Iron_Vixen

This is a distressing development to learn of. Gauntlet and Taunt auras were there for us to actively attack while still angering the mobs with the built in taunt and gauntlet effects above and beyond the simplisitc Taunt/Provoke aggro mechanic. Removing this ability when it's needed most is counter-productive and disappointing.

I wouldnt really change anything Gen_X. I did do a respec build, but mostly to get Stamina earlier for exemping. I need to re-do this guide, especially with ED damage numbers, but I just never get the time lately.

[ QUOTE ]
I will rephrase: People [censored] about what QA isn't catching. They have no idea what they are catching. My view is that complaining about QA not catching balance errors is like complaining about QA not catching errors in the spellcheck dictionary. It's irritating and intereferes with the product. But it does not warrant the comments being made in this thread.

The reason the global defense nerfs don't warrant a removal of the DEF penalty is, because, um... they were global nerfs. They had relatively minor effects on power balance.



[/ QUOTE ]
Regardless of anything else, they balanced invuln with the bugged Invinc. The invinc that was giving a triple +defbuff per mob. Statesman posted they felt the Invuln with that Invinc (the 3x one) was balanced. Then they fix that bug but don't re-adjust the set. Basic math reveals that if A+B+C=Ok and you cut A by /3 it's no longer OK. It's now less than ok. In Invuln's case it's not horrifically bad, but it's still below where it was when they said it was balanced properly.

While I greatly approve of a reduction to Scrapper/Brute Uy pelanties, since they get less res for the same nasty debuff, the debuff's very exsistence is itself an anachronism. It harms the new Uy user to a large extent, while not hurting a high level Invuln as much (although if you could actually test Inv full-on and Inv-full-on but without that def penalty, the numbers would be fairly obvious). Inv as a set has felt like it really does not know what it wants to be anymore. It is still illogical and counter-intuitive that the TH passive barely 'breaks even' with Uy's penalty these days. Uy just does not give enough benefit for this penalty anymore. When it was 20% (Primary base) to all barring psi, and ED didn't exist, we basically needed the penalty, but now it's just an inappropriate penalty that needs to be completely shed.

While this is a positive step overall, it's a very small one, too small really.

Hard to believe it's been a whole year. Someday, I may actually have one of my 50 heroines over here in the LoF too! Grats to LoF!

My Elec/Elec Brute is only 6 but so far I like her.

I have found a slight graphic glitch with Jacob's ladder though. It (for lack of a better term) "flattens" the graphics on the edges of it's effect when it reaches the end of the arc. A minor issue but it does look a little odd.

I still use the new build I posted later in the guide. I may redo the guide again with the new build in the first section. I will have to re-do my damage numbers and then maybe try a few test builds out.

Geez. I read the title and thought something bad was happening to Taunt. Taunt is still fine for PvE so it's not dead thankfully.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Although I still don't get why some folks take Hurdle along with SJ.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hurdle adds more height to SJ. And you can use it in to get around more quickly in ceilinged missions if you don't mind hopping.

[/ QUOTE ]
Hurdle also stacks nicely with CJ for improved hopping about while in a mission and you bang your head on the ceiling less than with SJ this way too.


I take Swift more often simply for faster 'standard' movement. It really does not hurt anything having Hurdle or Swift, both have utility.

We shall have to agree to disagree then. I gave PvP several shots to be enjoyable between my three MMOs. WoW at least (to my knowledge) fixed that Rogue perma-stun trick they used to do, and CoX makes PvP totally avoidable thankfully. EQ probably actually has the worst PvP of all 3 games. And I certainly am not 'missing something'. I am well aware that just like a game of say, Ravenshield, a team has to work together or they are doomed. The problem is it still has characters vs other characters and ever since I started D&D way back in 1980, I have never seen any good come from this. I gave PvP a try in these games anyway, since I was hoping it might have more of a point and less of the attitude that some of the people I played with way back then had, but it's actually worse since there is no GM to intervene.

Team vs Team is logically also more balanced than the FFAs or poorly matched duels that dominated the beta events for sure, but I still found them horribly lop-sided. In the SC beta event my Merc/FF MM never died and got 5 or 6 kills yet my Fire/Dark brute got destroyed.

My biggest gripe is actually the community and all the cries for:"nerf x! I cannot beat it in PvP!" instead of analyzing why they lost. When we would sit down for a game of SFB, losing was actually better than winning, as you learned more and refined your play skills. Instead of screaming that a power or whatever is too good (admittedly sometimes they can be, PvE is easier to balance than PvP), if more people would ponder the events and try to improve their skills/build, the boards would have less of the name calling and nerf screams. The boards here are better than the WoW boards at least. I was in WoW, and just recently my last friend that played quit but he was active on the boards, and the atmosphere was awful from all the venom being spewed over PvP.

