Void_X

[ QUOTE ]
Worst. Forum. War. Evar.

And this KEEPS happening on the CoH forums. People disagree, argue for a while, and then... people see each others points, and it just evaporates. Now you're even discussing the original topic! What's WRONG with you people!

(I love the CoH forums. Thank you everyone for restoring my faith in humanity and all that. )

Yeah, I'd blow lots of influence on good costume pieces. I'm already blowing real money on them. Why not influence?

[/ QUOTE ]

I could always start smashing them again to entertain you!

[ QUOTE ]
I've got a PB (sry my ws is only lvl 6). He's a dual build, one build is a strict nova/dwarf build, who is io'd out. The second build is the human form, which is tons of fun.

My human form (uber destructive) isn't all the way io'd out yet, but it's getting there. Remember there's a reason why Khelds are called EPIC.

That said when i'm dwarf form I can tank circles around most tanks (with the exception of stone/ tanks), this may be due to the fact that most tanks nowadays are noobs.

I also have a sd/dm tank, who has high damage output and can keep aggro pretty well, he's only got generic io's on him though.

With that said i'd say, if u want to play something fun, go with the ws.

If you want to go with something that is suppose to built for tanking go for the tank.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, one thing noticably different about PB Dwarf and WS Dwarf is that PBs have a taunt component built into their AoE. WS Dwarfs do not and therefore have to utilize Antagonize more often to maintain aggro on large spawns.

Regarding the tanking ability of Kheldian Dwarf Forms; they can Tank very well. My WS is just under 30 at the moment and i regularly Tank for 8 player groups against +3s and hold aggro fine. Sometimes high damage Scrappers can pull a mob or two off of me but for the most part everything stays on me. At this point his resists are hovering around 60% base, not counting any bonus from the inherent. His defense value is still sitting low (a measly 3% from the Steadfast Unique) and it helps to have a debuffer or healer backing me up on 8 man teams to deal with the Alpha.

Thats yet another check mark in the WS Dwarf column; currently he is 13 levels higher than my SD/Fire Tank. They are both still using just Common IOs. I wont invest in their Sets until 47+, outside of the uniques such as Procs, Numina, Miracle, etc.

Thanks for the input so far!

The input is pretty much what I expected but alot more heavily leaning towards the Tanker than I had hoped. I was hoping to build a unique toon and invest lots of inf into it, the Dwarf WS with 30+% positional defense to all is exactly that. While the SD/Fire will be alot cheaper to build but is also alot more common.

The reasons behind creating and focusing on the Dwarf WS are numerous, only later did I become interested in the SD/Fire Tanker.

With the WS, I love the way Dwarf form Looks and Operates. The playstyle is MUCH more involved, due to switching forms for buffs and pets, while still staying alive and maintaing aggro and good damage. I have played tons of Scrappers/Tanks/Brutes, and not a single one requires much thought or skill (in my opinion). Dwarf WS seems to be a much more active and invloved toon where i can shine based on my "skill" as a player, and the quality of my build, moreso than other melee toons.

Another key factor is that the build I pulled together, with the help of a very knowledgable WS player, is ridiculously good. Having Capped Resists as well as over 30% defense to all positions is very close to Granite survivability, if not better depending on the particular Granite AT/Build used. It requires heavy inf investment but the payoff is phenomenal and I will end up with a very unique toon that not many people (if any) have or can afford. When you add in the Kheldian inherent buffs, the toon will be off the charts!

The final reason, is because I also have a nicely IOd PB, that is Human form mainly and I enjoy Kheldians a great deal. I thought it would be cool to have a second Kheldian of the other variety that out performs most other toons.

I am currently leaning towards the Tanker, due to the responses so far. It will be cheaper overall (though i have enough inf that this factor isnt a very big deal) and everyone seems to think it will outperform the Dwarf WS despite the fantastic build I plan on using. Still no final decision yet, I will keep looking for more opinions from everyone.

Keep the comments coming! Yall are making my decision more informed with every post.

