Pilcrow

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He blued out all the CoV stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well Taser, you may not agree with me a lot. But at least you "get" me.

[/ QUOTE ]


With your post count nearly Cartel-esque, most of us are far too beneath you to understand anything you say.


[/ QUOTE ]

Oh please. I'm a guy who spends lots of his free time playing and talking about a VIDEO GAME.

My sense of humor may be obscure at times, but that's not a sign of superiority.

[ QUOTE ]
He blued out all the CoV stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well Taser, you may not agree with me a lot. But at least you "get" me.

My post will look a little better from the City of Villains boards than it looks from the City of Heroes boards.

That seems fair to me.

New High Level Zones: Grandville (Levels 40-50, PVE, COV only) – A vertical zone
Oh, how fripping COOL is that gonna be!! I don't care that I'll HAVE to have Fly or TP, that's just awesome!!!

Grandville contains Spider City
I think I need to change my pants



Recluse’s Victory (Levels 40-50, PVP, COV and COH)
I hope this Press release is partial, because if there is another release without a single new pure PVP zone for CoH, I'm going to be fairly disappointed.
[/color]


Mayhem Missions (Villains only)
Take villainy to the streets of Paragon City with tense new timed missions among destructible environments, which also unlock multiple random events. Players harass citizens, rob stores, destroy property, plant bombs and battle the police in these exciting open-ended timed missions. Causing extra mayhem results in bonus rewards![/b]

I had to post every single word. Destructible environments. Open-ended missions! Extra XP for extra mayhem!

Heaven, I'm in heaven!

Other New Missions (Villains only) Over 300 new missions, including new custom missions. Choose signature villains as Patrons to unlock more exclusive mission content

Yeah, level 40-50 content for the villains. And the Patron idea is genius, even more so when you notice...

Patron Powers (Villains only)
Villain players can select unique new Patron Power Pools based on the specific signature villain that they select (Scirocco™, Black Scorpion™, Ghost Widow™, Captain Mako™).

Now THAT sounds like truly epic epic pools. My heart is a twitter!

New Power Sets! (Villains only): Electric Melee, Electric Armor (Brute), Thug pets (Mastermind), Dark Armor, Dark Melee (Stalker)

OK. Sorry for the delay. I, ummmm, fainted a bit there.

/fans self



New Base Features (Heroes and Villains)
So, ummm, you've expanded the feature that most of us can't afford to participate in. Whee.

Quality of Life Features: (Heroes and Villains): New Global Chat and UI features improve the overall ‘City of’ experience.

CoH Art Upgrades (Heroes) City of Heroes gains reflective windows, added bump and specular mapping, a variety of higher resolution textures, and full screen depth of field effects.

Color me, underwhelmed.

New Costume Items

Well, that'll be nice-ish if it's the CoV costumes, actually something to celebrate if there is some real new stuff in there.



My God, this new version includes some of the things we have been looking for for a long time. I'm completely thrilled with what I see here and the direction it seems to indicate. I would be even more excited about it but I prefer playing heroes to villains and for heroes, this press release boils down to:



Guess my only hope is to wait until I8. :P

[ QUOTE ]
Not to toot my own horn or anything, but I thought this was a pretty darn good idea.

Make flight speed enhancers Schedule D, so that you get a 60% buff, and then I think most flyers' woes will go away.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is the best idea for fixing hover.

If that doesn't seem reasonable, how 'bout this: change SWIFT so it boosts both run and fly speed, then let us slot it for +fly speed, too. That way by slotting both swift and hover, we can get a decent flight speed.

(Wouldn't be bad to give hurdle +TP dist and have it take range enhancers under the same scheme).

[ QUOTE ]
Whirlwind has always done knock up, now it is doing knockback. I did not see any patch notes on this change. I do recall some discussion about the changes being made to the way knockdown works because of ragdoll physics but understand it was suppose to be reversed. Is this an unnoted patch change or a bug?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd act as if it were a bug, because it is indeed not noted in the patch notes as far as I can see.

[ QUOTE ]
I thought threads are purged when they dont get replies for over a week or 2? How did this one manage to rise from the dead, heh

[/ QUOTE ]

A redname in your thread makes it last forever.

