Sarrate
-
Posts
1774 -
Joined
-
Quote:Just a clarification, but when you say the "best," you mean has the best mechanics/etc, not necessarily most popular, right?Originally Posted by BeyondReach
I think one thing dominates it, at least in my opinion of what makes an MMORPG good. Well, at least something that other MMORPGs have managed to pull off. And yes, this will probably attract a horde of people arguing a moot argument against me, but CoH is not a skill-based game. CoH has click-it powers. You don't need to have skill to play CoH. Personally, that is what I think keeps people playing MMOs that are skill-based - though they are a dying breed -
-Let me just quickly jump in here and clear up any confusion. By Skills I don't mean an alternate name for click-it powers, like Staff Strike and Fireball, I mean the actual, non MMO definition of skill-
the players feel that they are good at something, and so persist at it. Whereas beyond a certain boundary, you can't really be "good" at a game with click-it powers.
Now, I know WoW is the most succesful game out there and every ape can play it, but when I say TOP MMO(RPG) I mean the best MMORPG. I like CoH the way it is. A casual relaxation for people who have the majority of their lives outside of the game. And that's the way I'd like it to stay. But that won't make it the best MMORPG.
At any rate, I vehemently disagree with your assesment that games with "click-it powers" don't require skill. You can argue whether they need more or less skill, but skill is definitely a factor. How would PUG horror stories exist if any ape could pick up the game and play it? (Btw, any ape may be able to solo in the game, but not any ape can play the spectrum of content the game has to offer successfully.)
I think this is an interesting point - as much as I like the customization in CoX and the ability to make a character look exactly as I like, there is also something about earning something that really distinguishes me. When I was making my newest character, Ohmni Slash (Claws/Elec Brute), there were several costume options I wanted to add to her that I couldn't unlock until later (some Vanguard / Roman pieces). I ended up making a first costume, then a second when I earned more pieces and kept adding to it. When the costume was finally complete, it really did feel good to sit back and look at it.Quote:Originally Posted by Myriad
Another aspect is functional clothing. It adds some realism to your costume. If you see someone in plate armor you'll know that he's less squishy than the person wearing a robe. The tradeoff is flexibility in costume creation. WoW is a bit extreme here by not allowing any customization to clothing parts. In CoX the goal was to allow players to create an iconic superhero look which resulted in our wonderful costume creator. The tradeoff is realism and to some degree even immersion factor. A huge character with heavy tech armor could be anything in CoX, still many would expect a tank, scrapper or brute and not a plant/storm controller. The most important aspect of functional clothing is probably the show factor. I believe most players want to shine with their character. Just by looking at them you should see how buff they are. In CoX this isn't possible. But when you see a toon in WoW with spiked shoulders, shiny armor, glowing weapons and whatnot it will give you a clue to the characters power. Especially if you're able to recognize the weapon or the armor pieces. It's a bit as if you had your leet badges and super cool uber enhancements on the outside. And I believe this aspect is more important that it seems to be on first glance.
I'm not saying I want every costume piece to be unlockable, but there is something about being able to earn something through your game experience that alters how you look.
Absolutely. One thing that strikes me about WoW is the fact that you almost always have something to strive for. It may be more uber loot, leveling crafting, PvP, gathering non-combat pets, achievments (badges), mounts, or other unique items.Quote:Originally Posted by Myriad
And lets not forget the end game. In WoW it's almost as if the real game begins when you hit L80 (the current max). Even if it's mostly a grind for better equipment, it gives players a goal and something to do. In current CoX the end game is to farm 2Bn influence to buy that Gladiators Armor +Def unique IO and that's it (more or less).
While earning IOs and making a build is one thing for our 50s to do, besides badges there isn't much to do beyond that in terms of actually progressing your character. My favorite character (Brimstone-Preacher, WP/Fire Tank) is pretty much "done." His build is essentially complete and suits me perfectly. He is a blast to play, but it really is a bummer that there's nothing more I can do for him. I'm very eagerly awaiting to hear what Posi has in store for the "end game" system. -
Quote:I can see the Blaster & Tanker combo going twice as fast as a solo Tanker, even with different tactics. A Blaster has a damage mod roughly 40% higher than a Tanker (ignoring Defiance / Aim + BU).Originally Posted by Aett_Thorn
However, with a Blaster, things will differ a bit. The Blaster usually stays with the Tanker. Thus, there is no splitting, and you're killing the same spawns at Y speed. If Y is equal to X, then the Tanker + Blaster combo will kill at speed X, equivalent to the 2 Tanker combo. However, if Y is less than X, then you're going slower than the two Tankers, leading to an outcome where the Blaster/Tanker duo goes at a slower pace than the 2 Tanker duo. If Y is greater than X, then the Blaster/Tanker duo will progress faster than the 2 Tanker combo.
