Sylph_Knight

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're doing it wrong if it costs you "billions". Both in building it and playing the market.

[/ QUOTE ]

My purpled-out build says otherwise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, you found room for purples?

I have just finished* painstakingly slotting out my Inv/SS Tanker for typed defense. (*Finished subject to the caveat that he's 48 so he has 1 power and 4 more slots [counting the default in that power] to go, and I also am still waiting on two bids to come in that will boost his +regen. The defense part's all done though.)

I feel like I had no room for purples, because purples don't have typed defense bonuses. Pretty much all my powers have sets for typed defense bonuses (and through careful planning, still pretty good enhancement values). My utility powers are either one-slotted or in the case of Dull Pain, can't be purpled.

I do have room for the Hecatomb proc in Jab, but I might stick another end reducer in there instead. that's just one IO though, not a set.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding -- are you purpling AND soft-capping? I'm not being sarcastic, I'm feeling like I must have missed something.

[/ QUOTE ]

I operate under a totally different design philosophy than most Invulnerability Tanks. My first post was more sarcasm than anything - I'm aware that most Invulnerability upgrades focus purely on the Defense cap and don't cost even a fraction of what I went for. I am more well-rounded with my upgrades, with a strong emphasis on procs in my attacks. After all, what's dead can't hurt you anymore.

Most folks can't stand the idea of Invulnerability not being at the Smashing/Lethal cap at Resistance or Defense and put alot of their focus on either of those categories through powers and IOs. I'm perfectly fine without them - with this build, I have successfully Tanked everything short of Hamidon in this game with little issue thanks to the use of accolades, utilities, inspirations (where needed), etc. - all which are readily available. My thoughts are that if something can handle 95% of the situations in the game without buffs of any kind, it's solid enough to put some emphasis elsewhere.

| Copy & Paste this data into Mids' Hero Designer to view the build |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------|
|MxDz;1415;727;1454;HEX;|
|78DAA594DB4E134118C7677BB0B4DD52B09C0B3D40A194C34 2118D80870BC1A46A2|
|3DACA95DA943AB61B365BD25D8CBDF30130D12BAF54C097D0 78E52BA8F1800F53BF|
|C3107BEF26FBFFCDEC7EA7F966768BCF3775215E5C179A7EC 3AA3A4EA55CB5F7642|
|B5496B586DDB49AF5B65E6A5BFB8DD46DDBAC37DC801022C1 26954DF954DA8E340A|
|F6B303CB96ADEAAE69996E3BAE5E17A525A5513AD88771C96 D49BBEE36FA0B7643C|
|2D035CE06E1ED66D3326E5A185CE7B1E9DAD271223429CA27 66CDB46544BD022BD3|
|AEC7B6F6CD9AB10539EBED4AB1EAB8B2D51E81CA72707F0D8 268708B8E474CC2202|
|B4209422649580809757584B8EB11222FBE818FA67C3436F6 B0AB274DF80E065E65|
|E02D6AE8E32B31CA040382FA39A8DF3F21F0D139850A60428 4F668A63B1E9CF5B60|
|131F103C20638AC37C0797B386F0FE71D9B222C41F4A02A39 E850C921D889B04A18|
|9EA147FA1CA16F96309E2324E609537B544518BC22ECE5894 C5145BDA7ECF587E00|
|783285724A26CF00B32F753773ADEFE415AEDF901461F618E 2BCA8770495C516C97|
|5C076A0C4918CA92DD508190E64E0420E12027F40F3EA0782 3055EFB8E8606895B8|
|C6B846C8642F580D7307BF9860F29DEC84B5EF66B5EEF2BC6 1B6E02988FAAFE8DC6|
|29C20A541BE755F9E21FC82AF59E7144C81D13E6DE119201C CCE8D9BE02D4FDD23A|
|4F91CFC842E25D50949F21EA6F9BCE579637F83C1A43298E4 3666B88D990455B40A|
|154DABFE4DAF51D6990DC63AE30A217B95C1FD3BF20A31CB5 EBED993EECA7347DD0|
|B58E0C51D83F9BC4A32BFCC6F16188B84458391677CA1737A 025E86F2322ED09BA5|
|15C62AE3121F818B8C8F74D84E61C5CBAAEBCBC3B47DE3BEA E6FAF0397B8D3FD244|
|8EEDB3EF501C3238D8C72FF8CFEEBFAA49FFD1B82F7F12F50 46D906D17670F410E5|
|114E1FE3A88AA35D941A4E3B9FF5B32AA297B1A0359475940 D9443340AE0371946D|
|1512228BD2851943E9418CA10CA18CA5B94CE5F210BF76F|
|-------------------------------------------------------------------|

That's the build information to date(which, aside from Proc IO levels - which have no bearing - is a perfect duplicate of my build to date including IO Set levels). I already have a mildly-upgraded PvP IO-friendly build I put together from scratch since Mids Hero Designer isn't up-to-date yet that I'm saving up around 1.5 Billion for.

