Consume [Archive] - City of Heroes Forums

MrTogo

02-02-2007, 12:28 PM

Honestly, even with Fulcrum Shift at the damage cap, the damage from Consume and Dark Consumption is still crap. It's a little different for DC, because that and Soul Drain is the only two AoE's... so then you might use it for damage. If you are using Consume for damage... then shame on you for wasting a power, whether it is the fire/ tank or /fire blaster. The longer timer actually works backwards that I would guessed between Powersink and Consume. Powersink is autohit, so you can put 3rech/3endmod and get it back faster than the 2acc/2rech/2endmod in Consume. Now, it seems to me that they would balance out if they were on the same time, because Consume does a measley amount of damage, but has the larger radius. And honestly, the radius isn't that big of a deal if 2 guys fill you up like with Powersink.

Also, powersink still gives the same amount back whatever the level of baddies.... The ones with tohit checks give less like Consume and DC, AFAIK.

The powersink/consume difference is one of the main reasons whey my /elec blaster made it to 50, and my /fire only made it to 33...

Blueeyed

02-02-2007, 12:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Eh? What's wrong with consume? :confused:

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps it recharges a bit slowly? Castle probably hasnt got round to it because I've been hammering them with my Imps + Oil Slick requests. :)

Lewis

[/ QUOTE ]

Consume recharges at 180 seconds, compared to the ~60 of Power Sink. It returns only 20 endurance per target rather than Power Sink's 25. Where Power Sink does a respectable amount of endurance drain (the Blaster version drains 35% of a critter's endo), Consume does a very meager AoE damage effect of 0.4 damage scalar.

It's a bit sad that there's no change coming down the line soon, but then again, that means that there might be an Invention that makes Consume valuable.

Thank you _Castle_ for providing this information to the community.

SuperChris

02-02-2007, 12:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]
That, and I'm getting cranky in my dottage. :P

[/ QUOTE ]

Nit pick: I think that's dotage.

EvilGeko

02-02-2007, 12:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can we fix Consume now that we're normalizing timers?

[/ QUOTE ]

There will be NO CHANGES to Consume at this time. Why? There are some essential datapoints I need to confirm which I have not had the opportunity to do yet. I *should* get my hands on the raw data after the Invention system hits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the reply. I really don't understand why one endurance drain has to have 3x the recharge of every single other endurance drain that exist in armor sets, but I'm willing to be patient until after Inventions come out.

GenericVillain

02-02-2007, 12:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
higher level enemies = less end drained. The last one is the most frustrating part for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe that's true for all endurance drains.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe. I've only ever noticed such a significant difference on my fire tank and brute. My Ice tank and electric brute don't seem to draw noticably less end from higher con enemies, but I haven't done any rigorous testing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have done the testing and consume scales down against higher level enemies and powersink (and energy drain) do not. This in addition to recharging 3 times as fast and being autohit (which means it can recharge even faster and recover even more cause it has more room for slots, and you can count on it never failing you when you really really need it).

Oh, and powersink drains a ton of end from the opponent. Consume does a wee bit of damage and costs virtually nothing iirc.

Only thing I can figure is that they think that /fire is good enough that consume doesn't need to be powersink's equal. I mean, there are sets with no end recovery (invul, dark, stone, and more).

Ohmi_on_Victory

02-02-2007, 12:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That, and I'm getting cranky in my dottage. :P

[/ QUOTE ]

Nit pick: I think that's dotage.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless he's refering to each PM doing dot.

Tannim222

02-02-2007, 12:57 PM

After you get the data, I have one of 2 suggestions for fixes to this power.

Others have requested, change this to mirror powersink, at least a bit closer. The damage dealth is an extemely minor, even with damage capped (same goes for Dark Melee's Dark Consumption).

Understandibly, since all powers cannot exist in a vacuum and have to consider all their possible build combinations for balance, Consume (and therefore, Dark Consumption) cannot be make equal to Powersink.

Consider these 2 possibilities, keep the power as is, but add in a pulsing dot-aura that does damage and and drains endurance, siphoning it to the user, for a duration of 60 seconds. This will give the upfront end boost, add some damage, and allow for continued end drain for a short time.

Or, reduce the recharge to 90, remove the to-hit check and damage. Change the amount of endurance gained for the first target hit, and a decreased amount for additional targets, the total of which is the same as it is now. Also add a self-buff to end drain resistance for 25 seconds. End mods placed not only increase the endurance gained on a drain, but also increase the end drain resistance (if possible).

ShrikeX

02-02-2007, 01:10 PM

SuperChris

02-02-2007, 01:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That, and I'm getting cranky in my dottage. :P

[/ QUOTE ]
Nit pick: I think that's dotage.

[/ QUOTE ]
Unless he's refering to each PM doing dot.

[/ QUOTE ]

So a barrage of PMs is like a damage over time effect? Interesting.

Fulmens

02-02-2007, 01:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Consume and Dark Consumption have always been overly long on the recharge

[/ QUOTE ]
Everyone wants to go to heaven, nobody wants to die.

anarchicgorilla

02-02-2007, 01:33 PM

My suggestion for change (given the data) would be to make it mirror the energy absorbtion. (auto hit and rchg included)

That way:
Consume has 15 endx gain + damage
Energy absorb has 15 endx gain + defense
Power sink has 15 endx gain + 10 endx gain
Energy drains has 15 endx gain + 10 endx gain

I did the 15 + 10 to show a point... That each has a base 15.. and a secondary effect that mirrors the set... EA + Elec = endurance bonus... Ice = defense bonus; Fire = damage bonus.

