Lacrymosa

[ QUOTE ]
was it so hard to form an opinion w/out blatantly bashing players who like the set?

[/ QUOTE ]

I was being objective, fact is, that you will find people who are fan's of the set, and many who are not. That much is too obvious. As for everything else i.e. the slow recharge and mediocore dps and strength vs human, are all facts.

Primarily yes, it's a bad engine flaw that doesn't make color swapping in this case easy. It has been easy to write color code since the NES days, It just takes more people than say, ONE person. A group of individuals can write code in their sleep. It's all about the engine, in this matter; [ QUOTE ]
The pipeline from power to effects just wasn't designed to be flexible.

[/ QUOTE ] Design flaw.

lastly ;

[ QUOTE ]
Can it be done? Sure. Given enough time almost anything can be done. But is it more important to do than all of the various other things that can also be done in the same amount of time? That's the step where power customization as a feature has repeatedly fallen off the list and pushed back to the next issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you didn't bother to read anything on issue. Stop trying to disprove someone and do some research.

Gauntlet is just fine....though that doesn't mean I wouldnt like a better "meat shield" inherent. I like the steel skin idea, or even the idea of demoralizing your enemy over time (fear proc). They changed defiance so I'm sure with enough complaining anything is possible. In my opinion they got it right with brutes. Live long = more damage. Easy to understand as its very fitting to more comic mythos heroes. Having a second passive taunt is useless, and far too redundant. I rather take taunt or have a taunt mechanice built in behind the scenes and have a better inherent. Or combine both, more taunting and more damage. Brutes farm whole maps so its not like many will be screaming OP.

[ QUOTE ]
But, if you are truly looking to survive anything and everything... go stone/ice.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT, pretty much.

I laughed a little, it's funny that since Champions Online, CoH is officially stealing pages, nay whole books from them. I can't say its a bad thing, but if we have to wait for another upcoming MMO to experience the same content, then epic fail for the Devs. I'm happy that we finally get to change our "red pom pom's of doom, or the rainbow invul, but taking 4+ years to do so was very lazy. I understand they didn't expect the franchise to get as big as it is, but cmon. Color palettes are the easiest thing to do in any game. You can ask any developer, it's been done on weaker engines , like the NES or SNES. It's no secret its standard programming, why It took this long is pretty sad. Especially since people have been modding CoH for a while now.

Its obvious that the "elemental" shields are weaker than the "durability" shields. That included Ice uses Energy Absorbtion as the "mitigator", combined with hoarfrost its usually the bread and butter. Its still primarily weak and offers no resistance to smash and or lethal. I never enjoyed the low levels as an Icer but once you get EA it gets easier. You can reduce the cooldown to thirty seconds if it makes it easier.

Also, take hibernate, you last longer when nothing can hit you. It is the perfect "I live" button. You really shouldn't be having that much of a problem even with tough and weave. But I still understand where your coming from. Especially if you ever made an Invul tank, or a Granite. Regardless EA makes up for it, and Hibernate should be taken in any case.

Lastly I don't exactly dislike Ice/Ice, I just like having different offensive powers. My advice, make an Ice/Stone = aka no touchy (Fault+tremor = deathless). Or an Ice Fire = AoE monster.

[ QUOTE ]
Mind if I ask why you'd skip them?

Tremor I can sort of understand. It has one of the slowest animations and has a lower base damage than some, but it's still an AoE and it has a nice 15ft radius. Not having any AoEs is a real drag. (SS was getting tedious to me pre-38. To be fair, my SM is Fiery Aura, so I had Blazing Aura to supplement it.)

Fault boggles me, though. It's hands down the best control power Tankers have access to. I'd go so far as to say that Fault is a defining power of Stone Melee. I can't imagine ever skipping it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I use Taunt and (said AoE taunt aura here), when I Tank so its not an issue of aoe. I've played an Invul/enrg, and a Fire/dark, way before I tried SM, I find through my experience Fault and Tremor aren't needed in my case. I just don't NEED them. I have tried them and while fun at early levels, once you get to the point where blaster and scrappers are shredding through mobs (past 32), holding a mob in place for five seconds isn't really noticed when their all dead.