Im looking for some information and opinions on the comparison of a Dwarf Form Warshade to a Shield Defense/Fire Melee Tanker. What I am looking to find out is which toon I should focus on for my next project. I have gathered quite a bit of information (builds, slotting, playstyles) for both of the toons but now its time to make a decision.

A little info about my goals for the toon as well as the amount I plan on investing into it: This will be my new "main" on hero side and therefore I will be investing as much as needed to completely IO/Purple this toon. My inf reserves are quite high (a tad under 900 million at the moment) and I generate income very quickly through farming and utilizing the Market. I am looking for a toon that is Melee, is able to "Tank" and hold aggro in even the most difficult teams and situations, but also can sustain a firm attack chain with enough damage to feel useful on large AoE oriented Teams or soloing large +2-+3 spawns for farming. As I said, this will be my new main hero side toon and therefore should be able to farm efficiently as well as contribute to large teams for TFs and the MA.

Also of note, this will NOT be a Triform or Nova based Warshade. The main playstyle will be in Dwarf form (using the human form for buffs/pets as needed) and the IO investment and build will be focusing on making this Dwarf a melee monster. It will be played as a Tanker/Scrapper/Brute, all the time.

With that being said, I like both of the toons and have been alternating my play time between them. Sadly, my time has been very limited lately and therefore my comparison of the two toons is somewhat lacking. I have yet to push past level 30 on either toon, much less been able to judge how they compare at 50 with fully slotted IOs.

This is where I need your help, if you have the experience to comment honestly on either toon. I want to know everyones opinion concerning which toon has better damage mitigation, firmer aggro management, and better damage (aoe and single target, mainly focused on AoE potential though).

I have a feeling most replies will say that the Tanker is better at aggro management, and I would agree due to Gauntlet and lack of a taunt component for the Dwarf Wardshade AoE.

I also have a feeling that most people will assert that the Tanker has better mitigation (capped defense with some resists) compared to the Kheldian which has capped resists. I will say that the build I am using for my Dwarf Warshade ends up with not only capped resists but also 30+% defense to all positions, which really muddies that argument.

The MAIN question I need answered is which is better for overall damage. It is very hard to judge, even when using the dps calculations within Mids. The Dwarf will have his damage potential completely changed based on the two self buffs available so often, the multiple pets contributing to damage, and also the added damage potential that comes from their inherent. The Tanks damage potential with Shield Charge, AAO, Combustion, and Fire Sword Circle is somewhat static outside of focusing on recharge values to maintain Build Up as much as possible.

So lets hear it: Which toon do YOU think is "better"? Which one would YOU focus on and invest 500+ million into? Is the damage mitigation, aggro management, and damage potential as close as I think or am I mistaken? Thanks in advance for all your replies. I am ready to focus on this project heavily and need to make sure I am choosing the best option considering the amount I will be spending on it.

The suggestion of creating more sinks has some merit if we feel that surplus inf is a true problem. Someone mentioned implementing badges and costume pieces the rely heavily on inf to achieve. I think this would be a sure fire way to eliminate a large pool of inf from the system. The great thing about the suggestion is that it would not only eliminate a huge chunk upon implementation but also continue to be a great sink over time.

Great suggestion!

Also, restructuring the way costume pricing and availability works is another great way to eliminate inf from the system. As long as the pricing and structure is not too ridiculous (like the inf -> prestige conversion, thats just a crazy ratio) people will gladly use it. Everyone I know loves having at least one secondary costume and most people spend the time to use all their costume slots. I certainly wouldnt hesitate to spend 50-100 million in order to have a second costume; especially considering how quickly inf can be generated these days.

Milady, I did take the time to read your post. You seem to take the word I used, "superior", in a much more aggressive manner than I intended.

I certainly dont look down on crafters or people who stick to using the Market. I dont feel as though I am a superior player or person because I produce massive amounts of goods and new influence which allow them to enjoy their respective niches. Swell merely wanted to assault my views and force me to use forceful replies in hopes that people like you would join in and help run me out of this thread.

I will refrain from starting it up again. It was silly to pursue it the first time. It would be a complete waste of time, at least within this forum and thread, to doi so again.

I knew what I was getting into when I made the initial post. The sad thing is, my initial message of...

