[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
qr
A quick count shows more posts in this thread bashing J_B than answering the OP's question...
* applauds Way to derail a thread guys...
As for me, I'll retire my main Inv/SS and replace him with an SS/Inv brute. Since I mostly solo, playing a meatshield no longer appeals to me.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tanks, all the way.
I made my ss/dark brute only because dark wasnt available to tanks back then.
Now, Im waiting for Energy/Electrical/SR/ninjitsu to come to tanks.
Knowing power proliferation is coming made me play controllers and mastermind more, until it shows up on tanks.
[/ QUOTE ]
To amend my post a little bit, if SS gets proliferated to scrappers (and isn't horribly nerfed) before side-switching becomes available, then I'll replace my Inv/SS with an SS/Inv scrapper instead of an SS/Inv brute. I'd rather be "true blue."
"Everybody wants to change the world, but nobody wants to change themselves." -Tolstoy
[ QUOTE ]
Six months from now I'm going to be playing a super hero MMO that lets me pick up and throw a friggin' car.
[/ QUOTE ]
Can you believe I found something to agree with Johnny about?
I too, plan to be playing an MMO in 6 months that lets me TROW CARS!
[ QUOTE ]
And exiting a mission door from an office I just cleared of CoT, and then immediately getting another mission at that same door, but now it leads to a cave full of Devouring Earth, isn't immersion breaking?
[/ QUOTE ]
And you may want to consider that the door itself isn't instanced, only the inside is (that some cave entrances lead to office maps is a bug, not an inherent issue with instancing). So, what's your point?
Of course there are limits to making everything consistent if you want to get indefinite replay potential out of finite content and map space, but you can minimize the impact with the right tools.
[ QUOTE ]
*** You are ignoring this user ***
Really people. Do this and he goes away.
[/ QUOTE ]
People like arguing with Johnny. If they didn't, they wouldn't need to "Ignore this user," they would just stop responding to his threads.
The City of Heroes Community is a special one and I will always look fondly on my times arguing, discussing and playing with you all. Thanks and thanks to the developers for a special experience.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
instancing is still relatively new. city of heroes was a pioneer in many ways.
how many of us remember waiting 'in line' to kill that one gnoll? or that one mob with a 4 hour respawn rate for his drop and hoping you could 'tag' or outdmg everyone else in the area enough to get said drop this time.
[/ QUOTE ]
Problems with non-instanced content really only occur when people have to compete for a scarce resource, especially if you need it to attain an important goal. For an example of where non-instanced content works, Rikti invasions aren't instanced, yet there isn't a problem, because they allow players to collaborate rather than compete. Warhammer zone quests (or whatever they are called) are another example of where non-instanced content works perfectly fine, because it allows everybody to work together towards a common goal.
The benefit of good non-instanced content is that it facilitates immersion in the world and gets you to meet other players along the way. Poor non-instanced content hurts immersion (I just defeated that named mob and it's already back?) and creates hostility between players (well, in a PvP game, the latter may actually be a feature, not a bug).
[/ QUOTE ]
Non-instanced content is simply always a problem in high traffic areas: either "resources" become too scarce, in that enemies become too hard to find, or resources become too scarce, as in...well, look at our raids and invasions and the lag they bring.
Basically, non-instanced content is great for: middle-to-upper level content (I think everyone is sick of competing against everyone else to kill 10 fluffy bunnies at level 1 using their only attack), where there's supposed to be a great big battle (up to a manageable size), and where there's enough game world plot to do so.
The way CoX handles its mission design as primarily instanced, IMO, is far superior compared to other games that simply shovel content into non-instanced areas that don't need to or shouldn't be. The lesson that all future MMOs need to learn is that balancing instanced and non-instanced content is a vital mechanism in controlling the flow and experience of your game.
All of the toons that I might bring over will be for roleplay. There's a brute that has a heroes background in the Isles, she'll be coming to Paragon. No tanks with angry backgrounds though
I don't think side switching will hurt Tankers at all. They survive everything, and that's why we love them 
There is no such thing as an "innocent bystander"
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Technically, Scrappers and Brutes have a lot of overlap (very similar survivability and damage output), but the playstyle is so different that it will probably come down to preference.
[/ QUOTE ]
I play scrappers and brutes the same exact way - stab stab stab stab stab stab stab stab stab stab stab stab stab stab stab stab....oh wait where's my team...eh whatever ...stab stab stab stab stab stab stab stab stab stab stab stab stab stab stab stab
The only difference is brutes deal more damage over time if you can keep going non stop and scrappers are more consistent dps.
