Ultimo_

[ QUOTE ]
'Retarded' is my opinion, not yours.

[/ QUOTE ]

And unnecessarily insulting, in my opinion.

I actually rather like the MA except for the strangeness in the power of the custom critters. I mean, I was one-shotted by a boss that did over 700 damage in one punch at L4! He could have oneshotted TWO scrappers with that. Minions do 90 damage per attack EACH at the same level! This is at MINIMUM difficulty.

It basically closes off custom characters to lower levels. I hope something is done to correct this soon.

[ QUOTE ]
And when you're a nobody who barely understands the game and barely understands game design, it's incredibly easy to say you'd do it 'right.'

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Except Babs hasn't got a reputation for being retarded, and Geko does.

[/ QUOTE ]


Good lord, is it possible for you to post without trying to insult someone? Honestly, we're not interested in yout case of colic. If you have something constructive to contribute, you're welcome to do so, but try communicating in a civilized manner for once.



Honestly, I can see Marvel's point. I mean, the claws set could have been talons or extra hard fingernails, but instead we got three metal claws springing from the backs of our hands. It's pretty obvious it's intended to hearken back to Wolverine. However, that's not quite what I mean. I'm speaking more generally.

In the comics we see things getting knocked around by strong characters, we see them uprooting trees, stopping trains and doing "strong" things. In CoH, we only hit things.

In the comics we see lots of collateral damage. In CoH, we see almost none. The only time you see debris is if you happen to be fighting next to a garbage can or something, or if you're on a mayhem mission.

You can't grab a foe (or anything else), which we see all the time in the comics too.

Like I say, I'm just speaking in general terms. These are just examples, a definitive list of similar shortcomings would be long indeed.



L41 is a high level. To have to wait that long is extremely disappointing when you're playing a character with a concept. It doesn't mean people won't play the character to that level, it's just a long time to wait. It also has nothing to do with who "deserves" what.

Of course, I can "go back and do any content I want," but in so doing, I give up the very powers I spent all that time waiting for.

[ QUOTE ]
Also the idea of being able to do the "content" that you've missed (or worse, re-doing content that you've already done) is a fairly ornery chore at best. "Content" in CoH being as extremely limited in scope as it is (as in "kill all enemies and click all blinkies").

As for the interest of the content itself (the story lines) some are interesting while most tend to be extremely basic and rehashes. This is of course my opinion. But one thing that does hold up is that the popularity of MMOs are based on "living worlds" with content that's interacted with. This is the basis by which MMOs (and gaming in general) supersede static content mediums such as books and television. CoH in this regard does a very poor job of bringing a "living world" to the player. This has always been its biggest problem in my opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with every single word in this quote.

Well, I'm not saying they did it badly, I'm just saying I'd have done it differently; I'd have been sure not to release the game until it more closely resembled the comic books.

That would mean allowing people to fight while airborne without gasping for breath. That would mean making super strength able to do things like lifting objects that are heavy. That would mean giving the heroes more to do than just hit things. I could go on and on.

By no means do I mean to say it would be easy, even with today's technology, let alone the technology available at that time. I'm just saying my priorities would have been different.

No, I want a presentation that would look like what we see in the comics. I never said it should be changed, I said I'd have made it right in the first place.

That said, I'd bet that no one would complain if the set was totally changed around, as long as it's effectiveness wasn't hurt. As it is, the only thing someone suggested was that Hurl have a different look. Not a big deal, if you ask me.

As usual though, this isn't about performance, it's about presentation.

What about replacing it with Taunt? As a Tanker secondary, it would need Taunt...

Right. Super Strength and Invulnerability are the two most common, iconic power sets in the comic book genre, they had to be done right. Personally, I don't think they were.

What I'm saying is that if I were designing a game based on comic books, I'd be sure to make it possible to emulate the action in the comics. CoH only goes so far.

