Sarrate

[ QUOTE ]
I honestly don't see what Masterminds give up for all this

[/ QUOTE ]

Living through their pets. You may not see it, but I sure did. I like to joke that "MasterMinds are the most powerful AT... until they're not."

Any AI effecting powers (as you mentioned Burn, or Caltrops, etc) give the pets fits. AoEs in general are especially nasty against them (more-so in bodyguard since they're taking normal aoe damage and some from you being hit) as are controls (lower tier minions are controlled for longer periods of time due to the purple patch, for example). Minion AI can cause them to do stupid things (ranged pets running into melee, melee pets spamming ranged attacks, chasing runners into mobs, etc).

Many of the Villain's original SFs have final missions that are really rough on them, too.

Tarikoss - Lava pits (Burn) and tight passages where you want/need minions to stand in specific areas, but they won't always listen.
Silver Mantis - A gigantic sea platform with tight footing where pets not standing where you want can cause unwanted aggro.
Renault - A final encounter with massive AoE knockback that scatters your pets to the wind and causes them fits (I believe the water spouts have the Avoid attribute on them like Burn)


Here is a video I stumbled across a while ago while rummaging through youtube. That fight took far longer than it needed to because of a combination of factors (controls, AI wonkiness, pets not focus firing in bodyguard mode, etc). For example, a Tank in that video could have popped a few BFs (for the fears) and went to town on the boss. A Master Mind can't exactly do that (since BFs only effect them and not their pets) and if they focused on the boss then they wouldn't be able to benefit from bodyguard.


I'm not saying Master Minds aren't a powerful AT; they can aoe farm, solo AVs/GMs, and out survive many squishies. However, they're not without their quirks that can be absolutely maddening at times.

[ QUOTE ]
Sarrate would you mind if I pull some of your charts in as well?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all, go for it!

[ QUOTE ]
I was thinking something similar but much more simpler: every tanker gets a passive Leadership skill that does not affect self.

This leadership skill would roll up all 3 Leadership powers into one innate power that costs no endurance but suppresses when mezed, with slightly better numbers:

[/ QUOTE ]

Starsman: My idea started like that (but only buffing Tanks), but evolved. I thought it was interesting/clever and decided to share. Yours is a bit more elegant, but violates one of my premises:

Tankers are fine as the only Tank.

Your idea would make Tankers better. Now, what could be done instead is to make the Tank only have a passive power that targets allies (but not himself). It would buff the team (if a mode is set) and set the mode if the target was a Tanker.

Solo or as the only Tank, nothing would change. When grouped with another Tank, they would start eminating their leadership buffs. That is a simpler solution, but it may (or may not) be too much.

[ QUOTE ]
Until they 'fix' fulcrum shift (which, like rage, is likely never to happen) the idea of +dambuff seems shortsighted for an offensive tank-style buff, particularly if the goal is stacking them on a team.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Even as small as -5 or -10% would make a bigger impact on team play, and if it was set so that the same effect didn't stack from the same tanker (ie: I combustion, gauntlet, then fsc, re-gauntlet, but no stack) you'd basically be getting a damage boost to hitting anything that is already taunted on the tanker.

[/ QUOTE ]

G_Tanker: The only time that really becomes problematic is if teamed with a Kin OR you're a Shield/DM or Shield/SS Tank. I understand the concern, though.

I didn't go with -res because, as above, it would effect solo and single Tank teams. I also don't think it's possible to make the res debuff not self stack, but stack from different Tankers. (If it can be done, I've never seen it.)

[ QUOTE ]
Right off, I disagree. I think blasters and controllers have worse END issues than tanks do. For the most part, the tanker END issue isn't because of the AT - it's because of no Stamina and lousy enhancements - but everyone has the same problem.

As for stacking on teams, the situations where they don't stack well are a failing of the PLAYERS, not the ARCHETYPE. Multiple tanks can be extremely effective if they know what they are doing and work as a team.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ironblade: A Blaster and Tanker running out of endurance are two completely separate things. For a Blaster, 100 endurance translates into dealing ~1203 damage base or ~3127.28 dmg slotted (3 dmg, 1 end - not counting Defiance which would increase that number). For a Tanker, 100 endurance is equal to ~855.5 dmg base or ~2223.8 dmg slotted. The Blaster has enough endurance for ~1.2 even con bosses at lvl50, the Tanker doesn't even have enough endurance to finish one.

