Electronite

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Once I got to higher levels, I got rid of Stone Cages and Stalagmites, and never took Stone Prison. Ghetto holds are for lesser controllers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Kids, this is very, very, very bad advice. Never under any circumstances skip Stalagmites. And certainly don't try and replace it with Salt Crystals.

[/ QUOTE ]

Another attempt at putting words in my mouth. I never said I picked up Salt Crystals and got rid of Stone Cages and Stalagmites, I said I got rid of the ghetto hold powers when I got to higher levels, because better options became available. Choking Cloud isn't available at low levels, for example, but once you can get it that and Salt Crystals is more effective when soloing than hoping two AoE powers target everything they can each time you use it. Liquify + Volcanic Gasses trumps Stone Cages + Stalagmites for hard control, too, though admittedly the combination isn't up as often. However, both of the former are location-based AoEs, which have certain advantages on occasion, like being able to be used outside of LOS if you prefer.

Ghetto holds are also pretty slot-intensive. Stalagmites isn't very useful with one slot, or even three, though I found Stone Cages to be good enough with two Accuracy and two End Reducer SOs when I had it. By contrast, Salt Crystals with three sleeps give Choking Cloud plenty of time to work, even if Choking Cloud has fewer than six slots in it.

[ QUOTE ]
Shadow Maul when used with Hover or used while circle strafing will routinely hit multiple mobs. In packs of 15-20, I can consistantly hit 10+ mobs with Shadow Maul (and Sands of Mu which I use prolifically in this setup). Jebe the Pirate can attest to how wide an impact my cones have.

[/ QUOTE ]

City of Data says Shadow Maul can only hit a maximum of five targets. Did this change recently? With all the numbers Shadow Maul creates, is it possible that it's actually hitting fewer targets than it appears?

[ QUOTE ]
Your suggestions, while interesting, would not be supported by the majority of experienced Earth Controllers.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true. We've had this debate before, and our arguments have inevitably failed to convince the other of anything. Fortunately I am content--even proud--to be a effective maverick among Earth Controllers. And I know I am not the only one.

[ QUOTE ]
A stun + immobilize has the same effect as a hold, plus it has the defense debuff from both powers and can be fired from range instead of PB AoE. And the foes don't "wake up" as soon as an AoE damage power is used. I don't see how that is a bad move.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't say it was a 'bad move,' I said it's a move that Earth Control doesn't need to rely on. For Fire and Gravity controllers it's a mandatory tactic, one that relies upon both powers hitting every target, which doesn't happen all that often. On a team I don't use Salt Crystals with the idea of controlling mobs; it's used to make sure my teammates' attacks hit much more often.

[ QUOTE ]
As for a sleep power, Salt Crystals is not bad . . . it looks cool and it includes a defense debuff. But Salt Crystals is the only PB AoE control power in the Earth set . . . when you have three good options for ranged AoE control that prevent most damage, I would say that a PB AoE sleep is skippable.

[/ QUOTE ]

And I'll continue to disagree when it comes to Salt Crystals. There are reasons that an Earth controller would want to be in melee range, such as if they took Consume for endurance recovery purposes. The fact that powers like Quicksand, Earthquake and Volcanic Gasses can be used at range doesn't mean that a melee range Earth Controller would be ineffective, or even less effective. For example, Salt Crystals + Choking Cloud, plus targeting Fossilize through Animated Stone means that you'll safely apply a hold to everything in range while waiting for VG to recharge.

[ QUOTE ]
With proper slotting for accuracy, Stalagmites + Stone Cages is clearly better than Salt Crystals. When you add in the fact that you can add procs quite easily to Stone Cages and can fire it off every few seconds, it is even clearer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Firing off Stone Cages (or any other AoE immobilize) every few seconds is a good way to empty your endurance bar.

[ QUOTE ]
The only way I think this argument would ever be resolved would be to introduce stances as a Tank only inherent (I think Stars came up with the idea once, though borrowed from WOW).

Defensive: Everything is as we have it now.

Offensive: Scale the damage modifier to just below scrapper levels, lower Res and Def cap to balance the increased Offensive ability. Adds Critical hits that scale a bit below a Scrapper.

Switching can be done on the fly, but shares a similar long animation to a self teleport and detoggles you.

This would let you pick your role based on the needs of the team. It would also boost the solo capability of tank.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why play a Scrapper when Tankers can turn into Scrappers?

