Umbral

Considering how recharge times are calculated on the fly based on the percentage of total time that they're currently at (re: the game doesn't care that your power recharges in 15 secs, it cares that it's 50% complete and your current state of +rech for it says its recharge value is 30 secs), I doubt that we'd get something that gives a flat number.

However, I would love to see a "pie chart" style visual for my recharging powers rather than or in addition to the the normal "regrowing" that I've never found to be particularly reliable, especially in recharge value variable environments. While it doesn't really do much to longer recharge powers, I can't count the number of times that a short recharge power that was nearly recharged shrank to nothing because I got hit with a recharge debuff.

[ QUOTE ]
1. Rather than separate single target vs AoE performance, the metric attempts to generate a combined offensive score that measures the net damage output against a range of target numbers. In other words, given the full suite of single target and AoE attacks, what's the offensive potential of the powerset when facing one target, three targets, five targets, ten targets, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

How do you plan on dealing with the AoE size/cone issue in that? A 30' range 30* cone is going to have fewer targets in almost all situations than a 50' range 360* targeted AoE simply because enemies don't tend to form up in nice thin lines for longer than a few seconds (not to mention player error because it's hard to gauge what exactly 30* is, much less how far out it extends thanks to issues with perspective).

[ QUOTE ]
This suggests that there is a problem intrinsic to Stalkers: they are more attractive on paper than in the actual game among a playerbase that almost always correctly judges how attractive something will be in-game at character creation time (or rather, they get it wrong equally often for every other archetype but Stalkers, where they get it wrong a whole lot more often).

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm curious as to what you mean by "on paper", especially considering that I'm reasonably certain that most players (re: the ones that don't crunch the numbers) choose to create characters based on assumed performance based on the interpreted effectiveness and play style of the character/AT based on the name rather than planned effectiveness.

You touched on this with the reason why Blasters and Scrappers seem to have such a comparatively high attrition rate. Could it simply be that the general assumption with Stalkers is that they'll play significantly differently than how players assume they will thanks to the name rather than simply a less effective (from a balance perspective) design? Blasters and Scrappers have a rather obvious high action play style but Stalkers have a less obvious one, especially at the low levels that most players tend to abandon characters at when there are not a whole slew of powers available that make them seem to be anything beyond "low hp Scrapper with stealth". Since the stealth, which, while designed to only be a portion of the ATs functionality, is often assumed to be the primary functionality of the AT by those that don't actually check the numbers, it could easily, and probably often does, take uninitiated players by surprise that stalking isn't quite as important to Stalkers as they assumed it would be, not to mention that the game has a definite AoE bias that further makes Stalkers a good bit less obviously effective.

I don't see it as any particular fault of balance, numbers or any other effect but more so the name evoking a role that only plays a small part in the Stalker's actual play and, if the player actually wants to capitalize one that specific role, CoX isn't really built for. CoX's general solution to hordes of enemies is generally "run in and break their faces" which is directly contradictory to the nominal Stalker role of "tactically ignore the little ones and kill the big one", not to mention the inability to generate rewards from playing in a "stalkerish" manner. The massive difference between expectation and reality (based entirely off of play style rather than balance or performance) is probably the biggest reason for the abnormally high Stalker attrition rate.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(QR)
Scrappers do not need buffs.

[/ QUOTE ] I disagree, Scrappers are horrible on teams. They don't bring anything to a team at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

It would be more accurate to say that Scrappers bring nothing more to a team than they do while solo, which is true. Of course, they benefit significantly from having a team around (although many in the Scrapper forums would argue that it's not needed), but, thanks to having an excellent balance of offense and defense along with buff caps that are generally pretty close to saturated while solo, they don't get as much as most other ATs.

My only real beef with Critical is that it's no longer unique. It used to be, back in the day when it was first introduced, but when you look at Scourge and Assassination, both of which are more playstyle intensive and actually get a larger benefit on average from their Inherents, Critical is simply bland.