"Yall really should stop insulting people who dont use the Market heavily to line their pockets"

...was completely lost because one guy wanted me to expand on how I view and use the market. I should have ignored him and saved everyone the trouble of reading through our ridiculous argument. For that, I apologize. I certainly dont apologize for my opinion. I will always feel that people who are producing the good are more necessary than people who "move" or make "income" from the good. I dont see or understand how anyone could think otherwise.

Swell, I will just say one last thing: I am NOT anti-market in the slightest. I use the market just as much as heavily invested marketeers. I am simply someone who understands why so many people hate the market and why the prevailing attitude (the attitude you display in every one of your posts) hinders the goal of getting more people involved in the market. That is all. If you feel the need to keep attacking me, do it through PM and save these fine folks the trouble of reading your nonsense.

Nethergoat, I am in complete agreement with you. It could easily be argued that without the initial good/product/drop the "white collar" worker would have no job at all. That is beside the point, however, when determining that both producer and marketeer make for a better system than just a producer who markets his own goods.

Great analogy, even if I disagree with the definitive statement that the system wouldnt work without the white collar worker.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I agree that the Market enables others to prosper due to the actions of others. I am someone who doesnt mind that. I know when i sell low and buy high, repeatedly, someone who enjoys the Market mini-game is getting wealthy off of my labor.


[/ QUOTE ]

No, they are getting wealthy off of their labor. THIS displays your underlying error.

You are choosing to sell at the price you choose, just like I do, to get their inf now or you are choosing to pay buy it now prices to save your time, just like I do.

They are taking the time and effort to buy and sell patiently to the sell it now and buy it now crowds. They provide a service to save me time. If you could see that you might get it but you don't so you won't. Just like the clueless market haters.

[/ QUOTE ]

Im sorry but I do not consider using the Market alone to gain influence in the same vein as I consider generating an actual product.

One is labor the other is using the fruits of someones labor to generate revenue. We definitely disagree on that point. Its similar to saying collecting/generating interest on $1000 requires the same amount of effort (labor) as actually generating that wage through work.

You can call me whatever you want and try to lump me into whatever group you deem appropriate. There are DEFINITIVE differences between the two "types of work" we are discussing. Not the least of which; Marketing can be done while you are offline while generating a product (new influence, salvage, recipes) can not be done offline.

Seriously man, quit pushing your agenda so hard and think about what you are attempting to argue about here. I am not someone who cares one way or another, but I wont let you post things that are simply ridiculous without calling you on it. Especially when you are replying directly to, and selectively quoting, my posts.

I am not interested in arguing semantics with someone on the Market forum or defending every post I make from ridiculous assertions. If thats what your goal is, I am afraid I wont be playing along much longer.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never wrote it was the same. I wrote that it was labor. I bet there are more people who would scoff at you defining playing the game and getting drops as labor than have ever played an MMO.

You do care or you wouldn't claim some superior labor to the marketeers.

You seem to believe there is some virtue in getting drops to bring to market. I am trying to point out to you that without those marketeers you wouldn't be able to sell most of your drops except to NPCs and there would be no amount of inf that would be able to buy certain items.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is superior labor and it doesnt take professional "Marketeers" to make the world go round. I have already given one blatant reason why producing new inf or drops is more intensive labor (superior) and the others are not very difficult to understand either. If you missed it, shame on you. I see no way of viewing it in any other logical fashion outside of blatantly deceiving myself.

Nice strawman by the way; did you actually want a reply to that?

Thats it for me, i derailed Fulmens thread quite enough by replying to you in defense of my posts. We must agree to disagree. The continued personal insults against those who dont view the Market as you do, do not solve anything. I made my point, and defended it soundly.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I agree that the Market enables others to prosper due to the actions of others. I am someone who doesnt mind that. I know when i sell low and buy high, repeatedly, someone who enjoys the Market mini-game is getting wealthy off of my labor.


[/ QUOTE ]

No, they are getting wealthy off of their labor. THIS displays your underlying error.

You are choosing to sell at the price you choose, just like I do, to get their inf now or you are choosing to pay buy it now prices to save your time, just like I do.