Suppose the Blaster waits for the Tanker to deal 25% a spawn's hp before attacking. The remaining 75% will then be defeated at 2.4 times the normal rate. (It would take the same amount of time as the Tanker alone dealing 31.25% of their health: 75 / 2.4 = 31.25)
The total kill time would wind up taking 56.25% normal, or 177.777% faster than the Tanker solo.
Yes, that very simple example is lower than double. However, it doesn't factor in defiance, aim, buildup, attacking before 25% of mob hp is burned through, or that Blasters have more attacks (in general). It also doesn't consider the effect of Lieutenants and Bosses - I don't have hp charts in front of me, but 25% of a minon's health is only like, 10% of a Lieutenant's health and maybe 3% of a Boss's health. Their higher health pools give Blaster's higher damage output time to catch up. -
Quote:I understand where you're coming from with this. While I'm very much pro-Taunt, I can fully see the reasons why someone may not want to take it. I don't begrudge Tankers who don't pickup Taunt. I get annoyed when they don't have it and things don't go well. (Repeated deaths/wipes, aggro peeling everywhere, etc. A loose mob or two isn't going to ruin my fun.)Originally Posted by dave_p
Here's the thing though, we have a finite number of slots w/which to fill out powers, and if we take Taunt, we're not taking something else. One some of my builds, I take Taunt and can well afford to. Others are a lot tighter and taking Taunt would mean sacrificing... something. More offense, better mitigation, something. So is it worth the tradeoff? And to whom?
Of course the answer should be dependent on every individual situation, but many pro-Taunt arguers will say, "it's always worth the tradeoff," which I think is an incredibly arrogant stance to take. If you can do your job as a tank in 90~95% of the situations thrown at you w/o Taunt, what exactly is the problem?
Let me contest the 90-95% figure for a moment. Let's assume, for the moment, that figure is correct; a Tank can handle 90-95% of the game well enough without it. Out of that 90-95%, how much of that could they have done better with it? By better I mean the team moving faster, less deaths (ie: using it to pull off a squishy, etc).
Now consider that aggro management is only going to get harder. Why? Well, with the proliferation of Brutes to Heroes (and Tanks to Villains), there are going to be far more clashes than exist now (Inv/Shield Scrappers, and Brutes on the LGTF/ITF).
As for the 5% to 10% that a Tanker can't do reliably, one of those is tanking AVs - which is a pretty classic Tanker role.
So, while a Tanker may be able to handle most situations well enough without it, I think the performance gap between having it an not having it is much larger than 5% to 10%. When the main (but not the only) goal of Tankers is holding aggro, skipping it is a pretty significant hit to that role. (Note: I have high standards for holding aggro.) -
Quote:Here is the reason I think controlling aggro is so important:Originally Posted by dave_p
One thing that hasn't been addressed into the ground, tho a few have touched on it is: why do people (mostly the OP) expect the tank to hold all the aggro? Is your blaster not capable of dealing w/a stray mob or three?
Yes, people can take care of themselves, but things are a lot smoother when they don't have to. Instead of using abilities to keep themselves alive, they're using an extra AoE, focusing on a boss, etc. The ability for squishies to stop worrying about their survival helps speed up the team. I say this from the perspective of a very "aggro concious" Tank and of squishies who have teamed with good and bad Tanks. The difference is quite phenomenal.Quote:Originally Posted by Wicked_Wendy
A good tank on your team makes life easy... AoEs hit for maximum damage because everything in gathered in one spot, everyone takes less damage so less time recovering more time battling, etc
Taunt's usefulness definitely varies from group to group, no arguement.Quote:Originally Posted by dave_p
On a *good* team, esp a farm team, the tank's job should be to soak the alpha and set up a tight grouping for AoEs. The mobs should be cleared out in very short order and Taunt is almost never necessary. In fact, sitting & Taunting is usually an inefficient way of gathering aggro than your taunt aura + tab-switching/punchvoking.
If you're doing a farm and mobs are just melting, yeah, Taunt's usefulness drops. If you're in a team that's leveling (ie: usually not in pimped out builds) that are still getting powers, slotting them out, fighting up level enemies? A bit more useful.
It's kind of the "better to have and not need, than need and not have" deal. I hate wanting to get aggro and having no way of doing so.
I can think of a few reasons why squishies that can solo just fine might have issues with similar number of mobs in a team:Quote:Originally Posted by Wicked_Wendy
But there isn't an AT out there that can't solo so if you can deal with a certain amount of aggro solo why is it suddenly such an issue when the same amount comes at you on a team with a tank?
1) Surprise aggro - When you're solo, you have plenty of time to plan how you're going to handle a spawn. You can use controls/debuffs to maximize your survivability. On a team, this may not be the case. Your debuffs may be on a different target far away from what is attacking you. You may also get hit by surprise by a mob you couldn't see / thought was attacking someone else.