YMMV do I need to post this?, obviously skipping them hasnt hampered my tanking ability. Just posting that their not really needed in the long run. And while yes they do have their place in SM builds, they aren't "go to" powers in my builds. Fun visuals to watch, but to me, their only useful when you don't have a single scrapper or blaster to do dmg on said mob.

Aett, like I posted before, No one is really "hurting", then again I would need your definition of that word in game context. Besides that, AT's don't need to be "hurting" for a change to be made, or even for additions to be put in. Were WP and DA Tanks put in because tanks where hurting?, no. It was an idea, a conept. People want at the very least, something different. I'm not asking for Overpowered this or that. Merely more addition's that add to the heroic feel of tanks, or any other AT for that matter. It's not a matter of "fixing", I never said they needed to be fixed, you need to read my posts again.

Its fine that you see Tankers "fine the way they are". Thats your opinion, your obviously entitled to it. So why bother posting?, I'm not here to argue so your looking at the wrong post. I'm here to post my opinions on said matter.

[ QUOTE ]
I have an idea for all characters in-game to get cupcakes. Throwing cupcakes at an AV would one-shot kill it. Throwing it at any other enemy deals no damage. As ridiculous as this sounds, I'm betting that I could get a few people behind it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see you just want to be cynical and argumentative. But It's not working, I'm not here to feed your need to insult or berrate people or their opinions, you don't like what I'm posting?, then move on, this thread is not for you. On that note, radical ideas and ridiculous ideas that don't make sense are two different things. A radical idea based of the game makes more sense. Sure you could offer your cupcake idea, but in comparison more tanker offense would be more valid and less outlandish than the cupcake idea.

My idea isn't as radical as most people think, especially since I'm not askinf for an "I win" button or overpowered defense. I understand you may not like mine or anyone else's ideas but being sarcastic about it won't help your case. You want numbers, but as I stated in past posts, somethings don't need numbers to prove that they need to be changed.

[ QUOTE ]
I think they should each have at least one ranged attack from their secondary pools.

I think certain sets (notably Super Strength) could use a cosmetic facelift, making them appear more powerful by use of debris, damage decaling and so on.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT.

Lastly, I'm not asking for a total revamp of the whole tanker AT, maybe you misunderstood, I'm asking for a very small addition compared to what the expansion will bring. My idea isn't game breaking or even monumental. I guess thats the whole problem here, even a small idea is deemed "wrong" or unsound due to people disliking change. In a way I understand you don't want to change whats already been made whole, but to accept the opinion, that it will always stay like this, is naive.

[ QUOTE ]
It doesn't exist.

Just acknowledge that what you're saying is always subjective and try to back it up with provable facts. That's what people aren't doing in this debate, pretty much on either side.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately it does exist. You saying it doesn't, shouldn't make people think their posts are less objective. You don't control opinion. And your being pretentious in believing you do. What I post is fact. I want change in any field, not just tanker offense. Though it would be nice.

Objective ;expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations. By this definition, anyone asking for more overall tanker dmg is purely objective by what kind of dmg the devs give to tanks. Besides the "Medium" dmg branded on them and the overall lack of high dps should be enough.

[ QUOTE ]
The mechanics aren't perfect; but I don't know how you would change it, and I don't think that the ones proposed here, in this thread and in others, are the way to go if a direction is at all necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ideas friend, Ideas. As radical as it seems, the radical in many an industry has been the reason things have changed, and usually for the better. Shutting down ideas just because they don't fit into your reasoning doesn't mean they should be halted. You may not see it as a change thats needed, but others do.