They are taking the time and effort to buy and sell patiently to the sell it now and buy it now crowds. They provide a service to save me time. If you could see that you might get it but you don't so you won't. Just like the clueless market haters.

[/ QUOTE ]

Im sorry but I do not consider using the Market alone to gain influence in the same vein as I consider generating an actual product.

One is labor the other is using the fruits of someones labor to generate revenue. We definitely disagree on that point. Its similar to saying collecting/generating interest on $1000 requires the same amount of effort (labor) as actually generating that wage through work.

You can call me whatever you want and try to lump me into whatever group you deem appropriate. There are DEFINITIVE differences between the two "types of work" we are discussing. Not the least of which; Marketing can be done while you are offline while generating a product (new influence, salvage, recipes) can not be done offline.

Seriously man, quit pushing your agenda so hard and think about what you are attempting to argue about here. I am not someone who cares one way or another, but I wont let you post things that are simply ridiculous without calling you on it. Especially when you are replying directly to, and selectively quoting, my posts.

I am not interested in arguing semantics with someone on the Market forum or defending every post I make from ridiculous assertions. If thats what your goal is, I am afraid I wont be playing along much longer.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure it was Nethergoat who posted about eons ago, but influence distribution
and therefore price setting is heavily skewed towards actively played level 50's. They earn inf
faster and even a hundred million doesn't take that long to gain. They are heavy consumers
of the "good" stuff and I think that is why those prices are the ones seeing inflationary pressure.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Eons ago", that was probably the entire story as well. It may still be true now, but it needn't
be the case any more. Why? The market.

The market doesn't create *any* new influence. In fact, it actually removes it (through
fees), although, with hundreds of billions coming into the game normally, it can be difficult
to see that sometimes.

But what it does do, better than any other approach, is share/spread rich people's influence
around to other players (including, thankfully, myself). It helps distribute those billions
to players who aren't actually creating it in any appreciable volume.

The market is the #1 way of *evening out* the distribution of influence in this game.

Think about that for a second.

All those guys running all the tf's, grinding the Cimeoran wall with their perma doms and FOTM
fire blasters make massive amounts of influence through sheer time, effort, and power gaming.

But (and I love this), they also *share* their hard-earned (and deserved) influence with me,
and I don't even have to ask them to do so - because of the market.

They get rid of their excess salvage, recipes, SO's, etc. and they spend large amounts
on the market buying what does interest them at NAO prices - because they can.

Prior to the market, those folks still did those sorts of things, but where did the influence go?

Nowhere. Maybe to a costume... Maybe to some SG buddies, but not to you or me.

If I could make the so-called casual gamers (and Positron) see ONE thing in this game,
I'd want them to see this:

Without a doubt, the market is, in fact, the very best enabler for players in this game.

Anything that actually does break the market skews the influence distribution back into
the hands of the farmers, large SG's, full-time players who are creating the bulk of it.

That's why I find this thread interesting... We've seen a lot of recent changes and we've
observed the market effects. A healthy discussion of those changes, as is occurring here
(imho) is a Good Thing. Personally, I think the most recent changes have helped fix the
disaster that I13 merits was causing.



Regards,
4

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that the Market enables others to prosper due to the actions of others. I am someone who doesnt mind that. I know when i sell low and buy high, repeatedly, someone who enjoys the Market mini-game is getting wealthy off of my labor.

I hold no illusions that everyone else has the same opinion about that issue though. Some people are very bitter about people using the Market to profit from their labors. Some people directly attribute inflation to the Market and therefore believe higher prices are due to people who enjoy the Market mini-game.

This is something I addressed in my previous post. Generalizing the opinions of people, specifically people who dont even post/read these forums at all, let alone the Market forum; it is just silly. Its a ridiculous assumption that I see people in this forum make all the time.

[ QUOTE ]
It is much less obvious to me that this is a true problem. As long as everyone's buying and selling the same stuff, does it matter if we tack a zero onto the end of every price? Not much.[u] It may make a difference, though, to the ignorant and the new; the people who haven't grasped the simple-to-us principles of buying and selling.[u] I find it inelegant to have ever-increasing prices; that doesn't mean that the prices themselves are a problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a HUGE assumption on your part and one that I can not agree with. Frankly, I am surprised to see you post it considering how broad the generalization actually is.

