Full_Metal_Geek

All the people suggesting that PvP will be fair now that you'll have 1% of hitpoints instead of being dead outright are smoking something real good. And I want some.

OK, look at it like this:

My Corruptor has about 730 hp at 32 (somewhere in that range +/- 10 hp). The will leave me, from full, assuming that the AS would have otherwise killed me, with 7.3 hp (+/- 1 hp).

Is there a single stalker attack that does less than 7.3 hp? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Naw, I thought not.

So, instead of one shotting all the people that could previously have been one-shotted we've now forced stalkers to follow up with brawl. Yeah, that'll make it pretty fair alright.

Look people, PvP isn't about fair, it's about winning. Stalkers win for the most part because they determine when they strike. There are very few ATs who can stack enough perception to see through Hide and Stealth (and let's face it, only the lowest level stalkers or those playing concept toons don' t have both). Thus you'll still be able to set up the hit when you like and hit from an angle that will make retaliation before that follow up brawl to be just as unlikely as retaliation from an actual corpse.

Nothing changes except that now you have to hit with a second attack. Unless you are hitting someone in the middle of their team you will still get just as many kills. And even from within the middle of the team they still have to hit you before you run and catch once you do.

Could someone please tell me how having 1% of your total hp left over really changes the substance of the assassin strike (or snipe, or headsplitter, or any other power that can do enough damage to one shot someone in PvP)? This isn't a rhetorical question: if someone has a good scenario (a likely scenario) wherein having to follow up immediate a second later with brawl would be bad I'd like to hear it.

[ QUOTE ]
1. We're looking into the tweak to Endurance for mobs that's affected Endurance Drain abilities. Sorry about that!

2. We'll be putting in a check that prevents "one shotting"; if anything occurs within a fraction of second that brings a player from 100% Hit Points down to 0, we instead give the player 1% Hit Points.

That's all for now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gotta love it. This post has been on the boards for, what . . . less than 10 minutes and already has 60+ replies.

Thank you, States, for looking into both of these and posting here to let us know that there are changes coming. No news is *always* bad news. Some news can go either way.

I'm with you on the Stone tank issue. Stoners can take absolutely HUGE amounts of aggro and be fine. This isn't a "Hey look at us we're gods" statement. It is a statement of fact. Before the nerf-herders cry foul remember that a stone tank's ability to fight is severly hampered by granite armor (-recharge, slow, no CJ, no sprint, no SJ or super speed, -damage). Thus I believe the significant survivability of granite is balanced with the combat nerf.

But that means that unless I'm tanking AVs or Giant Monsters I'm not challenged much. I'm only challenged in so far as moving through a mission in a reasonable amount of time goes. But on a team? No problem. Toss in a kinetics toon and I'm golden.

I'd love them to raise the aggro cap based on level. Say one additional mob per level starting with one at level one. This would ramp up pretty quickly in the teens which is when most tanks should have their status protection and basic defenses. This would allow higher level tanks to feel like a tank again being able gather larger amounts of aggro and providing more tanking services for a team. You would still be limited based on the resistance or defense limitations of your particular tank. This would allow a tank to get in over their head and put them on the edge of their seats again.

I miss that. And I never herded for the purposes of just xp gain. I always did it to revel in the churning chaos of combat. I always wanted to be in the middle of every mess taunting mobs and knocking heads.

/signed

All of it.