A Blaster very well may run out of endurance very fast, but that's after dealing damage and finishing an encounter. A Tanker not only deals damage slower (30% or more with equal attacks) but they also can run out of endurance before completing tasks a Blaster could. In other words, the Blaster is over the finish line (or in the next race) before running out of end, the Tanker is still in the first.

(Controllers are trickier because they have three sets that provide endurance, pets, and Containment upping their efficiency. I only have one serious Controller, and she doesn't get much playtime.)


Personally, I'm not an especially picky player (for most things). If someone wants to run missions with 2-3 Tanks, that's fine with me. Having said that, I've never been in a situation where I've said "I wish we had another Tanker." Instead, it's either more buffs/debuffs or more damage. Never "more Tankers." Yes, Tankers can coordinate and leapfrog each other, but I can keep the pace just fine as the only Tank. When the current group is almost dead I head to the next. I don't need a second Tank for that.

Another avenue that could be taken is to make content that shines with multiple Tankers, but I'm not sure how that'd be done with the way mitigation currently scales...

[ QUOTE ]
What would you recommend for people who disagree with your postulates?

[/ QUOTE ]

Talen_Lee: Feel free to, I only ask that you explain why. Criticism can be utilized, /jranger cannot.

[ QUOTE ]
Ok. That's a long enough post for a threadjack. Sorry

[/ QUOTE ]

Dersk: No apology needed. I agree with you about min/max teams (that's a lot broader in scope than just Tankers, though). It may not make multiple Tanekrs a staple, but it would lessen the grumbling a bit.

The ideas in that thread about Tankers being dangerous to entities not targetting them was interesting, I admit. (It was also explored a bit in AoC.) Two things:

1) My understanding could be off, but I don't think there's a way for an attack to check the target's target to make sure it's attacking the Tank (or not).

2) It would requrie rebalancing of some encounters. For example, if Tankers couldn't threaten Hamidon, he'd cut through the rest of the raid very fast. (Honestly, no matter what the Tanker did, he wouldn't be a threat to Hamidon.) Same idea for Lord Recluse in the STF or the Freedom Phalanx in the LRSF.

[ QUOTE ]
The Tanker toggles idea is ultimately a bit too fiddly and AT specific

[/ QUOTE ]

DrMike2000: Yep, it is very fiddly and specific. I probably should have titled the thread "brainstorming" instead of "tackling," oh well.

[ QUOTE ]
So... paladins? Been a while since I played WOW, mind you, but same effect.

[/ QUOTE ]

G_Tanker: Sorry, I wasn't clear. It would be a self only buff for the Tanker. For example, solo or soo tanking: no benefit (sans the end reduction tactic). Two Tankers: Self Buff x1. Three Tankers: self buff x2, etc.

As the title suggests, I see two main problems with Tankers:

1) Their endurance efficiency
2) They don't stack well on teams

Their damage is fine for soloing (while they have endurance) and a single one is useful to groups. The problem starts when multiple Tanks are in the same team. Now, what could be done to modify end efficiency while also making more than one attractive to a group?

An idea struck me today while reading another thread, have Tanks buff one another in some way. This wouldn't modify soloing / solo tanking, but would make multiple Tanks less of a turn off. That simple premise evolved into a form of "Tanker Tactics."

Short Version
The basic gist is that Tankers would have multiple (mutually exclusive) Tanker Tactics toggles available, each one would provide different benefits while other Tankers are around.

Gritty Details
The Tanker Tactics toggles would simply enable modes on the Tanker similar to how Kheldian Forms work (note the "Enable Bright Nova mode" line). This would flag the Tanker as being in a certain mode.

Tankers would also get an auto power like Kheldian Cosmic Balance that targets teammates, but each buff would check "if target is a Tanker" AND "if in Mode_Whatever."

With that framework in place, we can create whatever Tanker Tactics we want. For example, we could create a 'Tanker Tactic: Offense' which would set an offensive mode. The passive would then give Tankers a +X% damage buff for each Tanker in range.