Lastly, Ideas need to be stated, be it objective or subjective. If any idea exists it should be something that expresses an option for all to decide. It's just not about having it "my way" but merely a way that is beyond the now. I just don't see why so many hate the idea. After all history has been one radical idea change to another. Change HAS to happen. It is after all a super hero game based off Marvel and DC that much is obvious. So why not continue and develope some new powers, more additions, and more "comic like" tanks. I suppose thats what Champions Online is for, but time will have to prove us all wrong.

[ QUOTE ]
This is what it boils down to. People are STILL upset that their tanker can't solo an entire map in 5 mins as they could pre-i4. Get over it. That kind of undeniable power in a video game was completely and totally boring. There was absolutely zero challenge in the game at that point, and it was what made me stop playing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong, I never asked for what you posted. In fact thats way off the issue. Thats something you dislike personally. I asked for more blast like powers.

[ QUOTE ]
That isn't dev love, that is not wanting the game to be broken again to the point where I decide to leave. I LIKE the game as is, and more to the point I LIKE tankers as is. That isn't being in love with everything the dev's say or saying that they are infallible, that is my wanting to continue playing a game and an AT that I like.

[/ QUOTE ]

And theres nothing wrong with your opinion. Except I and many others like and want change. You can stay just the way you are , hence why I would like if more tank offense was an OPTION. Not a mandate. You focus on the wrong parts of my posts, address my questions. Or atleast some reasons to why you think tanks are fine just the way they are.

[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm using facts everytime I post, you just need in game numbers for it to make sense to you. But did in game calculations matter when they "fixed" those zones I mentioned?. No, it didn't hinder anyone's performance, numbers wise. And it was never an issue about performance, rather a concept. I haven't used any bias regarding the matter, just because YOU see it as such, doesnt make it true. Don't falsely accuse me because you can't see past your own opinion.

My main question is this, why not?, what if?. Why does it bother you if tanks get more offense?, in this case more ranged or blast powers. How will effect your gameplay?. Tanks already get a few ranged attacks (Hurl Boulder, Torrent, Hurl), I merely just asked for more "blast" powers. It's and idea they clearly thought of implementing, but didn't exactly flesh out.

Certain decisions have nothing to do with in game numbers. Thats fact. For example, adding a trainer to Peregrine had nothing to do with in game numbers, or player statistic. Some thing's are made for comfort or even concept. How am I not being objective when I ask for change?. I assume you like the way everything is now?, thats fine. But I actually want change via tank offense or anything else. Your posting sounds glib. A bit too fascist if you ask me. Let me get this clear, you don't want more tanker offense?....

[ 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 ]
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 ]
The Hollows were great when they first came out. Sure, they had some problems, but the story in the zone tended to be better than the one outside of the zone at that level, so people still did the content. After four years of having the same content, however, less people were doing it. The minor inconveniences of the zone became more pronounced, so they 'fixed' them.

Faultline had a story to go along with it, the Devs just never had the resources to get to it. As soon as they had the resources, they finished the story for it. Hardly makes it a mistake. An incomplete zone meant to be completed? Sure. A mistake? Not really.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not once did I ever see a thread about the devs saying Hollows or Faultline was incomplete. Maybe its just me, but they gave the impression that it was "good just the way it is" four years ago. Only when people complained did we see a change. But on that note a hero trainer was placed four years after?....I think thats an error if there ever was one. Forget about the hospital or the mission range, no hero trainer till four years after?.

[ 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 ]
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 ]
They obviously don't believe it is still an error since they have done nothing (in your eyes) about it... so continuing to post what the lead developer said years ago doesn't really support your case.

[/ QUOTE ]

This unrequited dev love needs to stop. Their human, they make mistakes. Fautline being one of those famous mistakes. And finally "fixing" Hollows after four years. Yes its an error, just because they don't admit to it doesnt make it any less a mistake. See passed the love for red names and use some objectivity.

[ QUOTE ]
Also once again... I'll present a question this time:
What gives you the impression that the only concept for a brute is someone driven by anger?