2) Mob difficulty - In teams mobs could also likely to be higher level than what you fight solo. It's also possible to be attacked by a more difficult spawn than you'd see solo (2-3 lieutenants rather than 3 minions, for example).
3) AoEs - You may end up eating extra attacks than you would solo that would disrupt you fighting the same number of mobs. You may be able to handle 3 minions, but when you get nailed with an aoe stun that wasn't even targetting you, it's easy to get thrown off beat.
I'm not saying that squishies insta die when aggro is lost, mind you; I can understand why things are a bit less forgiving on teams compared to solo. (On the other hand, teams with significant buffs can override the above. Two Cold Defenders, for example, puts most PvE into easy mode.) -
Quote:I think it's a bit ironic you laugh about a question to PvP, yet honestly believe this. (Yes, villain side could use more SFs, but I don't think the "neglect" is out of bias or hate, but business sense - bang for the buck and all that.)Originally Posted by Tokyo
My question would have to be: "Why do you let your bias for heroes affect game content and mechanics?"
It's not permanent, but you can get this power from a Day Job Accolade. I forget the exact combination, but it's Graveyard + something else. You can store up to 20 charges.Quote:Originally Posted by Lady Arete
Temp Powers:
Could we get a new permanent temp power or Vet reward power (like we do with Blackwand or Nemesis Staff): The nice Croatoa Spell vs the Fae named Rune of Warding? (I love the animation etc on it) -
Quote:True, but when they relased IOs they also didn't make statements like (paraphrazing Posi from a ComicCon vid) "Going Rogue will provide ways to make yourself a more powerful level 50, with new challenges that will make existing content look like a piece of cake."Originally Posted by Da_Captain
Doubt it, when IOs came out all content that came out after was still based around a SO build.
That doesn't say how much 'hard, new content' there will be in relation to new content with the current difficulty curve (or whether Maelstrom will be easy or hard), but I fully expect there to be content that kind of assumes you have participated somewhat in their nebulous new advacement system.
</speculation> -
I've never played the game, but I'd call them villains that had goals that aligning with the heroes, in this case.
Should they be locked up? That's a harder question to answer. On one hand, their motives weren't noble at all, and if their malice directed at another target it's likely they'd be running from the law. On the other hand, they likely weren't actually doing anything different from Sonic (at least the destroying Robotnic's toys if past games are any indication). Would you lockup Sonic for destruction of property? I'd wager not, so Team Shadow probably shouldn't be.
(Again, haven't played the game, so details that aren't outlined in the OP may change my mind.) -
Quote:That's a very loaded question for two reasons:Originally Posted by Blue_Centurion
What is the best Powersets for tanking AVs? Is it defense based or resistance based? And Why?
1) Not all AVs are equal. AVs can be chumps like Vandal or powerhouses like Recluse. They can deal purely s/l damage like Battlemaiden or purely psi damage like Barracuda, or a mix of damage types like the Honoree (smash/energy/psi). This is important because while Granite can shrug off common damage types, psi will still pierce it.
2) Are we talking SOs, IOs, or "2 billion inf" builds? You can take a set that may be a bit weaker on just SOs that is just stellar with them.
My opinion is that for tanking AVs, mixed sets are the best performers. Sets that are mainly defense with little resistance are more susceptible to unlucky streaks from the RNG. Sets that are primarily resistance based have a smaller (or no) base to build defense off of, making it harder for them to reach survivability of sets with defense. (It's also harder to get +res from buffers than it is to get +def.) Mixed sets have a defense which makes stacking +def from IOs easier while having res/+maxhp to blunt incoming attacks that get through the RNG.
--edit--
The ability to adjust to AV/situation as required is absolutely important. Even the "best" set can be thrown curve balls.Quote:Originally Posted by Rylas
The best powerset is your play style and how well you can adjust it for each AV. -
Quote:Dra'gon doesn't surprise me. His hardest hitting attack is an AoE incinerate with a 12s recharge time. (He also has FE, no idea if his AI is smart enough to use it, though.) He can melt people pretty good if you're not careful. And judging from your team makeup:Originally Posted by Grey Pilgrim
Wasn't expecting so many issues with Dra'gon and the Honoree. I've been on all Tanker TFs before, and haven't had things be quite that slow with AVs before. Though maybe we weren't the best combo for taking them down, I dunno.
It wouldn't surprise me is many of those weren't packing significant defense to avoid the damage. (Invulns tend to focus on S/L/E/NE at the expense of F/C, Ice Armor only gets fire def from EA - not much help vs 1 target, and Dark wouldn't have that much of a def base. Fire would've shrugged off the aoe fire damage, and WP could be in the 35% fire def range from HS, Weave, CJ, and a Steadfast.)Quote:The Team:
inv/mace (2)
fire/fire
fire/db
ice/ice
wp/en
dark/elec
dark/ss
Honoree, though? I suppose the ambush(es) he summons doesn't really help... Well, might help Invuln's defense, but it also increases incoming psi damage... -
Quote:Wait, wut?Originally Posted by Grey Pilgrim
Silly Sarrate, Fiery Melee for Tankers gets Combustion instead of Cremate.