Another idea I had was Tanker Tactic: Control, which would boost the control effects of their powers by Y%. (Could make this boost Taunt, as well, to help the "main tank" hold aggro.)

Where does endurance fit into this whole mess? Well, there would be a single Tanker Tactic that could be used solo and wasn't modified by the presence of other Tankers. All it would do is provide a static +Z% (I'm thinking somewhere between 10%-15%) end reduction. This Tactic would allow for Tankers to solo with fewer end concerns, but they could switch if off in a multiple Tanker team in favor of other benefits if they want.


(If so desired, you could create a 'Tanker Tactic: Debuff' that enables a "Mode_Debuff," then the passive enables a "Mode_Debuff_Enabled" when "Mode_Debuff" is active and a Tanker is in range. Then Tanker attacks could then, say, have a Regen debuff that only fires when "Mode_Debuff_Enabled" is active. That's getting pretty ugly, though. :P)

Potential Problems
<ul type="square">[*]Complexity, not to put too fine a point on it. It may not be the most intuitive for someone to pickup. ("I'm running TT: Offense, why aren't I dealing more damage" when solo, for example.) It might also hit servers a bit too hard.[*]Conceptually, I'm a little hard pressed to come up with a good reason for this to be added.[/list]
If I admit this concept has a couple failings, why post it? Two reasons:

1) People may be able to improve upon.
2) If the above isn't possible, then to generate ideas. I won't be heartbroken if this is never implemented, but it may turn the gears in someone else's head that will lead to a more elegant solution.

So what say you, the Tanker community?

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the explaination Sarrate. I'm not exactly sure on the deal with defense. Like why is 42.5 % way better than 38%? I always hear people talk like there are certain magig numbers in defense that make a huge difference to survivabilty. I also here people say at a certain point it's just too much defense and a waste. Care to try and explain to a lamen how it works? or maybe just provide a link? Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very, very simple example (even con minion):

30% def = enemy has 20% chance to hit
40% def = enemy has 10% chance to hit
45% def = enemy has 5% chance to hit

Okay, so going from 30% to 40% def decreased the chance to hit from 20% to 10%. Instead of being hit 20 / 100 times, you'll get hit 10 / 100 times. That means it will take twice as many swings to get hit as before. In short, it doubled your survivability.

Now going from 40% to 45% def decreased the chance to hit from 10% to 5%. instead of being hit 10 / 100 times, you'll get hit 5 / 100 times. Again, that means it will take twice as many hits as before. This doubled your survivability again. (This is four times as survivable as 30% def.)

(As another point of reference, it takes going from 0% to 25% def to double your survivability the first time, 12.5% def to double it again (37.5% total), 6.25% to double it again (43.75% total. Etc.)

As you can see (assuming I explained it well enough) approaching 45% def increases your survivability exponentially.


(This works against mobs with higher accuracy too, be it from rank or higher level. I used an even con minion since it would be simpler.)

[ QUOTE ]
What I hate about Tanks is they are the ONLY At that adds nothing if you bring in a second one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of the issues Tankers do have, Tanker stacking is one.

If you simply give them extra damage, you potentially boost solo effectiveness, team effectiveness with only one Tanker, and team effectiveness with multiple Tankers (the situation you're trying to solve). Unless Tankers are under performing in the other two areas, the Tank stacking issue should revolve around that one circumstance.


This discussion has given me an idea, though. Hmmm....

Old screenshot, but it shows Maul critting.

[ QUOTE ]
What can a well speced Tanker do?

[/ QUOTE ]

They can take out AVs, as well. AV soloing is less about AT and more about powersets. Sure, a Rad/Sonic Defender can liquefy AVs (or GMs). How about my Sonic/Elec Defender? Not so much. Can a Stone/Ice solo an AV? No, but a Shield/DM can beat some Scrappers at the task.

There is also the option to build for survival, too... (I ran that test over 30 mins, completely hands off.)
[edit: I think that's 12 of them packed in there. You can tell because the tohit debuff isn't effecting all of them. (See the tohit rolls.)]

[edit 2: Grammar.]

[ QUOTE ]
In group play they will start seeing buffs which gives them tanker values. Any tankers here have trouble staying alive in groups? Any brutes in here have trouble building fury in groups when you are the primary target?

