Yay! More nerfs!
/cry
[ QUOTE ]
He is still stuck on the 3 minion = 1 hero.
[/ QUOTE ]
Slight derailing. As he explained in that post (allthough not clearly enough) is that the game is designed so that a hero/villain will usually wind up fighting 3 minions. In a solo mission when you enter a room, chances are there'll be a group of 3 minions there to fight (or 1Lt and 1minion). They can't change this (or at least it would be too much work to do so), so they need this to be challanging for a hero to fight sicne that's what the game will throw at them most of the time.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He is still stuck on the 3 minion = 1 hero.
[/ QUOTE ]
Slight derailing. As he explained in that post (allthough not clearly enough) is that the game is designed so that a hero/villain will usually wind up fighting 3 minions. In a solo mission when you enter a room, chances are there'll be a group of 3 minions there to fight (or 1Lt and 1minion). They can't change this (or at least it would be too much work to do so), so they need this to be challanging for a hero to fight sicne that's what the game will throw at them most of the time.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well a way to change this and still keep it within limit is to say that a hero = 1 lt 2 minions for example... or tanker defense = 1 boss 2 minions while tanker offense = 3 minions.
Could care less about toggle dropping in PVP wish they would lower the NPCS so my brutes/tanks and scrappers would not get stunned on large teams unless they have the right helpers.
[ QUOTE ]
This is also interesting:
[ QUOTE ]
Do you guys really listen to our suggestions for powersets, costume options, map, etc....? If so can we have a example?
Oddly, ED came as a suggestion for diminishing returns on the forums. Archery and Sonics were both mentioned.
[/ QUOTE ]
I would like to know the name of the person who suggested this...
[/ QUOTE ]
I believe it was Havoc that brought up the idea first.
Everyone might as well not even bother anymore at this point. They want us playing on the heroic standard and that is possible with every combintaion of character that I have seen to date. We ran some missions on test last Saturday to see if a Tanker would be missed in teams and we came to the conclusion that the ATs are fairly well-balanced for the Heroic range and that team composition mattered much less than the mission length and skill of the players in a team. I don't mind being weakened down to this level anymore, I just wish that my passives didn't seem to be such poor choices for my Tanker to take.
"I never said thank you." - Lt. Gordon
"And you'll never have to." - the Dark Knight
[ QUOTE ]
Could care less about toggle dropping in PVP wish they would lower the NPCS so my brutes/tanks and scrappers would not get stunned on large teams unless they have the right helpers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Eh? Even with the mez resistance hit, tanks and scrappers still have a pretty good mez protection. And if you're on a large team, odds are you're going to see more mez buffs from controllers/defenders.
Chief Hamster of the Fist of Justice / Shadows of Victory
Victory Server: Join Victory Forum for team forming and general game chat and IRC Chat: irc.hashmark.net #victory for offline chatting.
Rock, rock on Hamster.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Could care less about toggle dropping in PVP wish they would lower the NPCS so my brutes/tanks and scrappers would not get stunned on large teams unless they have the right helpers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Eh? Even with the mez resistance hit, tanks and scrappers still have a pretty good mez protection. And if you're on a large team, odds are you're going to see more mez buffs from controllers/defenders.
[/ QUOTE ]
My brute has plenty of times when he teams with plenty of masterminds and there is little to no corruptor in sight. Not all defenders and controllers have mezz protection(storm, Dark, TA) and I find it ridicoulous that I have to get certain ones in particular.
I replied to States abt looking into those powers like Tanker passives that only use one type of enh. The purpose of ED would not have applied to those powers, unless the intent was "tough luck".
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He is still stuck on the 3 minion = 1 hero.
[/ QUOTE ]
Slight derailing. As he explained in that post (allthough not clearly enough) is that the game is designed so that a hero/villain will usually wind up fighting 3 minions. In a solo mission when you enter a room, chances are there'll be a group of 3 minions there to fight (or 1Lt and 1minion). They can't change this (or at least it would be too much work to do so), so they need this to be challanging for a hero to fight sicne that's what the game will throw at them most of the time.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well a way to change this and still keep it within limit is to say that a hero = 1 lt 2 minions for example... or tanker defense = 1 boss 2 minions while tanker offense = 3 minions.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're still missing the point, firebane.
The 3 minion = 1 hero thing only applies to the spawn counts. It is not an upper limit as to what a hero should be able to tackle. Rather, it is a minimum.
[ QUOTE ]
I replied to States abt looking into those powers like Tanker passives that only use one type of enh. The purpose of ED would not have applied to those powers, unless the intent was "tough luck".