Please note I'm not here to argue the validity of this build or seek feedback, I just wanted to clarify the purples question.

/signed

I want my line breaks back - run-on descriptions are an eye-sore!

[ QUOTE ]
You're doing it wrong if it costs you "billions". Both in building it and playing the market.

[/ QUOTE ]

My purpled-out build says otherwise.

Besides, some of us prefer crushing enemies to manipulating the economy.

[ QUOTE ]
Inv's FREAKING AWESOME if you can afford the BILLIONS necessary to slot it >.>

[/ QUOTE ]

I fixed your post for you.

*Laughs*

Good point.

This is true. Although I think the more important concern is whether or not they even get a chance to look at it - I haven't seen Castle on these forums since the Invulnerability buffs a while back.

Vicar,

I respectfully agree with your opinion and have been trying to veer in that direction myself as of late. I have been attempting to only post when endorsing or presenting constructive ideas regarding Tankers. I think we should all start focusing less on retaliating against the few individuals who tend have disruptive habits and focus more on creating and supporting ideas.

To add to your second post: thank you very much for the endorsement. The idea was definitely to detract from souping-up Tankers against softer targets (which are largely met in Soloing) as my observations have been that they are not the issue at hand. The -Regeneration idea stemmed from a couple of things: A) Johnny's consistent basis that Tankers should appear more fearsome against bigger foes, but also acknowledge the fact that mundane foes are scarcely an issue. Bosses, EBs, AVs, and Giant Monsters are notorious opponents by virtue of their regeneration, and these foes are most prominently fought in teams. B) -Regeneration is, to my knowledge, scarcely used in the game but quite powerful where it is seen. I think Radiation sets are the only ones that really have a viable -Regeneration element, if any at all, and they can floor regeneration in foes to nearly zero. I would not want a Tanker to reach that level of utility, but chopping off a solid fraction of a GM or a AV's Regeneration would make it possible for smaller teams to go against these monsters without increasing their damage directly.

In conclusions, the idea was to grant the advantages of having a Tanker in the vicinity to permit requiring fewer members to be necessary to defeat more powerful opponents and give them the added benefit of appearing more fearsome against tougher types of enemies. Scrappers and Brutes can surely deal more individual damage, but -Regeneration assists an entire team, just like Gauntlet, which increases team utility.

To add to the other suggestion: It's also a very good alternative but it seems like it would require a great deal of creating coding to implement.

I've been thinking up an alternative that meets the criteria I met in my last post and I figured I'd toss this out there (although I'm sure this has been suggested in the past in some form):

Breakdown: Enemies affected by Gauntlet (not Taunt) suffer a percentage of loss to their regeneration and recovery. For kicks, we could say this is non-stackable with other Gauntlet effects in the party (multiple Tankers), or the inverse - the amount of Gauntlet in place (more attacks over time) causes a scaling Regen reduction in targets.

The idea is simple: Instead of increasing Tanker Damage, make it so that Tankers (or teams with them) have one less obstacle to contend with against foes of increasing strength and HP: Their high Regeneration values. Minions would barely feel this. LTs would probably be barely phased by it. Bosses would require fewer blows (in the early game, this would make things far less taxing for the current endurance-heavy Tanker), and AVs would seem far less resiliant. Further complicating the mix, faster attacks (usually weaker ones) would provide a better benefit to this inherit than constantly using the strongest attacks in your arsenal, creating an option for alternating attack styles to keep opponents softened up.

It's said that the little things are what truly break a man down.

And, in the case of dealing with AI opponents, I've always considered regeneration to be an absurd obstacle. It exists solely to remind you that no matter how well you can break through their resistances or defenses, they're still better than you because you can't deal enough DPS to stay above the damage treadmill.

In PvP, this would obviously have be reduced (or removed entirely). Any thoughts?

Given our recent discussions, I'd say the viability of anything else benefiting Tankers would come from the following criteria:

A) It must be linked to Gauntlet.

B) It must not be damage-related.

C) It should probably run in the same vein as the Taunt / -Range idea in its core functionality. In other words, it should be a beneficical effect that improves an existing function without emulating the effects of another existing archetype.

The problem is we're still working with ideas that have already been introduced in some way. Thinking outside the box is always difficult, and so was designing the now-simplistic concept of the wheel I imagine. Heck, even I'm stumped on this one, but I'll speak my mind if I think of something.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is true, but (correct me if I'm wrong) didn't Tankers also get -Range to their Taunt exclusively as well.