[/ QUOTE ]

Besides the obvious name? or the "rage meter" they have. But if you need a more obvious hint; " Brutes live to fight, and as a brute you revel in hand-to-hand combat. With power offensive sets to inflict pain and impressive defense to take it, your the best there is in a straight fight. Protracted battles only makes you mad, and the madder you get, the more damaging your attacks become." - CoH Brute description.

[ QUOTE ]
Comic Brutes get carried away on their anger. Comic Tankers make a tactical decision to kick it up a notch and stop pulling their punches.

Which is something I've been trying to get for CoH Tankers.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT, hit the nail on the head, with a sledge.

Its horrible at the early levs, and if you don't have the right primary, its all out hell in the later ones. Seven toggles was never my idea of fun. especially when you need to hit enemies, or atleast want to. DM would be the perfect primary due to Dark Consumption. I hate to sceam Io, but yeah, it definitely would benefit more from IO's early on. Great Psionic resist and good synergy with DM, but It's last on my list of tanks I want to get to 50.

[ QUOTE ]
Based on their strength levels alone, The Thing and Superman would be Blue Side SS/INV brutes. Wonder Woman has superhuman strength but not on the level with Supes and Ben and she is not impervious to injury, thus she is a WP/SS tanker. Again this is my opinion based on what I know of the canon and what I know will be possible in the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really, if you want to give them an AT, It would be Superman-Invul/SS (Hero class). Hulk invul/ss Brute(Hero class). Brutes lack overall defense and res end game, these heroes do not. I agree, WW would be WP/SS.

[ QUOTE ]
Im just the opposite. I cannot stand Rage. I still took it, I just don't like it. Its just not fun. Of all my 50 tanks, my /SS is my least favorite because of rage. I know, Im weird that way

[/ QUOTE ]

I tried to understand, but I used some objectivity when reading. I have a Granite/SS and took rage for the -dmg of GA, I never have a problem popping Rage and going to work on enemies. The weaken debuff lasts for ten seconds. If you cant handle the wait then, tanking is not for you. Lets not forget you can perma Rage, which keeps me running Rage all mission long. Don't get confused, just because its not called Build up, it does the same thing for a longer period. Thats like saying you hate hitting hard for more than ten seconds.

If you want overall dmg, go with Stone Melee. If you want speed with your dmg, go with EM. I have a invul/enrg and a Wp/Rock and both are fun, all pom pom's of doom jokes aside. Whirling hands is a great aoe which can be reduced to a eight second chariot of aggro. If you want straight power out the gate, go with EM or DM, obviously EM has more attacks and even for a tank my dps goes up very fast with Energy transfer and total focus. Don't listen to the naysayer's, for a tank, EM is very good.

DM requires you spam SM in corner mobs. The "pull here" tactic works best. But you will still miss some. Overall for all the buffs, its more of a survivalists set. Still very big dmg with SM. Midnight Grasp also does great DoT for what it is. Although pretty strong, you still have to wait for the full power feeling on DM.

Lastly, we have Stone melee. Anyone can tell you, its powerful. Slow and usually full of heart felt misses. But never the less, it shines when its accurate. Deadly in the higher levels, but Fault and Tremor always make me reconsider picking it, or at the very least, make me skip them. Either way, its a slow build up for Stone M.

In conclusion, go with EM, if you want speed and power out the gate (yes even low levels). Go with DM if you want high DoT. And go with Stone melee, if you wish to achieve maximum power within reasonable levels(later on).