[/ QUOTE ]
A big part of the purpose of ED was to tone down the power level of the entire game (from a Player's perspective). So in that sense, yes Tanker passives were very much a part of the purpose of ED (although ED and I5 combined, it went over the edge).
Tanker Primaries, while not glorious for the most part, were worth tanking and slotting right away. Many (if not all) aren't now at the lower levels due to the small base numbers (this is one arguement I whole heartedly agree with).
This exacerbates the Tanker's underwhelming feeling.
Statesman (in my mind) is also balancing things in CoH to the wrong equation. He is basing what *should work* balance wise, not on his personal experience, but on someone else's model (EQ).
The problem is that CoH doesn't follow the EQ model is a vast variety of ways.
In the very beginning of CoH I advocated these types of changes and lobbied heavily for them. A year and a half down the road, I think it's time for Cryptic to understand what they have here (and why it works on a commercial scale).
In short, the changes that have been wrought are with EQ balancing in mind. However without EQ type dynamics, you're getting a lot of the negative with little of the positive from that system. CoH is really more of a casual player oriented game. Cryptic should stick to that demographic, rather than try to adhere to a system that really doesn't apply (most of your "No EQ in tights" arguements).
Just my 2 influence.
[ QUOTE ]
This is also something interesting that might include a buff for Stone (pre-Granite) and Ice:
[ QUOTE ]
Why did defense need to be scaled back so drastically?
Here was my goal. Have every type of build able to play on Heroic with perhaps one defeat on groups of all sizes, and do the same on Invincible with at most a handful of defeats. Also, Tankers needed to tank, and Scrappers needed to survive long enough to contribute. We tested and arrived at our numbers.
But there is an issue with Defense as a whole; it doesnt scale. If we make it balanced at +4 levels, itll be absolutely awesome at even con. Were looking into some things that might even this out (as well as even out the minion/lt./boss issue).
[/ QUOTE ]
...but it is Statesman looking into this so it could actually mean a nerf...
[/ QUOTE ]
Well an interesting note on this point. In my last email exchange with Statesman where we were running numbers, he explicitly told me that something like this was in the works, that he could not elaborate more, but that for purposes of Accuracy in the calculations we should assume that all mobs were minions.
[ QUOTE ]
Well an interesting note on this point. In my last email exchange with Statesman where we were running numbers, he explicitly told me that something like this was in the works, that he could not elaborate more, but that for purposes of Accuracy in the calculations we should assume that all mobs were minions.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wait... what? So Lts and bosses and AVs would all have a base 50% (adjusted for level) and not scale for the defense based sets? But how would that really help us against +2s, common in 8-man groups? Mind you, a +2 minion trying to hit me currently has a far harder time than a +2 boss.
Be well, people of CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well an interesting note on this point. In my last email exchange with Statesman where we were running numbers, he explicitly told me that something like this was in the works, that he could not elaborate more, but that for purposes of Accuracy in the calculations we should assume that all mobs were minions.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wait... what? So Lts and bosses and AVs would all have a base 50% (adjusted for level) and not scale for the defense based sets? But how would that really help us against +2s, common in 8-man groups? Mind you, a +2 minion trying to hit me currently has a far harder time than a +2 boss.
[/ QUOTE ]
Heres my take on this: Instead of higher cons and higher type mobs getting straight to-hit, they get +acc. This will make it so defense can scale perfectly with the 1 def to 2 res against everything.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is also interesting:
[ QUOTE ]
Do you guys really listen to our suggestions for powersets, costume options, map, etc....? If so can we have a example?
Oddly, ED came as a suggestion for diminishing returns on the forums. Archery and Sonics were both mentioned.
[/ QUOTE ]
I would like to know the name of the person who suggested this...
[/ QUOTE ]
I believe it was Havoc that brought up the idea first.
Everyone might as well not even bother anymore at this point. They want us playing on the heroic standard and that is possible with every combintaion of character that I have seen to date. We ran some missions on test last Saturday to see if a Tanker would be missed in teams and we came to the conclusion that the ATs are fairly well-balanced for the Heroic range and that team composition mattered much less than the mission length and skill of the players in a team. I don't mind being weakened down to this level anymore, I just wish that my passives didn't seem to be such poor choices for my Tanker to take.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well I still run my mission on Unyielding with no issues whatsoever, so I think it's specific groups of people that have issues running on anything higher. My controllers and scrapper find it way to easy to run on any setting under Tenacious. I normally run in teams of 4-8 because soloing missions is utterly pointless and boring.