[/ QUOTE ]

Inquizitor: Depends on the Brute, support, and what you're fighting. A support heavy team? No. A 'normal' team that isn't heavy on support? Yes. Also, I have seen Tankers with survivability issues.

Brutes are much more open to being power gamed than Tankers, but if the time / effort isn't taken (either via IOs or optimal group makeup) they don't compare to Tanker survivability.

(For the record, I don't think Brutes should have Tanker res/hp caps.)

[ QUOTE ]
Tankers have a .85 base with a 400% cap.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shadow_Fire: Tankers are 0.8 base.

[ QUOTE ]
What are the scrappers and stalker numbers, Out of curiosity

[/ QUOTE ]

Inquizitor:
Tanks - 0.8, 400% cap (+300% over base)
Brutes - 0.75, 850% cap (+750% over base)
Stalker - 1.0, 500% cap (+400% over base)
Scrapper - 1.125, 500% cap (+400% over base)

Note: That doesn't include Stalker crits (out of Hide, 10% all the time with an additional 3% per teammate within 30 ft) or Scrapper crits (5% vs minions, 10% vs higher rank).

[ QUOTE ]
I understand why your saying not to depend on the tohit debuff for softcapping....makes sense. I was wondering though, when figuring tohit into your defense, does 5% tohit debuff = 5% defense?

[/ QUOTE ]

A 5% tohit debuff and a 5% def buff provide identical survivability boosts on an unresisting target. The last two words are the problem - any enemy higher than even con will resist the tohit debuff:

<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre>Lvl Effectiveness
+0 100%
+1 90%
+2 80%
+3 65%
+4 48%
+5 30%</pre><hr />

There are also enemies that resist tohit debuffs, most notably being AVs (who will resist 85% of it, on top of the purple patch).

Also, as mentioned, RttC's tohit debuff will only effect enemies in melee range, and only up to 10 at a time. If you're fighting more than 10, they will remain uneffected. (Also note, that above 10 won't be giving RttC any extra fuel, either.)

So when you're getting close to the soft cap, the tohit debuff does make a difference, but it's definitely not 1:1 with defense in actual play.

As someone with 453 messages in my inbox (after I started cleaning it... and filling it up again), thanks a ton. I was not looking forward to making another huge push to clean it up before Tuesday at all.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That's because Khelds are chained to the 'ideal team' setup more than any other AT in the game. To reach anything like their full potential, they MUST have as much AT variety on their team as possible. They get nothing from being around other Khelds.

Replace their inherent, and I think Kheldian performance and popularity would improve in a dramatic fashion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fixed recently - they get Recharge Reduction now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, they get 10% recharge resistance (makes rech debuffs less painful) not a recharge reduction (makes powers cycle faster). Better than nothing, but nowhere near as good as what they get from some other ATs imo.

The person in the Spines video has a point... make with the Earth Assault video!

[ QUOTE ]
Here is a clip from the discussion panel. 10 megs, go easy on my bandwidth and please do NOT hotlink to it. Download and move on thanks

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm, we'll be able to make our 50s even more powerful... with new challenges that make current content look easy... O.o I really wonder how they're planning to pull that off, but I look forward to finding out.

[edit: Ahh, misheard. They said that's what people want and what they're focusing a lot of dev effort on - Posi didn't say we'd get exactly that though.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You can have up to five of them in any one build before their bonuses stop applying.

However additional 7.5% bonuses from sets are not counted with the LotG IOs so theoretically you can have up to five of those bonuses as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

LotG: +Recharge doesn't count against the rule of 5?

[/ QUOTE ]

What's important for the "rule of five" is the name of the bonus. You can only have five "large recharge" bonuses. Luck of the Gambler has its own name, "Luck of the Gambler: Recharge" (or something similar. Since it's not the same as the name for other 7.5% recharge bonuses, they stack.

In other words, you can have five LotGs and five 7.5% set bonuses for a total of +75% rech.

[ QUOTE ]
Yeh I always thought Toxic and Psy were pretty much the unavoidable hazards in the game for everyone.