Oh ffs... :\ I completely read that wrong because Tankers are usually listed as Defense/Melee. When listed as Melee/Defense, I automatically swap to Scrapper/Brute mode. Sigh. Well, those nice pretty numbers up there? Yeah, they need to be redone. (Well, I forgot to factor in the 5% miss chance and Scrapper crits anyways. I said it was done fast..)Quote:Originally Posted by Elegost
This coming from my fire/shield tank with 75% rech bonuses (ex hasten). -
Quote:1) That sounds extremely low. Is that with or without counting +dmg (enhancements, AAO, etc)? I ask because last time I checked, I could pump out ~90 dps on Preacher (assuming I'm not spending time Taunting). I would think you would be in the 150-200 dps range.Originally Posted by Elegost
As a numerical base, I could throw down the chain:
(greater fire sword, incinerate, fire sword, scorch)
GFS>INC>FS>SCO
This chain could be run flawlessly while hasten was up (92% of the time). yielding about 97dps (excluding procs)
This chain cycles every 7 1/3 seconds, so it's pretty quick to restart, and a BU starting the chain will last all the way through the next GFS, which is nice. That's fine and all, but I'm sure I could get more out of the set.
Okay, this is going to be a bit rough since I'm trying to do it fast-ish (and I don't have all the info), but here we go:Quote:Originally Posted by Elegost
(Sarrate can destroy my math if he so chooses, I could be wrong. I don't do this often.)
DPS Unenhanced: 70.33901638Code:Cast AT Base Dmg** GFS 2.33 2.508 176.2828928 Inc 1.67 1.848 156.4 FS 1.33 1.584 97.363616 Sco 1.00 1.188 71.33 TOTAL 7.128 501.3765088
DPS Enhanced + AAO (1 targ): 150.789266377
DPS Enhanced + AAO + BU (30s rech): 174.2356051730
** Fire Melee's extra dot isn't just an 80% chance to apply the whole thing, but an 80% to continue. So each dot (except Incin and Scorch) could have anywhere between 0-4/5 ticks. So the formula I used (taken from the boards, don't have a link atm) is:
Multiply that by the damage per tick and voila. (This lowers the damage done compared to just doing TotalDotDamage*0.8.)Code:H = % chance to proc (ie: 0.8) N = Number of ticks ((1 - H ^ (N+1)) / (1 - H)) - 1
I don't have time to crunch out this chain, but I do have another option - get Cremate into your above chain instead of FS or Scorch. Unless CoD is out of date (possible), Cremate is up there with GFS in terms of DPA. Unlike most other fire melee dots, it appears to be guaranteed to hit with all of them. If true, you should definitely have it in your chain. Added bonus, the chain would be shorter and easier to remember.Quote:Originally Posted by Elegost
(...)but I'm sure I could get more out of the set.
INC>GFS>FS>INC>SCO>FS>GFS>SCO>FS>(repeat) (BU, for reference, would last through the second FS)
This chain runs right at 15 seconds, and pushes about 104dps. Definitely better.
Keep in mind, however, that this is only considering solo play. If I have any outside recharge buffs I'll need to figure out a better chain to get the most out of set.
(You should have the recharge for it.)
-
Quote:Keep in mind that right now you can slot acc/dmg x2 into a power, but only if you choose an acc/dmg from two different sets. In other words, you can slot acc/dmg from Set A and another acc/dmg from Set B, but you cannot slot two acc/dmg from Set C. So that acts as a bit of a limiter to what you can slot into powers. If generic double/triple enhancers were made, I don't know if those restrictions would work.Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Well, isn't the solution to that to have enhancements that don't have set bonuses to worry about, and in return come with reduced rarity and/or cost? I mean, it would seem to make sense.
Whether or not the devs would have a problem with that, I don't know, but I figured I'd throw that out there. -
Quote:I think Common IOs are the way enhancers should have worked from the beginning. I always thought the "you get weaker as you level up because your enhancers degrade in performance" was dumb mechanic... especially when they turned red and stopped working. Sure, there's no "ahh, this fresh set of SOs feels so good," but there's also no "dangit, I keep missing because my enhancers are-2" - the consistency is a win to me.Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
If I were going to just stuff a bunch of enhancements in there and never upgrade them, then what's the point of having them in the first place?
As for me, I aim to slot characters with lvl25 generic IOs at 22 and never worry about them again until sets. The first set can be a little annoying because of how many there are (and I'm terrible at planning ahead), but after that, it's just crafting up 1-2 enhancements every few levels. Easy!