"People love to talk, but hate to listen." Alice Duer Miller, American Author (1874-1942)
From Statesman on the Euro forums:
[ QUOTE ]
I've responded to the tanker issue - I've played builds myself, described my tactics. I'll gladly try different builds and circumstances...but all in all, I feel a tanker can still Tank.
[/ QUOTE ]
And I still call BS. His one posted test involved using the broken version of Invincibility. He also completely glosses over the fact that when buffed, any AT can Tank, so what then is so special about Tanks?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you guys really listen to our suggestions for powersets, costume options, map, etc....? If so can we have a example?
Oddly, ED came as a suggestion for diminishing returns on the forums. Archery and Sonics were both mentioned.
[/ QUOTE ] I would like to know the name of the person who suggested this...
[/ QUOTE ]
(raises hand meekly)
I actually campaigned pretty hard for various forms of enhancement nerfs until I settled on just pushing my own version. However, I also pushed for buffs to the base of powers and I still do. See SIG.
ED in and of itself is not really such a bad thing (although I think the drop off is too dramatic too early), I particularly wanted to emphasis what Krunch said here:
[ QUOTE ]
...(although ED and I5 combined, it went over the edge).
[/ QUOTE ]
I find this particularly true for Invuln. My Fire Tanker was briefly a better tank than Vixen (unless I gathered my helper-monkey squad) in the post-I5, pre-I6 world due to Fire's resistances being untouched until ED came about. They hit Fiery Embrace (although I don't feel the duration loss was too major overall), and of course slapped Burn a bit too hard, but she had her old resistances until ED came to life.
[ QUOTE ]
Poster: Circeus
.
[ QUOTE ]
I've responded to the tanker issue - I've played builds myself, described my tactics. I'll gladly try different builds and circumstances...but all in all, I feel a tanker can still Tank.
[/ QUOTE ]
.
And I still call BS. His one posted test involved using the broken version of Invincibility. He also completely glosses over the fact that when buffed, any AT can Tank, so what then is so special about Tanks?
[/ QUOTE ]
I call BS because in his example he didn't do anything my Blaster couldn't do. Strongmen don't have ranged attacks that I can remember so keep just out of melee reach and pepper his buddies with dmg.
If you see someone going after a person and their health goes red blast them and they will turn on you easily enough.
If a decent Blaster can do the same thing Statesman did with little risk then he wasn't doing anything that required a tanker to do successfully.
As for the tanking......
Well I can't recall any good examples where a Tank started taunting bad guys AFTER someone went red. Any decent or good tanks that I've played with tend to actively control aggro so that people don't take lethal damage not taunt after they are near dead or closer.
(Virtue/Champion) Neil Fracas: Inv/SS
(Virtue) Gideon Fontaine: MA/SR (Sc), Generic Hero 114: Ice/Cold, Marcus Tyler AR/En, Project F: Spines/DA (S)
(Champion) Jenna Sidal BS/SD, Generic Hero 114: En/En (Bl), Loganne Claws/WP (Sc)
[ QUOTE ]
From Statesman on the Euro forums:
[ QUOTE ]
I've responded to the tanker issue - I've played builds myself, described my tactics. I'll gladly try different builds and circumstances...but all in all, I feel a tanker can still Tank.
[/ QUOTE ]
And I still call BS. His one posted test involved using the broken version of Invincibility. He also completely glosses over the fact that when buffed, any AT can Tank, so what then is so special about Tanks?
[/ QUOTE ]
This really shows how much we need a Tanker rep more than anything else.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is also interesting:
[ QUOTE ]
Do you guys really listen to our suggestions for powersets, costume options, map, etc....? If so can we have a example?
Oddly, ED came as a suggestion for diminishing returns on the forums. Archery and Sonics were both mentioned.
[/ QUOTE ]
I would like to know the name of the person who suggested this...
[/ QUOTE ]
I believe it was Havoc that brought up the idea first.
Everyone might as well not even bother anymore at this point. They want us playing on the heroic standard and that is possible with every combintaion of character that I have seen to date. We ran some missions on test last Saturday to see if a Tanker would be missed in teams and we came to the conclusion that the ATs are fairly well-balanced for the Heroic range and that team composition mattered much less than the mission length and skill of the players in a team. I don't mind being weakened down to this level anymore, I just wish that my passives didn't seem to be such poor choices for my Tanker to take.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well I still run my mission on Unyielding with no issues whatsoever, so I think it's specific groups of people that have issues running on anything higher. My controllers and scrapper find it way to easy to run on any setting under Tenacious. I normally run in teams of 4-8 because soloing missions is utterly pointless and boring.