[/ QUOTE ]

Nope. It wasn't exclusive to Tankers. It was applied to Scrapper Challenge and Brute Taunts as well.


.

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent.

Makes the arguement much more viable.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Saying that most Tankers would not want to play with a damage boost against Boss, EB, AV, and GM class enemies is likely not true and borderline insanity, however, everyone is entitled to their opinion.


[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is no one wants to know how much downward their defenses would need to go in order for them to get such a thing and still be balanced.

Because I have a hard time seeing Tanks getting more damage and still being pretty much unkillable... but, what do I know, the only tank I ever had I quit playing at 38.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd say level 38 gives you the right to "talk tanker". By 38 you have the majority of your core powers in place and slotted and you're tactically savvy. Beyond that it's all icing on the cake.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I may interject; said icing is pretty much what alleviates the Tanker Damage debates in that it is common to have some of your most cushy damage powers (or opportunities for more) beyond the level 38 threshold. Not to say his opinion doesn't count, but the level 38 discussion does signify a major turning point in character development, one which we often overlook - the advent of the Ancillary Pools lies beyond that threshold.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My question regarding the idea was why did tankers deserve two inherents and the other nine primary ATs did not? IIRC, it was never answered.

[/ QUOTE ]

Brutes?

Who said two? This would wrap into Gauntlet.

Just like Defiance now does a couple of different things (pseudo mez protection and damage buffs) as does the Stalker's new Assassination(regular crits, hidden crits, demoralizing effect), there's no reason Gauntlet can't do something else on top of being a radial AoE taunt.


.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true, but (correct me if I'm wrong) didn't Tankers also get -Range to their Taunt exclusively as well.

I don't mean to bash an arguement that might lend more power to my character, but it does well to bring up further issue with a possible debate of this nature. Beyond the -Range in Taunt, I do have to say that Johnny is right in so far as some other Archetypes getting double benefits and thus the idea is not entirely far-fetched.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You make a valid point with the brute/stalker example and you are correct that simply buffing tanker damage is not the answer. Something needs to be done to make tankers and scrappers as divergent in play style as brutes and scrappers. Vox Populi had a good suggestion. I think taking that a step further and applying the increased debuff/control to any mobs affected by gauntlet would be a step in the right direction. While not increasing damage (accept maybe in the case of Fire Melee’s DoT) it would move tankers toward more of a group fighter role. Which, IMO, is where they should have been all along.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now that's interesting, and easily doable to boot. All you'd need to do for that is apply a status resistance debuff to the target, thus making controls last longer. It does gives some sets more perks than others, though.

For example, compare Axe and Mace. Very similar sets, except all of Axe's attacks have a chance for knockdown while Mace is a mix of knockdown/stun. Knockdown wouldn't be effected by the status resistance debuff (it would cause knockback which has just been removed in most cases) and the stuns would. Mace would be able to benefit while Axe would be left in the cold. Now I'm imagining giving that to Stone Melee... (Fault anyone?)

Still, it's something to think about. (Finally, a fresh idea!)

[/ QUOTE ]

I second that notion.

Pending the average firing percentage VS damage boosts (coupled by accuracy and chance to hit - alot of math involved so I basically wing it on most accounts, easier to do with SS's massive to-hit bonus)... I'd wager the 3-Proc approach over a 4-Proc one if you cannot boost the damage any higher. I only use one 4-Proc power (Haymaker) as endurance and accuracy concerns are not an issue due to massive IO bonuses elsewhere (got 2 lvl 50 damage IOs and 4 procs slotted for it specifically). All my other powers use 2 Procs of varying origin and various frankenslotting methods.

I think Mids said he was playing World of Warcraft now.

DOOM!!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Procs do stack in everything. But, mathmatically speaking, the effect is not consistant (20% + 20% = 40%), rather it is subject to a sort of diminishing returns.

I don't remember the exact formula, but I think 20% + 20% = 32% or something like that. Adding a third 20% sees an even smaller percentile chance that at least one will fire off. The chance that multiple will fire off remains a static 20% I believe (with the exception of purples).

[/ QUOTE ]

You've got that quite wrong. The chances that each proc will trigger is mathematically independent. Assuming for simplicity that each proc has a 20% chance to go off, two procs gives a 0.2 x 0.2 = 4% chance for both to trigger and a 2 x (0.2 x 0.8) = 32% chance that only one will fire. You therefore have a 36% chance that at least one proc will fire.

