Umbral

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You should just go for melee defense.

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't find it effective enough.

[/ 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.

Melee defense at least has the advantage of working against multiple damage types. Of course, if you're interested in farming a specific custom enemy group (which I kind of figure you are, considering the build), aiming for typed defense over positional can actually be beneficial since custom mobs have the same attack types for ranged and melee.

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

[/ QUOTE ]

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

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And now...back to trying to figure out how to get Formula X to incorporate Variable Y without breaking in hideous, horrible, awful ways.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please tell me you're doing something about bringing animation times into the damage formula. Please. Pretty please...

[/ QUOTE ]

Before any rumors start swirling -- It's an analysis formula, not anything directly impacting gameplay. Sorry!

[/ QUOTE ]
Take a look at the PvP damage changes (they're now based partially on animation time) - those changes royally hose some powers and even entire sets (hello, Ice Blast!).

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a different damage formula. I'm pretty sure that the hosing of certain powers was actually part of what Castle is referring to when he said "breaking in hideous, horrible, awful ways".

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Keep in mind that a Corruptor's damage base is only 0.75, compared to a Defender's 0.65. You could raise the damage base to 0.70, but if you raised it to 0.75, Defenders would do the same damage as Corruptors, and would have greater buffs besides.

[/ QUOTE ]
I doubt many would object to corruptors getting a small damage bump as well. In my view, it's the controller-defender comparison that's really problematic, since one of the two ATs is clearly a high performer -- not so much the defender-corruptor one, where both ATs are kind of meh.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cuz, you know, Scourge does absolutely nothing for average damage scalar. There's absolutely no data to support Corrupters more accurately having a .95 ranged damage scalar to account for averaging Scourge in.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually scourge makes it about 0.91 from my data.

[/ QUOTE ]

Either way, it's substantially higher than the base scalar gives it credit for.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Keep in mind that a Corruptor's damage base is only 0.75, compared to a Defender's 0.65. You could raise the damage base to 0.70, but if you raised it to 0.75, Defenders would do the same damage as Corruptors, and would have greater buffs besides.

[/ QUOTE ]
I doubt many would object to corruptors getting a small damage bump as well. In my view, it's the controller-defender comparison that's really problematic, since one of the two ATs is clearly a high performer -- not so much the defender-corruptor one, where both ATs are kind of meh.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cuz, you know, Scourge does absolutely nothing for average damage scalar. There's absolutely no data to support Corrupters more accurately having a .95 ranged damage scalar to account for averaging Scourge in.

[ QUOTE ]
How ironic your calling me ignorant. You can't just take hurdle and Combat jumping like you say becuase then your still slow as hell.

[/ QUOTE ]

Allow me to demonstrate.

Hurdle w/ 1 level 50 common jumping IO + Combat Jumping w/o any movement slotting = 58.4 ft/sec movement for .07 end/sec

Fly w/ 1 level 50 common end redux and Swift w/ 1 level 50 common flight = 57.5 ft/sec for .7 end/sec

Hurdle + Combat Jumping is actually quite fast and does quite well without any other assistance, especially if you know the tricks (like scaling huge walls with jump) and transit ways.

[ QUOTE ]
In other words, for calculation purposes the avg dot ends up being represented like it is up front damage. If it was fire would be OP'd, but in actual play the dot is very good, but a bit less amazing than paper analysis shows.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's also for this same reason that Defiance isn't nearly as awesome as paper analysis indicates, nor is Sonic Blast for Blasters quite as awesome. Delayed effects are indeed less effective overall than direct effects, but they're an important factor to consider when trying to consider balance.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The click protections also use less EPS, don't they?

[/ QUOTE ]

WP IW: .208 EPS
SR PB: .087 EPS

yup.

[/ QUOTE ]

This actually makes sense when you consider that Practiced Brawler has an additional cost that a toggle never has to consider: animation time. In most aspects of the game, this isn't really addressed simply because animation time was never actually considered to have anything to do with game mechanics way back when, but, hopefully, soon the devs will have a mechanism to actually check.

Are we counting BU + Aim?

Without either, the base damage on Blaze is 205.921 but is slightly edged out by AR/Dev Sniper Rifle + Targeting Drone at 206.19.

Start tossing in self buffs like BU and Aim and Blaze wins out hands down simply because AR/Dev doesn't have BU.