So consume would have the same damage, be an auto hit, and have a 60 recharge, with a 15% endurance gain. Which all seems balanced to me.

Zarkonan1

02-02-2007, 01:40 PM

Disappointing news, but not unexpected. <thinks about how long Temperature Protection has remained the same>

Bill Z Bubba

02-02-2007, 01:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Something tells me you've been getting way too many PMs on this :p

[/ QUOTE ]

That, and I'm getting cranky in my dottage. :P

[/ QUOTE ]

But now that you've come out and said, "no way, at this time, ya damn, dirty apes!!!" we can sit back and relax about it.

Then you can datamine and fix it at your leisure. (liesure?... nope... leisure. Stupid i before e except after c... and in words like leisure...)

Well played.

Severe

02-02-2007, 02:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That, and I'm getting cranky in my dottage. :P

[/ QUOTE ]

throw more dots!

[/ QUOTE ]

DOT FTW!!!

UberGuy

02-02-2007, 02:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
higher level enemies = less end drained. The last one is the most frustrating part for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe that's true for all endurance drains.

[/ QUOTE ]

Castle told us this is not the case. Originally he thought so too, but came back with a correction.

Stele

02-02-2007, 02:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
My suggestion for change (given the data) would be to make it mirror the energy absorbtion. (auto hit and rchg included)

That way:
Consume has 15 endx gain + damage
Energy absorb has 15 endx gain + defense
Power sink has 15 endx gain + 10 endx gain
Energy drains has 15 endx gain + 10 endx gain

I did the 15 + 10 to show a point... That each has a base 15.. and a secondary effect that mirrors the set... EA + Elec = endurance bonus... Ice = defense bonus; Fire = damage bonus.

So consume would have the same damage, be an auto hit, and have a 60 recharge, with a 15% endurance gain. Which all seems balanced to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

/signed

Tannim222

02-02-2007, 04:39 PM

I have no problem with that in of itself, except for a couple of things.

I wonder if they will give an auto hit damage - even if it is minor. Would the damage dealt be balaned with other other secondary effects from the comparible powers?

What about Dark Consumption? It has damage, accuracy debuff, and end gain.

Considering this, if Consume were changed like you suggest, would the various power combintations it is available with be given a distinct advantage the devs want to avoid?

Also, if Consume were changed like you suggest, Dark Consumption should also certainly be looked into.

Then there are sets they may be planning behind the scenes have have either Consume or DC in them and any changes made would have to take them into consideration as well.

Crosis

02-02-2007, 04:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Something tells me you've been getting way too many PMs on this :p

[/ QUOTE ]

That, and I'm getting cranky in my dottage. :P

[/ QUOTE ]

Who's agititating my dots? You agitating my dots? *eat's cake*

anarchicgorilla

02-02-2007, 04:54 PM

I would consider dark consumption in a different class as it is in a assault and not a defense set. However, if it were to be included... I would say remove the damage or thdb. (i would go with damage)

Burn & Bonfire... if they are not auto hits, then make the damage in consume have whatever type of to hit check and accuracy they have. You could also make the damage in consume something like a 80% chance at 5 ticks (with all 5 adding up to current damage).

I donot see consume over powering fire as of now with any combo. Personally even with this change I still perfer ice.

The best improvement I see is a EM/Fire brute... and even here I still think a EM/Elec does better.

StratoNexus

02-02-2007, 06:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
TY for the post. To me this leads me to be optimistic that once indeed you do get the data points, there is a possibility we can expect to hear some good news.

[/ QUOTE ]
It could just as easily be determined that Power Sink, Energy Absorption, Energy Drain, etc. are all performing above their desired level and Consume is the correct performance level. I could easily make that arguement based on my experiences with my EA brute, my Ice Tank, and my friends experience with his /Electric blaster. Or they may decide to treat this like they did Burn. They might move them all to a 120 second recharge (in addition to possibly altering other characteristics such as mob level affecting amount drained), so it would be a buff for Consume and a nerf to the other powers.

GenericVillain

02-02-2007, 06:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Or they may decide to treat this like they did Burn. They might move them all to a 120 second recharge

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't even suggest such an attrocity :(

Monkey_King

02-02-2007, 06:24 PM

Well, at least he's going to look at it. I can respect "too busy with Inventions" as an answer, there's only so many hours in a day. I'm almost certain that datamining will definitively prove how awful Consume really is, so I say take all the time you need to. It's probably better to focus on making sure Inventions don't break the game right now anyway.

Shroudbearer

02-02-2007, 06:47 PM

No real reply - I'm just entranced by your avatar.

1!
Cut a hole in the box!

Arcanaville

02-02-2007, 07:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can we fix Consume now that we're normalizing timers?

[/ QUOTE ]

There will be NO CHANGES to Consume at this time. Why? There are some essential datapoints I need to confirm which I have not had the opportunity to do yet. I *should* get my hands on the raw data after the Invention system hits.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is why I keep bothering Castle about Martial Arts and Super Reflexes: it adds some diversity to his complaint box.

Consume's recharge is wrong, though.

Scorching_Tank

02-02-2007, 07:15 PM

Yeah, it works fine for me, but only because I have Stamina, Conserve Power, and Hasten. If I relied on only Consume, or even on only Stamina and Consume, I'd be an END-less sap of a Tank. I'd say put it to 100-120 seconds, and leave it at that.