I tend to plan out IO builds for all my characters and just slowly work towards that goal. Some characters I never put a single IO in because I realize they're not for me. Others I'll get half done and think "close enough" and stop. So far, only one character has reached completion. (It's 1 IO away, but I'm not spending 2 billion on an IO that I may not even need, depending on how the "end game" system works.) -
Quote:You consider 1.17 / 1.32 seconds is a long time to animate, or are you saying it's a long time to animate considering the benefits?Originally Posted by Umbral
...because it's single target and takes so much time to animate...
-
Quote:Indeed, I used it for both purposes while playing my DM/Invuln **. I find it's a lot more flexible than Parry is. Don't get me wrong, Parry is very strong where it helps, but useless where it doesn't. I used ToF a lot when dealing with psi mobs, for example.Originally Posted by Catwhoorg
I use ToF in 2 ways. I don't have a DM at 50 (yet) so these are both during the leveling process.
1) Ghetto hold. Use it on one critter, whilst finishing another. As you are not attacking that critter, its nearly as good as a hold and available for a scrapper much much earlier.
2) Debuff. 11.25% -tohit, 20s duration so it is stackable without slotting. When leveling that makes a tough critter (such as an EB) miss significantly more often.
The most shining case I can think of was using ToF to perma-fear an Rularuu Overseer while I cleared out a mob or two (before the new difficulty slider) and went back to kill it.
So while you can build in such a way that you'll rarely need it, it can still help out for corner cases like that.
** That character was the first one I ever IOed (so it's a terrible build!), and hasn't been respecced since I9/10, so he doesn't utilize any of the new sets / modified ones since then. I was planning a build for him, but it would've required dropping ToF, which I really didn't want to do. It made me hesitate long enough that I salvaged several of the IOs I was saving for him and used them on my Tank instead. :P -
There are a few things in here that I'd like to comment on:
Quote:Originally Posted by Zombie Man
Nothing aggravates me more than watching a Tanker standing in one spot Taunting a range-using foe over and over again with that range-using foe continuing to stand far away because...
IT'S A RANGE-USING FOE -- IT'S NEVER GOING TO COME RUNNING TO YOU NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES YOU TAUNT IT SO STOP TAUNTING IT AND DO SOMETHING USEFUL LIKE GOING OVER TO IT AND HITTING IT!!1) Just because a Tanker is Taunting a ranged foe and not engaging doesn't mean they're doing anything wrong. I would say it's not something I'm shy about doing. When I have a group of 10-15 mobs around me and 1-2 plucking away at range, I'm not moving 10-15 mobs for the sake of one more. I'll Taunt it and keep the 10-15 I have in place. Why? If I move, I risk losing aggro of what I already have. I've also seen mobs that were previously in 'melee mode' switch to 'range mode.' End result? A mob is still shooting from range. Things can get messier with aoe debuffs (anchors/pseudo pets, etc) because moving would break up the debuff cluster. It makes a lot more sense to just taunt a few mobs than upset the layout of the battle.Quote:Originally Posted by Zombie Man
I think after six years of playing almost exclusively on PuGs, I've paid enough attention.
And you do know that the -range debuff attached to Taunt is relatively recent, no?
And as the actual words I typed explicitly referenced, I am indeed talking about those Tankers that keep Taunting the same ranged toon that's not switching over to melee.
Quote:Originally Posted by Zombie Man
If you want a tightly packed herd, my Dark Defender can do that better than any Tanker with an AoE debuff anchor and Tar Patch and then either hiding or backing out far enough. Even the ranged-shooting foes will run into the patch.2) I don't agree that a Dark Miasma character can do it better than a Tanker. The example you gave required a corner, which aren't always present. (It's great when they are, no doubt!) In an open battle a Dark Miasmist cannot move ranged foes into an AoE cluster. They also don't deal with knockback that well. (It messed up Tar Patch, Darkest Night, Fluffy, and Fearful Stare - well, recasting it.) The pro of a Tanker is their -range can actively nudge AI to move closer. It may not be melee range close, but it sets a limit to how far mobs will be.Quote:Originally Posted by Zombie Man
But, to the general thread: Here is a video of how a D3 can herd a group into debuffed insignifcance. If a team would wait for me to round them up like they would for a Tanker to herd, then it would be the same result. As you watch the video, remember, I'm a single Defender with an aggro cap full of foes gunning for me. I have their full attention. If there were some blasters on the team, that spawn would be gone in 3 seconds instead of 15.
I also object to the use of "any." I'm very leery of the term because it means "there is no exception." While you may do a better job at keeping the team than PUG Tankers, I don't agree that you'd be better than "any Tanker." That's a bold statement. (No offense meant to your skills, mind you.)