The only differences between the Snipes, however, is secondary effect and damage type. Where base damage, recharge, and endurance costs are concerned, all Snipes are exactly the same. Fire Blast wins out because Fire's secondary effect is a DoT.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And now...back to trying to figure out how to get Formula X to incorporate Variable Y without breaking in hideous, horrible, awful ways.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please tell me you're doing something about bringing animation times into the damage formula. Please. Pretty please...

[/ QUOTE ]

Before any rumors start swirling -- It's an analysis formula, not anything directly impacting gameplay. Sorry!

[/ QUOTE ]

/shakes tiny fist of rage

[/ QUOTE ]

Just remember Bill... Analysis leads to direct changes to gameplay.

[ 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've never gotten more then 10. I just wrote it off as 10% of base just like the rest of the bonuses. If this is the case, why am I only getting 10?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure it's due to the proc's chat message simply being a static string.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And now...back to trying to figure out how to get Formula X to incorporate Variable Y without breaking in hideous, horrible, awful ways.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please tell me you're doing something about bringing animation times into the damage formula. Please. Pretty please...

[/ QUOTE ]

Before any rumors start swirling -- It's an analysis formula, not anything directly impacting gameplay. Sorry!

[/ QUOTE ]

Is that a qualified yes? /puppydogeyes

[ QUOTE ]
And now...back to trying to figure out how to get Formula X to incorporate Variable Y without breaking in hideous, horrible, awful ways.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please tell me you're doing something about bringing animation times into the damage formula. Please. Pretty please...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Because Quick Recovery is a larger buff than Stamina, it should get preferential slotting compared to Stamina. Before Stamina gets any slots, Quick Recovery should get 3.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not exactly. The way the math works (like recharge reduction) is that the first generic endmod slotted in Stamina is worth more than the second slotted in QR. (Of course, that's the base slot.) So--if using plain endmods of the same level--your second slot in QR should definitely precede your second slot in Stamina, which should precede your third slot in QR which should precede your third slot in Stamina.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're simply wrong here. Recovery isn't increased on the same path as Recharge (which does follow the diminishing path). Recovery is improved from a point of (1 + endMod). Recharge is improved inversely because recharge is determined by 1/(1+recharge). The slotting advice I've given is still correct.

What you're probably thinking is going to decrease the effectiveness is ED, which isn't going to hit until the second slot, at which point it's pointless to continue slotting. Because QR is simply the larger buff, it should get slotted completely before you even begin throwing slots into Stamina. If you want, I can do even more complete math for you.

[ QUOTE ]
Nitpick, also. At least as it registers in your chat window, the proc is 10 end, not 10%. (Barring the chat window lying.) A toon of mine with 119 max end always bestows herself 10 end when it procs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've seen it reward both 10 and 11 end on my characters in the chat window, and the endurance tests I've gone through have always demonstrated to me that it's a percent benefit of max endurance rather than a flat quantity. I've got good reasons for using 10% rather than 10 end.

[ QUOTE ]
Got it. Thanks guys. Now, the OP was saying that he only had 4 slots between QR and Stam...what would be the optimum slotting for both if you are not limited to only 4 slots? I'm anxious to give this is a shot tonight and see if it makes a difference.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly as I said it would be. Stamina and Quick Recovery each get their basic slot plus 2 more. My slotting recommendations require 3 slots in each for a total of 6 slots. The 2 starting slots plus the 4 free slots equal 6 slots.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm IO'ing out a really tight build for my BS/WP and could only afford 4 free slots for both stamina and quick recovery. The WP toggles + tough + weave + maneuvers make this a very end-heavy build. So how would I slot these two powers for maximum benefit? Should I just slot three end mods for each or use performance shifters (%, endmod, endmod/acc)?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because Quick Recovery is a larger buff than Stamina, it should get preferential slotting compared to Stamina. Before Stamina gets any slots, Quick Recovery should get 3.

If you've got QR, Stamina, and 4 slots to put between them, your best bet is this: Perf Shifter proc, Perf Shifter EndMod, and a level 50 common End Mod. The Perf Shifter proc is actually better than anything else you can put into Stamina and it's just as good as anything you can put into Quick Recovery (it's actually .01 end/sec worse than the first lvl 50 End Mod you put into it, but I rate the fact that you can't debuff the Perf Shifter proc to be better than .01 end/sec). After that, the 2 level 50 End Mod IOs (the Perf Shifter is just there to get that little set bonus but isn't really necessary) simply bring the enhancement up to the edge of the redzone. Any End Mod after that is going to be largely ineffective thanks to ED.

