Rylas

Snarky post is snarky.

I prefer something that works better.

Either or both are still good for mitigation, because DA is pretty weak without some help.

OP, are you looking for an IO build? What part of your build do you like? What else other than endurance do you want to fix?

Hmmm.... I'm thinking my Elec/Stone tanker, iTaunt. He's been IOd out for some high durability. Sign him up!

Looking at the list, that's a varied team. Not one primary or secondary repeated (yet).

[edit] Can't remember, do market bids/sales transfer with you?

Even better, how about a "paw at tail" emote. Like cats do to other cats.

Ok, maybe I'm just reading you wrong. I'll just mark that up to textual formats. I'm going to calm down myself.

Oh, you'd be surprised. Its very possible to get over defensed without sacrificing too much on attacks. Spending the influence would be the real waste.

I get where you're coming from now. On this, I can agree to disagree. It's very rare someone takes the aggro from my tanks who don't have taunt on an AV. Rare enough to not make it worth the worry. That's just my experience. Some builds just don't permit it, and I can agree with that.

It's the fact that's it's possible to lose aggro from an AV without taunt that I think is the real issue here. I think that's a real design flaw in the game, and it's the only reason threads like this persistently pop up. It gives a misconception of how tanks "should" be played by newer players, and it's unfortunate.

Again, no one's saying some tanks can't get help from Taunt. We're just saying not all tanks need it, nor do they suffer for not having it. Taunt does cause you to sit still for a second, so the time you save by not running from group to group (which is 2-3 at most before the cap), isn't all that much.

I'd argue that a Tank isn't needed for an AV. And if a tank is needed, then neither was his taunt. No AT is required in this game. There's enough blending between ATs to allow for this.

You have your play style, I have mine. Just because you haven't seen someone herd in a while doesn't mean that its not happening on a regular basis. In fact, I've been on plenty of teams where both tanks herd independently and the team goes from tank to tank clearing groups. Everyone has fun and the map is cleared quickly. It's just as efficient as the next way of playing.

By the by, herding two mobs isn't useless. Its not like the AI makes sure all AoEs hit only the same 16 foes. And this is the second time you've argued not needing a tank (non-AV situations and steamrolling). Again, if the tank isn't needed, neither is his taunt.

In my defense, you neglect to mention what 2 powers you're using, while earlier stating that tanker DPS is poor. There's strong enough reason to believe why you'd say that if your fine with using fewer powers. EM's strong hitters are pretty slow, so I'm guessing their not part of your "smooth" attack chain.

As for AVs. I maintain their aggro as much as needed on all my tanks. Those with, or without Taunt.

Again, if the tank isn't that necessary in your eyes, I don't see why Taunt should be mandatory for all tanks.

Doesn't anyone who solo's an AV sit their for ages? The point is that you have to have high DPS to overcome the regen of an AV. If a tank can obtain this, then it's not so poor.

But that's the thing, you keep bringing up team synergy. You're big argument is team synergy. It doesn't come from just a tank. And certainly not if he has one power. In comes from everyone playing smart, and playing together. Demanding taunt means you expect yourself to make the mistakes too much. That makes you (general you) an idiot.

We're not saying some tanks couldn't get a lot of taunt, after all WP tanks have weak aggro for their primary. No, we're just saying demanding from all tanks is silly, rude and trollish.

You misunderstand. Moral high ground doesn't necessarily have to do with morals. It's in reference to your superiority-complex which exudes from almost every statement you've made.

Weak argument. I've never seen a tank worse off for achieving a 60% defense. It doesn't mean it's needed.

Wow, splitting hairs on semantics. That's an even better argument. By "Just fine," I can assure you that I have no issues with my tanks. Whether they have taunt or not. We're not agreeing to disagree, if you insist on saying those tanks without taunt are bad tanks, or can't be good tanks (or even great tanks). You're just being ignorant.

Well, that's what you think. Try going without it and have the ambition of overcoming your need for taunt. As an Ice/ tank. I can run very quickly to each group and hold their aggro. With CJ and hurdle and plenty of slow resist, I have no issue gathering scattered groups. You might try it sometime and push past your comfort zone. Who knows, you may even like it. It should at least be a new challenge for you (this time it's a specific you).


You're making a lot of assumptions here, princess (read that like Han Solo uses the word). I won't speak for Aett, but my play style with my usual team, and many PUGs is to herd up a group. If this is a well rounded team, they'll have them locked down in no time and once half the herd is gone, I'm off hunting down the next herd so that it's ready when my team finishes. No slow down for the team. Sure, they had to wait a little bit for that first herd, but we all played like a team and cleared the map pretty damn fast.

But maybe we did that because we're looking outside the small confined boxes you keep relegating ATs to on an individual level.

[quote]I just made an Invuln/Energy tank and can make a smooth attack chain from 2 attacks. There comes a point when you don't need that extra attack, and I would struggle to find a tank where I can't fit Taunt in.[/qoute]

With a smooth 2-attack chain from Energy, I can see why you think tanker DPS has to be low. Hey, if that's the way you like to build them, then do so. But for me, it's boring and slow. Especially if I'm soloing. Don't expect a lot of others to want that.