Plus, something to remember when bringing it up, Scrappers actually generate more overkill with Critical than Corrupters with Scourge and Stalkers with Assassination because Scrappers start off with better base damage that causes their Crits to be substantially larger.

[ QUOTE ]
I find it both amusing and confounding that people keep thinking that Willpower has better +regen than Regeneration, particularly when Regeneration can cap out its Hit Points easily and has Instant Healing, which does beat a fully saturated RttC.

[/ QUOTE ]

The reason that */WP has gotten the reputation for better +regen than */regen is mostly because it's true.

They've both got Fast Healing with the same +regen, but */WP's is slightly better (thanks to debuff resistance). Dull Pain is a bit better than High Pain Tolerance (HPT manages 29.5% +maxhp SO slotted, Dull Pain manages 38% when averaged) but has the definite advantages of providing resistance to go along with the +hp and not being recharge dependent. The big exchange is in Integration versus Rise to the Challenge. Slotted with SOs, RttC nearly matches Integration's +regen with a single target in range (1.3% +regen less actually) but can go up to more than 2.75 times as high (682.2% +regen compared to 244.9% +regen) when saturated. Instant Healing's uptime with SOs is notoriously bad (27%) and, coupled with the fact that only a quarter of its +regen is actually enhanceable (600% unenhanceable, 200% enhanceable), fully slotted, it only gives 989.9% +regen for an average benefit of 267.273% +regen.

In order to achieve +regen equivalence, Willpower only needs to sustain 6.49 targets in RttC and that's assuming that Regen pops IH as soon as possible, every time that it's up.

The +regen dominance issue is pretty much a non-point: */WP wins; RttC is simple better than Integration and Instant Healing combined. The bigger point to consider is that */regen isn't about +regen anymore and hasn't been for a while: it's about self heals. The +regen is only around to provide a minor base of survivability to live off of while using the click heals.

Someone asked this a while ago, and I built this toon. Softcapped to all three positions (blank space if for the Glad 3% +def IO). The attack string is easy enough to pull off (GD>DA>SD>GC>DA). The only issue I've really seen is that it coughs up a lot of DPS to achieve this mainly due to suboptimal attack slotting (no space for Achilles' Heel proc).

Hero Plan by Mids' Hero Designer 1.401
http://www.cohplanner.com/

[u]Click this DataLink to open the build![u]

Level 50 Magic Scrapper
Primary Power Set: Katana
Secondary Power Set: Willpower
Power Pool: Leaping
Power Pool: Fighting
Power Pool: Speed
Power Pool: Fitness
Ancillary Pool: Darkness Mastery