This deserves repeating

[ QUOTE ]
Reworking defense to scale

[/ QUOTE ]

And let me add: For rolling back (at least for now) the stealth glowie nerf because it wasn't well implementd.

Kudos to the devs for origin specific inherent powers. They're just plain fun.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes i know, but then you can resist up to 90% of that already debuffed damage for a max mitigation of 99%

[/ QUOTE ]

As a damage debuffer, that is not what I recall. 90% is the maximum that you can resist/debuff. They are not cumalitive.

[/ QUOTE ]

I suppose it would be easy to test with a Tanker, a Sonic, a Kin and a bunch of grey MOBs.

I have the KIN.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes i know, but then you can resist up to 90% of that already debuffed damage for a max mitigation of 99%

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting observation.

FWIW, two counterpoints:

-DMG + DMG RES doesn't protect you from secondary effects, -ACC +DEF does.
-DMG + DMG RES is more rare than, -ACC +DEF is.

The effect isn't additive. I.E. - the 10% you lose to a +1 on application and the 10% you lose on their toHit don't result in a -10 -10 = -20 thing.

-ACC does get a ding DEF does not when the debuff is applied. So that 1st -10% vs. a +1 does occur. But the -ACC debuff scales just like DEF does, and so whatever -ACC you do manage to get through the purple patch will provide the same damage mitigation to a +1 as it will to a +5. So you don't wind up with 20% less mitigation than DEF at +1, just 10% less.

Here's how ToHit debuffs would work against an even con minion as you scale up levels:
<ul type="square">[*]Even con Minion gets debuffed for -15 ACC.
MOB has 1 Purple Patch Multuplier.
Mob has 35% to hit instead of 50% ToHit w/o debuff.
Result is a damage mitigation of 30%[*]+1 Minion gets debuffed for -13.59 ACC.
MOB has 1.09 Purple Patch Multuplier.
Mob has 39.83% to hit instead of 54.7% ToHit w/o debuff.
Result is a damage mitigation of 27.18% (~90% of even con)[*]+2 Minion gets debuffed for -12.2 ACC.
MOB has 1.19 Purple Patch Multuplier.
Mob has 44.86% to hit instead of 59.34% ToHit w/o debuff.
Result is a damage mitigation of 24.4% (~81.5% of even con)[*]+3 Minion gets debuffed for -11 ACC.
MOB has 1.27 Purple Patch Multuplier.
Mob has 49.41% to hit instead of 63.34% ToHit w/o debuff.
Result is a damage mitigation of 21.99% (~73% of even con)[*]+4 Minion gets debuffed for -9.6 ACC.
MOB has 1.36 Purple Patch Multuplier.
Mob has 54.94% to hit instead of 68% ToHit w/o debuff.
Result is a damage mitigation of 19.2% (~64% of even con)[*]+5 Minion gets debuffed for -8.2 ACC.
MOB has 1.45 Purple Patch Multuplier.
Mob has 60.75% to hit instead of 72.67% ToHit w/o debuff.
Result is a damage mitigation of 16.4% (~55% of even con)[/list]
Notice that the damage mitication = 2x the amount of debuff applied. So -ACC's mitigation is only lowered when they apply their debuff. When the toHit is rolled, the new equation protects the debuff from being eroded by the purple patch a second time.

Now the DEF doesn't erode at all. DEF gets the same mitigation against a +5 as it does against an even con. But DEF only helps one teammate, and -ACC helps all teammates. Which is why it's "OK" for the -ACC to be less powerful against +con foes than DEF is.

[ QUOTE ]
I believe what Kali is saying is this.

37.39% defense versus melee/range is equivalant to 74.78% total damage mitigation.

This can be determined by a comparison of normal 50% defense to the new value of 12.61% defense (determined by subtracting the 37.39% from the original 50%).

The total mitigation can be worked out either by dividing that 12.61% by 50 and subtracting the result from 100%... or we can recognize that what we are doing is equivalent to multiplying the original defensive value by 2.

I do not believe she is talking about enhancers when using this particular factor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Aha. That makes sense. Thanks for sliding me a clue.

Since the base is now 50 for everyone, a 1 DEF = 2 RES formula makes a lot of sense.