I mean, the first image of a superhero we have is Action Comics #1, with Superman lifting a car and smashing it, right there on the cover; and yet, superheroes in CoH can't do this. Heck, they don't get to lift ANYTHING until rather late in the game, and even then it's only a little chunk of stone.

It just seems strange to me that they wouldn't have ensured this would be better realized.

What if they simply made Broadsword weapon models available to the BattleAxe set? Tankers would still be using the Axe powers, but could have weapons that resembled Swords.


As for Parry, what's so special about it?

It's always amazed me that the game didn't include this from the beginning. There are a few things that make me scratch my head. I mean, this is a staple of the comic book genre. People are always grabbing things, being knocked through things and so on. The other big one is customizable powers. I mean, they went to considerable length to let us customize our characters appearance, but then locked us in on our powers. Why one and not the other? As I say, I would have made sure to do both, it seems obvious to me...

Heh, I've no illusions that I'm the first to suggest this. It seems so obvious... It makes me wonder why it's not been done already?

You know, the two melee classes seem to be defined as Tankers=power, Scrappers=finesse.

That makes me wonder why Tankers don't have access to Broad Sword, but do have access to Dual Blades? I mean, Dual Blades looks fast and precise, and has little sense of raw power. Sure, you could argue for finesse in Broad Sword, but it's really a power weapon.

In other words, when are we going to get Broad Sword for Tankers (and Brutes, for that matter)?

Opinion is mixed on that, for just the reasons pointed out.

I wonder if there would be a way to have the power only access appropriate items? I mean, I'm no programmer (last time I did any programming, BASIC was the language of choice...), but surely some sort of "if map=warehouse then itemlist=warehouse objects" sort of mechanism could be made to work?

I mean, grabbing and lifting objects would be ideal, but barring that, perhaps the heaving appropriate objects can overcome the sudden materialization of them.


Meh. In the end, I don't mind Hurl as it is, except that the chunk of rock is too small. I mean, it looks like a patio stone. I swear I could lift it myself (no chucking, though).

Actually, the idea of simply adding Power Blast to Energy Melee would have been enough for me. As you say, though, they're not likely to make a change.

In my mind (which is a muddy place sometimes) I'd have made all the power sets identical in format and ability, but with different special effects (so Power Bolts would do exactly the same damage as Flares, would use the same endurance and have the same range, but would have the special effects of the specific powers, that is, knockback and a small DOT). That would have meant Super Strength would have had Hurl, Energy Melee would have Energy Blast and so on. But that's me.

And many of us wish we could grab cars and telephone poles and smack things with them. Too bad the engine can't support it.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It seemed to me, considering how Claws performed, that Defenders suffered inordinately in this regard.

[/ QUOTE ]

And this is where you need to learn the game. The secondary effect of Claws is a reduced endurance cost. Thank you for using completely inappropriate comparisons.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, good lord, go back and read the thread, I already SAID that this wasn't a fair comparison, and was the reason why I used my Shield Scrapper instead.

I don't agree with your assessment (yes, I know you're shocked).

My assertion has been that endurance costs are too high, and that characters are constantly running out, often in dealing with minor threats. It seemed to me, considering how Claws performed, that Defenders suffered inordinately in this regard. My extensive experience with Tankers led me to conclude that they also suffered disproportionately. I described an experience with my Defender to support this. It turned out that the example I described was an outlier, and not a good example.

Thus I initiated a test roughly concurrent to your own. I found that my Defender and Scrapper both ran out of endurance frequently, supporting my original assertion, but neither seemed to suffer more than the other.

You described your characters having some endurance-related stoppages as well, though perhaps not as frequently as mine did. As I said, the difference was on the small side, from the sound of it, and considering the small sample of data, not very telling. Simple luck would be enough to account for the difference.

In other words, my original assertion stands, that endurance is too costly. As for the rest, well, lacking more definitive data, I can't say more.

I neither waffled nor equivocated. I simply carried on in search of truth.