[/ QUOTE ]
Quoted for OPINION. *pppppbffbtbppfbfbfbpttt*
Running missions at Heroic solo is the only way to have fun.
OPINION. *PPBBFBTBTBTPPPPFBTFBTPBPTBTP*
The Maltese Knight is a forum trolling stud amongst the Tanker community.
Now that's a FACT! *wheeeeeeeee!*
You've been informed that raspberriies are nerfed. Continue to use them at your own peril.
I've noticed my raspberries are only half as effective as they once were. What a ripoff.
HOWEVER...
With a Defender buffing my raspberries, I can use them to almost I4 capacity. This is just wrong. Raspberries are inherent to the success of my tank when soloing on Heroic. Which as we all know, is the most fun anyone can have in the entire universe. EVER. IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.
the point blank fact of the matter is that tanks didnt need to be nerfed as hard as they were and we do deserve some compensation as per the fact that our primary powersets are very undiversifiable.
If Statesman in fact made this change to "encourage diversity", we should get something in return for the fact that we cant possibly diversify something that takes 1 type of enhancement let alone ~9 powers like that.
If he wants to encourage diversity he has to realise that some ATs cant and then accomadate that fact.
We dont need a billion resistance and defense, we only need and honestly deserve what ED stole from us.
I am an ebil markeeter and will steal your moneiz ...correction stole your moneiz. I support keeping the poor down because it is impossible to make moneiz in this game.
[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you guys really listen to our suggestions for powersets, costume options, map, etc....? If so can we have a example?
Oddly, ED came as a suggestion for diminishing returns on the forums. Archery and Sonics were both mentioned.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to know the name of the person who suggested this...
He also confirmns that a shield powerset is on it's way and that it will be for tanks and scrappers
Overall he dodge alot of the more interesting ED-questions and nowhere does he adress the problem with tankers being obsolete...
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually I think a system of diminishing returns is good. It makes everyone very close to equal in effectiveness. The only thing I wouldn't have done is scroll back defenses like they did in I5.
Diminishing returns though makes it so someone that 6 slots their passives, gets that boost in defense, but they also won't be head over heels better than someone who only decided to 3 slot. The MMO that I played before this had a very similar system to this, and it makes balancing a lot easier. Now they can balance for people with 3 slots, letting those with 6 be powerful and know that it won't be as glaring of a difference as it was in I4, where anyone that 3 slotted was considered unwise.
Statesman finally took the time to answer some of the "Ask Statesman"-questions. There's a couple of points I find interesting for the tanker community.
When it comes to ED let me summarize it by saying that States thinks ED works fine and that no AT should cap out by themeself. He is still stuck on the 3 minion = 1 hero.
an interesting thing was that statesman said that I5 and ED was separated because they had not decided if ED was going in, it was dependent on how I5 hit.
I find this strange considering that he previously said they been running with ED internally since march...
But then we got this:
[ QUOTE ]
Considering the resistance and mez mag resistance changes to scraps/tanks do you have any plans to rid PvP from the excessive toggle dropping (IMO) or at least lessen it? Please elaborate so I can understand the reasoning.
An issue that were looking into.
[/ QUOTE ]
Let's cross are fingers that toggle dropping will be decreased or even removed!
This is also something interesting that might include a buff for Stone (pre-Granite) and Ice:
[ QUOTE ]
Why did defense need to be scaled back so drastically?
Here was my goal. Have every type of build able to play on Heroic with perhaps one defeat on groups of all sizes, and do the same on Invincible with at most a handful of defeats. Also, Tankers needed to tank, and Scrappers needed to survive long enough to contribute. We tested and arrived at our numbers.
But there is an issue with Defense as a whole; it doesnt scale. If we make it balanced at +4 levels, itll be absolutely awesome at even con. Were looking into some things that might even this out (as well as even out the minion/lt./boss issue).
[/ QUOTE ]
...but it is Statesman looking into this so it could actually mean a nerf...
This is also interesting:
[ QUOTE ]
Do you guys really listen to our suggestions for powersets, costume options, map, etc....? If so can we have a example?
Oddly, ED came as a suggestion for diminishing returns on the forums. Archery and Sonics were both mentioned.
[/ QUOTE ]
I would like to know the name of the person who suggested this...
He also confirmns that a shield powerset is on it's way and that it will be for tanks and scrappers
Overall he dodge alot of the more interesting ED-questions and nowhere does he adress the problem with tankers being obsolete...