[ QUOTE ]
Salt crystals do suck on teams where a Tank or Scrapper has a damaging PBAOE attack toggled or on autofire - but then so do all Sleep powers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Salt Crystals is still better than other sleep powers even on teams because it applies another huge defense debuff that doesn't disappear when the spell effect is broken. Also, Salt Crystals does not have the same accuracy penalty that other AoE powers do, so it has a better chance of hitting opponents initially than the Stagmites/Stone Cages 'ghetto hold,' which is a necessary tactic on sets with fewer control options than Earth.

[ QUOTE ]
Oh yeah, once you have Stoney, let him take the lead in which sleeping opponent to clobber first, he's very bad about following your lead.

[/ QUOTE ]

Another tactic I use on my Earth/Sonic is to target Stoney, Super Speed into a group, hit Salt Crystals, then use Fossilize on whatever Stoney attacks.

Once I got to higher levels, I got rid of Stone Cages and Stalagmites, and never took Stone Prison. Ghetto holds are for lesser controllers.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'll sit on my damned throne of bayonets if it helps Tankers get closer to the comic book ideal they should be.



.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which ideal though?

[/ QUOTE ]

One of the ones that aren't about being a mediocre damage rodeo clown.


.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like Atom Smasher? Oh, right, the Annihilator is a GM... But Superman would have beaten it easily... even though Wonder Woman couldn't without help... but Superman is still a tanker just like Atom Smasher...

[ QUOTE ]
One tanker build that i have found surprisingly effective at solo farming Cimerorans on the wall is my Invul / Axe tanker.

Capped resistance with Tough ( 90% ) renders Cims harmless and the axes powers Whirling Axe ( 10 targets ), Pendulum ( 5 targets ) kills the romans at a decent pace. Maybe not the fastest farmer but it is very decent and relaxing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ice/Axe is much the same.

You're going to have a rough time of it without support. One With the Shield will help, as will trying to get as many HP and regeneration bonuses as possible through accolades and IO set bonuses. If you have room for Aid Self in your build, that will help as well. My Shield/SS managed it with an Illusion/Emp controller supporting me, but a Rad, Dark, or Sonic Resonance character could also help.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can you tell me how to slot Hand Clap to make it pick up a Boss over my head and break it in half?

[/ QUOTE ]
In a comic book representation of a CoH fight, my Tank could definitely pick up a Clockwork Boss and tear it in half.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah of course. He's like a level 50 and the Clockwork stop at level 20.



.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tell that to the Clockwork in the two Clockwork King missions you get in Peregrine Island.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Clockwork in question are the regular ol' electric attack spamming variety.



.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where did Vox specify that? Or is that just another convenient distinction only you're making, like 'lowest melee damage dealer'?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can you tell me how to slot Hand Clap to make it pick up a Boss over my head and break it in half?

[/ QUOTE ]
In a comic book representation of a CoH fight, my Tank could definitely pick up a Clockwork Boss and tear it in half.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah of course. He's like a level 50 and the Clockwork stop at level 20.



.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tell that to the Clockwork in the two Clockwork King missions you get in Peregrine Island.

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe Tankers should get their bottle too. You know, for doing the job nobody wants to.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except D3 Defenders... and Tankerminds... and some Scrappers... and some Controllers... and many Brutes... and dwarf form Kheldians...

[ QUOTE ]
The point is, subjective and qualitative rationale were the stated reasons for Dom changes.

You saying "no, ignore that, don't even bring that up" doesn't dismiss that.

If subjective qualities such as "feel" are good enough motivation to make changes to one AT, they should be good enough motivation to re-examine another.

[/ QUOTE ]

This may or may not have been done already for all we know, and Tankers may have passed whatever litmus test the devs used to determine 'feel.'

But if subjective rationales are now a valid reason for changes to happen, I'd like to say that tankers feel too powerful and need a serious damage nerfing.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is a strawman argument, and really needs to stop. There is no unrequited Dev love here, no matter how much you'd love to foist it off on players that disagree with you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually I dont "foist" it off to just players of one type, I apply it to those that do. Simple as that, blindlessly following everything a dev says to the point that they defend things like Tank offense, and how it should stay the way it is because the devs deemed it so. Fallible dev, does not a god make.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see people saying Tanker offense should remain the same because the devs say it's fine, though I see alot of 'Tanker offense should change because a dev who doesn't work on CoH anymore said it should have changed four years ago' and ignore the fact that he said changing it was also a mistake later. Most are saying Tanker damage should stay the same because increasing it would be damaging to overall game balance. The closer tanker offense gets to scrapper offense, the less reason there is to play a scrapper. It's that simple.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And they have admitted to some mistakes before. We know that they make mistakes. However, that does not mean that the current Tanker situation is one of them.