Hard to say. I've never actually made a Tanker with Taunt (I almost exclusively solo, and I've never needed anything other than Gauntlet), so I can't speak to how it works. As for Gauntlet, since you're in melee range, how would you know?

Hm, I wasn't aware that Taunt forced them to close the distance to engage in melee...

I wonder how that affects enemies that have no melee attacks (as in the case of some custom critters).


I suppose I see what everyone is saying. Ah well, it was an idea.

No, he can't throw his hammer, which is signature Thor, even in the myths, but as with everything, I have to make concessions. He feels enough like Thor otherwise, though, so he still is satisfying to play.

I see what you mean, if the ranged attacks do the same damage as melee attacks, that would be tankmagey. I agree. That's why I pointed out that ranged attacks do less damage than melee.

Using Energy Melee (for example), I would expect the melee powers to be the same as the existing melee powers (eg. if Bone Smasher does 100 damage in Energy Melee, it should do that in Energy Assault). The ranged attacks would do less damage than the melee attacks simply by virtue of the fact that they're ranged. Would that be enough? I don't know, I don't have the numbers in front of me, but if it's still too much, then they could be adjusted. I'm still looking for balance, here.

[ QUOTE ]
At some point you (all of us) has to realize that this is a video game with a finite amount of possibilities. Not all concepts are going to be able to be realized.

Try making Thor ... see how far you get.

P.S. - CO will help but only to a limited degree. If you go the defensive route, your damage will be equal to Defender damage (which is generally considered lower then Tanker damage) and if you go the nuker route, the best you can hope for in defenses is to be Scrapper like (unmodified).

[/ QUOTE ]


Actually, I made a version of Thor already, as a Stone/Elec Brute! It actually works pretty well. The Hammer effects sound like thunder rolling. War Mace, using the warhammer, might look better, but it wasn't available at the time.

If you're suggesting a Tanker that does Tanker damage is a Tankmage, then every Tanker in the game is a Tankmage already. Obviously ludicrous.

Actually, I'd love a character with Tanker toughness and Defender damage output, if that's what was deemed balanced. The problem I have with the Defender isn't that he had no damage or that he has no defense, it's that he has NEITHER (though the FF/EB build improves as it matures).


I'd never advocate proliferating the special effect sets, such as the controls, buffs or debuffs. Just pure damage sets. Damage is Damage, but the buffs, debuffs and other effects can completely change the way the game plays, and thereby unbalance things easily. Can you imagine a Will/Mind Control Tanker? He'd never die!

To put it in perspective, I see no reason why any AT that does normal damage couldn't use a combined melee/ranged set. Use the Corruptor as an example. What would be wrong with a Traps/Energy Assault Corruptor (as opposed to Traps/Energy Blast)? The damage set is generating damage. What's the difference if it's melee or ranged?

Tankers tend to suffer at lower level, in my experience. I don't see them getting a benefit at lower level as unbalanced at all. It could be argued that it's making it better balanced. As they level up, they tend to fight foes with more ranged attacks, and often longer ranged ranged attacks. I think it's still balanced, but of any criticism, this is the most salient to me. It might result in excessive survivability on Tankers. Personally, I think it would result in a slight increase in survivability, but reduced offense would balance it. Then again, I could be wrong. It would be interesting to see some actual numbers to see how it might play out.

The sets would need to have Taunt, as you say, and I suggested it might be inserted in place of the usual Snipe attack. Beyond that, I'm not sure what you mean. The Tanker could aggro them and then take them apart one at a time? Isn't that what happens now? As I say, this confuses me a bit, could you elaborate?

I agree, the Peacebringer might be a decent option, except for the fact that it's not avaialable. Not to me, and not to many players. I can overlook the alien origin of the peacebringer, and tell myself it's something different, but there's something oddly displeasing about that. It's hard to put a finger on. I mean, if I want to pretend, I don't need a game at all. I can pretend all sorts of things.

Either way, I'm just trying to suggest a way to create more options for character design.