Hero Profile:
Level 1: Gambler's Cut -- Mako-Acc/Dmg(A), Mako-Dmg/EndRdx(3), Mako-Dmg/Rchg(3), Mako-Acc/EndRdx/Rchg(5), Mako-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg(5), Mako-Dam%(48)
Level 1: High Pain Tolerance -- Heal-I(A)
Level 2: Mind Over Body -- S'fstPrt-ResDam/Def+(A)
Level 4: Fast Healing -- Mrcl-Heal(A), Mrcl-Rcvry+(21), Mrcl-Heal/Rchg(21), Mrcl-Heal/EndRdx(37), Mrcl-Heal/EndRdx/Rchg(37)
Level 6: Build Up -- GSFC-ToHit(A), GSFC-ToHit/Rchg(7), GSFC-ToHit/Rchg/EndRdx(7), GSFC-Rchg/EndRdx(43), GSFC-ToHit/EndRdx(46), GSFC-Build%(48)
Level 8: Divine Avalanche -- Mako-Acc/Dmg(A), Mako-Dmg/EndRdx(9), Mako-Dmg/Rchg(9), Mako-Acc/EndRdx/Rchg(11), Mako-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg(11), Mako-Dam%(40)
Level 10: Indomitable Will -- EndRdx-I(A)
Level 12: Combat Jumping -- DefBuff-I(A), DefBuff-I(13), Zephyr-Travel(13), Zephyr-Travel/EndRdx(40), Zephyr-ResKB(40)
Level 14: Super Jump -- Zephyr-Travel(A), Zephyr-Travel/EndRdx(15), Zephyr-ResKB(15)
Level 16: Rise to the Challenge -- Numna-Heal/EndRdx(A), Numna-EndRdx/Rchg(17), Numna-Heal/Rchg(17), Numna-Heal(36), Numna-Heal/EndRdx/Rchg(37), Numna-Regen/Rcvry+(39)
Level 18: Boxing -- RzDz-Acc/Rchg(A), RzDz-EndRdx/Stun(19), RzDz-Acc/EndRdx(19), RzDz-Stun/Rng(23), RzDz-Acc/Stun/Rchg(23), RzDz-Immob%(25)
Level 20: Quick Recovery -- P'Shift-End%(A)
Level 22: Tough -- Empty(A)
Level 24: Weave -- DefBuff-I(A), DefBuff-I(25)
Level 26: Soaring Dragon -- Mako-Acc/Dmg(A), Mako-Dmg/EndRdx(27), Mako-Dmg/Rchg(27), Mako-Acc/EndRdx/Rchg(34), Mako-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg(36), Mako-Dam%(36)
Level 28: Flashing Steel -- Sciroc-Acc/Dmg(A), Sciroc-Dmg/EndRdx(29), Sciroc-Dmg/Rchg(29), Sciroc-Acc/Rchg(31), Sciroc-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx(31), Sciroc-Dam%(31)
Level 30: Hasten -- RechRdx-I(A)
Level 32: Golden Dragonfly -- Sciroc-Acc/Dmg(A), Sciroc-Dmg/EndRdx(33), Sciroc-Dmg/Rchg(33), Sciroc-Acc/Rchg(33), Sciroc-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx(34), Sciroc-Dam%(34)
Level 35: Hurdle -- Jump-I(A)
Level 38: Health -- Mrcl-Heal/EndRdx(A), Mrcl-EndRdx/Rchg(39), Mrcl-Heal/Rchg(39), Mrcl-Heal/EndRdx/Rchg(48), Mrcl-Heal(50)
Level 41: Petrifying Gaze -- Lock-Acc/Hold(A), Lock-Acc/Rchg(42), Lock-Rchg/Hold(42), Lock-EndRdx/Rchg/Hold(42), Lock-Acc/EndRdx/Rchg/Hold(43), Lock-%Hold(43)
Level 44: Dark Blast -- SipInsght-ToHitDeb(A), SipInsght-Acc/ToHitDeb(45), SipInsght-Acc/Rchg(45), SipInsght-ToHitDeb/EndRdx/Rchg(45), SipInsght-Acc/EndRdx/Rchg(46), SipInsght-%ToHit(46)
Level 47: Stamina -- P'Shift-End%(A)
Level 49: Super Speed -- Zephyr-Travel(A), Zephyr-Travel/EndRdx(50), Zephyr-ResKB(50)
------------
Level 1: Brawl -- Empty(A)
Level 1: Sprint -- Empty(A)
Level 2: Rest -- Empty(A)
Level 1: Critical Hit

Honestly, my advice to */WP scrappers is to simply get a decent chunk of defense (25-30%) with as much +hp as possible while focusing just as much on your attacks. What's the point of playing a Scrapper if you're not going to capitalize on the damage? You might as well just roll a tank.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can't it be both?

[/ QUOTE ]
Sure thing! Its Shrodenger's Defender!

[/ QUOTE ]

Schrodinger. Interestingly, if/when I ever get a cat, this will be its name.

Assuming the OP is refering to regeneration as a game mechanic rather than as a power set, I'd like to weigh in.

