Hopeling

...but if you're willing to consider more drastic changes, I think much better can be done.

ATOs are not nearly as expensive as purples. I think your build could be much improved by their inclusion.

The Fighting pool is near-mandatory for almost any melee build, and this one is no exception. My TW/WP is a scrapper, so he never even has to try to tank for a team, and I still would feel terribly vulnerable without Tough and Weave. /WP benefits enormously from higher defense, and better resists help you survive long enough to regenerate the hits that get through.

Spring Attack is quite redundant with how much AoE you already have from TW and Mu. If you like it just for fun, that's fine, but in terms of performance we can do better things with that power slot.
You also have a ton more attacks than necessary. At minimum, I'd drop Defensive Sweep (it doesn't combine too well with WP's typed defense anyway). Alternately, you could skip Crushing Blow.
Strength of Will is a nice power to have, but far from critical to any build.
I've been really unimpressed by the patron pets for brutes in general.
So, let's see what happens if we drop 3 of those 5 powers, which makes room for Fighting:
The 5 empty slots in Arc of Destruction are for the ATO set (all the pieces except the acc/dam). Again, I've left some slots unspent to finish the build as you please (probably Ball Lightning and Electrifying Fences, but slotting Brawl or Boxing with another Kin Combat set wouldn't be bad either). Note that this build has more than 10% higher S/L defense than the first one, once you count the ATO set bonuses - in precise technical terms, that increase in survivability would be called "a lot".

I hope this helps. A large part of building a character is finding what works for you, so take or leave any part of this advice that does or doesn't let your character do what you want it to.

You're misreading what we're saying about the rule of thumb. Well, you're misreading what I'm saying about it, anyway; I can't speak authoritatively for others, but I'm getting the same feeling from them. It isn't "this is the rule, and you're dumb/dishonest for not figuring that out yourself." It's just "That won't be OK, and this handy rule explains why." Then you went off on a tangent about how the rule of thumb is inapplicable, or incomplete, or useless, which was never the point.

You don't have to be planning to do it explicitly at the expense of others for it to be so. Offensive things are against the rules for a reason.

If you don't see how portraying modern real world mass murderers (plus a touch of implied racism/faith-ism) as comedy is different than portraying completely fictional bad guys, I don't know what to say, except to again point out that maybe somebody else in the world has "the curse of communication awareness" and would be quite upset to see such a character, even if you have never explicitly intended that. If you can accept losing the pun, making the character a Resistance Crusader would otherwise let you accomplish the same thing, without risk of dragging real-world problems into people's entertainment.

Well, building t3s and t4s only from shards is no better. It takes 88 (!!!) shards to make a Notice from scratch. It may seem easier because you're guaranteed a Notice from the WST, but you can also get guaranteed R/VRs from Empyrean merits, and have a chance at them from arc rewards.

A Lego tank, maybe, but a real tank would have some components larger than a belt pouch. Probably most of the components, in fact, but I'm not a tank technician so I couldn't say authoritatively. I suppose he could design some kind of tank assembled from small parts, though.

I'm not sure the wormhole thing is actually true in the comics, though. I've certainly never seen it or even heard of it.

Let's look at what the rule actually is, as Snow Globe stated in the first reply:
Do you feel the need to ask if it will be OK to use the Witch top with skin? Or whether your red-colored slime aura will be too disgusting to behold? Or whether the Valkyrie boots will offend someone who holds a family grudge against Vikings for raiding their farm a few score generations ago? I doubt it. Thus, the rule doesn't apply to them. Of course, it's only a rule of thumb, so it's not perfect: a character that you weren't worried about can get reported and that report acted upon, or one that you were worried about might turn out OK. That's why we call it a rule of thumb, because it isn't perfect, and doesn't tell the whole story. I mean, it has "probably" right there in the rule itself. Still, it's generally a good rule, which is why it's become the rule of thumb (you know we didn't just make it up for this thread, right?). It certainly applies in this specific case.

I find it odd that you've become so defensive over some people saying vaguely disrespectful things to you on a message board, yet have even entertained the idea that it's OK to drag modern mass murder into a game of escapist fantasy, as long as you have enough fun with it, and anybody who gets upset at you dredging up memories of their murdered relative, or vaguely implying their race/religion makes them a terrorist, is just too easily offended.

By the way, you might try totally avoiding the issue by making your character part of a fictional terrorist group, rather than a real one? Crusader Resistance, maybe.

Right, that's exactly the kind of counterexample I was saying is totally irrelevant, because the rule of thumb is for this specific situation. If you're creating a character that you think might be offensive (terrorists are funny!), somebody out there will probably think it is definitely offensive (thanks for that reminder of deep personal real-world loss while playing a video game!).
Sure, but that doesn't particularly contradict the first rule of thumb, which is that if you're worried about it, someone else will probably be legitimately offended. If it isn't offensive at all, you wouldn't be worried about it.

Hey, I appreciate how you cut out most of my post (despite it already being quite short) to make it look more condescending. In case you've forgotten, here is your original post:
I didn't see any mention of how fun you find it in there, or whether it would be "worth it". The only question in the whole post is asking whether NCSoft is "cool with that". We answered: no, they are not (and we aren't, either). In fact, this is the same point I made in my previous post: that people were responding to the question you actually asked, instead of the question you then started claiming you'd asked. In short, you're hearing about the process so much because it answers the question you posed.

Lastly, the "if you have to ask, don't do it" rule of thumb applies specifically to this kind of problem: if you think the character might be offensive, somebody out there thinks the character is DEFINITELY offensive, and will report you for it if you ever meet. It's not a rule for life in general, and attempting to cite counterexamples from elsewhere is a bit silly.

Well, that's the question of whether it's worth doing. But that wasn't what you asked at first, which was whether NCSoft would allow it. In terms of the equation, you only asked "What is P2?" And the answer is that it's quite high. A GM won't care how much fun you're having breaking the rules.

*shrug* Sabotage your own threads all you want, I guess. I'm done here.

Hey, I didn't design the change, I'm just trying to explain how it works. I think they should just let Mind Link be slotted directly for recharge already, it's kinda silly that it can't be.

Cytos will still reduce endurance cost, though, in any power that accepts cost reduction. Burnout is the only power I can think of that costs endurance but cannot be slotted for it; in any other power, Cytos will work fine.

First, could you please learn to use the multi-quote function? Or at least put quote tags around stuff when you copy it into your message?

Second, are you telling me it's illegal for me to sell my car below market value? Because you'd be wrong. Also, you didn't answer the question. Would it or would it not be OK in-game to buy something below market value if someone offered you a better price?
That's an off-market sale at (what he thought was) the going rate, which he adjusted when he found out it wasn't. It's not above the inf cap, either. Note also that Justaris hasn't sold it yet, as of his last post in that thread. So again, you have yet to prove that this is actually happening to anyone anywhere, which kinda renders your whole point moot.

If somebody offered to sell you that 1.5b item for 100 million off-market, would you make that trade? Would it be unethical or "not nice" to do so? And if not, why is it OK to buy something below the going rate but not OK to sell something above it, as long as both parties agree on the price?

Plus, you have yet to demonstrate that this is actually happening to anyone, anywhere. I haven't seen anyone selling glad armor uniques in Freedom help chat for the last few weeks, (and if anyone tried, I suspect they'd be shouted down by people who are aware of the coming changes), other than one known scammer, and he's not really selling anything anyway. I find it difficult to believe that someone has more than 2b to spend on such items, but has not bothered to check the market for them (where they are guaranteed to get the item for 2b or less) at any point in the last few weeks.