[/ QUOTE ]

No human, you see it as perfectly normal. the key word in there was YOU. Others do and have not cared for the weakness in offense with tanks since I4. It's a reoccuring theme. Your very statment is a perfect example of what I'm posting about. Disregarding an issue just because the devs didn't admit to it being an error. So when they do, what then?.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pining for the days of issue 4, where Fire/Fire and Invuln/SS tankers were soloing maps spawned for 8 and Burning or Foot Stomping mobs to death by the score, illustrates just what you think of game balance. God mode isn't coming back, nor should it.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please, show me where the mistake is and why. Don't use comics to justify it. Use actual game balance issues. Are Tankers hurting with the current setup? Is that because of a lack of damage, or because of a lack of a ranged attack in most of the secondaries. Show us exactly why and where Tankers are hurting. Bring some evidence, instead of just saying it's a mistake.

Just because you think it's a mistake doesn't make it a mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where people hurting because Hollows or Faultine werent "fixed"?, no, people dealt. Thats all we can do. Just because people deal with the problem, doesn't mean it isnt an issue that needs to be fixed. Are you that delirious or that glib?. No it isn't a major issue like say, unyielding keeping the player grounded. That was a problem. But the matter at hand is still an issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

You haven't shown it to be an issue with any objective data to back up your premise.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
See PAST your own opinion and use some objectivity yourself. If you think that you have a case, bring some evidence to back yourself up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm always objective when it comes to issues like this. Did it take four years for Hollows to be "fixed"?, yes. Was leaving Faultline the way it was a bad decision?, clearly yes. That's the thing here, you assume I'm not using an evidence when I clearly show all the facts. Devs make mistakes, why are you so against change in an MMO that HAS to eventually change. Your too enamored by the "way it is" mentallity. See past both our opinion's and ask yourself "why not" or "what if". Is it so hard to see a class with more power or in some cases more defense?. Does it actually bother you this much?. I think I've been plenty objective here.

[/ QUOTE ]

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

[ QUOTE ]
Objective: adj. expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations

[/ QUOTE ]

You are not being objective at all. The burden of proof is on the people who want change to prove that it's necessary, using hard data like in-game numbers recorded in controlled conditions, not subjective arguments such as personal interpretations of comic books, how tankers 'feel' to play, etc. Those people who want tanker damage to increase have not provided objective evidence to support their premise. Instead, the people who post data to back up their arguments are the ones who posit that tanker damage should remain where it is.

If you want tanker damage to increase, you're not going to prove that it needs to be increased by saying the people who say it shouldn't are just expressing unrequitted dev love.

My game room.

One. This is the desk I have right now. I have a new computer that is too large to fit into the desk, so it sits next to my monitor, which makes things a little cramped. I have plans to build a new desk which will look like this when it's done, hopefully this summer. I'll be able to move the metal filing cabinet elsewhere then. In the lower left you can just see a bookcase with a bunch of 2nd edition D&D materials.

Two. A pile of old computer parts that no longer exists, plus a piece of art I've yet to mount of an old D&D character.

Three. The gaming table and chairs, plus a couple of bookshelves that have tons of paperback novels and various RPG books, most of them 3.5 D&D. To the right is an old pic of an even older Jarlaxle-clone D&D character.

I love my tankers because they're the only characters that I can play with the Han Solo-esque "Never tell me the odds!" mentality and survive with regularity. No group of foes is too big, nor no single foe too intimidating to prevent me from stepping in to take the heat off others. Only with my tankers do I throw caution to the wind, because only with my tankers is caution not a necessity.

But golly, Pep, what about all the people who want to play indestructible Tankers and also be able to saunter up to Lord Recluse and one-shot him?

WHAT ABOUT THEM? WHY ARE YOU SO SELFISH, HUH???

What are you saying?