Verdeman

02-02-2007, 09:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
After you get the data, I have one of 2 suggestions for fixes to this power.

Others have requested, change this to mirror powersink, at least a bit closer. The damage dealth is an extemely minor, even with damage capped (same goes for Dark Melee's Dark Consumption).

Understandibly, since all powers cannot exist in a vacuum and have to consider all their possible build combinations for balance, Consume (and therefore, Dark Consumption) cannot be make equal to Powersink.

Consider these 2 possibilities, keep the power as is, but add in a pulsing dot-aura that does damage and and drains endurance, siphoning it to the user, for a duration of 60 seconds. This will give the upfront end boost, add some damage, and allow for continued end drain for a short time.

Or, reduce the recharge to 90, remove the to-hit check and damage. Change the amount of endurance gained for the first target hit, and a decreased amount for additional targets, the total of which is the same as it is now. Also add a self-buff to end drain resistance for 25 seconds. End mods placed not only increase the endurance gained on a drain, but also increase the end drain resistance (if possible).

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't mind seeing consume have its recharge dropped by a lot. Lessen the amount of endurance it gives back to make up for the quicker recharge. Drop the damage out completely and make it kind of a reverse of Siphon Power. The user gets +25% damage and all enemies hit by it get their damage dropped by 25%.

This would keep consume from becoming a clone of a power in a different set while at the same time increasing the damage mitigation and output of the Fire set.

Starsman

02-02-2007, 10:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Something tells me you've been getting way too many PMs on this :p

[/ QUOTE ]

That, and I'm getting cranky in my dottage. :P

[/ QUOTE ]

And here I thought I was being original with that PM...

Starsman

02-02-2007, 10:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can we fix Consume now that we're normalizing timers?

[/ QUOTE ]

There will be NO CHANGES to Consume at this time. Why? There are some essential datapoints I need to confirm which I have not had the opportunity to do yet. I *should* get my hands on the raw data after the Invention system hits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the reply. I really don't understand why one endurance drain has to have 3x the recharge of every single other endurance drain that exist in armor sets, but I'm willing to be patient until after Inventions come out.

[/ QUOTE ]

We have to be careful what we ask for, though. Look exactly how they "normalized" burn. Sure, fire tankers got a buff, but what happened to other burns?

Thats what the entire community may get out of Consume Vs Energy Leach normalization.

MrQuizzles

02-03-2007, 12:43 AM

Oooh, can we reduce the recharge time for Dark Consumtpion in the Dark Mastery APP for Defenders, too?

I mean, it's great and all, but the recharge is 4 minutes.

Dysmal

02-03-2007, 01:24 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Oooh, can we reduce the recharge time for Dark Consumtpion in the Dark Mastery APP for Defenders, too?

I mean, it's great and all, but the recharge is 4 minutes.

[/ QUOTE ]

By the time it recharges, I've forgotten I have it!

UberGuy

02-03-2007, 01:25 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Thats what the entire community may get out of Consume Vs Energy Leach normalization.

[/ QUOTE ]

While that's never kind of result I want, that's not going to stop me from questioning when powers that perform similarly have radical imbalances in performance (though I understand there are mechanical differences in Consume and DC and the other drains. However, the net function of those other powers makes them superior in every way, and I don't see set-wide balance considerations suggesting Consume should underperform that much in its apparently primary function. (That doesn't mean they aren't there, but they'd have to be explained to me.)

I don't want my Brute Burn nerfed, but I've not been afraid to ask the question about Tanker Burn being so much longer to recharge. I'm not cool with balance by "these guys get shafted but I've got it good".

All that said, I will be pretty shocked if the response is a nerf to the other drain powers. They're pretty pervasive. It's not inconceivable, but damn if someone isn't asleep at the helm if something doled out as much as Power Sink and its cousins is considered overpowered.

UberGuy

02-03-2007, 01:30 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Oooh, can we reduce the recharge time for Dark Consumtpion in the Dark Mastery APP for Defenders, too?

I mean, it's great and all, but the recharge is 4 minutes.

[/ QUOTE ]

By the time it recharges, I've forgotten I have it!

[/ QUOTE ]

You realize you actually made out like bandits there, right? The normal rule of thumb for epic power recharges is double standard and that one is 133% standard. (Normal DC recharge is 180s or 3 mins.)

Of course, if Consume was brought down (I'd be pretty happy with 90 or 120s), I would hope DC would come down also and the Defender EPP version should then come down proporionally.

GenericVillain

02-03-2007, 03:11 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Oooh, can we reduce the recharge time for Dark Consumtpion in the Dark Mastery APP for Defenders, too?

I mean, it's great and all, but the recharge is 4 minutes.

[/ QUOTE ]

By the time it recharges, I've forgotten I have it!

[/ QUOTE ]

You realize you actually made out like bandits there, right? The normal rule of thumb for epic power recharges is double standard and that one is 133% standard. (Normal DC recharge is 180s or 3 mins.)

Of course, if Consume was brought down (I'd be pretty happy with 90 or 120s), I would hope DC would come down also and the Defender EPP version should then come down proporionally.

[/ QUOTE ]

And if for some reason they decide to normalize and put powersink up to a minute, the PPPs that have powersink will double up to 2 minutes :eek: Or maybe they'll forget about those powersinks and for a few patches they'll be exactly the same.

Scorching_Tank

02-03-2007, 03:48 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Oooh, can we reduce the recharge time for Dark Consumtpion in the Dark Mastery APP for Defenders, too?