*feel free to substitute punching, kicking , slicing or smashing at your convenience*
[/ QUOTE ]
Thank you! You solidify my argument! I suspect without intending to. You play your brutes and scrappers the same. Without attention to aggro control and team coverage (which by the way is NOT a requirement and also works often).
I choose to play my brutes as... taunt, hit, tab target, hit, tab target, taunt, tab, follow, hit, taunt, small area circle, hit, taunt. If someone on my team somehow has aggro on them (most often from straying...), locate them, taunt, follow, hit...etc... On my brutes it DOES take more active taunting and aggro managing WORK then on my tanks, but I do it, and well.
My scrapper, hit, hit, tab target, follow, hit, hit, tab target, follow, hit (will taun..err...confront soon as it can be fit in to build). My crab, same as scrapper...except I don't have current intention of adding taunt to my crab soldier Goat herd.
Brute vs Tank for aggro hold and managing. Its the Player that makes or breaks it, technique, understanding, slotting, etc - Not the AT.
[ QUOTE ]
Tanks will make Brutes look silly, redside. I've noticed that your non-Brute player must take caution in using their attacks, as you can never rely on Brutes to completely hold aggro. And if they are, there's a chance they're getting themselves in deep... stuff. HOWEVER, Brutes blueside will attract your Scrapperish types.
Here's my main point:
Right now, they're all redside has to offer in terms of tanking (well, Tankerminds... but yeah...). I think side-switching will put Brutes (as a tanking force) in their place -- right behind Tankers.
[/ QUOTE ]
PLAYER performance, not the AT. Unless I, and several other well played team brutes I have the pleasure of playing with are anomalous exceptions to brute players rather then par.
The whole side-switching effect on tankers question has me thinking of Sesame Street.
"One of these things is not like the others" etc....
Tankers are built for teaming. Like most of the other blue side archetypes, save for the scrapper, they were designed with weaknesses that could be shored up by teaming with the other archetypes. Scrappers were designed to fill the solo role from day one. The red side archetypes were also designed with solo play in mind, especially the brute and the stalker. So what we have is a comparison of one team oriented archetype to three solo oriented archetypes. The tanker is the odd man out, not because he is inherently weaker but just because he is designed to do a different job than the others.
Based on this I think that people will continue to play the archetypes that they want to play after side switching becomes a reality. Those that concentrate on DPS will likely give up their 'scrankers' for brutes but those that enjoy playing tankers will continue to do so. As Thrunk pointed out, player performance will have more of an effect on tanker popularity than anything else. That being said I think that the aforementioned 'scranker' to brute conversion will ultimately improve the quality of tanking experiences in PUGs. This alone should assure tanker popularity.
Now should tanker popularity start to wane I can see the developers tweaking tankers but I'm with Vox_Populi in hoping it's something other than a simple damage buff. Tanker damage was buffed once before and it's still supposed to be "sub-standard" so I can't see another buff helping. Actually, based on track record, they may just lower scrapper and brute defenses in the name of balance.
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
[ QUOTE ]
A quick count shows more posts in this thread bashing J_B than answering the OP's question...
[/ QUOTE ]
If I had to guess, I would say that the eventual result of side-switching (which may not necessarily open the floodgates immediately) is a small reduction in the percentage of players that play tankers. However, my guess is that this will come less from Brutes switching sides and displacing Tankers, and more from people rolling new Brutes slightly more often than rolling new Tankers. My guess, however, is that Brutes will do a slightly better job of displacing Scrappers. And I'm using the word "slightly" in all cases to emphasize that I don't think you'll see dramatic shifts in player population in the moderate future (+1 year after release of GR).
And this is less based on any point-by-point performance numbers so much as I think Brutes are a bit more solo-friendly than Tankers, and the number of people who solo as a significant if not majority percentage of the time is higher than I think most people assume.
If you want a less obvious prediction, without more information on GR's mechanics I believe side switching will somewhat increase the number of villain archetypes being played as a percentage of the total and that will be sustained. You'll also see an increase in red-side zone populations (after the initial burst of activity in Praetoria) but I'm not certain that will be ultimately sustained. I think you might see more *players* red-side, but less "free radicals" wandering around red-side: they will tend to be more focused groups of players choosing to gather red-side rather than spontaneous accumulations of red-side players.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A quick count shows more posts in this thread bashing J_B than answering the OP's question...