3) People aren't saying "not locking down aggro 100% of the time is useless!" They're just saying "that's not tanking." It's like asking for the best buff/debuff set for protecting a team and having someone say "A Tanker because they can prevent a team from getting attacked in the first place!" While true, it doesn't answer the question asking for a buff/debuff set.Quote:Originally Posted by Zombie Man
Now, while herding a spawn into a tightly pack group on a Tar Patch won't satisfy the usual whine of "That's not Tanking because you're not locking down aggro and I might actually take some damage so therefore, you're useless to me!", I can also throw about 100% -ToHit on that tightly packed group and Immobilize them so that it's unlikely they'll ever hit you or run up to you, and if they do, I got that covered with -Damage and a powerful AoE Heal.
Note, I have a Dark/Rad/Dark Defender and a Dark/Rad/Soul Corruptor, so I'm familiar with the sets you're using and not speaking from ignorance. Don't get me wrong, they're great sets and can provide great team survivability. I'm not doubting that at all. I just wouldn't call it tanking. -
Brutes are the closest analogue because all of their secondaries (sans EA) have taunt auras and all of their attacks have taunt effects added to them. They have the same threat modifier as Tankers (4.0) and the same taunt durations. A few differences between Brutes and Tanks:
1) Tankers have Gauntlet, so their single target attacks (from their secondary) have splash taunt. This helps hold aggro a bit, but I think it's a little overstated.
2) Tanker Taunt has -range applied to all 5 foes is hits, which makes it an excellent tool for clumping mobs together. I've heard that Brute Taunt only applies -range to the primary target. (I have not confirmed this.)
3) Brutes obviously do more damage. What isn't obvious about this is it increases their threat generation significantly. If a Brute and Tanker are playing the exact same (Taunting with the same frequency, same duration, etc), the Brute will win due to dealing much more damage.
Some Scrappers can hold aggro decently, namely those with strong taunt auras (Invuln, Shield), but they don't quite compare to Tankers/Brutes. They have a lower threat mod (3.0), their attacks don't taunt, and their Confront is a shorter duration/single target version of Brute/Tanker Taunt.
Other sets/ATs can generate a lot of threat, but they can't hold/control it like the above can. (Taunt effects are pretty much strong enough to override anything but other taunt effects.) -
Quote:It's one of my favorite sound effects on my WP/Fire Tank.Originally Posted by Bill Z Bubba
My fire/shield scrapper is this guy. I've actually come to like the fire sword scream.
-
Quote:Originally Posted by Rylas
Here's a question, is it possible that two tanks can be aggro capped off of the same mobs?
Example: If two tanks are in a group of 34 mobs, and both their auras are hitting the same 10 people, would that mean the most they'll maintain aggro on is 24 (10+7+7)?
Or does that mean one tank has the 10 and the other tank will have to rely on other methods to get aggro? If this is the case, even with taunt, it would take quite some time to have aggro of all 34 mobs for both tanks. Because taking out their aura as a means for grabbing aggro (because aura range would be full of already claimed mobs from the other tank), means you have to wait for taunt to recharge, and for gauntlet to take effect. Granted, the other tank could try jumping around, and that would work, but this would still take time.
Either way, a blaster in this situation would still need to practice using their head. Correct?
Don't know for sure, but I suspect only mobs that are actively targeting you count against the target cap.
Having said that, if they're targetting the same mobs, standing close to one another, etc, then their auras/Gaunlet are likely hitting the same mobs.
Ex:
Tanker A has mobs 1-15 actively attacking him.
Tanker B has mobs 16-20 actively attacking him, with taunt effects on mobs 5-15.
Mobs 20-30 have no taunt effects on them and are free to attack whoever they want.
Neither Tank in the above example is aggro capped, despite there being enough mobs to do so. -
Quote:"Samurai farm" means absolutely nothing to me, sorry. I'd assume Katana/Something, but I have no clue.Originally Posted by Blue_Centurion
Yeah, I am slightly embarrassed to say, but it was an AE PUG team. It was a Samurai farm, and it was cranked to a serious level difference. And I may have only waited 5 seconds, but seriously, everyone looked engaged, and it does take me a while to line up that narrow Full Auto cone for best effect.
Also, the "serious level difference" makes tanking even harder. I'm just going to assume +4, so correct me if I'm wrong. At that large of a level difference, mobs are only being effected at 48% normal rate. This includes damage, debuffs, and taunt duration. So, a normal taunt from an aura is 13.5s (longer for Inv/Shield) and pulses at 2s for damage auras, 1s for autohits like Inv/AAO/RttC, and 0.5s for Ice's CE. If it was a damage aura, not only does it pulse less often, but it hits self often. Anyways, take a 13.5s taunt, cut that to 48% and you get a 6.48s taunt. If it pulses every 2s, that means it's down to 4.48s remaining if it misses. Not a lot of room for error.
It also means that if they move / reposition, it's more likely they'll lose aggro. (Repositioning is a tricky thing. If you never move, other mobs never get hit by your aura. If you move too far/frequently, then the taunt effect can drop off. Especially when fighting higher con foes.)