[ QUOTE ]
Melee/Range: 37.39%. Multiplying that by two, we get: 74.78%
AoE: 22.475%. Multiplying this, we get: 44.95%

[/ QUOTE ]

Due to ED, shouldn't we be multuplying by 1.6 instead of 2? +DEF inspirations are on Schedule B, methinks.

At 1.6x you get: ~60% melee/range and ~36% AE.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With the change to bounding, you can achieve 90% mitigation against any enemy up to +5.

Changing it the way you suggest means you can reduce a +5's or an AV's damage to less than 10%.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm. That's wierd.

The maximum mitigation becomes a sliding scale, depending on foe rank or level.

Because, with this system, you can, in fact, mitigate a +0 minion to 5%. But your best mitigation vs. a +5 is 10%. Everyone in between has some proportional value.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's the trade off. Higher floors for better performance when you can't floor them.

It's a good trade off, and a fair one.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I mean really, a %7.5 chance to hit for an AV?????? Thats a joke.

Am I completely missing something here?

[/ QUOTE ]

You're missing that debuffs are serious business in CoH. That's the reason people keep saying "you don't need much healing if you have enough debuffs." The AV doesn't have a 7.5 % chance to hit you, but it can be reduced to that with enough debuffs. Course, if it lands a hold on one of the debuffers, that springs right back up again.

[/ QUOTE ]

Another thing he's missing is that it used to take only two DDDs to floor an even-con AV before this change (assuming they could squeeze an extra -5% ACC out of the rest of their powers to put on top of Darkest Night), and that floor was 5%.

And 3 or 4 could floor a +5 AV, before the change.

Post the change, it will still take 2 to floor the AV, but now the floor is higher. So pragmatically speaking (since you can't get 1/2 of a DDD on your team), it's no easier to floor the AV now, and the floor is higher.

The main difference is that the team with only 1 DDD will get a lot more out of him than before.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can we just get a full accuracy equation please? ... or a link to the post if it is already there.

[/ QUOTE ]

Final ToHit = ((50% + ToHit Buffs - (Defense+ToHit DeBuffs)0.05,0.95 MinMax)
* (1 + (minions: +00%; LTs: +15%; Bosses, Snipers: +30%; Monsters, Giant Monsters, AVs, Controller Pets: +50%)
*(1 + (10% for each level higher than you))+ (Purple Patch Multiplier - 1)0.05,0.95 MinMax)

Right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think the yellow part belongs there. It's redundant with the Purple Patch Multuplier-1 thingie.

Also, you broke the thread!

[ QUOTE ]
I'm terrible with numbers, so could someone help me out? With what I'm reading so far, I'm guessing that my FF/Dark Defender will never be hit again....not sure. So, could anyone who understands this give me a rough idea what these powers would mean...numbers wise?

Dispersion Bubble: base 9.25% Def, w/ 3 +DEF SO's
Force Bubble: Unknown Base Def, but also w/ 3 +DEF SO's
Manuvers: 3.125% Base w/ 3 +DEF SO's
Hover: 2.5% Base DEF w/ 3+DEF SO's

next:
Tenebrous Tentacles: -ACC
Nightfall: -ACC
DarkBlast: -ACC
Gloom:-ACC
Torrent: -ACC



Now, again I'm totally ignorant of these numbers, but seems to me I might be a tad...how do you say....UNTOUCHABLE???

Thanks for any help.

Tourettes

[/ QUOTE ]

Ignoring Force Bubble and assuming a 5% -ACC debuff...