[/ QUOTE ]

I apologize in advance...I'm still learning some of the terminology. Which Perf Shifter are you referring to when you say "Per Shifter proc"? I'd like to try your slotting recommendation but not entirely sure which ones you're referring to. I'm getting started WAY late in the game as you can tell )

[/ QUOTE ]

"Proc" refers to the "Chance for [insert effect here]" IOs. The Perf Shifter proc is the one that has a 20% chance to restore 10% endurance.

[ QUOTE ]
Ice slows and lowers To Hit

[/ QUOTE ]

Only 2 of the powers do that (BIB and Blizzard), and they're both relatively minor, shorter duration effects than the -rech -spd.

Ice's big schtick is -rech -spd.

[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying you can easily and quickly traverse the cities in CoX with just hurdle?

[/ QUOTE ]

Combat Jumping + Hurdle is more than enough to quickly traverse the areas in CoX. There are numerous players that do it specifically because they don't want to have to have a travel power at all.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry your so close minded that you feel your ignorant little opinion is law. To disagree or just flat out not like an idea is one thing, but to come in here spewing negative garbage about how I my idea is stupid and that I'm being deceptive in what I really want is both uncalled for and just [censored] rude.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not closed minded. I'm actually very open minded. Your idea just doesn't do anything new. It's exactly the same as what's already possible, except that you want to be able to do so with a single power pool rather than 2.

I didn't say you were being deceptive. I said you were lying. You're lying because what you're saying is wrong, whether it's a lie of ignorance (you didn't realize that it's exactly like the current jumping and running modes of transportation) or intent (you did realize that what you're saying is wrong, you just don't care because that would make your argument look weaker) I never stated.

The fact of the matter stands that it's not actually different than what can already be accomplished in game already. The only thing it and every other parkour or freerunning inspired power pool do is make it so that anyone that wants to have the specific combination of moderate jumping and moderate running only has to take 1 power pool rather than the 2 existing power pools that make just as much thematic sense if not more for parkour (Fitness + Leaping).

This is completely ignoring the fact that the transport powers aren't even really required. If you want to, you can hoof it about town and force downtime upon yourself (like the heroes that you keep bringing up have to) rather than giving your character some more obviously super-human mode of transportation but that's not the fault of the game nor is it any more reason to create a power pool specifically for it than there is to make an alternate medicine pool because someone doesn't like how that one looks. There are more than enough ways to get about the city that don't require any transport power: ouroboros, trams/helicopters, SG bases, etc.

If you want me to quit raining on your parade, try actually coming up with some substantive reasons as to why the power pool is needed that actually stand up to the counterarguments. Saying that it gives players a new travel mode is blatantly wrong (for all the reasons I've given above), as is suggesting that it's something that isn't possible with the current power pools (similarly, for all the reasons I've given above). Your arguments have pretty much been built around "I want it in one power pool so I should get it in one power pool because I don't want to get it in 2 power pools".

5 piece Doctored Wounds (all but Heal/End) for Instant Healing, Reconstruction, and Dull Pain. 3 piece Numina (Proc, Heal, Heal/End) for Integration. Fast Healing shouldn't get a lot of slot loving because you're already packing in the +regen with everything else you've got and +regen doesn't really stack well. MoG should get the LotG +rech, LotG (def/rech), and 2 level 50 common recharge IOs. Resilience is best used as an IO mule for the Steadfast 3% +def IO and the Gladiator's 3% +def IO. QR gets the Perf Shifter proc, Perf Shifter End Mod, and a level 50 common IO End Mod.

6 piece Obliteration for your AoEs. 5 piece Crushing Impact for Gambler's Cut and Divine Avalanche, using the 6th slot for the Achilles' Heel proc and LotG +rech IO respectively. 6 piece Mako's Bite for any other single target attacks. Depending on whether you get Tactics or Focused Accuracy, you should either slot BU with 2-3 common rech IOs or 6 piece Gaussian's (give a guess which should go into Tactics/FA).

Here's a build that has performed historically well (ValBlademaster solo'd 4 AVs at once with it) and demonstrates a lot of what you should look into doing. It's expensive. You've been warned.

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

Click this DataLink to open the build!

