Silas

Or they have extensive experience with both which educated their point of view.

That's not what he said at all. He just said that he prefers farming with his BS/Inv Scrapper and that it does a lot of damage.

Yeah, I'd be curious to know what it is about WI that's crappy. It costs the same endurance as Unyielding, provides you with DDR, some resists and a tiny bit of defense. Seems like a fairly solid power to me.

Not likely!

Indeed, what UberGuy said. If you enjoy the character, they're not obsolete. The Tanker hasn't stopped being effective.

As you say, there's just overlap between what the Brute can do and what the Tanker can do. Which is as it should be Glad I was able to help you see things from a new perspective. Good luck with the Brute rework!

You're exactly right on this one, this is something Deus brought up earlier*. All things being equal, a Brute is going to generate more threat than a Tanker more often than not due to their higher damage.

As you say, Tankers do have a slight advantage in their Gauntlet being AoE, but that isn't a significant factor as soon as the Brute gets their PBAoE. Which is always going to be sooner than the Tanker, comparing the same attack sets.

*Edit: Here

I like it. It looks really solid so far and seems like it'll really lend itself well to the kind of characters I build. Think it'll be a great addition to any team and very good solo.


Well then you're doing it right as far as I'm concerned. Attacking and supporting the team are both important. There's no real reason to do one to the exclusion of the other except for laziness

Emp guide will be done by this weekend, Saturdayish.

When I am deciding whether or not to do something, I first consider if it will cause you anguish. If it will not, then I must give much thought to whether or not this action is worth doing at all.

In seriousness, it'd be like a day or two. Friday or Saturday afternoon/evening. Come party with me, Stray. For clarity, I'd be looking to do this on the Friday or Saturday the 5th or 6th of November.

Horus get in on this actionnnnnn. Take a Greyhound or whatever it is that Americans use since they don't have public transport. Horse drawn cart? I don't know, leave a few weeks in advance.

Your 'Bible' is the crazed scribblings of a madman. Then again, I suppose the same could be said for other holy texts :3

In seriousness, I've not written the TM guide because it's not out yet. I've not been able to properly level and play it, so I'm not in a position to talk about it, let alone write a guide for it.

Sometime after i21 hits I'll start work on my Poison and TM guides. In the meanwhile, got mah damn Empathy guide to finish. That should be done by this weekend though.

As for what primary, what Deus said. Only potential concern with Fire is endurance, but that can be solved with good slotting and/or Cardiac.

But of course there is. Illusion/Cold Controllers can tank things with PA, they can control stuff and they can do lots of AoE damage with the Ice or Fire APP. Fire/Traps Corruptors can tank things (I'm sure you're aware of how well Traps can tank with Provoke), control things with PGT and Fire delivers the nuking. A Stone/WP Brute can control aggro, control mobs with Fault and deal lots of damage. Same could be said for SS/whatever brutes though Footstomp comes a good deal later than fault. An Earth/Psi Dominator can obviously control mobs, tank them if they take Provoke (survive the aggro with their controls, DP and APP/PPP shield) and deal lots of damage in the process. There are lots of combinations and ATs that can control aggro, control mobs and deal lots of damage.

The WS may be better at some or even all of those abilities than some of those combos. Similarly, some of them may perform some or all of those abilities or roles better than the WS. But this does not mean the WS has no purpose.

Edit: Unless of course you mean no other AT can duplicate the shape-shifting, rather than the roles the different forms contribute. In which case, your WS is a unique snowflake. Except for Peacebringers. And no one plays those

Exactly! I would still call my Corruptor a support character and a damage dealer, yes. Similarly, you can call your Warshade whatever portmanteau you feel is most applicable.

You said that you felt a Brute had no purpose on a team because while it could deal damage and control aggro, other ATs could do either or both tasks better. If the team needed aggro control, you'd be better bringing your Tanker. If the team needed damage, you could bring something else. When they needed a bit of both, you could bring your MM. If I understood you correctly, your point was that anything the Brute contributed to a team, another AT could do better.