[/ QUOTE ]

Toxic and psi are pretty crumby damage types in PvE. When those two sets are resisted, they're resisted very strongly.

Using Culex's Resistance Spreadsheet, I made a post comparing enemy resistance at varying level ranges. I'm just reposting it here:

[ QUOTE ]
I went through Culex's spreadsheet a couple days ago when I saw that thread, and I pulled the following:

<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre>Average Damage Admitted
(To compute res, 100-number.)

All &lt;&gt;1 All
Sm 80% 94%
Le 76% 92%
Fi 85% 97%
Co 85% 96%
En 89% 97%
Ne 87% 97%
Ps 82% 95%
To 67% 93%

50+
Sm 76% 93%
Le 75% 90%
Fi 76% 96%
Co 80% 95%
En 85% 95%
Ne 77% 95%
Ps 63% 87%
To 63% 94%

40-49
Sm 77% 93%
Le 74% 91%
Fi 76% 96%
Co 79% 95%
En 85% 95%
Ne 79% 95%
Ps 63% 89%
To 61% 93%

30-39
Sm 82% 95%
Le 74% 92%
Fi 92% 99%
Co 80% 96%
En 93% 98%
Ne 92% 98%
Ps 70% 94%
To 62% 94%

20-29
Sm 79% 94%
Le 75% 92%
Fi 90% 98%
Co 85% 96%
En 95% 99%
Ne 92% 98%
Ps 81% 97%
To 61% 93%

10-19
Sm 83% 97%
Le 81% 96%
Fi 89% 98%
Co 102% 100%
En 95% 99%
Ne 90% 98%
Ps 111% 101%
To 61% 95%

1-9
Sm 87% 98%
Le 83% 97%
Fi 85% 98%
Co 103% 101%
En 100% 100%
Ne 86% 98%
Ps 111% 101%
To 61% 97%</pre><hr />

First column is all the entities with some form of resistance or vulnerability to the damage type. The second column counts every entity in the game within the given level range. So, for example, a lvl50 Psi user fighting resistance/vulnerable foes will be running up against ~37% resistance. For all lvl50+ enemies, that average is 87%. So it's not often resisted, but when it is, it's very significant.
---
This makes Energy look like the real winner, though personal experience is that fire is the most consistent. (The numbers could also be skewed by enemies you don't fight a lot, but do show up. Praetorians, for example, would be in this range, but outside of a few story arcs, you'll never run into them again.)
---

[edit: Oh yeah, Toxic sucks.]

[/ QUOTE ]

QR regarding Brute/Scrapper vs Stalkers

I haven't been able to get much sleep tonight, so bear with me if this post is a bit disjointed.

<ul type="square">[*]Assassin's Strike - Solo this is very powerful. Being able to preemptively start the fight at spawn count -1 is awesome. On a team... not so impressive. It takes time to setup (more on this later) and I generally don't want to use it before someone else had aggroed the mob. Stalkers aren't so hot at eating the alpha, despite AS's fear proc (if the target lives). (Experience from a lvl38ish Elec/EA in SOs.)
[*]Placate - Again, more powerful solo than on teams. If you play a set that has any dots, using Placate at the wrong time can waste it. The Hide component can easily be wasted by other enemies (easily on teams) or by dots.
[*]Hide - In my experience, this mechanic has a number of problems. First, it can force downtime if spawns are &lt;8s of travel time apart. Where a Brute, Scrapper, or even a Tank can just go from spawn to spawn, a Stalker has to pause in order to setup Hide. This can be especially problematic on teams which can move fast. The next fight may be underway before you can setup Hide/AS and take out a high priority target. Further, there are numerous missions / mechanics that work against Hide (ambushes, Mayhem Missions, etc).
[*]Squishy - Their tools can help them survive, but there are several factors that work against them. First, they work best with def based sets (stay hidden, slip back into hide, etc), but most of those sets have no resistance, so when a Stalker gets hit, they get hit hard. A Stalker at their hp cap has as much hp as a Scrapper with +20% hp Accolades. I vividly remember fighting Metal Shift on my Elec/EA Stalker. One hit from him took off 2/3 to 3/4 my health, if not more. If he got lucky and hit me twice, I was dead.[/list]Outside of Lightning Rod, I was never that impressed with my Stalker. Loved the concept, wanted to like the character, but aspects of the AT always got in the way. I always felt like a different AT would've benefited the team more.