Hero Plan by Mids' Hero Designer 1.401
http://www.cohplanner.com/

[u]Click this DataLink to open the build![u]

Ryokan: Level 50 Magic Tanker
Primary Power Set: Stone Armor
Secondary Power Set: Super Strength
Power Pool: Fitness
Power Pool: Teleportation
Power Pool: Speed
Ancillary Pool: Earth Mastery

Hero Profile:
Level 1: Rock Armor -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A), LkGmblr-Def(3), LkGmblr-Def/EndRdx(3), LkGmblr-Def/Rchg(5), LkGmblr-EndRdx/Rchg(5), LkGmblr-Def/EndRdx/Rchg(7)
Level 1: Jab -- Empty(A)
Level 2: Stone Skin -- Aegis-ResDam/EndRdx(A), Aegis-ResDam/Rchg(7), Aegis-EndRdx/Rchg(9), Aegis-ResDam/EndRdx/Rchg(9), Aegis-ResDam(11)
Level 4: Haymaker -- Mako-Dam%(A), Mako-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg(15), Mako-Acc/Dmg(15), Acc(31), Acc(33), Mako-Dmg/EndRdx(40)
Level 6: Swift -- Empty(A)
Level 8: Earth's Embrace -- Numna-Regen/Rcvry+(A), Numna-Heal(17), Numna-Heal/EndRdx(17), Numna-EndRdx/Rchg(19), Numna-Heal/Rchg(19), Numna-Heal/EndRdx/Rchg(21)
Level 10: Taunt -- Zinger-Dam%(A), Zinger-Taunt/Rng(11), Zinger-Taunt(13), Acc(13), Acc(46)
Level 12: Recall Friend -- Empty(A)
Level 14: Teleport -- TSM'n-Stlth(A), TSM'n-EndRdx(21), TSM'n-Rng(23), Winter-RunSpd/Jump/Fly/Rng(23)
Level 16: Rooted -- Dct'dW-Rchg(A), Dct'dW-Heal/EndRdx(25), Dct'dW-EndRdx/Rchg(25), Dct'dW-Heal/Rchg(27), Dct'dW-Heal/EndRdx/Rchg(27), Dct'dW-Heal(29)
Level 18: Health -- Empty(A)
Level 20: Stamina -- P'Shift-End%(A), P'Shift-EndMod/Rchg(29), P'Shift-EndMod/Acc/Rchg(31), P'Shift-EndMod(31)
Level 22: Mud Pots -- Oblit-%Dam(A), Oblit-Acc/Rchg(37), EndRdx(39), Acc(39), Acc(39), Oblit-Dmg/Rchg(46)
Level 24: Knockout Blow -- C'ngImp-Dmg/EndRdx/Rchg(A), C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx(34), Acc(36), Acc(37), C'ngImp-Dmg/EndRdx(37), C'ngImp-Acc/Dmg(46)
Level 26: Minerals -- LkGmblr-Def(A), LkGmblr-Def/EndRdx(34), LkGmblr-Def/Rchg(34)
Level 28: Rage -- GSFC-Build%(A), GSFC-ToHit/EndRdx(33), GSFC-ToHit(33), GSFC-ToHit/Rchg(45), GSFC-Rchg/EndRdx(45), GSFC-ToHit/Rchg/EndRdx(45)
Level 30: Punch -- Acc(A), Dmg(43)
Level 32: Granite Armor -- LkGmblr-Rchg+(A), LkGmblr-Def(40), LkGmblr-Def/EndRdx(40), Aegis-ResDam(42), Aegis-Psi/Status(42), Aegis-ResDam/EndRdx(43)
Level 35: Hurl -- Acc(A), Acc(36), Dev'n-Hold%(36)
Level 38: Foot Stomp -- Zinger-Dam%(A), Zinger-Taunt/Rng(48), RechRdx(48), RechRdx(48), Acc(50)
Level 41: Hasten -- RechRdx-I(A), RechRdx-I(42), RechRdx-I(43)
Level 44: Salt Crystals -- Empty(A)
Level 47: Quick Sand -- Empty(A)
Level 49: Stalagmites -- Ragnrk-Knock%(A), Posi-Acc/Dmg/EndRdx(50), Posi-Dam%(50)
------------
Level 1: Brawl -- Empty(A)
Level 1: Sprint -- Empty(A)
Level 2: Rest -- Empty(A)
Level 1: Gauntlet

A warning, DA, is the basterd child of CoH. Many where "tricked" into trying it out because it was part of the new tank AT's. Unfortunately it has little bang for its end hog. Even with IO's its still unbearable. But if you do decide to run it, its seven toggles(nine if you go for Tough and Weave) plus attacks. Moving on.