I mean, it's great and all, but the recharge is 4 minutes.

[/ QUOTE ]

By the time it recharges, I've forgotten I have it!

[/ QUOTE ]

You realize you actually made out like bandits there, right? The normal rule of thumb for epic power recharges is double standard and that one is 133% standard. (Normal DC recharge is 180s or 3 mins.)

Of course, if Consume was brought down (I'd be pretty happy with 90 or 120s), I would hope DC would come down also and the Defender EPP version should then come down proporionally.

[/ QUOTE ]

Weren't we trying to lower Consume a little so it balances along with the other End Recharge powers? Especially due to the fact that that's basically all it does, no debuffs or anything.

UberGuy

02-03-2007, 04:19 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Weren't we trying to lower Consume a little so it balances along with the other End Recharge powers? Especially due to the fact that that's basically all it does, no debuffs or anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah... I kinda mentioned that, especially in the post right above the one you quoted?

Chadius

02-03-2007, 09:57 AM

I wouldn't mind if they upped the damage and made it an actual AoE attack that, by the way, gives endurance.

Or is it supposed to be an end drain that, by the way, deals damage? It sucks either way.

Arcanaville

02-03-2007, 12:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Something tells me you've been getting way too many PMs on this :p

[/ QUOTE ]

That, and I'm getting cranky in my dottage. :P

[/ QUOTE ]

And here I thought I was being original with that PM...

[/ QUOTE ]

Five seconds after I read the burn normalization note, I thought to PM Castle about Consume, because its the obvious next thing. Ten seconds after I read the burn normalization note, I figured there was no point, because its a little too obviously next thing. :p

NeverDark

02-03-2007, 12:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]

What about Dark Consumption? It has damage, accuracy debuff, and end gain.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just damage and end gain. Neither DC nor Soul Drain have debuffs attached.

Starsman

02-03-2007, 01:30 PM

One thing to be noted about this whole normalization of Edruance Leach powers, is not only the recharge. Consume does has the obvious gigantic difference there, but most of the powers give drastic different endurance gains and at drastically different endurance costs, those are all aspects that would require looking at if you do shoot for normalization. The side effects of the powers are the part that should be different, with ice causing slow and self def, fire doing damage, and energy/electric simply lowering the endurance of the target.

I can see how some powers may get what may be considered nerfs under such a normalization, in one way or another.

Scorching_Tank

02-04-2007, 12:19 AM

Well Consume doesn't actually suck, because I'd suspect that almost every Fire Tanker takes the power. On the basis of a necessity, it is one of the most important powers in FA, I think.

The problem is that it only partially alleviates one of Fire's biggest problems. With Consume, I can usually bring my bar back to full if I find even a small mob. So the End Modification isn't the issue. Within the 90 seconds (yes I have it 3-slotted), I will still run out of Endurance when I'm actually attacking constantly. And I have Stamina.

100 seconds would help Fire Tanks a lot...of course, still, just with offense. We also need a help with defense.

Darkhole

02-04-2007, 09:18 AM

Powersink VS Consume VS Energy Absorption VS Dark Consumption

Stone/Electric Brute. I don't have to take Stamina because Powersink is an instant fill-up when I need one. In the case where I will only have one target for a while (vs AV/Hero) I can just hit Conserve Power and/or Power Surge and never worry about endurance.

Fire/Fire Tanker. I am forced to take Stamina to be efficient. Since Consume requires 4 enemies around me, and a to-hit check, every 90 secconds I may or may not have an endurance refill. This is unreliable.

Ice/Energy Tanker. I am forced to take Stamina to sustain my toggles. However, I have an auto-hit power that refills my endurance with about 3 enemies around me and gives me a massive defense boost.

Dark/Dark Brute. I'm forced to take Stamina to have endurance. In addition, I have stymied AoE damage because both of my AoE attacks are on a 120 seccond timer. One of these AoEs is an endurance heal power. I'm not sure whether or not to slot it for damage or drain. It already needs two accuracies and two recharges, so theres not much room for anything else.

Dark/Fire Brute. I don't need to take stamina, but I do anyhow. With two endurance recovery powers endurance problems are a thing of the past. I can afford to slot Dark Consumption for damage, but why bother. Its DPS is horrible. I can't figure out why a power like this is in an attack set.

I did this to show how practical these powers really are. Consume could get a buff, but then Dark Consumption would deserve one too. Buffing both of these powers would make Dark/Fire overpowered. But hey, since AR/Devices gets a synergy bonus other sets should too huh? Energy Absorption needs left alone. Sure, the power itself might be very strong, but the rest of the set is weak. This single power balances the set. Powersink/Energy Drain are powerful. Using these, you can get rid of stamina altogether. They are probably too strong, their drain is massive and they can keep your endurance sustained.

These powers really are not balanced. Given Primary/Seccondary combinations though, I can't see how they could possibly be balanced without some major changes.

UberGuy

02-04-2007, 09:34 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't mind if they upped the damage and made it an actual AoE attack that, by the way, gives endurance.

Or is it supposed to be an end drain that, by the way, deals damage? It sucks either way.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm convinced it's supposed to be the latter.

In either case, even if they made it do meaningful damage I'm not really interested in an AoE with a three minute base recharge. As long as it also recovers endurance it will likely never do big damage. So moderate damage at best on a 3 minute recharge? No thanks. I'd much rather it be primarily an end recovery power and actually do that well.

StratoNexus

02-04-2007, 12:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Consume could get a buff, but then Dark Consumption would deserve one too. Buffing both of these powers would make Dark/Fire overpowered.