Wrong and wrong. Tanker damage is not poor. In fact, I have quite a few tanks that can melt through mobs at a very good pace. Now, it's ok if you don't want to play your tank like that. To each their own. But it doesn't make a player a bad tank because they've decided to control aggro and contribute to the damage. By your rationale, one can easily say "Letting the DPS of all teammates go all out makes the team more efficient." Because tankers can still provide high enough DPS. If you don't believe so, you need to speak to those tank who can solo AVs (sans temp powers).

No, it's relevant. Let's say I've got a group of 10 around me. The Blaster looks at another group of 10, and blasts. Well, I can jump over there fast enough without taunt and grab 7 more, but that last 3 aren't my responsibility. Nor were the other 7 (if the blaster chooses to act like a headless chicken), I just don't see any point in dead team mates.

So, I can't be a headless chicken, but others can? No. Team synergy requires everyone playing smart. Not just the tank. Don't expect the tank to make up for your (this is a general you) bad play style. If you insist on the tank being the aggro manager, then you better be able to follow his aggro choices.

I prefer to control as much aggro as I can and letting the team deciding what extra aggro they want to control. If someone's wants to go willy-nilly without thinking, they can join another team where the tank babysits their every move.

Again, an immob happy troller is an irresponsible controller (depening on group situations). You can't expect the tank to work with you, if you refuse to work with the tank. Well, you can. But you'll be considered a hypocritical tool for acting that way. Maybe you're not aware of this, but some tanks require mobs around them for their survival. A controller who won't allow a tank to have mobs around isn't being a team player.

No, but there are ones where a tanker may say "Damn I wish I had room for Physical Perfection/one more attack/another pool power/anything else" and for some tanks, dropping taunt is a complete possibility without dropping their performance on a team. You have no moral high ground to expect they keep it.

Which can be placed in any secondary power.

Look, some people/buids can do just fine without using taunt. Some can't. Don't generalize them all by demanding they need it when they all don't. Asking the tank to bend over for your play style isn't being a team player. If you want him to control all the aggro so you can safely let loose without thinking, then let him do aggro his way.

So, what you want, is for tanks to taunt so that you, the blaster/brute don't have to think about how to play more safely? Because that's what you sound like your saying.

Some tankers don't feel like letting others have all the fun while we just taunt-bot the enemies for you. I know, I know, that sounds impossible! I mean, why would we want to do more than just sit there and spam a button when you're having all the fun doing the damage? But hell, some people are just plain kooky like that. As one of those crazy sonsofbeetches out there that likes to do more then just taunt, allow me to explain myself.

I can build and play a tanker that doesn't have taunt. I can even keep capped aggro with said tanker. Now, if you choose to aggro something above that aggro cap I have on me, then by all means, feel free. But it's your problem at that point. Not mine. While you sweat the extra aggro you managed to pull, I'll be killing at a decently steady pace since I've managed to hold the aggro cap and put out decent damage.

Granted, sometimes I do make a tank that has taunt. But you know what I've noticed? Blasters and other characters can still get killed by their own bad play style despite the extra power I picked up. So who's not using better synergy in that case?

Reading Comprehension FAIL.

Here's what he said:

Now, you can interpret this to mean you specifically (I took it as the general you), but the overall point of the message isn't whether or not you can play the market. It's whether or not you can still play the game if you choose to play the market, suck at the market, or ignore the market completely. So, his point still stands. The logic is sound. If you can't understand that, just stop trying to argue it, because there's no way for anyone to explain it any simpler than that.

I don't play the market. I have no desire to play the market. But I do use it. As someone who uses the market and sometimes lets out audible sighs when viewing price histories, I can understand that the market is like this because it runs on economics. The most impatient bidders raise prices. You should be upset with them.

If I want something for a low price, I just bid for the price I find comfortable and go play the game. If I come back in a month and it's been bought, then cool. If not, I leave the bidding there, or move on. It wasn't that important to begin with. It didn't keep me from being able to play my toon effectively.

Now, I will say prices have gone up quite a bit in the past 6 months. Climbing to some pretty ridiculous levels. Again, this isn't because of marketeers. It's because demand is too high for supply. And supply is horribly low. Drop rates would be my suggestion for a fix.

Hmm. I uninstalled 9.12. Then I ran drive sweeper in safe mode and got rid of all ATI drivers. Then I went here and downloaded 10.1 and installed it. When I go to the control center and look at the Information Center, it says that it is Catalyst Version 09.12.

What gives?

Good to know. I did have the hotfix for the 9.12, but I don't think it took care of what was causing issues for me. I'll try installing the 10.1 release when I get home. Thanks!

Can we get some clarification? $30 gets me early Pistols and Demons, while paying $40 can get me the same stuff plus shiny things? Or is the Complete Collection a separate deal altogether requiring I spend $70 total?

QFT. If it gives the same performance and allows even more people to use it, it sounds like a great selling point for the game. This isn't City of Elitist.