DA/Fire is a nice combo, fast and aoe heavy. Combustion and breath of fire will be your bread and butter here.

DA/Energy is fast and strong, purely single target(Whirling hands excluded). Though if you don't like the Pom Pom's of doom...

I would recommend those two sets for speed and synergy. If you want overall power choose SS or SM.

Brimstone's first vid proves my point. About 38sec's in you see the Granite tank loose aggro. He has to reestablish more than a few times, and the mob wasn't even that big. And this is with an Elec blaster. Imagine a fire blaster or an Ice.

On that note , I'd like to thank BrimstoneBruce for the vids and would loved if you kept them up as I wish to use them as further evidence.

Fact; Gauntlet is broken
Aura's arent as strong as most think they are.
If a Blaster can take aggro away, a scrapper should have no problem.
Taunt is needed.

[ QUOTE ]
It's unrelated to Corruptors, but EQ doesn't do KB

[/ QUOTE ]

Does now, even without KB sets. It officially does KB.

I agree Suichiro, I have used the Tanker version aka Red carpet, and have realized KD is way better than KB, which is why I made a Earth troller when Earthquake used to KD, now that it KB's teams dont exactly cheer me on for an EQ. Now if only Thorlover5000 could get that into his head this thread could end.

No one said the set is difficult, stop undermining players. Every set is easy, as blasting requires 0 thinking even for energy. As far as a 1-2-3 aoe combo's go, if you didn't happen to read my post, all blasters have 3 aoe's either cone or middle group aoe. If you dont like say Ar/...oh wait flamethower, M30 Grenade and Full Auto. Is that three? it looks like three. Or how about Sonic blasting aka the king of cones. Howl, Shockwave, sirens song, and dreadful wail. thats 4. And dont exclude Fire because they run away from RoF. The fear effect makes them run slowly, enough for a combo to take full effect; Fire Ball, Fire breath, Rain of, and inferno.

Maybe your thinking about Psionic blasting? which has one aoe. Have you actually played any other blaster AT?. Because it seems like you don't know much about the game let alone blasting. When you post information you think is correct about a set make sure you know EVERYTHING about it. You actually posted that Smashing dmg (which what energy has) is the least resisted on the later levels....I seriously need to quote you on that. Tell me you haven't been playing this game for more than a month...

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, but I don't buy the argument of turning KB into KD to make the set more appealing. Anything that caters to the lowest common denominator of intelligence should be avoided.

[/ QUOTE ]

You assume its the lowest common denominator. Like I said before, every other AT does just fine without KB. Its just something the devs put so you can smile everytime you do a power push or send an enemy flying. Its amusing for you, but it isn't loved in big groups. Its not about making the game easy, it's about fixing a power that is weak and filled with annoying Caveats. KD would only mean they fall down, of course, the devs can make the KD as long as the KB animation, so its not a matter of ease, its a matter of you in love with seeing things fly away with one punch. Infantile but hey everyone floats differently.

[ QUOTE ]
Oh please put away that fantasy MMO comparison. I came to CoH from the Guild Wars / WoW camp and fell in love the Blaster immediately. LOL - give me a "caster" that can solo the hardest game content over a wand waving backliner any day.

[/ QUOTE ]

The point of the topic is to use evidence and compare, thats how the Devs make games. They see something so they decide to make it better using pre existing knowledge or genre's. Why am I explaining this?, are you that in need of an e-arguement?, grow up kiddo. And yeah you can solo AV's with IO sets a shivan pet and tons of purps. It comes off very underpowered when I put it in those terms doesnt it?. If your going to post "I can solo AV's" atleast point out why, don't make it seem like you can get on CoH and solo everything out the gate.