brophog02

Do you also hate booster packs, cutscenes, and anything cute and cuddly?

You mean those games that milk their customers dry with these things, and in general, infuriate their customers who feel like they are being nickel and dimed to death?

Such an item goes against the model set forth by this game, wherein the micro-transactions (namely, packs) are designed as fluff, and have little or no bearing on actual gameplay. Even powers such as Ninja Run are designed in a way that their usage does not equal other powers currently within the game.

EDIT: Let me clarify:

The doomsday situation given above suggests the Scrapper has little choice but to absorb all of the aggro from the spawn. He may be able to initially grab aggro, and keep it to a certain degree, but the mobs aren't going to run away from a blaster throwing AOEs at him and kill the Scrapper simply because he has a relatively weak taunt aura on, because the Blaster is generating threat and the taunt auras aren't much bigger than melee range. It's not an instant death sentence in this situation, his mates don't need him to hold all of the aggro, and the two mates are going to have their share of the aggro in nearly any situation simply because they are generating a large amount of threat with their attacks, and the aura is so small.

It's ironic that the tankers will complain that a taunt aura like WP is too small and ineffective, yet this Scrapper complaint is that the taunt aura is a death sentence. It's simply not a realistic example unless you play with mates that like to go AFK and laugh at you.

He essentially described a blapper..........

Thee are solutions (alpha slot, careful toggle management, etc), but you may have to accept the fact that you are not able to keep everything at the level they are currently at. That's why we call it min-maxing.

Why are all of the mobs attacking one scrapper? How is this realistic, in the slightest? I've never been in any situation, at any level, where an AT couldn't handle at least some aggro, and by definition, your example means 2 players aren't capable of handling any aggro.

Good advice. The other piece I'd add is in terms of quantity.......one comment will usually be treated in isolation, but if you do it 10 times, the player is much more likely to just ignore you, or quit.

No matter what, you'll always have players who don't like constructive help and sooner or later someone will get angry. Be the mature one, have a thick skin, and don't make the matter any worse. Some people are simply going to get angry and quit, and responding to them will just make it more uncomfortable for the rest of the team.

I loved old defiance (at the time). I don't mind dying. I had a toon that I deleted after defiance changes, simply because his style really only worked with old defiance. Old defiance could be a lot of fun if you accepted its fallbacks; perma-debt, ridiculously slow leveling, and limited damage in team environments (since you couldn't really leverage old defiance well on teams). You played for the thrill of surviving, and the hope that you'd reach the next level before you retired. It was a badge of honor to be in perma-debt, and teams didn't quit simply because they faced the slightest amount of resistance.

From a perfomance standpoint, old defiance completely pales in comparison to new defiance. The normalization of damage gives you a constant buff, the mez workaround makes it so that you're not instantly dead due to one mez, and it works a lot better in a team setting. There is a reason many ATs have seen similar normalizations, because it is an easy fix to several problems. It's easier for the players to balance around, and much easier for the devs to balance around.

Old defiance simply doesn't work in this environment. We have IOs now (which we didn't have then), debt is all but eliminated, and the game is not about simply surviving and leveling, but about maxing out your characters to make everything as overpowered as possible. In that light, old defiance fails, miserably. It was a neat idea (from a comic standpoint), but a very poor game mechanic (like many of the older mechanics). It didn't work solo (because the odds of you pulling out that miracle were really quite low given the alive or dead binary nature of the game), and was next to useless in a team setting.

There is a reason why you will find nearly unanimous levels of opinion on this subject.

Exactly. Using the term as some defacto excuse doesn't fly.

Until your highly flawed assertion that it was 'only my opinion', there was nothing rude in our conversation (and if you think you did adequate research and that my opinion was mine only, I do question your reading comprehension skills). My advice in my original post is one I give in all suggestions threads, and for good reason: most of them do not do the research necessary to avoid getting embarrassed.

Learn from this lesson, and walk away from this thread. It will not get any prettier as it goes along. Before making any more suggestions, I highly recommend you do the proper work necessary to ensure it is a workable suggestion. It takes a lot of work to make a good suggestion, and junk thrown on the board will get the treatment one would expect.

If you think I'm being rude, you do not have skin thick enough to be throwing up poorly constructed, flawed suggestions.

Did your reading comprehension in the search go as bad as your reading comprehension in this thread?

That pretty much sums up every suggestions thread, and a large percentage of the general threads.

You haven't met Blasters yet. We don't get powers that outdo our friends.....the purple inspirations.

And I severely dislike when people are full of a load of crap.

Yes, it is. The set up time running multiple smaller TFs is what makes one big TF worth your while because the set up time in some cases can easily equal the time it takes to do the TF. The smaller TFs are not run very much at all, because for the total time invested the merits are deemed rather small. It's the same reason many think GMs are not worth the time necessary, even though the time it takes a team to actually kill one GM is easily a good deal for the 2 merits.

With inspiration combining it is very likely that they can continue the entire map defense capped on inspirations alone. In many cases, a toon (whether it be need for reds or purples) is better off with 8 man spawns solo than a lower number, simply due to how crazy fast inspirations drop in solo spawns.

I definitely support Strato on this. Blasters, more than any other AT, are balanced around inspirations. Frankly, they don't work without inspirations, and that's just a fact of life. No matter how much you have in your primary/secondary/power pools/epics.......one mez in that spawn and you likely face death.

If anything, slotting blasters is nothing but an exercise in reducing the number of skittles one consumes.

It really depends on the toon, and the particular alphas being debated. The difference between a Total Core Revamp and a Core Paragon isn't much more than the extra ED bypass, however, for a toon that can use the Radial Paragon it can be very worthwhile to go to a very rare.