PRAF68_EU

In the movie, Thor is wounded by Loki's dagger, and appears to be in pain for the rest of the battle. One imagines it was no ordinary dagger, but it's hard to imagine the Hulk being hurt like that - would only make him stronger anyway.

It is also implied that a very long drop could seriously endanger Thor or Loki, where as the Hulk quite easily survives just such a drop.

I would say that Asgardian invulnerability is significantly reduced in this movie series.

Wouldn't have closed the portal.

Might have moved the portal.

Moving the portal into the ground so New York fell into another dimension would probably not be considered a good solution.

Captain America doesn't really have a secret identity in the current movie continuity, so it doesn't matter if he wears a mask or not.

As for the Spiderman trailer, the tentacle thing looks interesting, but I don't think I'm ready for another version of a familiar origin story, this one apparently retconning that Peter Parker was genetically modified as an infant, just for the sake of being different.

Yeah, "isn't that a very rude word" passed though my mind too. That it got through probably says something about the education of the censors. At least the UK censors should have known. Although they might have felt it was obscure enough that children wouldn't notice, and therefore it didn't matter. Being London based, they tend to forget places like Wales exist.

Thing to consider:

On a tank, when solo, you will probably spend quite some time standing in the middle of a big group of mobs whilst you wear them down.

On a Scrapper, you will probably kill the mobs quickly, or they will kill you first.

I guess I'm saying: probably not.

I know some people go Spines/Dark for the damage auras, but I would consider this a very specialised build.

It's good with some auras. Try it with "Bats".

A /WP Scrapper really is not a good way to get the best out of Staff. WP doesn't benefit from +recharge, so FoM isn't very useful; it's quite good for endurance, so FoS isn't very useful; and FoB, well, Build Up would be better...

Yup, Dark/Staff tank is awesome. No survivability issues there! Staff/Dark stalker looks pretty interesting too, I'm going to give it a try and see if I can afford the end. You might try Fire/Staff tank. That's pretty awesome too, with decent damage. Recolour the flames black!

Putting aside that Staff isn't as good for scrappers as it is for other three melee ATs (IMO), what I think is going on is a lot of lethal attacks (swords and guns) have -def, and destroy your Guarded Spin faster than you can stack it up. It wouldn't hurt DA to gain some def debuff resistance, perhaps in CoD, and I would like to see def debuff resistance available through IOs and Pools too. But that doesn't help you now. The only other thing that would help is getting close to the def cap, but that isn't really possible for a level 27 scrapper.

Once you get to 32, the resistance buff from Sky Splitter should solve the -def problem. However, that means using FoB instead of FoS, which means turning off toggles.

Unless they can release 5 at once, which I'm sure they wouldn't want to do even if they had the manpower, I don't see any kind of origin bonus or restriction being considered.

However, I think they may restrict it to only one of these special pools being in a build at a time, to limit "pay-to-win". After all, if they aren't better than at least some of the existing power pools they won't sell. No one is going to shell out for another Presence Pool...

Go Staff/Dark and use FoS...

Gotham was mentioned in Superman Returns...

I tell you what I'm sick of: Origin stories.

Unless it's a character I'm unfamiliar with, I don't need to hear their origin story.

Yup. Just Coulson's sense of humour.

The devs use mathematical methods when the first design a set of course, and one of the things Arcanaville has managed to show up was when there where flaws in the methodology used by the developers.

But actual, measured performance always trumps any amount of theory, as it should.

The Scientific method: If the model fails to agree with observation, there must be something wrong with the model.

The Combat method: If the model fails to agree with observation, there must be something wrong with reality.

You can't just "ignore this" "ignore that" and expect to draw any meaningful conclusions.

I did a Mathematical Modelling unit at University. It was a long time ago and boring, but I do remember that anything you left out of your model you had to justify by proving that it wouldn't affect the outcome.

No it isn't. For one, it leaves out Guarded Spin, which would be one of the most frequently used powers in REAL gameplay. You also leave out equivalent powers from other sets. This does not make the model better, it makes it worse. For two, you leave out Mercurial Blow (and equivalent powers in other sets), which would be the most frequently used power for tanks or brutes - you really have no idea how those ATs work, do you? I've played a great many of those sets, and I don't use any of those attack chains. I might, if I was a scrapper and attacking immobile targets that don't fight back, but last time I looked, this wasn't City of Target Dummies.

You really, really, have no idea about how different powers interact, do you?

Yes, as in "not at all".
Exactly. And an analysis that doesn't include those things is meaningless drivel.

Then you will have to live with your invalid conclusions based on broken logic, or maybe listen to other people with a better understanding of the game and/or real experience.

Evidence based on a model that bares no relation to how the game is actually played has even less validity.

Opinion based on actual experience is far more valid than metrics based on a lousy model.

Just a few stupiditys in you model, without going into detailed maths:

1) It's for scrappers only. We know Staff is worse on scrappers, since they get a bigger bonus for BU than the other ATs, loosing it hurts them more than other ATs. They are also more dependant on big hitters.

2) It's an utterly stupid attack chain. Only a moron would use that in regular play.

3) You are using the worst form.

4) You are ignoring the influence of the secondary powerset. Some of those affect damage you know...

5) You are ignoring running out of endurance. That hurts DPS you know...

6) You are ignoring survivability. Being dead hurts DPS you know...

Actually, I think those are some of the worst* (just ahead of WP).

Best: Fire, Regen, Dark.

*Not Stalker SR and ELA.

I'm a native (British) English speaker, and ate has always been pronounced ait where I come from. You sure someone hasn't been yanking your chain?

"et" would be considered the "uneducated" version.

"At" is just "at". Or something you wear on your 'ead.

Historical. It's been pretty much lost in modern usage. The name of the leader of the X-men is always pronounced "Ex-avior", not Savior these days (even when it's not referring to that character).


And UXB was certainly used as far back as WW2. I remember a program on British TV in the 1970s called "Danger-UXB" about a bomb disposal crew.