Disclaimer: I've only really played that one Stalker. Don't take my word as authoritative, it's just what I've seen with my limited experience.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think you are misremembering, but maybe I am. As far as I am aware, Invincibility never interrupted the summons. RttC and AaO work for sure. I believe Chilling Embrace and Mud Pots will also work, but anytime I ran with those type of Tankers, we also had another Toggle debuff, so I am unsure. The power seems to require a Debuff component in addition to the auto-hit nature in order to interrupt (and I think the tick rate has to be faster than two seconds, as I have seen him spawn inside Hot Feet, but I do not have conclusive evidence on Hot Feet's failure to stop him).

[/ QUOTE ]

The really interesting part is his summoning powers do not even appear to be interruptible. A wild guess would be that the summons are controlled by the AI to occur if he hasn't been attacked for X seconds (attacks including pulsing debuffs/damage ticks from toggles).

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd agree with that train of thought, Sorciere; I'm 99% certain that's what we're seeing.

I'm not sure if you read the Scrapper Forum (if you do, you've never posted there), but Powerforge actually was the first to really document it. He (Claw/SR) kept trying to find ways to kill Silver Mantis solo with minimal inspiration usage (eventually used a tray of reds iirc). The key was to never, ever let up attacking. If he did for a moment (ex: Aid Self) Silver Mantis would use Dull Pain and/or Build Up. While under pressure, her AI would be quirked and never use it.

It's why I never even knew she had either power despite doing the STF umpteen times. (Similarly, Black Scorpion has Rage... I had no idea.) It's kind of funny that way; some of these AVs have powers that could be pretty potent, but where they should be using them most (against teams) they're too stupid to.

[ QUOTE ]
I haven't attempted it again from greater altitude... does anyone know what the range of that drain attack is?

[/ QUOTE ]

Channelgun has a range of 110 ft.

Taunt has a range of 70 ft, so the ED softcap for range is 109.2 ft (+56%). It's possible to push that a little bit further by enhancing it beyond the softcap, of course.

There is also the range debuff, so that would help a bit. It should be effected by the Purple Patch, which would drop it from 75% debuff to 36%, so Channelgun's range would drop to 70.4 ft. (This is speculation, I have not tested it.)

[ QUOTE ]
Is it normal to take straight up "Taunt", or is there enough threat from the other abilities to make it obsolete?

I have seen some builds with it and some with out across the various Tanker posts.

Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here are the tools a Tanker has to manage aggro:

*) Gauntlet - All Tankers have this. It is an AoE taunt that radiates from the target of all your (single target) attacks. (AoEs just taunt the enemies they hit.) Different attacks have different radii, generally the harder they hit the larger the radius.

*) Auras - These periodically taunt up to 10 enemies close to you. Some (AAO) are more effective than others (RttC, which barely qualifies).

*) Taunt - A ranged, autohit, aoe with a duration second to none. It also has a range debuff, so it can be used to cluster mobs even if there isn't geometry around to break LOS.

For mobs in melee range, Gauntlet and Auras will normally keep you covered against normal content. Where Taunt comes into play are situations where everything isn't clustered nicely around you. This could be a result of knockback, an ambush, a spread out mob, multiple mobs within los of one another, etc. Without Taunt, you'd normally either have to just let the group deal with the loose aggro or leave the mobs you currently have to go hit the loose mob.

Taunt is also the only way to cement aggro of an AV/GM with certainty. Gauntlet and Auras have a chance to fail against them, so if you plan on tanking AVs/GMs I'd strongly suggest picking it up.

One last corner case - Scrappers with taunt auras (most notoriously Invuln and Shield). These sets can and will pull aggro off you without Taunt. You see, the taunt mechanic isn't a binary on/off, but a gigantic threat multiplier of many variables, including damage. Since Scrappers deal more damage than Tankers, their threat is multiplier more dramatically than a Tanker. Taunt, with its superior duration and thus larger multiplier, can overcome that shortcoming.