<ul type="square">[*]Even con Minion used to have a 21.65% chance to hit, now has a 21.65% chance to hit. You will take 0% less damage than you used to.[*]+1 Minion used to have a 26.35% chance to hit, now has a 23.68% chance to hit. You will take 10.12% less damage than you used to.[*]+2 Minion used to have a 30.98% chance to hit, now has a 25.69% chance to hit. You will take 17.09% less damage than you used to.[*]+3 Minion used to have a 34.98% chance to hit, now has a 27.42% chance to hit. You will take 21.62% less damage than you used to.[*]+4 Minion used to have a 39.65% chance to hit, now has a 29.44% chance to hit. You will take 25.75% less damage than you used to.[*]+5 Minion used to have a 44.32% chance to hit, now has a 31.46% chance to hit. You will take 29.01% less damage than you used to.[/list]Lt
<ul type="square">[*]Even con Lt used to have a 30.15% chance to hit, now has a 23.49% chance to hit. You will take 22.09% less damage than you used to.[*]+1 Lt used to have a 35.65% chance to hit, now has a 25.52% chance to hit. You will take 28.4% less damage than you used to.[*]+2 Lt used to have a 41.07% chance to hit, now has a 27.53% chance to hit. You will take 32.97% less damage than you used to.[*]+3 Lt used to have a 45.75% chance to hit, now has a 29.26% chance to hit. You will take 36.04% less damage than you used to.[*]+4 Lt used to have a 51.21% chance to hit, now has a 31.28% chance to hit. You will take 38.92% less damage than you used to.[*]+5 Lt used to have a 56.67% chance to hit, now has a 33.3% chance to hit. You will take 41.24% less damage than you used to.[/list]Boss
<ul type="square">[*]Even con Boss used to have a 36.65% chance to hit, now has a 24.89% chance to hit. You will take 32.07% less damage than you used to.[*]+1 Boss used to have a 42.76% chance to hit, now has a 26.93% chance to hit. You will take 37.02% less damage than you used to.[*]+2 Boss used to have a 48.78% chance to hit, now has a 28.93% chance to hit. You will take 40.69% less damage than you used to.[*]+3 Boss used to have a 53.98% chance to hit, now has a 30.67% chance to hit. You will take 43.19% less damage than you used to.[*]+4 Boss used to have a 60.05% chance to hit, now has a 32.69% chance to hit. You will take 45.57% less damage than you used to.[*]+5 Boss used to have a 66.12% chance to hit, now has a 34.71% chance to hit. You will take 47.51% less damage than you used to.[/list]AV/Monster
<ul type="square">[*]Even con AV/Monster used to have a 46.65% chance to hit, now has a 27.06% chance to hit. You will take 41.99% less damage than you used to.[*]+1 AV/Monster used to have a 53.7% chance to hit, now has a 29.09% chance to hit. You will take 45.82% less damage than you used to.[*]+2 AV/Monster used to have a 60.65% chance to hit, now has a 31.1% chance to hit. You will take 48.72% less damage than you used to.[*]+3 AV/Monster used to have a 66.65% chance to hit, now has a 32.83% chance to hit. You will take 50.74% less damage than you used to.[*]+4 AV/Monster used to have a 73.65% chance to hit, now has a 34.85% chance to hit. You will take 52.68% less damage than you used to.[*]+5 AV/Monster used to have a 80.65% chance to hit, now has a 36.87% chance to hit. You will take 54.28% less damage than you used to.[/list]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
sometimes it gets the best of both worlds, and sometimes it gets the worst of both worlds

[/ QUOTE ] Correct me if I'm wrong, but the PP was introduced to the game. It wasn't part of the original design strategy as far as we know. That is why I don't see why Debuffs would be any less effective than +DEF if we ignore the context of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry, but I don't understand your post.

When the PP came on board, it included both an accuracy penalty that scaled with the level differential (actually, I think it just raised the penalties that were already there), and an "power effect" penalty that scaled with the differential.

For damage powers, the penalty reduced the damage
For debuff powers, the penalty reduced the value of the debuff
For status powers, the penalty reduced the duration

Had it reduced both the value and the duration of debuffs, they would get double dinged

That said, I could believe slow got double dinged because it acts like both a status and a debuff

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This suggests there is no inherent weakness of one versus the other from a design perspective. Which is why Arcana's statement is a curiosity. It doesn't preclude the PP from reducing the debuff, but I haven't seen any statement that says the PP provides -to hit buff resistance as of yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Debuffs are affected by level difference, so that 30% debuff won't be a 30% debuff against a +2 enemy.

[/ QUOTE ]I know things like Slows are less effective in what appears to be both duration and magnitude.

