JayboH

Originally Posted by dugfromthearth

The devs have stated that MM's had the tanker role on redside such as there was one, the players just did not realize this and assumed it was brutes. But the devs really wanted there to be no tanker role.

Originally Posted by Golden Girl

He should be drawing with the crayon in his mouth - it's more creative and it looks cooler.

Originally Posted by Leo_G

Jayboh: You must have lost track of the actual OP. This was about Player Controlled animal characters and what they'd look like using regular Player powersets, of which was highlighted by the OP with examples like Electric Melee. Yes, that the discussion has reached nearly 15 pages shows it is a topic of debate whether you agree with it or not. It has little to do with animals wielding weapons in their mouth and more to do with animals with powers period.

As for making the giant wolf with a sword fight into just a giant wolf fight? Because it's been done. Not saying that's a bad thing, but there's little worthy of note with the latter. Things that stand out more are what catch interest, especially when we're talking about fiction.

Originally Posted by ShadowMoka

I said Rad/Rad, not Rad/Fire. Fire blasters can't be bad unless bad on purpose.

Originally Posted by Tater Todd

How can Rad/Fire get boring?!

Originally Posted by Carnifax_NA

This, with Scrappers moved up to 80% (and Stalkers left at 75).

Originally Posted by BrandX

That wouldnt be an AT issue though. That would be a powerset issue.

Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane

If that was the case the changes wouldn't have increased the Stalker HP cap and they would have made them more dependent on Assassin Strike and less able at scrapping after the AS.

But doing that would have been stupid, like giving more survivability to Tankers. They're already the most survivable AT in the game and survivability is the last thing giving them problems. Their problem is being one trick ponies that sacrifice far too much for aggro control when we don't really need a supreme aggro control AT because we've got two other ATs, three if you count Masterminds, intended to share aggro and tanking duties. Pushing Tankers further into that niche wont help them.


.

Originally Posted by slaunyeh

on behalf of gravity controllers everywhere, i would like to take this moment to thank you for your consideration. Teams are much better without this kind of attitude on them.

Originally Posted by Draeth Darkstar

The inability to view something without a sexual component to the perception can be seen as a sign of repressed preferences.

Originally Posted by Leo_G

Yellow Indisputable Fundamental Fact #1: People have gotten this thread to 10+ pages in like 3 days, so the idea *MUST* be popular.

Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane

I'm going to say this, and I'd like people to keep an open mind. Don't focus on the messenger, but listen to the message.

Most people playing this game don't know there's an aggro cap, let alone what it is, let alone think that it's too low. I highly doubt that raising it is going to make Tankers any more appealing except to a relative few hard core players, as most players wouldn't even notice the difference.

Furthermore, if you're trying to increase Tanker popularity with the masses, making the toughest AT even tougher isn't going to do it. If they're not playing Tankers now, it's because being tough isn't enough of a selling point to them, especially at the cost of so much damage. That is not going to improve Tanker's image of being slow, low damage and boring. If people wanted premium survivability at the cost of losing a ton of offensive capability, Stone Armor would be the most popular power set in the game. Pushing Tankers further towards the extreme, and pushing them further into a niche doesn't help them.

I ask you to look at what was done for Stalkers. They didn't play up their hide-and-backstab shtick further because they were hurting for being too specialized around that. What they did was improve their fighting ability and damage they could do when not hidden and increased their HP cap for a bit more survivability. In other words, they brought them a little bit closer towards middle and made them a little more rounded than they were before. And they are all the better for it. I've rolled and kept more Stalkers since their buffs than I ever have, largely because they don't feel so much like one-trick ponies now.

The same should be done for Tankers. They're currently one-trick aggro ponies. They could stand to be able to pitch in with the damage dealing a little more and have their damage cap increased the same way Stalkers had their HP cap increased. Because I'm sure if you asked people why they're not playing Tankers, they're not going to answer that it's because they're not tough enough and the aggro cap is too low.


.

Originally Posted by Issen

MMs were already sleep-walking through Trials.

Originally Posted by Miladys_Knight

Yep. I usually check vet badges first though. Far far far too many bad experiences with bad grav players. I once was on a 3 hour PUG ITF (I was helping a newbie I was trying to mentor) that featured a grav/FF controller. If we had kicked him we'd have been done in an hour.

I won't go into that particular missions details again lets just say that I won't stay on a team with a grav player that I don't know unless he/she has at least 4 years of CoX experience and even then its a first 5 minutes type thing.

To date I've never teamed with a "good" grav player and the recent "update" to grav means that there are lots more "bad" grav players out there. To save myself the hassle I just don't team with them.

Originally Posted by Leo_G

Humans, naturally, do not know how to use swords.



Did some animal actually tell you this?

Originally Posted by ShadowMoka

I also forgot to add I tried rad/rad blaster before. NEVER AGAIN.