[/ QUOTE ]
You make this bizarre statement in the same post where you admit that your Stone/Electric Brute has no end issues because of Conserve Power, Power Surge, and Power Sink? Are you saying that you feel /Electric is currently overpowered and lowering the recharge on Consume and DC would make a Dark/Fire Brute equally overpowered? Of course, regen scrappers then must also be overpowered, as well as /Energy Brutes.

I don't think the 2 end recovery powers a Dark/Fire Brute can get would make them overpowered even if they were both on a 1 minute timer.

Arcanaville

02-05-2007, 11:01 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Consume could get a buff, but then Dark Consumption would deserve one too. Buffing both of these powers would make Dark/Fire overpowered.

[/ QUOTE ]

Consume and Dark Consumption only "deserve" the same treatment if the presumption is that all endurance recovery powers everywhere have to be identical for balance purposes. But that is not the logic behind buffing consume (at least, it isn't mine). The logic behind buffing consume is that its in a defensive set, and specifically a defensive set that relies on high endurance output to reach comparable performance with its peers on average, both for tankers and brutes. In many cases, that is because many of its peers have significant endurance recovery and/or endurance management also.

Dark consumption does not specifically have the same issues as consume in that light. It does not underperform its peers just because its endurance management is inferior - almost the opposite.

StratoNexus

02-05-2007, 12:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The logic behind buffing consume is that its in a defensive set, and specifically a defensive set that relies on high endurance output to reach comparable performance with its peers on average, both for tankers and brutes. In many cases, that is because many of its peers have significant endurance recovery and/or endurance management also.

[/ QUOTE ]
What about /Fire blaster's Consume? /Fire blasters fit into both of your justifications, as far as my experience goes. They suck down endurance to reach their potential and other blaster secondaries have endurance management powers as well.

Diesel Punk

02-05-2007, 01:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The logic behind buffing consume is that its in a defensive set, and specifically a defensive set that relies on high endurance output to reach comparable performance with its peers on average, both for tankers and brutes. In many cases, that is because many of its peers have significant endurance recovery and/or endurance management also.

[/ QUOTE ]
What about /Fire blaster's Consume? /Fire blasters fit into both of your justifications, as far as my experience goes. They suck down endurance to reach their potential and other blaster secondaries have endurance management powers as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

The difference is, the Dark Melee set is a complete utility set, With Fear, Healing, AoE Buffage and AoE Damage that restores endurance. As is its quite a strong set and does not need any sort of extreme buffs to make it able to sustain massive endurance costs. Compared to Firey Aura that is still somewhat lacking with Resistances and Some Mez protection, boosting consume to be in line with other defensively based Endurance Restorative powers might not be such a bad idea.

Arcanaville

02-05-2007, 01:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The logic behind buffing consume is that its in a defensive set, and specifically a defensive set that relies on high endurance output to reach comparable performance with its peers on average, both for tankers and brutes. In many cases, that is because many of its peers have significant endurance recovery and/or endurance management also.

[/ QUOTE ]
What about /Fire blaster's Consume? /Fire blasters fit into both of your justifications, as far as my experience goes. They suck down endurance to reach their potential and other blaster secondaries have endurance management powers as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fire blaster /Fire attacks aren't specifically designed to suck more endurance. There are more AoEs, which means they are only endurance-efficient when hitting multiple targets. Actually, giving endurance management to high-order AoE damaging things is counter-productive for balance. The devs can do whatever they want regarding /Fire consume, but it would be pointless to design AoEs to balance their endurance around a higher than 1.0 target-strike, then give out free endurance to sets with a lot of AoE attacks. That would be the left hand not knowing what the right hand was doing, and shooting off its thumb with a pistol.

Ian_Of_Moore

02-05-2007, 03:00 PM

<QR>

Haven't really read this thread so this may have already been mentioned.

I recently got consume and had some concerns about it's effectiveness as well. Certainly given the choice I'd rather have power sink but consume is still a good power. It has a 20 foot radius, which is really a big deal. Also the endurance cost of practically zero means you can use it even when at pretty much nothing. The low endurance cost also means that even if I use it against a single target I'm getting some endurance. It's not the type of power you should plan to use all the time to keep your end bar full but I anticipate that once slotted, I will love it even though it's not power sink.

Ian Moroe

Starsman

02-05-2007, 04:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Consume could get a buff, but then Dark Consumption would deserve one too. Buffing both of these powers would make Dark/Fire overpowered.

[/ QUOTE ]

Consume and Dark Consumption only "deserve" the same treatment if the presumption is that all endurance recovery powers everywhere have to be identical for balance purposes. But that is not the logic behind buffing consume (at least, it isn't mine). The logic behind buffing consume is that its in a defensive set, and specifically a defensive set that relies on high endurance output to reach comparable performance with its peers on average, both for tankers and brutes. In many cases, that is because many of its peers have significant endurance recovery and/or endurance management also.

Dark consumption does not specifically have the same issues as consume in that light. It does not underperform its peers just because its endurance management is inferior - almost the opposite.

[/ QUOTE ]

Although even if they buffed dark consumption the dark/fire brute would not get more endurance management utility, than a dark/energy does now.

The true issue by boosting Dark consumption is that the power actually does a decent amount of damage, about twice as much damage as Consume, and Dark melee is [supposedly] balanced around minimal AoE damage potential.