I was gonna spend an hour or so throwing out some numbers to demonstrate this, but a late night Dr. Q and other sources of sleep deprivation were making me wonky in the head. Suffice it to say that, until you get to about 300% regen, you're better off getting more +regen IO set bonuses than +hp set bonuses. If you get the accolades, this increases the number to about 400% regen before you want to start investing in +hp. The reason for this is that +regen is simply given in larger doses than it is for +hp where set bonuses are concerned (and for good reason too) to such an extent that the 15% +regen you're getting is generally outweighed by the multiplicative benefit that the +hp has upon it.

Here's a simple formula to help:
+hp functional +regen = (percent of baseMaxHp * regenRate)
If this number is larger than the +regen you're getting, the hp is better. If it isn't, the +regen is better.

[ QUOTE ]
Getting a whole lot of buffs before getting started, getting a lot of damage increased. Debuff/etc. to your GM to maximize effectiveness, then one blast. 1-5 minute prep time, cast 3-5 debuffs, then one attack and crippled.

That's just one of the exploits I see, not to mention a team of 2-5 doing this and each getting their one attack with all their debuffs on it as well. Force multipliers times two!

[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt it would actually get that extreme, mainly because the +dam would be limited by the Defender +dam cap of 300%. Enhancements work against you here as well.

I've always supported some kind of Defiance-esque buff though I doubt this idea would work very well. Personally, I think making the various primary powers provide a short term damage buff and the secondaries provide a short term end redux buff would work well.

[ QUOTE ]
Why do all these [censored] hover over the suggestion forum? I had an idea, some of you think it's stupid, you let it be known....now get a life and move along. Seriously what is wrong with you people? You just keep repeating the same thing over and over. I UNDERSTAND YOUR OPINION and I don't need you to post ten more times to confirm you don't like it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then do one of two things to stop us from pointing out the flaws in your ideas: quite posting such low quality and largely unoriginal ideas and stop necroposting asking for more input when we do let the topic die.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Originally, FA (Weap Mastery Targeting Drone is simply an animation tweak clone of FA) was friggin' huge +tohit coupled with the +per and resistance to tohit buff. The cost was actually commensurate to the benefit.

[/ QUOTE ]
It was still just a copy of Targeting Drone, as far as a I recall. I know most APP powers have penalties (longer recharge, higher end cost, etc.), but 2.5x the end cost seems like it was always steeper than it should have been. As far as I know, none of the other APP powers saw that steep an increase from the base version.

[/ QUOTE ]

It was a substantially larger +tohit buff than the original Targeting Drone, even including the higher Scrapper self-tohit buff modifier (1.00 rather than .75). IIRC, it was 20% +tohit unenhanced, but it might have been higher. It was definitely a huge tohit buff, though now it's only worthwhile for the debuff resistance.

[ QUOTE ]
1. What is your favorite word?

[/ QUOTE ]

Word? As in singular? Can I just list a few of them? Schnitzel, Purple, Schadenfreude, Quixotic, Didgeridoo, Titillation...

[ QUOTE ]
2. What is your least favorite word?

[/ QUOTE ]

Curse words. Really. I'm serious.

[ QUOTE ]
3. What turns you on?

[/ QUOTE ]

Intellectually stimulating debate. I don't care if I'm winning or losing as long as it's one that actually makes my brain crank. Preferably a nice, long debates that actually involve presentation of information, analysis and point-counterpoint.

[ QUOTE ]
4. What turns you off?

[/ QUOTE ]

Continued ignorance. Ignorance is fine, but if you're still ignorant after someone keeps trying to fix that problem whether because you're simply not smart enough or whatever other reason you've got, get out of my face, leave the discussion, and go back to playing with your alphabet blocks.

[ QUOTE ]
5. What sound or noise do you love?

[/ QUOTE ]

The sound of my players at my D&D games. (Contrary to popular opinion, my favorite sound is not actually my own voice; I'm much more fond of listening than speaking if the conversation is already full and informative).

[ QUOTE ]
6. What sound or noise do you hate?

[/ QUOTE ]

Loud noises. Any kind, but especially loud music. You'd be able to hear your music decently if you weren't trying to broadcast it across the country from your car!