In closing, I would say that if I found it even remotely interesting and more people had friendlier attitudes (like Foo, Reckage, and by your posting here aqshy2004, you as well), it may be worth it, but after being burned time after time, it's time to not touch that stove anymore.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In other words: PVP sucks, avoid it like the plague, it's not worth the time and debt (and there will be debt as all of those unfair conditions will often be planned to happen to your detriment amongst NPCs).

[/ QUOTE ]
A bit stronger than I would say, but basically how I feel as well. After giving PvP a try in EQ, WoW, and this game, I will stick to games like BF:1942 or Star Wars:Battlefront for a far more balanced and less hostile attitude environment for multiplayer combat with battlefield objectives.

[/ QUOTE ]

mmmm.....

PvP and the arena are good additions to this game. It brought more options for fun. The best part is, you don't have to enter them if you don't want to.

The PvP zones aren't "hostile" enviroments, they are only more dangerous. There's always the "ubAhdoOmlEet3!1!!" players, but, don't take it personal and you'll find how PvP can be enjoyable too.

[/ QUOTE ]
Definately cannot agree. I found PvP in these MMOs dull, poorly balanced, and full of rude people with very poor behavior. When I tried it a few different times, I either absolutely annihilated my opponents, or had the exact reverse, never a close matched or very interesting fight. RPGs are about cooperation and not competition as well, so PvP in an RPG is an anethma to the very foundation of the concept.

Luckily they keep this chicanery bottled up in the arenas and the PvP zones, but it would be a grand day if they simply ripped PvP out of the game forever.

[ QUOTE ]
In other words: PVP sucks, avoid it like the plague, it's not worth the time and debt (and there will be debt as all of those unfair conditions will often be planned to happen to your detriment amongst NPCs).

[/ QUOTE ]
A bit stronger than I would say, but basically how I feel as well. After giving PvP a try in EQ, WoW, and this game, I will stick to games like BF:1942 or Star Wars:Battlefront for a far more balanced and less hostile attitude environment for multiplayer combat with battlefield objectives.

ED in and of itself is not really such a bad thing (although I think the drop off is too dramatic too early), I particularly wanted to emphasis what Krunch said here:

[ QUOTE ]
...(although ED and I5 combined, it went over the edge).


[/ QUOTE ]
I find this particularly true for Invuln. My Fire Tanker was briefly a better tank than Vixen (unless I gathered my helper-monkey squad) in the post-I5, pre-I6 world due to Fire's resistances being untouched until ED came about. They hit Fiery Embrace (although I don't feel the duration loss was too major overall), and of course slapped Burn a bit too hard, but she had her old resistances until ED came to life.

In case you may have missed it, Invinc has been fixed and is actually far more useful than it was against single mobs/small groups. It now is giving the appropriate +1.5% (base) per mob, but the first enemy is giving the equivalent of 4-5 mobs (I have heard from roughly 6% (1.5x4) to 7.5% (1.5x5)). And the +1.5% per mob now maxes at 10 mobs. Recently it was giving from 200%-300% too much of a buff, and although this means we lost a lot of def, it was bugged def anyway, and since the first mob counts as 4-5, Invinc has become far more useful against small amounts of foes. I for one am glad they fixed it.

Also, Dull Pain now gives a +to max health comensurate with the heal% you have slotted in it. With the 3heal/3 recharge SO set-up I have, I had 3212.7 health (this is with both +health accolades).

I left my basic I5 Inv/SS guide intact and added an ED build near the end.

Weathering the Storm 2.0 I5/I6 Inv/SS Tanker guide

Well my I5+ED testing has been limited. Mostly due to my having a lot of fun with new villainesses. I have done some limited testing, but only solo. Many of my friends I normally group with have been taking breaks or playing when I am not on.

I have been able to still solo 2 orange-con Death Mages with Rage and CP up. Or without CP but using Unstoppable. It's tight without Unstoppable, have to DP or swallow greens, but not totally untenable. I still feel we need at least modest improvements to the passives, and dropping the archaic and inappropriate def debuff in Uy, but I'll still play Vixen.

Let me know if any of my girls can help. I am @Iron Vixen globally in game. I am mostly on my villainesses on Virtue right now so global is the best way to plan. Or PM me here. I check in at least a couple times a day.

When do we plan to this? Tonight? Who should I bring?

On top of my 2 50 Tankers, I also have a 34 AR/Dev Blaster, a 22 Emp/Dark Defender, a 24 BS/Regen Scrapper, and a 24 Spines/Regen Scrapper. All are respecced for I6, although some need to buy enhancements yet. Every other heroine I have is 16 or lower.

I have a 50 Inv/SS and a 50 Fire/Fire that I can use here (assuming I can get to test now). Depending on when we plan to do this.