Hellincarnate is referring once again to the Ancillary/Epic Power Pools, and I've addressed this suggestion.

Again, I have a pretty good sense of what the game has to offer now, I'm looking at ways to expand on that in a positive way.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, being limited to only melee powers is very limiting to concepts like mine, that require the combination of toughness and ranged powers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you even read feedback? As others have posted, you are NOT limited to melee attacks. There are ranged attacks in the Epics and I can think of two Secondaries that both include a ranged attack.

What you want is a Tankmage.

My Energy/Energy/Elc Blaster is a homage to Iron Man. He's plenty tough. Of course there are some irregularities to his concept but since he's a homage in a world where someone elses rules apply, I work with what I'm given. If you haven't tried the Elec pool for Blasters, then you are missing out. Surge of Power is a excellent tool (yes, I know you look like a gremlin) and Charged Armor certainly adds some toughness to your character by giving you resistance to the 3 most popular damage types in this game; smashing, lethal and energy.

I can't wait for CO to be released. Finally we'll stop seeing posts from yourself and J_B about your silly concepts and how CoX can't meet your design goals.

[/ QUOTE ]


Do you even read my posts, or do you just jerk your knee at the first few words?

I have said several times that the epic pools are nice, but they come at the very end of the character's existence. The character concept is often, even usually, the first thing created. Thus, L41 is an awful long time to wait to finally realize the character's original conception, and even then only to a limited degree.

I specifically said I don't want a Tankmage. A Tanker that does Tanker damage is not a Tankmage. The difference between a ranged attack that does 50 damage and a melee attack that does 50 damage is NOTHING. The only difference is the presentation of the power. The reality is even that the ranged attack would actually do closer to 35 damage, since ranged attacks are less powerful in general. Then again, I said this too.

I also said it's not about making an Iron Man homage (well, not ONLY for that). Variety is the spice of life, and CHOICE is everything. Giving Tankers, and indeed, all ATs, more choices when building their characters is a GOOD thing. I suggested making the Dominator sets available, because they're fairly balanced already, in the general range of damage output for Tankers already and in the game already. That is, there's relatively little work involved.

Finally, I hate to burst your bubble, but even if CO meets my expectations, I'll very likely still hang around here. You'll be able to post to my threads with unwarranted hostility well into the future.

(I was going to use the "T" word, but it's not allowed here)

Oh, I'm agreeing with you! There's some serious issues with custom characters of all sorts (Lord Dire, a custom EB, did over 600 damage with one Charged Brawl to my Claws Scrapper at L8! The Scrapper only has a maximum of 574 health! I don't usually use the word "stupid," but I can't think of a better description).

On the other hand, you can't say a Defender is as hardy as a Tanker.

There are many people who just like playing Tankers for their survivability. Even if it means less damage, we like being tough enough to withstand whatever gets tossed our way. However, being limited to only melee powers is very limiting to concepts like mine, that require the combination of toughness and ranged powers.

You may be right, perhaps I'll like Champions Online, lord knows I keep comparing CoH to the old PnP version. Until that comes along though, wouldn't a little more choice be nice?

Actually, I've been playing an Iron Man homage on Infinity that's a FF/EB Defender (Technaught, he's in the Techwar arc in my sig), and I'm kind of enjoying it. The problem is he solos like a brick, what with minimal defenses (at this point, anyway) and minimal offense. No, it's not about damage/tankmagery, but it still has to be fun, and playing a solo defender is often like pulling teeth. Plus, he's still very squishy. He's been essentially one-shotted frequently already (granted, by custom bosses). Still, I agree it's as close as I've ever come. Even at that, it would still have been nice to have the choice of a power set that's a mix of melee and ranged attacks.

I agree, Tankers tend to be melee characters, but I see no reason why they have to be. I mean, Tankers have two mandates, get aggro and survive it. Neither task demands melee. I simply thought this would open up more options.

Remember that the other side of this is not about the Iron Man comparison. It's about opening up options for people who like playing Tankers.