[ QUOTE ]
7. What is your favorite curse word?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not really a fan of any specific curse word, simply because they're all so abrasive to the ear.

[ QUOTE ]
8. What profession other than your own would you like to attempt?

[/ QUOTE ]

Game design. I don't care if it's PnP or computer/video, I love the systems, the design, the balance and everything else involved.

[ QUOTE ]
9. What profession would you not like to participate in?

[/ QUOTE ]

K-12 educator. I can't stand kids.

[ QUOTE ]
10. If heaven exists, what would you like to hear God say when you arrive at the Pearly Gates?

[/ QUOTE ]

"Turn around. You're going back down there this instant, and you'd best not mention this to anyone if you know what's good for you."

[ QUOTE ]
I am not sure why it was decided to make them cost 2.5 times as much as blaster TD, but it is excessive.

[/ QUOTE ]

Originally, FA (Weap Mastery Targeting Drone is simply an animation tweak clone of FA) was friggin' huge +tohit coupled with the +per and resistance to tohit buff. The cost was actually commensurate to the benefit. When Castle reduced/distributed the numbers, he didn't reduce the end cost along with it so it's still friggin' expensive.

Personally, I prefer Focused Acc/Targeting Drone mainly because they provide tohit debuff resistance, but also because most of my builds are already hurting for power pool choices. I wouldn't be all that adverse to a reduction in the end consumption though. We're paying for a huge buff and only getting a moderate one.

[ QUOTE ]
Seriously? My suggested Travel pool is all about being super athletic. It's about running faster and jumping higher than normal folks can.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe the set you're looking for already exists. It's called "Fitness".

[ QUOTE ]
Being dismissive of what? You said the Devs won't add a 5th power to travel pools....I just asked why. They added a 5th power to epic pools. they've done alot of things in the past year that weren't expected. I'm just curious if you had a persoanl sit down with Castle or something? What makes you so sure?

[/ QUOTE ]

Adding the 5th power to APPs and PPPs is vastly different than adding a 5th power to the power pools simply because every AT gets access to all of the same power pools whereas every AT gets different APP/PPPs. Changing an APP or PPP is significantly less complex than changing a power pool (or adding one) simply because there are fewer things it's linked to, which is probably one of the big reasons why they've never added a power pool. Adding or changing a power pool would require checking its performance for all ATs while simultaneously using different amounts of other power pool choices in order to make sure that it's not giving too many additional increases in power.

This is one of the big reasons I don't like your power pool suggestion: you may have based it roughly off of the leaping pool, but you have to remember that it could be used along side it. Combat Jumping is already one of the best pool powers in the game (dirt cheap and great defense, plus excellent combat mobility and low tier mez protection and resistance). You'd be giving another one to everyone else along with a quite easily overpowered tier 4 power.

Blues have huge AoE and melee defense (huge meaning enough to make a heavily buffed character still have 5% chance to hit) and Yellows have huge ranged and AoE defense. You'd pretty much need a very well balanced group with both ranged and melee toons that know what they need to do.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Softcapping smash/lethal resist won't be much more effective unless you've got a lot of ranged smash/lethal attacks being directed at you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly.

[/ QUOTE ]

they weren't going for resist, they were going for defence, BIG difference...

[/ QUOTE ]

My bad on that. I'm used to only ever refering to typed resist rather than typed defense, mainly because typed defense is simply so much harder to actually get to meaningful universal levels than positional.

Honestly, I still don't think that the additional DoT damage is the biggest factor in Fire's incredible performance. It wouldn't be too hard to simply remove that from the calculation and use only the base damage numbers in order to illustrate that Fire just has DPA that is simply that awesome. It's not the fact that Fire does so much damage with its attacks. It's that Fire does so much damage and takes up so little time to do it.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Since you can only have one proc, it appears that your best bet is to go 4 pieces of Performance Shifter in Quick Recovery, and 3 level 50 IOs in Stamina.