[/ QUOTE ]

Slow leads this wierd double life. It's kind of a status and kind of a debuff, and so sometimes it gets the best of both worlds, and sometimes it gets the worst of both worlds. This seems to be a case where it gets the worst of both worlds. It's the platypus of CoH. Slow should not be used to meaasure the usual behavior of debuff or status.

While it appears from my testing that most debuffs do NOT have their duration shortened by the purple patch (just their effectivity), I haven't tested extensively enough (stopwatch) to be able to say that for sure.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This suggests there is no inherent weakness of one versus the other from a design perspective. Which is why Arcana's statement is a curiosity. It doesn't preclude the PP from reducing the debuff, but I haven't seen any statement that says the PP provides -to hit buff resistance as of yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Debuffs are affected by level difference, so that 30% debuff won't be a 30% debuff against a +2 enemy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed, the debuff will work just as well as the def, but since the debuff gets purple patched WHEN YOU APPLY IT, your 10% -ToHit debuff will not result in the foe receiving a -10% ToHit debuff if he cons higher than you. If he is three levels above you, he will get more like a 6.4% debuff. That -6.4% debuff works exactly as well as if everyone he was targeting had 6.4% more DEF.

Some people say this makes DEF better than -ACC, and in a solo situation that is true. But where your 10% DEF helps only you, the -ACC debuffs helps your whole team.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Don't forget that accuracy debuffs were heavily affected under ED. My Darkest Night (which was about a 90% -ACC before) is now only 65% -ACC, a fairly hefty change.

[/ QUOTE ]

Debuffs are applied to To Hit, not Accuracy. So, a 30% To Hit Debuff on an AV would result in the AV having (50% - 30%) * 1.5 [Their Accuracy Modifier] or 30% chance to hit someone with no Defense. If you have 5% Defense on top of the Debuff, that would be cut down to 22.5% chance to hit. If you have 20% Defense on top of the Debuff, then the AV's chance to hit would be 7.5%. A Defender with Darkest Night with 3 even level To Hit Debuff Enhancements has a 30% To Hit Debuff.

Lastly, To Hit Debuffs essentially fulfill the function of Defense for everyone the Debuffed target attacks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the clarification Castle!

W00T. -ToHit is still as strong as DEF and +ToHit still "penetrates"

&lt;-----Happy with the implementation (on paper at least)!

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, as debuff are divisors, it does not matter where in the accuracy calculation they are put (relative to Defense which is a flat subtractive/additive number).

Basically, this change does not fix nor hurt accuracy debuffs, which are still getting double dinged.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I understood Castle correctly, we went from:

Final ToHit = (Base ToHit + ToHit Buffs - Defense) * (1 + Accuracy)

Where

Base ToHit = (50% + Rank Bonus) * Purple Patch Multiplier

And now we have something more like

Final ToHit = (50% + ToHit Buffs - Defense) * (1 + Accuracy)

where

Accuracy = Rank Bonus + (Purple Patch Multiplier - 1)

EXAMPLE:[*]AT +1 level PPM ~= 1.1 (1.0940)[*]And a BOSS gets a 15% Rank Bonus[*]Let's say with no ToHit Buffs or debuffs
and [*]0% vs a 20% DEF

<ul type="square">[*]OLD SCHOOL (0 DEF): ((50% + 15%) * 1.1 + 0 - 0%) * (1+0) = (71.5 - 0) * 1 = 71.5%[*]OLD SCHOOL (25 DEF): ((50% + 15%) * 1.1 + 0 - 25%) * (1+0) = (71.5 - 25) * 1 = 46.5%[*]25% DEF = 46.5 vs. 71.5 = ~35% DMG mitigation
[*]NEW SCHOOL (0 DEF): (50% + 0 - 0%) * (1 + 15% +10%) = 50% * 1.25 = 62.5%[*]NEW SCHOOL (25 DEF): (50% + 0 - 25%) * (1 + 15% +10%) = 25% * 1.25 = 31.25%[*]25% DEF = 31.25/62.5 = ~50% DMG mitigation[/list]
If you put ToHit Buff in there of 20% you'd get

