« I7 and Beyond | Main | Return to the Rogue Isles »
January 31, 2006
Oh, yes ... I'm the great ... Defender ... (woo-ooo-ooo-oo) ...
A review of the Defender bug list with comments by _Castle_ about how it's being or has been fixed (or else explanations -- in far too many cases -- of why it's not going to get fixed, like Endurance costs for Rez if not accepted). Too long to quote, but required reading for Defenders.
Posted by Dave at January 31, 2006 7:03 PM
|
Edit
Filed under: Resources & Rules
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.hill-kleerup.org/blog/mt4/080510t.cgi/8531
Comments
Hythian said:
Interesting.
A lot of it broke down to "Yes, Defenders will do a little more damage but Controllers get better control effects with the same power."
But still interesting reads. Doesn't seem to affect my Defenders really, but it does kind of help explain why some of the screwier power bugs haven't been fixed ( "It'd require re-writing more of the power system then we are willing to re-write." ).
Posted on January 31, 2006 11:20 PM
***Dave said:
Yeah. I can appreciate the "That's how the engine works, alas" problems; the "Defenders debuff, Controllers control" explanation for the wash in Defender Secondaries vs Controller Primaries still irks; a secondary ought to be intrinsically weaker than a primary (else what's an AT for?), albeit perhaps less weak in areas that jibe with the AT's concept. So the control aspect of Controller secondaries might be only 5-10% off of Defender Primary power, while the (de)buff/heal/damage/whatever aspect should be more like 15-25% off. By making them too close to the same, it makes Defenders into Controllers with weak blasts (or Controllers into Defenders with spiffy controls).
IMO.
Posted on February 1, 2006 6:15 AM