Starsman

02-05-2007, 04:19 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The logic behind buffing consume is that its in a defensive set, and specifically a defensive set that relies on high endurance output to reach comparable performance with its peers on average, both for tankers and brutes. In many cases, that is because many of its peers have significant endurance recovery and/or endurance management also.

[/ QUOTE ]
What about /Fire blaster's Consume? /Fire blasters fit into both of your justifications, as far as my experience goes. They suck down endurance to reach their potential and other blaster secondaries have endurance management powers as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fire blaster /Fire attacks aren't specifically designed to suck more endurance. There are more AoEs, which means they are only endurance-efficient when hitting multiple targets. Actually, giving endurance management to high-order AoE damaging things is counter-productive for balance. The devs can do whatever they want regarding /Fire consume, but it would be pointless to design AoEs to balance their endurance around a higher than 1.0 target-strike, then give out free endurance to sets with a lot of AoE attacks. That would be the left hand not knowing what the right hand was doing, and shooting off its thumb with a pistol.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would also boost blaster fire consume, if simply because blaster /electric power sink also has a 60 second recharge timer. There is precedence that should this change happen, it should cover all versions of consume.

StratoNexus

02-05-2007, 04:29 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Fire blaster /Fire attacks aren't specifically designed to suck more endurance.

[/ QUOTE ]
Is Healing Flames what you mean when you say that Fiery Aura relies on high endurance output to reach comparable performance, or is it more than that? What is it about Fiery Aura that deserves more endurance than Fire Manipulation (I am not disagreeing, just curious as to your reasoning)?

Arcanaville

02-05-2007, 05:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fire blaster /Fire attacks aren't specifically designed to suck more endurance.

[/ QUOTE ]
Is Healing Flames what you mean when you say that Fiery Aura relies on high endurance output to reach comparable performance, or is it more than that? What is it about Fiery Aura that deserves more endurance than Fire Manipulation (I am not disagreeing, just curious as to your reasoning)?

[/ QUOTE ]

There are a number of factors. Three of the tanker sets have a high cost damage aura: Fiery Aura, Stone, and Ice. Ice gets endurance recovery. Stone gets to eventually be granite, and outperform them all. FA gets neither massive tanking performance, nor endurance recovery to power all of its defenses continuously.

In addition, its performance only rivals the other sets when healing flames is spammed. That costs additional endurance: if slotted for maximum effectiveness (3heal/3rech) it can burn almost 0.5 eps. And when healing flames was buffed, it was simultaneously strengthened by increasing its heal (from 17.5% to 25%), and reducing its recharge (60 seconds to 40 seconds). Boosting the heal simultaneously boosts heal per second, and heal per endurance point, but reducing recharge only boosts heal per second, not heal per endurance point. So while the power was increased by a total of 114%, its heal per endurance point was only increased by 43%, and its endurance burn per second was actually increased.

In effect, not only does Fiery Aura burn more endurance for its performance, but the devs actually *increased* the endurance costs of the set by tying some of the buff to HF to higher endurance costs. The only justification for doing that would be that Fiery Aura was in danger of outperforming the other sets if it had too much endurance, but that's not even remotely true.

Fire manipulation does not share this property relative to its peers. It doesn't lag its peers in damage output unless it uses more endurance, and any deficiencies in the set (such as secondary effects) would not be resolved by having more endurance. The fact that they both have a power called "consume" or for that matter the fact that /Fire has significant endurance recovery at all is a coincidence, not I believe a signal that Fire manipulation is supposed to have vastly superior endurance management ability. From a game balance perspective, I believe fire manipulation consume has more in common with dark consumption than fiery aura consume.

There's a difference between being constrained by endurance costs, and being burdened by them. Dark armor is a set that can easily approach its peers without burning very much more endurance than them. But it can *exceed* its peers by burning *more*. That's a case where unlimited endurance would potentially unbalance the set, because endurance costs are what keep it within the rough performance range of its peers. But Fiery Aura is not like that: it doesn't outperform its peers but for the lack of endurance to do so.

StratoNexus

02-05-2007, 05:24 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Dark armor is a set that can easily approach its peers without burning very much more endurance than them. But it can *exceed* its peers by burning *more*.

[/ QUOTE ]
How can Dark Melee exceed the other attack sets by burning more endurance?

EDIT: I should note that I believe Fire Manipulation can exceed the other blaster secondaries by burning more endurance, but they already sacrifice most of the protections the other secondaries provide for that benefit.

Arcanaville

02-05-2007, 06:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Dark armor is a set that can easily approach its peers without burning very much more endurance than them. But it can *exceed* its peers by burning *more*.

[/ QUOTE ]
How can Dark Melee exceed the other attack sets by burning more endurance?

[/ QUOTE ]

Theoretically, by slotting a lot of recharge and closing its attack chain gaps with very fast attacks, but that's not what I said in the original post you quote above: my example was Dark Armor, not Dark Melee, and has nothing to do with dark consumption per se.

EvilGeko

02-05-2007, 06:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]

I would also boost blaster fire consume, if simply because blaster /electric power sink also has a 60 second recharge timer. There is precedence that should this change happen, it should cover all versions of consume.

[/ QUOTE ]

What he said. I think though we should take Castle at his word and let inventions come out and then open the floodgates folks.

StratoNexus

02-05-2007, 06:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
my example was Dark Armor, not Dark Melee, and has nothing to do with dark consumption per se.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, the example was just to illustrate the point that endurance can be and is used to balance sets.