This isn't a Tanker specific problem. Give a player a good player a gimped Blaster, and they'll make it work. Give a bad player a FOTM Blaster, and they'll faceplant constantly. Me, I'm a terrible Blaster player. I just can't get into them, despite having a pretty good understanding of CoX mechanics - they're just too fragile for me.Quote:Originally Posted by Blue_Centurion
What is really frustrating is that the people who seem to know what they are talking about tactically run whatever they are given pretty good. Give them a 1st level tank with no taunt and they will still try to make the most of it. Give someone with no game experience or a stubborn streak a 4 billlion 50 and they can be of little use on a team. And you cannot say anything to them that seems to help. It just makes it worse somehow. -
Too many variables to even begin guessing what happened. What level were the mobs? What kind of mobs were they? Did they prefer melee or range? Were the Tanks standing on top of one another? Were the Tankers running their taunt aura? Heck, which auras were they? (If it was WP, it basically doesn't count. :P) Etc.
I said that Tankers can hold aggro under normal circumstances without Taunt, not that all of them can. Likewise, a Tanker can have Taunt but use it poorly (ie: only using Taunt on their target, not spreading it around, etc) and still lose aggro. Taunt itself doesn't simply guarantee holding aggro - that's good play. -
Quote:I'm sure you know about DPA, the stat basically measuring what you're talking about (especially since you use it later), just make sure you factor in 'ArcanaTime' when doing so. In short:Originally Posted by _Ryxx_
I don't think you guys really understand ... Maybe it's just a powergamer thing, but It's not simply about being uber, (Well I guess in the long run, it is) it's about knowing what powers do the most damage in the time it takes to activate, which helps you choose what attacks to take or not to take.
FinalCastTime = (ROUNDUP(CastTime / 0.132) + 1) * 0.132
So, a power with a cast time of 1:
FinalCastTime = (ROUNDUP(1 / 0.132) + 1) * 0.132
FinalCastTime = (ROUNDUP(7.5757..) + 1) * 0.132
FinalCastTime = (8 + 1) * 0.132
FinalCastTime = 9 * 0.132
FinalCastTime = 1.188
Also note that additional fire dots (like those found on Fire Blast) aren't calculated right in MIDs, last time I checked. They are not an 80% chance to apply the ful dot. It's an 80% chance per tick. There was a formula for that, but I don't have that with me at work. I'll try to remember to post it here later, if you'd like.
Keep in mind that attack chains are most useful in situations where you can use them consecutively for long periods of time. AoEs by nature are mowing down swaths of weak creatures that don't stand up to successive AoEs very well. I'm no Blaster, but I swear everything I've heard is that Fire Breath is a must have. It's much bigger than the melee version (Breath of Fire) and hits harder. A friend of mine could two shot +1/2 mobs with Aim+BU+Fireball+Fire Breath. (He had 20-30% bonus damage in the build, iirc.)Quote:Originally Posted by _Ryxx_
Example: My most expensive toon is Frosty Nibblets, a fire/fire Blaster. 5 purple sets, 3 Lotgs, and lots of other goodies give him 115% recharge before hasten. Though he's a walking mob melter, I still want to know how to do the most single target damage that I can. Against AVs, do I include burn in my attack chain? Since Flares has a higher DPA than Fire blast, do I actually TAKE flares over it? What attacks should I use for an aoe attack chain? Should I break down and get Breath of fire? How bad is combustion, really?
If you want a sigle target attack chain, your best bet would be asking on the Scrapper forum. They're the best at churning out those things. (I know the mechanics behind their calculations, but I'm not as good at just making chains. I tend to use floating chains as well, since I play characters that have to interrupt chains a lot (Tankers/Defenders/etc).) If you do post there, however, make it clear in the subject it's for a blaster, and prepare to have your build disected. Not saying it's bad, but they will try to tweak it (especially if said tweaks would net you a better chain).
Indeed!Quote:Originally Posted by _Ryxx_
Also it helps your time on speed runs >.> -
Quote:Well, any adjusting that Tankers need to do won't be that much different than adjusting they've had to do now in coop task forces. The two differences now will be the level at which they will interact (much, much lower) and frequency (much higher).Originally Posted by Godpants
I don't think tanks will have to adjust much at all. Although by no means identical, scrappers and brutes are similar, and tanks have been running with scrappers since day one. By the same token, if your blaster has been on a tankless team with a scrapper, you'll have a reasonable idea of what it would be like with a brute.
The two things Tankers will be doing is having another AT to compete with eating the alphas (Scrappers can do this, but Brutes are pretty encouraged to just from a mechanics standpoint) and, as I've mentioned quite frequently, fighting for aggro.