---

My personal take? Taunt is an exceptionally useful tool with a wide array of uses. I wouldn't make a Tanker unless it was a solo only character. When I pick it up is an entirely different question. I normally pick it up in the 20s. I almost always end up soloing at low levels, so Taunt isn't useful to me. Besides, there are other more interesting powers I'd want to pickup. If, however, you're like Sorciere and group at early levels, it may be more useful to you. I tried a Taunt-less Tank (Ice Armor) once, but I couldn't stand it. Broke down and picked it up at lvl30.

I don't begrudge Tanks who don't have Taunt so long as they can hold aggro.


[edit: Note, taunt durations scale with level, so relying on Gauntlet for aggro at low levels is very problematic. It gets much better by the 20s.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'd like to see a storm place challenge. Lol

[/ QUOTE ]

Storm Palace Challenge replaced RCS challenges. The problem with these is the lack of +4 spawns. Storm Palace Challenge really isn't much of a challenge on a decent IO build. Granted, come I16 all this is out the window.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, the Storm Palace 'only' goes up to +3s. Of course, back then people were still rocking SOs. For a build like that, a +3 spawn of Brutes (2 bosses) is plenty strong to flatten you.

Especially when one of the minions uses that nasty AoE... Good times.

[ QUOTE ]
How much defense should I maintain to floor his chance to hit? Between inspirations, buffs and temp powers, I hovered between 60% and 120% defense to all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Laevateinn: While the Blue Tower is up, you need 75% def to floor Recluse. Keep your def monitored, he does have def debuffs that could drop you below that and substantially increase his tohit chances. Once the Blue Tower is down, the standard 45% def will floor him.

[ QUOTE ]
Have they fixed the bug in that last mission dealing with the engineers?

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You should have at least one Defender or Controller helping you out as support.

[/ QUOTE ]

Aett: Nope, not yet. By support, you mean healing, right? If you're having survivability issues that would be ideal, but right now killing the towers is a dps race. It'd take even longer to destroy them if you took one more person off to help keep the Tank alive. Unless you're on a heavily optimized team, I can see that last fight being very ugly / tedious.

[ QUOTE ]
I don’t believe Blue gives a constant +30% tohit as stated in the Wiki.

[/ QUOTE ]

Brakner: The Blue Tower definitely gives a static +30% tohit. I've run this TF so many times, sometimes just scraping the min def required to floor him, and he has never had bouts of insane tohit. (That and I've looked the power definition, the buff is set to not self stack.)

As I mentioned before, some of his attacks have a def debuff, which would yield a better tohit chance for him.

[ QUOTE ]
Whenever I'm on this TF with my Dark/ Def or /Rad Cont, I always try and place my toggles on LR to give the tank some help, even though the debuffs are resisted...anything helps.

[/ QUOTE ]

Clouded: Btw, Enervating Field does essentially nothing to help the Tanker's survivability until the Red Tower goes down (Recluse will have 100% s/l/e res, so the dmg debuffs are fully resisted). Imo you'd be better off putting EF on the Tower to bring it down faster so Recluse isn't buffed as long.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do these things do unresistable damage or something?

[/ QUOTE ]

The eyeballs are all ridiculously accurate which means that you're defense buffs aren't really going to be doing much and they deal energy damage, which */Dark resists about as well as the Ban Pan zombies resist fire.

[/ QUOTE ]

To expand on this a bit, they have +100% tohit. That's like taking old Focused Accuracy, slotted, and tripling it. If that wasn't bad enough, their eye beams debuff defense. To add insult to injury, they have a recharge slow as well, so they're nuking Dark Regen's recharge.

Rularuu Sentries (Eyballs) are exceptionally nasty buggers.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Have we heard if we can change the powers customization based on the costume slot, or is it going to be one set of power color customization for one character?

[/ QUOTE ]

Powers can be individually customized per costume slot, but not supergroup mode.

[/ QUOTE ]

Woo Hoo

[/ QUOTE ]

And then they turned it up to 11.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do believe they are at 12 or 13 for that feature.

I expected to be allowed to customize the colors of the powers individually. They added different color blending options, per costume slot customization, and the framework for new animation (with two sets utilizing it). They're even allowing Spines (previously exempt from weapon customization) to be modified.

They're well above and beyond what I anticipated.