes watching your back. Espeically when one is named Tomo or Akira or whatever :P

Huh.

So, on paper, the PPPs don't suck? Iiiinteresting.

We'll see how they play out, as I'm a little concerned about the AoE attack I'm getting from Ghost Widow. I already have AoE attacks (Cones, though, rather than burst radii) and while I won't turn my nose up at another, if it's crap compared to what I already have and costs more endurance to boot, I may just be as well without it.

And I'm curious how the pets turn out. I'm skeptical about somethign that's only around for 4 minutes out of 15...

Hooray!

[ QUOTE ]
There aren't enough travel powers being used in that video.

[/ QUOTE ]

No kidding. I've never seen a PvP fight where everyone's just standing around hitting each other.

I mean, that's one of the really exciting things about the PvP zones. It's complete chaos, like a flowing Warzone with people flying and zapping people and explosions and a light tapping in the water before a sword bursts through your gut O.O

That's what makes CoV PvP so great. I'm surprised you guys didn't show that... though I suppose it makes sense. Hard to "set up" a film like that.

[ QUOTE ]
(To other Dominators: The nature of the AT, and the fact that any routine Dominator player is quite proud of their ability to function as one, leads to comments such as the above often being construed as 'whinying from someone who doesn't know how to play and is having a hard time trying to ruin our AT'. I do -not- want Dominators to get "easier", else I would by complaining about survivability. I argue for more effectiveness.)

[/ QUOTE ]

As one of those posters who usually growls at people who complain about Dominators (and in my defense, there's alot of annoying whiners in the Dominator forums, so it's a knee jerk reaction), I have to say I'm coming around.

Corruptors have ranged, blaster-style attacks as their primary. If they had this alone, one would assume that the value would be 100% of what a blaster does. But they do 75%. Why? Because they buff, and they can self buff, and that evens the difference out.

75% seems to be the golden number for secondaries. Controllers and Corruptors, for example, are 75% as effective with their secondaries as Defenders are with their primaries. Defenders break this trend by having 65% in their secondaries (their attacks). But that's ok, they can self-buff, and this evens it out.

Dominators do 65% damage with their secondaries (Yes, Melee does more damage, but with greater risk comes greater reward. Blasters do more damage with their melees too). Shouldn't it be 75%? That would be more consistent. We don't self-buff, not in the consistent, perma-manner that Defenders and Corruptors can. Couple this with the fact that we have low hit points and no passive forms of defense, and it becomes troublesome.

Domination does throw a spanner in the works. Does the massive bonus we have on for 90 seconds out of 200 (rather than 300, what it used to be) even things out? I'm not sure. I need to test to find out. >.< Too bad the test server is still down.

*sighs and waits patiently*