What if neither had Tough? That puts Fire at roughly 48.1% S/L res, and Ice at 0 S/L res.

[ QUOTE ]
When the bug is fixed, Invuln not using Unstoppable will look/function a lot like an Ice Tanker. Only Invuln will be better at Smash/Lethal/Fire, and Ice will be better at Energy/Negative/Cold. Ice will be better at Solo play, and larger mob groupings and higher level mobs is where Invuln will outperform.


[/ QUOTE ]
And all this time we have felt Ice needed help. Instead of fixing Ice they gutted Invuln and Fire and pre-GA Stoners. GA is going to be the best stable tank (with some drawbacks, but GA gives exactly what we need to tank, making the drawbacks easily palatable for team tanking). Unstop is great for some situations, but some it will just not work.

And this poses the question about Fire's performance now. If Invuln and Ice are both going to be poor now. What about Fire? My conversations with da5id have put Fire below Inv and Ice barring fire damage. This is truely sad when Fire lost so much offense to Burn getting hit so hard.

[ QUOTE ]
Tom, you post as if you and De5id are the only ones here that remember tanking before now. You are a quite mistaken if that is the case. I was there through I1 and every issue since.]

[/ QUOTE ]
Not quite as long for me, but I have been here a bit. I started a bit before I2 and in fact I2 was what made me come to the boards. I had gotten KO Bow prior to I2 and the first time I used it after I2 went live I was pleasantly surprised at the large increase in damage. I also have tanked in EQ for 3 years now, and even my short stint in WoW had my main being a warrior and tanking.

[ QUOTE ]
You are saying that the new generation of tankers will define us, but I don't think that will be the case. I think we define what we are as an AT within the scope of what the Devs give us to work with. However, Da5id is right about our role being taken over by other ATs. They have always been able to to so and can easily supplant us in teams now if they wish. I3 gave us the illusion that team needed us and now we are upset when we learn that they nver did to begin with. In all honesty, if the current "vision" of Tanks is for us to be the odd AT out, then I suggest that everyone move to a different AT and don't waste your time on Tankers.

[/ QUOTE ]
I refuse to throw in the towel, despite the current 'limbo' I feel we are in. Ice, Fire, and Invuln have all been cut (between I5 and I6) too much for what we are supposed to do. Stone, despite the fact that the penalties of GA are going to be more pronounced thanks to ED, is the best raw Tanker by far now. Certain situations will be difficult (Diabolique comes to mind) with the penalties now, but GA is undsiputed queen of pure tankability. Unstoppable is of course huge, but only for 3 minutes. This makes it absolutely worthless for some situations. When I tanked the Croatoa TF on Vixen shorty after I5 (and thusly before ED), we had 10 sequential ambushes of the AV and a horde of other mobs with her. Three minutes would be insufficient to tank this properly, and with the new poor res levels and the impending fix of Invinc without a slight upgrading of other issues in Invuln (the now totally inappropriate def debuff in Uy and the too low passives), it makes the set nowhere inadequate for the task.

[ QUOTE ]
However, that is not what you wanted in this thread, Tom. what you wanted was an idea of what our role in a team is. Our role is to control aggro as much as we can. No other AT can quite do it as well as we can, supposedly. Now, take you "been around since launch, pat yourself on the back" experience and prove or disprove it. I can. Can you?

[/ QUOTE ]
I would say again that using our aggro controls to force mobs to make our primary defensive powerset along with the largest health pool in the game, help keep our comrades alive, is what we are supposed to do for teams. There is no point whatsoever in having the best defenses in the game if we do not get to use them.

Tankers are the only Defense primary AT in the game. We also have the best aggro tools for melee ATs to use that inherent defense for the good of our team. Soloing, I still have not had any issues really. And this is on both my Inv/SS and my Fire/Fire neither of which have the fighting pool (although HF has that bug that is hurting it's heal%).

I am so-so on the old meatshield concept. I did for years in EQ and liked it, and I liked it here too. I can understand the desire for more that many have however.

Tankers have far-greater damage mitigation than any 'tank' class in EQ could ever dream of. I have never seen a planar level warrior able to solo any mobs worth xp, and they need support to tank for a team. Scrappers are actually better at tanking than EQ tanks are, and Tankers are above that! This is why they slapped us so hard I think. They belatedly realize they bascially made us too tough and now are bandaging the game haphazardly.

What should our team role be? Using our defenses and aggro-tools to help keep our less-protected teammates alive while using our attacks to accelerate the demise of our enemies. Right now I feel that barring GA and Unstoppable, we are below where we need to be to be equal contributors. The AT has been cut too far and needs some re-adjusting.

They already nerfed my Brutes' costumes anyway. There just isn't much left of them!