I dont want to state the obvious but it will make me feel a bit better, so I will. The Market can be used to generate influence/infamy without ever "playing" the game outside of using the Market. This fact, in essence (no matter how faulty the logic is), is why there is so much hate for the Market and those who champion it. Think of it in terms of real life "class warfare" and you will understand where it comes from and that it will never go away. The efficiency of generating said income through the Market is above and beyond any other revenue stream within the game, due to the nature of how buying and selling over time, while offline, is heavily rewarded.

To answer your question, from my point of view; personally I dont care if we have perpetual in game inflation or rising costs. I dont dig that deep into it as entertainment. I do play alot, but I play doing something I enjoy, and that is enough for me.

Whether I sell my stuff on the market or not has no bearing on what I enjoy within the game. Consequently, the price of something is simply an arbitrary number (or goal) I must achieve and I am rarely concerned with what that actual number is. My only concern is with being able to achieve that goal or number by doing what I enjoy within the game. Unless they remove enemies from the game or remove all rewards for killing enemies, I will always be able to achieve that goal.

Anyway, I didnt mean to preach about how "Ebil Marketeers" misunderstand the reasons why people dont like the Market. Afterall, I enjoy reading all the critical analysis that goes on within this forum specifically. Even if I view it as a waste of time to enjoy a game's economy, I still find it interesting to read the opinions of people who do.

I played a gravity controller for quite a long time so have a good bit of experience with Gravity as a powerset. Ive also played a Gravity Dominator, simply because I love Gravity so much despite its performance issues.

There are three easy fixes that will not make the set overpowered, will bring it up to par with the other control sets, and overall give Gravity the attention it has needed for a long time but has yet to receive.

1) Lift needs to be an AoE or Cone power with its damage scaled down to reflect the change. One thing Gravity does not lack is single target control and damage. Using Lift to shore up the lack of AoE soft control and damage is the most logical place to start.

2)Wormhole needs to be altered so that the radius is slightly larger and the knockback is converted into knockup or knockdown. It also needs to come earlier in the set; between 12-22 is fair. The activiation time also should be looked at and probably shortened.

3) Dimension Shift needs to be removed from the set and replaced with am AoE soft control power. The consensus is that a Location Based AoE that uses Knockup as a soft control; similar to how Freezing Rain or Ice Slick use Knockdown as a soft control. In this case, such a power could be interchangable with Wormhole as far as the level they are available go. Iwould prefer that Wormhole stay later in the set while a power like this be gotten earlier.

That is all. With those three changes, gravity would perform on at least the same level as other control sets and would be more played, and also more enjoyable for those that play the set. These changes are realistic in terms of game balance, seemingly not too resource intensive for the Devs, and dont diminish the "feel" of Gravity Control but rather enhance it noticeably.

I know we have all been lobbying to the Devs for a much change to our favorite control set, for a long time. I can only hope that a Red Name or Dev read this thread and take action, this time. I dont care what certain Devs have said about not doing this, or changing that, in the past. Today is where we are. They CAN and SHOULD change their minds based on the amount of player feedback they have received about this particular problem.

How many threads about Gravity that are tons of pages long, with multiple ideas and fixes for the powerset, need to be made before someone in charge finally says "Lets make Gravity shine!"? Not too many more I hope.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am surprised I havent found it yet, if it is there; if its not there, it needs to be at the top of the priority list.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have to empty the custom group of all creatures. You can either delete them (custom enemies), remove them (original enemies), or change the group they're associated with (custom enemies).

Once the custom group is empty it'll vanish.

Deleting characters, if that's how you want to do it, is done through mycreattions->mycharactes, not from within the editor for your story.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I say MA Editor, I mean the entire interface, not just the Story Creation interface.

I found a way to do it within the editor.

You have to use the "My Creations" tab and there is a delete option when you click on a Custom Group.

Problem solved, thanks for your replies. Obviously I was blind, rather than dumb.

Post deleted by Void_X