If you have 3 procs, all with 20% chance to trigger, you have an 0.8% for them to all go off at once (0.2^3), a 9.6% (or 3 x (0.2 x 0.2 x 0.8)) chance for two of the three to fire, and a 38.4% (or 3 x (0.2 x 0.8 x 0.8)) chance that only one will go off. This gives a 48.8% chance for at least one proc to activate.

[/ QUOTE ]

I stand corrected. Thank you for the update.

I am trying to figure out how that works for 4 procs as an experiment. I understand the first portion is .2 x .2 x .2 x .2 = .16 for all 4, but I'm not sure I understand the second portion of the equation for 3 and up (.2 x .2 x .2 x .16 does not seem right at a glance).

Procs do stack in everything. But, mathmatically speaking, the effect is not consistant (20% + 20% = 40%), rather it is subject to a sort of diminishing returns.

I don't remember the exact formula, but I think 20% + 20% = 32% or something like that. Adding a third 20% sees an even smaller percentile chance that at least one will fire off. The chance that multiple will fire off remains a static 20% I believe (with the exception of purples).

[ QUOTE ]
I do remember someone saying they had it slotted on their tanker and were still only getting around 60hp a tick. And yes the tanker hp cap is twice that of the blaster hp cap, but like all heals it would be based off of base hp. Also, a willpower tanker could potentially have 2 performance shifter procs and a panacea proc and in one lucky burst get 27.5 endurance.

[/ QUOTE ]

True.

PvE, it appears the only function for this proc is to pair with the Performance Shifter proc. In PvP, the regen bonus (whatever it may be) could prove useful or meaningless pending its scale and whether or not the character has an emphasis on regeneration slotting.

I remember reading that too. I think the guy mentioned he was a blaster though.

Although that does offer a pretty good clue, since Blasters have, at maximum probably about 1/2 the HP of a Tanker.

I'd say Tankers get roughly 150 HP a tick, which is roughly once per minute (based on a 20% chance of activation if it operates just like the Performance Shifter procedure). That's pretty low.

The proceedure only shines when you consider the potential stacking of a Performance Shifter procedure in Stamina, effectively doubling your opportunity for a burst of stamina.

Any idea how much HP per tick this would give on a Tanker in PvE, and how much regen it might offer in PvP?

/signed

Outer Space for the win!

[ QUOTE ]
My complaints, off the hip;

The background colors are too muted. Too bright would detract from the content, I understand, but dark-dark-blue doesn't really work for me either.

The constantly cycling trial window is annoying - it might need to be noticeable, but it has all the appeal of a flashing banner ad.

The side menu is nice, in terms of functionality, but again, I don't care for the color choice.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have to agree. The new site feels "foreboding".

In fact, it feels like a cheap Champions Online site knockoff. I know you guys can do better.

I will be most upset if they remove Energy Torrent from Tanker's Energy Mastery APP. That's the reason I took the pool in the first place.

On that same note, I really hope they leave that set alone altogether.

[ QUOTE ]

Not that it matters anyway, Johnny. If they give you what you want for invul and Super Strength, you'll just look for something new to [censored] about.



[/ QUOTE ]

I'd put bets on that! I would simply DIE if Johnny went from obsessive complaint fanatic to jolly forum-goer would such changes were to ever go through. *laughs*

It would mean the end of days.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So, wait...in the picture with the gladiator armors, is that Statesman in there?

[/ QUOTE ]

That does look like the Statesman cape and Helmet. Do we get access to those???

[/ QUOTE ]

That helmet is SIMILAR to states helm but it isn't. look very closely at both of them. Not the same just very similar and I expect to see a few new states look a likes using that helm once the feature goes live.

When Jay said "No to the above" he meant the whole statement "Is that statesman helmet and cape? do we get access to them?"

Hence "No they aren't and no we won't get access to the states cape and face plate."

I may be wrong but personally I believe that the pics are accurate and we get all the good stuff we see there. Again look close to both states and the roman helm. Not the same just similar.

[/ QUOTE ]

So let me get this straight.

A ) I'm a Tank, so I can't get the super-huge shoulders that the female Arachnos chick in that one pic has. That SUCKS. I've waited forever for giant shoulder pauldrons and now I can't get them because it's an archetype exclusive (even Kheldians didn't get an archetype exclusive costume).

B ) We don't get the Cloth Mantle (made famous by Statesman).

Two of my biggest wants dangled in front of me with sadistic availability options in place for one and false advertisement for the other... wait, isn't that illegal?

I see you have lost your sexiness, Jay. And your Silent Bob, to boot!

[/ QUOTE ]

What huge shoulders are you talking about? I'm not seeing any at all.

In other news: what is Teddy Roosevelt doing in the promo picture? I'm very confused.

[/ QUOTE ]

These shoulders. Second lady from the left in the hulking armor. Can't miss'em.