Do the following statements bear any resemblance to your opinions? I may or may not agree with these statements myself, just trying to further discussion and gain a better idea of what people think.

Dark Consumption from Dark Melee has no counterpart in any Brute, Scrapper, Stalker, or Tanker attack set, and Dark Melee has no particular reason to require higher than normal endurance in order to bring it on par with those other attack sets.

Fiery Aura Consume does have counterparts in other Brute, Stalker, Scrapper, and Tanker sets, and it also requires higher endurance use than many (if not all) other defense sets in order to bring it on par to those other sets.

Fire Manipulation Consume does have counterparts in other Blaster secondaries, but does not require higher endurance use than those other secondaries to bring it on par with those support sets.

Arcanaville

02-05-2007, 07:29 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
my example was Dark Armor, not Dark Melee, and has nothing to do with dark consumption per se.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, the example was just to illustrate the point that endurance can be and is used to balance sets.

Do the following statements bear any resemblance to your opinions? I may or may not agree with these statements myself, just trying to further discussion and gain a better idea of what people think.

Dark Consumption from Dark Melee has no counterpart in any Brute, Scrapper, Stalker, or Tanker attack set, and Dark Melee has no particular reason to require higher than normal endurance in order to bring it on par with those other attack sets.

Fiery Aura Consume does have counterparts in other Brute, Stalker, Scrapper, and Tanker sets, and it also requires higher endurance use than many (if not all) other defense sets in order to bring it on par to those other sets.

Fire Manipulation Consume does have counterparts in other Blaster secondaries, but does not require higher endurance use than those other secondaries to bring it on par with those support sets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Rephrasing those statements as I would put them:

Dark Melee does not have a specific balance requirement to have significantly more endurance than other scrapper primaries, so the inclusion of dark consumption should be seen as a "nice to have" and not a "critical to balance." Therefore, there is no specific requirement for it to be any stronger or weaker than it currently is, because its inclusion in the set is specifically to be a unique benefit to the set.

Fiery Aura does appear to have issues related to its performance relative to its endurance consumption. Therefore, there is every reason to consider the overall endurance management ability of the set relative to its tanker and brute peers. Under those circumstances, its clear that taken as a whole, Fiery Aura has less endurance management capability than other sets with comparable performance, and less performance than sets with comparable endurance management capability. In some cases, it lags in both areas simultaneously.

Fire Manipulation appears similar to dark melee: its performance relative to its peers is not limited by endurance, and therefore like dark melee the presence of consume appears to be a "nice to have" unique benefit, not a "necessary for balance" component. As a result, just because it shares the same name with Fiery Aura consume, doesn't intrinsicly mean it should be balanced by the same criteria.

The devs *could* buff both FA consume and FM consume. But those buffs would have two different net results. The net result of buffing FA consume would be to equalize the imbalance between FA and other tanker and brute sets. The net result of buffing FM consume would be that /FM blasters would be getting a substantial endurance management tool "for free" as a secondary benefit of taking the FM secondary. It would be an out-of-balance addition similar to the DoT damage of Fire attacks (which are considered "secondary effects" by the devs that are not explicitly balanced for in the same way as base damage when designing the various attack sets).

StratoNexus

02-05-2007, 08:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The net result of buffing FM consume would be that /FM blasters would be getting a substantial endurance management tool "for free" as a secondary benefit of taking the FM secondary.

[/ QUOTE ]
Is that what Power Sink in Electric Manipulation is?

I am pretty confident that when Blazing Aura and Hot Feet are on, and with the occasional use of Fire Sword Circle, the Fire Manipulation secondary will use more endurance than the other secondaries (using just those 3 powers will probably use more end than anything the other blaster secondaries can muster). Will they use more endurance per bad guy killed though? That I am not so sure about, and really that is what matters I guess. It is entirely possible that since Fire Manipulation kills so quickly, endurance issues are an important balance mechanism to slow it down.

anarchicgorilla

02-06-2007, 07:45 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
my example was Dark Armor, not Dark Melee, and has nothing to do with dark consumption per se.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, the example was just to illustrate the point that endurance can be and is used to balance sets.

Do the following statements bear any resemblance to your opinions? I may or may not agree with these statements myself, just trying to further discussion and gain a better idea of what people think.

Dark Consumption from Dark Melee has no counterpart in any Brute, Scrapper, Stalker, or Tanker attack set, and Dark Melee has no particular reason to require higher than normal endurance in order to bring it on par with those other attack sets.

Fiery Aura Consume does have counterparts in other Brute, Stalker, Scrapper, and Tanker sets, and it also requires higher endurance use than many (if not all) other defense sets in order to bring it on par to those other sets.

Fire Manipulation Consume does have counterparts in other Blaster secondaries, but does not require higher endurance use than those other secondaries to bring it on par with those support sets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Rephrasing those statements as I would put them:

Dark Melee does not have a specific balance requirement to have significantly more endurance than other scrapper primaries, so the inclusion of dark consumption should be seen as a "nice to have" and not a "critical to balance." Therefore, there is no specific requirement for it to be any stronger or weaker than it currently is, because its inclusion in the set is specifically to be a unique benefit to the set.

Fiery Aura does appear to have issues related to its performance relative to its endurance consumption. Therefore, there is every reason to consider the overall endurance management ability of the set relative to its tanker and brute peers. Under those circumstances, its clear that taken as a whole, Fiery Aura has less endurance management capability than other sets with comparable performance, and less performance than sets with comparable endurance management capability. In some cases, it lags in both areas simultaneously.