I disagree with that line of thinking, because hybrid ATs are in many situations more effective than their more 'pure' counterparts due to their flexibility. To demonstrate this, I used your WS. When you're in Dwarf form to control aggro, you'd be better off on your Tanker. When you're in Nova form to blow stuff up, you'd be better on your MM or a Blaster. When you're in Human form to control/blast/etc, you'd be better off on a Controller/whatever.

But that is not the case. Aside from the logistical absurdity of relogging and switching characters every time the situation changes, it doesn't work that way because often times, the WS (or whichever other hybridized AT) can be good enough. When a WS is good enough to control the aggro, you're better off with a WS (or Scrapper, or Brute, or Blaster controlled by a madman, etc) because they can control the aggro sufficiently and bring more damage to boot.

That's why I disagree with the breaking down of a characters roles into x and y and saying well, AT A does x better than AT B and AT C does y better than AT B, therefore AT B has no purpose. That make sense now?

I can throw Fireball and then hit FS and you can hit Nova Emanation and then Taunt, but neither of us can do both at the exact same time. That's what I've been saying. You are not Dwarf, Human and Nova all at the same time. That's a mentality, not an ingame mechanical reality.

Your Warshade is not a Tanker, a Controller and a Blaster all the time. It is a character which can fill any of those roles or a combination thereof at any given time. It's not the same thing.

Edit: the relevance of this point is this: from the second you enter Dwarf form, you're entering a role at which a Tanker would perform better. Ditto for Nova and Blasters. But this does not mean a WS has no purpose, just because its individual forms/roles are individually beaten by the respective 'pure' ATs.

Similarly, a Brute does not have no purpose in a team because a Scrapper may do more damage or a Tanker may control aggro better.

I did not disregard durations. I explicitly stated in my post that some of the aspects carry over due to their durations.

I'm not sure how I can explain this better. When you shift to Dwarf, you lose access to your Nova powers. That's a fact. You can regain access to them, but you lose access to your Dwarf powers. Various powers can stay in effect but it is mechanically impossible for you to be all forms at once. What you have is access to all of the forms at any given time, with shifting animation time. We're talking about different things. You're talking about your playstyle mentality when playing your WS, I'm talking about what is mechanically possible.

What I'm getting at this is that this is not a weakness or a failure. It is a strength of the AT, that you can shift as necessary to fill any given role at any time. But you cannot fill all of them at the same time. Which means by your previously stated reasoning, whenever you shift into Nova to blow stuff up you'd be better off on a Blaster. As soon as you shift to Dwarf to control aggro, you'd be better on a Tanker. When you shift into Human to buff up and control mobs, you'd be more effective on a Controller. However, in any of those forms you can potentially be 'good enough' or even better than the 'pure' AT.

The strength of a WS is in their versatility, their ability to do all of those things. Similarly, it is the strength of a Brute (for example) to both deal damage and control aggro.

Edit: but anyway, as UberGuy pointed out, this is an old argument. As well as a fairly major thread derail. Let's agree to disagree.

Except that's not the case, unless you've got some mad hax going on that I'm not aware of. What you're describing is a mindset, an attitude. Not a mechanical functionality.

When you've got that ranged attack chain you do not have the ability to taunt. When you've got the ability to taunt you don't have the ability to summon those pets and so on.

You cannot be in all forms at all times, you cannot have the full benefit of all forms at all times. What you have is the ability to access all of those things. Granted, some of the aspects do carry across forms (summoned pets, Eclipse) but when you shift into a form, you accept both its strengths and its limitations.

The "all forms at all times" is a great mentality and an excellent way to teach people flexibility in formshifting but it is not a mechanical reality. That may change, but I doubt it. Alternatives exclude.

Mentality is not the same thing as mechanical functionality. It's the same for all ATs. I say I play my Corruptors as team support and damage dealers. Absolutely true, but the same exclusion applies when you really get down to it. When I'm throwing a Fireball, I'm (arguably) not supporting my team at that moment. When I'm throwing out shields or dropping Fulcrum Shift, I'm not dealing damage at that moment. That doesn't mean I can't do both to great effect by using all of my powers flexibly.