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

Hero Profile:
Level 1: Gambler's Cut -- Hectmb-Dmg/Rchg(A), Hectmb-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(3), Hectmb-Acc/Rchg(3), Hectmb-Dmg/EndRdx(5), Hectmb-Dam%(5), Achilles-ResDeb%(7)
Level 1: Fast Healing -- Mrcl-Rcvry+(A)
Level 2: Reconstruction -- Dct'dW-Heal/EndRdx(A), Dct'dW-Heal/Rchg(7), Dct'dW-Heal/EndRdx/Rchg(9), Dct'dW-Heal(9), Dct'dW-Rchg(11)
Level 4: Quick Recovery -- P'Shift-End%(A), P'Shift-EndMod(11), EndMod-I(13)
Level 6: Build Up -- RechRdx-I(A), RechRdx-I(13), RechRdx-I(15)
Level 8: Divine Avalanche -- C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg(A), C'ngImp-Dmg/Rchg(15), C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(17), C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx(17), C'ngImp-Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg(19), LkGmblr-Rchg+(19)
Level 10: Combat Jumping -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A), LkGmblr-Def(43)
Level 12: Dull Pain -- Dct'dW-EndRdx/Rchg(A), Dct'dW-Heal/Rchg(21), Dct'dW-Heal/EndRdx/Rchg(21), Dct'dW-Heal(23), Dct'dW-Rchg(23)
Level 14: Super Jump -- Zephyr-Travel(A), Zephyr-Travel/EndRdx(25), Zephyr-ResKB(25)
Level 16: Integration -- Numna-Heal/EndRdx(A), Numna-Heal(27), Numna-Regen/Rcvry+(27)
Level 18: Boxing -- Amaze-Stun(A), Amaze-Stun/Rchg(29), Amaze-Acc/Stun/Rchg(29), Amaze-Acc/Rchg(31), Amaze-EndRdx/Stun(31)
Level 20: Tough -- Aegis-ResDam/EndRdx(A), Aegis-ResDam/Rchg(31), Aegis-ResDam/EndRdx/Rchg(33), Aegis-ResDam(33), Aegis-Psi/Status(33)
Level 22: Weave -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A), RedFtn-Def/EndRdx(34), RedFtn-Def/Rchg(34), RedFtn-Def/EndRdx/Rchg(34), RedFtn-Def(36), RedFtn-EndRdx(36)
Level 24: Hasten -- RechRdx-I(A), RechRdx-I(36), RechRdx-I(37)
Level 26: Soaring Dragon -- Mako-Acc/Dmg(A), Mako-Dmg/EndRdx(37), Mako-Dmg/Rchg(37), Mako-Acc/EndRdx/Rchg(39), Mako-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg(39), Mako-Dam%(39)
Level 28: Instant Healing -- Dct'dW-EndRdx/Rchg(A), Dct'dW-Heal/Rchg(40), Dct'dW-Heal/EndRdx/Rchg(40), Dct'dW-Heal(40), Dct'dW-Rchg(42)
Level 30: Hurdle -- Jump-I(A)
Level 32: Golden Dragonfly -- Armgdn-Dmg/Rchg(A), Armgdn-Acc/Dmg/Rchg(42), Armgdn-Acc/Rchg(42), Armgdn-Dmg/EndRdx(43), Armgdn-Dam%(43)
Level 35: Health -- RgnTis-Regen+(A)
Level 38: Moment of Glory -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A), LkGmblr-Def/Rchg(45), RechRdx-I(45), RechRdx-I(45)
Level 41: Focused Accuracy -- GSFC-ToHit(A), GSFC-ToHit/Rchg(46), GSFC-ToHit/Rchg/EndRdx(46), GSFC-Rchg/EndRdx(46), GSFC-ToHit/EndRdx(48), GSFC-Build%(48)
Level 44: Stamina -- P'Shift-End%(A), P'Shift-EndMod(50)
Level 47: Super Speed -- Zephyr-Travel(A), Zephyr-Travel/EndRdx(48), Zephyr-ResKB(50)
Level 49: Resilience -- S'fstPrt-ResDam/Def+(A), Empty(50)
------------
Level 1: Brawl -- Empty(A)
Level 1: Sprint -- ULeap-Stlth(A)
Level 2: Rest -- Empty(A)
Level 1: Critical Hit

[ QUOTE ]
Willpower has decent DEF to F/C/E/N/P, which might be cappable, and decent RES to S/L, with a lot of Regen. Its tier 9 is immune to recharge buffs. Regen has diminishing returns, unilke DEF or RES. Willpower's almost designed to be proof against IO'ing.