[/ QUOTE ]

The proc isn't unique. You can have one in each power. My recommendations still stand as the best.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm still not seeing your math add up. Proc +endmod + Common = ~45%.

Proc +3 from the set = ~50%.

50%> 45%

Dual 4 sockets would be ideal if, as follow up asked (not as OP asked) slots were not an issue. Correct? Or were you still answering OP and I'm answering follow up and we're talking in circles as a result? (in that case, see my sig )

[/ QUOTE ]

Dual 4 sockets is also taking up an extra 2 slots for an extra .16 end/sec, half of which is due to a set bonus. The big issue I've got is that, if you're going to say "slots are not an issue", you might as well just 6 slot it and get the damage and AoE defense buff.

Under the constraints of the original question (powers + 4 slots), the set up I gave is optimal for end recovery. If you're going to start changing the requirements and tossing out limitations, it's pointless, especially since I can think of plenty better things to use 2 slots for than .16 end/sec.

[ QUOTE ]
On my very poor math skills, I have concluded a saturated softcapped DM/Shield scrapper does better damage than a saturated DM/Shield brute. Survivability is nearly identical.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is where you obviously don't know what you're talking about. Brute and Scrapper survivability is only nearly identical when you only pay attention to baseline mitigation values. Brutes have a baseline survivability benefit that Scrappers can never eclipse because they have greater base HP. This means that, even if a Scrapper and a Brute have the same defense and resistance values, the Brute will still take more to kill him plus any and all native heals and regeneration values will be more effective because they're acting on the larger pool.

[ QUOTE ]
Behold, for I have invented the best idea for the mutation booster pack ever! Observe:

Secondary Mutation: You spontaneously acquire a new power for ten minutes. After generating a new power, you cannot acquire a new one for 30 minutes.

Possible powers could include:

Temp Invulnerability
Reconstruction
Ice Bolt
Flares
Power Bolt
Gust
Fire Sword
Ice Sword
Power Thrust
Heal Other
Revive
Neutrino Bolt
Blazing Aura
Impale
Stone Fist

Obviously the Secondary Mutation powers wouldn't be as strong as the primary or secondary versions of them. Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

Might be interesting but I'd probably make it a bit more like the Lab Equipment explosions if they were auto-hit. Chance for buff, chance for debuff, and chance for nothing. All of them are passive, but noticeable.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm the opposite. I consider the procs less valuable than their average would indicate because they're random, and therefore can't be counted on. I do see your point, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

They also don't scale down when exemp'd so they're better for that reason as well.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Rage has needed a nerfbat for ages, but it's just too popular.

[/ QUOTE ]
Or perhaps it's the OTHER sets that are underperforming. In recent Issues we've seen Mace buffed, Dark Melee buffed; IF the other sets are inferior why not make them better ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Dark Melee is fairly overpowered now and I am preparing a grand thread showcasing it off

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not overpowered! Quiet!

(Personally, I'd say it isn't. It's got great ST damage and excellent utility but it pays for it by having very anemic AoE damage that only becomes even remotely decent when played intelligently and no one else is interfering with enemy placement)

[ QUOTE ]
You are saying, however, that proc in *first* slot in Stamina, second slot in QR, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm saying proc first in both. From a sheer numbers standpoint, the proc is better than anything else you can put in Stamina and only .01 end/sec worse than anything else you can put in QR. However, what makes me rank the proc higher than a level 50 End Mod IO is that the chance for +end can't be debuffed. Even if you self debuff from a nuke or get hit by a sapper, the Perf Shifter proc will still keep on trucking, which, to me, is more than worth the loss of one one-hundredth of a point of endurance every second, on average.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Look at the title. The question is 'why'?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't believe there has ever been +dam on Cloaking Device.

[/ QUOTE ]

There has, when I played the game earlier there was always a statement of a small + damage boost, when real numbers came out i checked, it was only about +15% but now it's gone, apparently.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you sure you don't mean the Targeting Drone, which doesn't have +dam but does acts as a flag to increase the damage that Sniper Rifle (from AR) deals?