Okay, weird idea time. What if tanker base damage was boosted by, say, 15%, but for every enemy in melee range to a max of 3, they suffered a 5% damage debuff? I think this would serve to increase tanker damage against single targets (presumably the ones that stay alive the longest -- Boss class and above), but quickly reduces their damage potential in crowds to the levels that currently exist.

1 foe in range = +10% damage
2 foes in range = +5% damage
3 or more foes in range = no change from before.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What if we go with the idea of a damage boost against Boss/EB/AV/GM class mobs?

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you accept one if it came with a corresponding decrease in defenses vs the same mobs? If the answer is yes, then you really want to play a Scrapper.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am well aware of the game balance effect and trying to discuss this civilly. No need to climb up on a high horse and tell me what I want.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll rephrase.

Would you accept one if it came with a corresponding decrease in defenses vs the same mobs? If the answer is yes, then you might be pleased to know the option already exists: Scrappers.

Even though Scrappers do not have the same AoE capability overall that Tankers do, so buffing Tanker damage vs. Boss+ enemies will make them Boss farmers in MA missions. Oh, but wait, we'll only buff their single target attacks maybe... On thursdays falling on an odd numbered day of the month... when the player's chair faces north...

Standard Code Rant starts applying pretty quick.

[ QUOTE ]
jb did you just start in on 'canon'?

this is a unique IP. get over yourself already.

what you are proposing is game breaking. in order for it to work, all of these Colossus clones you are propsing to make would need a crap ton of magnetos to balance them out or it's going to be issue 4 all over again.

[/ QUOTE ]

Had JB been around for issue 4, he might know what you're talking about.

[ QUOTE ]
It's obvious what happened at the Paragon Studios office to allow all this new nonsense to go on.

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be easy to confirm. Ask them if they support huge subsidies to the Brain Slug homeworld.

[ QUOTE ]
What if we go with the idea of a damage boost against Boss/EB/AV/GM class mobs?

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you accept one if it came with a corresponding decrease in defenses vs the same mobs? If the answer is yes, then you really want to play a Scrapper.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Brutes get a weak, single-target Gauntlet effect coupled with Fury -- an inherent-and-a-half, at best.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is false.

Brutes have the exact same Threat Magnitude and Taunt Duration in their version of Gauntlet. The only difference is the AoE vs. Single Target nature of Gauntlet for each AT. That is not a "weak" Gauntlet--That is a full-strength Gauntlet without a splash effect (which is practically impossible to be seen in the first place).

[/ QUOTE ]

You are misinterpreting the way in which I am using the word 'weak.' It's the single-target nature of Brute Gauntlet that makes it weak when compared to that which is given to Tankers.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
By contrast, Gauntlet is an always-on effect that is very useful for the tanker's primary role in this game, which is not to deal lots of damage. Granted, it has no useful effect when solo, but Tankers don't need help to solo content unless they're going up against things not intended to be soloed.

[/ QUOTE ]

You say that like Gauntlet for Brutes isn't always on. or like their Fury isn't always on.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cherry-picking. Read and respond to the entire sentence, if you please. Brute Gauntlet isn't 'very useful' for the primary role of a Brute.

Look around for global channels on your server that are more in line with the sorts of things you want to do. I know Justice server has a couple of popular global channels for badge hunters, Hamidon and Rikti ship raids, and Trial/TF teams, as well as channels pretty much dedicated to PLing/farming.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My question regarding the idea was why did tankers deserve two inherents and the other nine primary ATs did not? IIRC, it was never answered.

[/ QUOTE ]

Brutes?

Who said two? This would wrap into Gauntlet.

Just like Defiance now does a couple of different things (pseudo mez protection and damage buffs) as does the Stalker's new Assassination(regular crits, hidden crits, demoralizing effect), there's no reason Gauntlet can't do something else on top of being a radial AoE taunt.


.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would disagree when said 'something else' is as potentially powerful as your proposal is, though I am on board with the idea of Tankers providing Defender-level buffs from Leadership Pool powers. To continue your original example, Brutes get a weak, single-target Gauntlet effect coupled with Fury -- an inherent-and-a-half, at best. Assassination for Stalkers combines several situational effects (being hidden, having teammates for higher crit chances, PvP opponents being slept or Held) into a variation of Scrappers' inherent.

By contrast, Gauntlet is an always-on effect that is very useful for the tanker's primary role in this game, which is not to deal lots of damage. Granted, it has no useful effect when solo, but Tankers don't need help to solo content unless they're going up against things not intended to be soloed.