[/ QUOTE ]

The point when IO'ing */WP isn't to augment the regeneration portion. When IO'ing */WP, it's best to simply crank the defense as high as humanly possible, whether you aim for typed or positional is up to you (Tanks probably fare better with typed). The reason for this is because, whereas damage recovery mechanics have rather swift diminishing returns with themselves, they have very substantial multiplicative returns with damage mitigation, especially considering the massive hit points of a Tanker.

Personally, I'd have to say that, if they both had an equivalent amount of inf dumped into them, Inv/* and WP/* would be pretty close to equal to each other. Inv/* would have a definite advantage in the realm of mitigation, but its damage recovery would pale in comparison to WP/*'s perma-IH levels of regen.

[ QUOTE ]
Basically, their "status affect" is more damage (aka, the Fire Dot).
Where as Ice for example, slows the enemy down quite a bit.

[/ QUOTE ]

The funny thing about this is that Fire actually benefits from this design twice. Fire Blast has excellent damage and DPS, but it's not entirely due to the "secondary effect". The more substantive benefit is that Fire Blast is simply fast. Fire Ball and Blaze, which are probably the two most important powers in the set, both animate significantly faster than any of their counterparts in the other sets. Low animation times gives Fire a massive advantage in the DPS category because it gets more attacks in within a similar period of time.

[ QUOTE ]
Ah, I understand now. Could you post a slightly more detailed indication of your methodology. Using your previously posted chains, I am calculating different values. Perhaps break down one of the chains for a reference.

[/ QUOTE ]

The IO level Fire Blast attack chain is Blaze>Ball>Flares>Wait(.264 secs)>Blaze>Flares>Blast

Remember that the Defiance buff lasts 7.5 seconds after the end of the blast that generated it and a +dam buff is effective for the full effect of a blast as long as the damage buff is present at the start of the attack. Thanks to the total length of this attack string (8.052 seconds) all of the Defiance buffs for each of the powers are equal (which is lucky). This generates a total Defiance buff of 6.6 + 2 + 6.6 + 6.6 + 6.6 + 11 = 39.4% +dam. Combined with the enhancement +dam buff of 94.93% +dam, that gives us a total modifier of 2.3433 for each attack.

Blaze: 170.5 damage * 2.3433 = 399.53
Fire Ball: 74.6 * 2.3433 = 174.81
Flares: 63.19 * 2.3433 = 148.07
Blaze: 170.5 damage * 2.3433 = 399.53
Flares: 63.19 * 2.3433 = 148.07
Blast: 84.7 * 2.3433 = 198.48

Total: 1468.49

Animation Time: 1.188 + 1.188 + 1.188 + .264 + 1.188 + 1.188 + 1.848 = 8.052

1468.49/8.052 = 182.375

This number is actually ever so slightly lower than what I'd calculated initially because I did some more aggressive rounding earlier on. The original total damage I had for the set was 1468.705, which is an incredibly small difference.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Those correct numbers were being used for the results. Fire is just that crazy thanks to Blaze.

[/ QUOTE ]
The charts (the ones that break the forum) list Fire Blast damage as 92.6, but the real average should be 84.72. Blaze is listed as 188.9, but it should be 170.5. I did not check any of the others. Perhaps there is something I am missing?

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't use those. Those are Player99's. I used my own numbers for all of the calculations that I posted.

[ QUOTE ]
but why ya gotta state your objections in perhaps the rudest way possible?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, it's not really the rudest way possible. If I did that, Niv and Mod08 would be angrier at me than they already are considering my habit of using overt insults when my covert insults are ignored.

[ QUOTE ]
At any rate, I can get behind the idea to add the option to Teleport TO a teammate (as problematic as the code for that may be... having to not intersect geometry and all). Also, new travel pools are a great idea in general, I am just not a fan of the particular idea in the OP.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have to agree wholeheartedly here. Teleporting to a teammate would be wonderful, even moreso if it were possible to do a teleport-to-target type power for tactical combat.

The big issue I have with many suggested power pool is that they're not actually new travel modes. They're existing travel modes dressed up to be exactly what the OP (not this OP, but the OP in general) wants to use for a character concept. New travel pools for new travel modes are great in concept, but the problem is always that they require a fair amount more coding and engine screwery.

It's kind of a damned-either-way approach as far as I'm concerned. If the suggestion is something that would be easy for Castle to just make some quick new powers for that doesn't involve any new tech because it's pretty much the existing travel modes with a new paint job. If it's something that is actually impossible to pull off with the current tech, it's got the problem that it's got to get entirely new tech to make it even possible.