Edit: Sortof. Dechs has clarified to say that it's his opinion that Brutes have no purpose for him/the way he plays them rather than a blanket statement. Unfortunate, but we can agree to disagree.

Great! Now we're on the same page.

We'll have to agree to disagree, then. This comes back to what Deus was saying about the concept of 'good enough'. A Brute can control aggro well enough for a given task where you need aggro control (which many Brutes can and do) as well as contribute their high damage.

Given that is the case, if we use your reasoning the Tanker has no purpose. The toughness and aggro controlling abilities of a Tanker can be replicated adequately on a Brute or Scrapper and they'll contribute far more damage.

Whereas that's not the case, all of the ATs can and do have purpose. Because again, purpose is almost entirely decided by the player at the controls.

Consider the following statements:

• I feel this AT has no purpose.
• This AT has no purpose.

Only two words dropped from the second statement but it drastically alters the meaning. One is a statement of personal preference, the other is a blanket statement about the validity of the Archetype.

By your own logic, your WS has no purpose on a team. If he's in Nova form, you'd be better off playing a Blaster. If you're in human form, you'd be better off playing a Scrapper, Controller or Blaster. If you're in Dwarf form, you'd be better off playing a Tanker.

But that's not the case. The fact that a WS can perform multiple roles is a strength. I don't see why the same reasoning cannot be applied to similarly hybridized ATs.

Heh, I think there's mutual misunderstanding here, we seem to be talking past one another. I understand that you play different characters for different reasons, I'm the same way.

What I was responding to was you saying you felt Tankers were the only melee AT which serves a purpose on a team (quote below). Which I disagree with, since I feel that purpose for a character is something the player decides.

My own opinion on melee ATs is that they all do basically the same thing, contribute damage and aggro control. To varying degrees and in different ways, but it boils down to those two factors. Not to plug my shamelessly plug my melee teaming guide, but that's the core idea I worked with for it.

Tankers can control aggro much effectively than they deal damage. At the other end of the spectrum, Stalkers can deal damage much more effectively than they control aggro. The point is that all the melee ATs can do both, therefore should not be limited to one purpose. Or said to have no purpose at all.

I'm probably not explaining this very well, the tl;dr version would be: no melee AT is without purpose since purpose is player defined and all melee ATs can contribute melee damage and aggro control to varying degrees.

I'm going to have to disagree on this point. Many Scrappers can still control aggro even without a Taunt aura, or even the ST Taunt. Certainly not as effectively as one with either of those tools, but that doesn't mean they can't at all.

Perhaps I've misunderstood you, but it seems you're contradicting yourself. You said that when you play a Scrapper or Brute you feel you have no purpose. But now you're saying that Brutes (and presumeably Scrappers) do have a purpose.

If I'm understanding you correctly, the Tanker is first and foremost there for aggro control, secondarily for damage. Totally agree with that one. For the Brute, its the other way around. There I disagree a little, but close enough to work with it. A Brute might not be able to control aggro as well as a Tanker (debateable, but let's go with it) but that doesn't mean they're devoid of purpose.

What I'm getting at is that one AT being better equipped for a task doesn't mean the other AT has no purpose. If I can go all reductio ad absurdum for a minute, that'd mean there would be no point to playing anything other than a Blaster, Tanker, Defender and the Tanker and Defender shouldn't bother using their secondaries. After all, nothing controls aggro as well as a Tanker, nothing deals damage like a Blaster and nothing buffs/debuffs better than a Defender.

However, we both know that's absurd, right? Hybrid ATs exist in this game and all have purpose. Or can be given purpose by the player at the controls. Actually, the entire purpose of a given character or AT is arguably entirely decided by the player at the controls. But I digress. Characters have a primary and secondary set, so there's no reason they should be limited to a single purpose