Fire Manipulation appears similar to dark melee: its performance relative to its peers is not limited by endurance, and therefore like dark melee the presence of consume appears to be a "nice to have" unique benefit, not a "necessary for balance" component. As a result, just because it shares the same name with Fiery Aura consume, doesn't intrinsicly mean it should be balanced by the same criteria.

The devs *could* buff both FA consume and FM consume. But those buffs would have two different net results. The net result of buffing FA consume would be to equalize the imbalance between FA and other tanker and brute sets. The net result of buffing FM consume would be that /FM blasters would be getting a substantial endurance management tool "for free" as a secondary benefit of taking the FM secondary. It would be an out-of-balance addition similar to the DoT damage of Fire attacks (which are considered "secondary effects" by the devs that are not explicitly balanced for in the same way as base damage when designing the various attack sets).

[/ QUOTE ]

When you speak about FM consume for blasters and say looking at other sets in its category the buffs not needed to balance or that it is more of a bonus then to off set endx costs I say incorrect.

FM has 2 very heavy endx toggles (/Elec has 1) so if the balance is in regards to offsetting the heavy endx costs in such a set... well fire would be more worthy then /elec.

Both hot feet and blazing aura are part of FM and to say it does not appear to be limited by endx is bogus. It is only not limited by endx if you specifically skip the powers that drain it... Which by that rationale nothing is limited by endx for you can skip all their powers too. To ague otherwise would to be to somewhat imply blasters (or at least a */FM) are not designed to battle in melee, thus their melee toggles are only bonus, to which I would disagree with too.

Buffing FM consume does not get FM any advatage over other sets, what it does allow is for them to use the powers they do get without having a empty endx bar.

Zen_Concern

02-06-2007, 08:59 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Dark consumption does not specifically have the same issues as consume in that light. It does not underperform its peers just because its endurance management is inferior - almost the opposite.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am somewhat curious, I have always felt that Dark Melee was the safest melee primary but also at the same time the weakest in terms of damage output. What does Dark Consumption add to the melee set and why is an end recovery power in the melee set to begin with in your opinion?

I realize you can only guess at what the original design conept was but what I am specificaly wondering is how you see Dark Consumption functioning with the set as a whole as it stands now after 8 issues of changes.

I'm just looking for your feelings on this, not a proof :p

UberGuy

02-06-2007, 10:11 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I am somewhat curious, I have always felt that Dark Melee was the safest melee primary but also at the same time the weakest in terms of damage output. What does Dark Consumption add to the melee set and why is an end recovery power in the melee set to begin with in your opinion?

I realize you can only guess at what the original design conept was but what I am specificaly wondering is how you see Dark Consumption functioning with the set as a whole as it stands now after 8 issues of changes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know this wasn't directed at me, but..

I see this as a side effect of Dark powersets in general being "utility" powersets. They are the swiss-army-knives of the sets, known for DoT damage and features that like normally lie outside the AT or primary/secondary role.

In conjunction with this, I do think that DM and DA were designed to be specifically complimentary. I suspect that DC was meant to offset the costs of Dark Regen. Of course, if true, this isn't a very good design, since it implies that DA isn't effective without an endurance recovery power in its paired primary. That may have been the case, since the devs did come along and reduce DA's costs.

Arcanaville

02-06-2007, 11:07 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Dark consumption does not specifically have the same issues as consume in that light. It does not underperform its peers just because its endurance management is inferior - almost the opposite.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am somewhat curious, I have always felt that Dark Melee was the safest melee primary but also at the same time the weakest in terms of damage output. What does Dark Consumption add to the melee set and why is an end recovery power in the melee set to begin with in your opinion?

I realize you can only guess at what the original design conept was but what I am specificaly wondering is how you see Dark Consumption functioning with the set as a whole as it stands now after 8 issues of changes.

I'm just looking for your feelings on this, not a proof :p

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, the devs have stated multiple times that the original intent was for dark melee to have lower damage, but higher control than the other sets. Not utility: specifically control (martial arts is supposed to have the best "utility").

It makes sense for a set with high control and lower damage to have more endurance, because a set that has more control and less damage will fight for a longer time.

Also, the set's control is single-target in nature. It has a single target fear, and its debuffs primarily affect one target. In fact, the more they are stacked, the stronger they get. Which means the less targets it fights, the stronger it is, and the more targets it fights (beyond a certain point) the weaker it gets.

That's interesting, because its self buff (soul drain) and its endurance recovery (dark consumption) both are PBAoEs: they get stronger when you hit more things, and weaker when you hit less things. That means DC and SD vary in strength completely opposite to how the rest of the set performs, which creates a "sweet spot" where the set tends to want to be. You can go lower and safer, or higher and more dangerous, but the set has a built-in regulator on performance: it rewards the skill it takes to operate from its comfort zone, but it makes in increasingly harder to operate farther away.

The devs are not always - or necessarily often - quite that deliberate in their design choices: dark consumption might have simply been a cool idea they threw into the set they thought it was most appropriate for, but that's how I see the set functioning now. The mistake the devs made in dark melee was that they did not, and do not, tend to think about activation times carefully enough: specifically how they relate to recharge. Because Dark Melee has such fast attacks, it benefits the most from slotting recharge. That was a minor issue pre-ED, but post-ED with almost *everyone* slotting recharge, their notion that dark melee should be a low damage set goes out the window: any set with fast activation times and with the discretion to slot recharge is going to be a high damage set: its *impossible* for it not to be, given how the devs design attack powers.