Sorry, but that isn't true. A 13.5s taunt (standard for taunt auras) without any damage at all, is simulating around 13,500 damage. All taunt auras do at least that every 2 seconds. If a target is actually taunted, a Blaster really can't pull aggro **. There have been tests done where a Tanker would stand next to mobs doing nothing but running their aura, and a Blaster couldn't steal aggro. If you are pulling aggro from a Tank, it's because that mob wasn't taunted (by auras/gauntlet, not Taunt the power) to begin with.Quote:Originally Posted by Blue_Centurion
Sailboat, it comes down to two things. First is threat level. When a Tank is not taunting the threat level can drop below what a Blaster has going, or what a Brute can agro. I know alll about damage auruas. Those are meant to hold the group around the tank while the Tank taunts those that seem to be on the fence about who they should wail on.
This isn't hard to explain, either:
AoEs prefer hitting targets close to the center. Auras can hit 10 targets, that means you need to hit 7 more in order to stay aggro capped. So your aura will hit the 10 targets closest to you. (Remember, 8 foot radius, so you may not even be hitting that many.) Gauntlet, likewise, prefers targets closest to their target, which is likely closest to the Tank, which are already being taunted by their aura. In this way, Gauntlet can be wasted. (Keep in mind that most people, not all, tend to lock onto one target, so who Gauntlet is hitting doesn't change much.) Same goes for standard AoEs like Footstomp.
You can do better by changing targets frequently and repositioning frequenly (to spread the aura), but these are traits I don't see very often at all. So it's not that Taunt is required to hold aggro off Blasters, rather, better play is.
Now taunt capable characters (Brutes/aura Scrappers), on the other hand, you need Taunt to hold aggro off them. There is just no way to do it without.
** Note: There are some extra parameters to the taunt mechanics we don't know about, one of which being "AI Preferences." So it is possible that they have an AI Preference that prefers beating on Blasters enough to ignore Tankers. I find the existance of an AI with a setting set that high to be very unlikely.
Note, that even though I'm a strong proponent of Taunt, I won't go so far as to say it's required or kick a Tanker from a team if they don't have it***. Besides, in cases without other taunt capable characters (pure hero team, no Inv or Shield Scrappers, no AVs/GMs), Gauntlet and auras can be enough. It's all those corner cases that are increasing in frequency and potency where Taunt becomes more and more valuable.Quote:Originally Posted by Blue_Centurion
But primarily it is deeply personal I guess. I have played Tanks, and I have a couple of them at 50. I have played lots of Brutes, and I got multiple 50s of those (some with the exact same build....don't ask.) Now I am starting to seriously run Blasters, having 50d my main one a week ago. I say this not to show how many 50s I have, but just to let you know I have thought about it, and understand Tanks and Brutes.
I feel like tankers who don't take taunt either do not understand the role Tanks were designed for on a team, or understand that but are trying to push the build into a different archtype. Either way, not an individual that I want to count on for tanking. I would prefer a world-wise brute that knows they don't have taunt, and tries to compensate for it with playstyle. Much better that than a Tank who is unhappy with playing the build.
*** Okay, for something like the STF I might - holding aggro on +4 AVs with just Gauntlet? Unreliable, to say the least. -
Quote:This is a bit misleading because it is mixing two different representations of the damage cap together. The numbers aren't wrong, just in consistent.Originally Posted by macskull
Brute: 750
Blaster/Corruptor/Stalker: 500
Everything else: 400
Brute: +750% / 850% total
Blaster/Corruptor/Scrapper/Stalker: +400% / 500% total
Everything else: +300% / 400% total
The reason those are separate is all players start dealing 100% damage. So a Scrapper without enhancements deals 100% damage. A Scrapper with SOs gets +95% damage, dealing 195% normal. If they activate Build Up, they are now at +195% damage, dealing 295% normal.
Also, UberGuy's link is an excellent tool. -
Quote:I try to point out corner cases to people are aware that "X" isn't always true. I also know what you're referring to here, but if a corner case had a corner case, that's basically what it is. You're not wrong, but I'd say it's extremely rare.Originally Posted by New Dawn
I'd say that they can completely control some situations. I can't see a tauntless tanker ever beating the best tankers with taunt in a tanking competition. The tauntless ones would be dead.
Incidently, when I was leveling up a Tanker to try playing without Taunt, it was an Ice/SS as well. Only made it up to lvl30 until I snapped and picked it up.Quote:Originally Posted by RosaQuartz
I'm currently leveling up an Ice/SS tank, and when I started I thought I'd try it without Taunt.
Finally ended up taking it at 32. I don't think I "need" it, but there were plenty of times that I "wanted" it.
I think Taunt's value has increased since those times (ignoring the -range debuff) just because of the proliferation of taunt effects. (More Scrappers have it, and Tankers run into Brutes now with the frequency increasing with GR. Tankers can't compete in the threat arms race without Taunt.)