<ul type="square">[*]OLD SCHOOL (0 DEF): ((50% + 15%) * 1.1 + 20% - 0%) * (1+0) = (91.5 - 0) * 1 = 91.5%[*]OLD SCHOOL (25 DEF): ((50% + 15%) * 1.1 + 20% - 25%) * (1+0) = (91.5 - 5%) * 1 = 86.5%[*]25% DEF vs. 20% ToHit= 86.5 vs. 91.5 = ~5.5% DMG mitigation
[*]NEW SCHOOL (0 DEF): (50% + 20% - 0%) * (1 + 15% + 10%) = 70% * 1.25 = 87.5%[*]NEW SCHOOL (25 DEF): (50% + 20% - 25%) * (1 + 15% + 10%) = 45% * 1.25 = 56.25%[*]25% DEF vs. 20% ToHit= 56.25 vs. 87.5 = ~35% DMG mitigation[*]CHANGE + ToHit -&gt; + ACC (25 DEF): (50% - 25%) * (1 + 15% + 10% + 20%) = 25% * 1.45 = 36.25%[*]25% DEF vs 20% ToHit = 36.25 vs. 87.5 = ~58.5% DMG mitigation[/list]
So, if I understand the equations right (a big IF), it DOES matter where you put that ToHit Buff or Debuff.

Leave it over where DEF is and it penetrates DEF more strongly That 25% DEF delivered only a 35% DMG mitigation when ToHit was over there.

Move it to where the level and rank ACC bonuses are and it does a worse job of penetrating DEF. That same 25% DEF mitigated 60% of the damage when you put ToHit buffs in that part of the equation.

In either case, ToHit Buffs penetrate DEF less than they used to, but it still matters where you put them.

As for ToHit Debuffs. If they leave ToHit buffs on the left hand side of this equstion, they will have the exact same effect as DEF does.

If they move them to where the rank and level bonuses are going...bad news for ToHit Debuffs.

[ QUOTE ]
Although I've pushed for this change at least as hard as anyone, I'm *not* an advocate of making everything work exactly, precisely the same way. That's why even though I've harped on tohit buffs for a long time, I *dont* want a solution that completely nullifies their strong effect on defense. I *want* the devs to have a tool in their toolbox that allows them to make enemies that are hard on defense to create challenges above the norm: I just wanted that effect not be used *pervasively* (i.e. all higher ranks, all higher levels). I don't want defense to be immune to tohit buffs, I want the devs to use tohit buffs to make things special, ala villains with psi damage or regeneration debuffs.

I'm also not in favor of making tohit debuffs work precisely the same way as defense either. Defense, tohit buffs, tohit debuffs, and resistance should work differently for variety sake: what we need to make sure about is that each AT gets the appropriate one (or ones) necessarily to function as they should.

You can get too crazy trying to make *everything* "equal." For example, blasters are said to use offense as their primary defense: they are presumably supposed to kill faster than something like a tank, which has higher mitigation and lower damage. But tank mitigation is stable relative to higher level foes, while the purple patch reduces blaster damage substantially. It reduces tanker damage similarly, but the tank isn't relying on high offense for its survivability: in effect the tank gets high mitigation and low damage, while the blaster gets high damage and low mitigation, and one of those two is hit harder by the purple patch. Does this mean blasters need a damage boost against higher foes? I don't personally think thats a good idea myself, at least not directly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just wanted to echo this sentiment.

I think this DEF scaling fix is very good, and - if I understand it correctly - it boils down to moving the ACC bonus that +rank and +level opponents get to the same place in the equation where our ACC enhancers lie instead of putting that ACC for +rank and +level where ToHit and DEF live in the equation.

If that is correct, then ToHit buffing should still be able to penetrate DEF just as it used to do, and debuffing ToHit should act a lot like having +DEF (with the advantage that it helps your teammates, too). I think that's all very good as far as it goes.

But I hope they will retain the idea of ToHit buffs "penetrating" DEF and apply it where appropriate. Such as places where the extra accuracy of the entity isn't due to his rank or level, but due to his nature.

For example. Those damnable turrets with their higher BTH than other things. Don't move that ACC to the enhancement portion of the equation. Those suckers should have nice, DEF penetrating ToHit buffs so us squishies with no access to DMG RES continue to hate them.

For those having trouble keeping score:

Devs + 40

Silver Gale -32.5