[/ QUOTE ]
If I had to guess, I would say that the eventual result of side-switching (which may not necessarily open the floodgates immediately) is a small reduction in the percentage of players that play tankers. However, my guess is that this will come less from Brutes switching sides and displacing Tankers, and more from people rolling new Brutes slightly more often than rolling new Tankers. My guess, however, is that Brutes will do a slightly better job of displacing Scrappers. And I'm using the word "slightly" in all cases to emphasize that I don't think you'll see dramatic shifts in player population in the moderate future (+1 year after release of GR).
And this is less based on any point-by-point performance numbers so much as I think Brutes are a bit more solo-friendly than Tankers, and the number of people who solo as a significant if not majority percentage of the time is higher than I think most people assume.
If you want a less obvious prediction, without more information on GR's mechanics I believe side switching will somewhat increase the number of villain archetypes being played as a percentage of the total and that will be sustained. You'll also see an increase in red-side zone populations (after the initial burst of activity in Praetoria) but I'm not certain that will be ultimately sustained. I think you might see more *players* red-side, but less "free radicals" wandering around red-side: they will tend to be more focused groups of players choosing to gather red-side rather than spontaneous accumulations of red-side players.
[/ QUOTE ]
i really dont think people will roll new brutes, not after they take a good look at scrappers.
i mean if people are rerolling - and i assume they ahve some cash - one has to only look at how much easier it is to cap positional defense if yo uare a shield/sr scrapper and take katana or bs with it's parry (opening more slotting options), and how you can relatively cheaply slot one or two -20% resist procs in either said primaries
i mean, just from a pve standpoint - that's pretty killer. (and just one example)
QR
TBH, if it hasn't really been "OMG, we need x of this and y of that" in co-op zones, it won't be any different with side-switching. There really shouldn't be any AT rebalancing that needs to be done that hasn't been done, or at least suggested via thorough playtesting, already.
[ QUOTE ]
QR
TBH, if it hasn't really been "OMG, we need x of this and y of that" in co-op zones, it won't be any different with side-switching. There really shouldn't be any AT rebalancing that needs to be done that hasn't been done, or at least suggested via thorough playtesting, already.
[/ QUOTE ]
that is true. one thing not considered is where the pbase may be numbers wise by the time this hits.
that other game may be out and may have pulled from here. there are other mmorpg's slated for this summer that may pull yet more.
it may end up when all is said and done being a matter of 'we'll take any warm body currently available'
[ QUOTE ]
i really dont think people will roll new brutes, not after they take a good look at scrappers.
i mean if people are rerolling - and i assume they ahve some cash - one has to only look at how much easier it is to cap positional defense if yo uare a shield/sr scrapper and take katana or bs with it's parry (opening more slotting options), and how you can relatively cheaply slot one or two -20% resist procs in either said primaries
i mean, just from a pve standpoint - that's pretty killer. (and just one example)
[/ QUOTE ]
Guess you've never played a SR Brute. I don't even have Weave yet and I'm running around at 43% Melee Def, 37% Ranged and 36% AoE (CJ + some IOs).
Not to mention Brutes > Scrappers in survivability and damage output. Which isn't the best thing to note since scrappers are a balanced AT. I have always feared a brute nerf at some point.
Back to topic! I think tanks will be fine since most brute players (sans a majority of stone armor brutes) play similar to scrappers from my experience. When I lead a team, I considered Brutes damage dealers and still try and find a tank.
actually yes, i have a katana/sr scrapper at 38. brutes have the same numbers power for power defense wise. their advantage is in more hp which helps when a hit gets through
although have you tried a katan/sr scrapper? soft capped defense to melee and lethal at level 8. actually, over 50% to lethal
[ QUOTE ]
actually yes, i have a katana/sr scrapper at 38. brutes have the same numbers power for power defense wise. their advantage is in more hp which helps when a hit gets through
although have you tried a katan/sr scrapper? soft capped defense to melee and lethal at level 8. actually, over 50% to lethal
[/ QUOTE ]
Compared to Scrappers, Brutes are about as survivable overall, about as good offensively overall, but have slightly more diversity in powerset choices. My guess is based on the belief that the number of casual players for which that will be a factor is likely to exceed the numbers of more performance-minded players that look at any other feature of the archetypes. In a sense, every powerset brutes have that scrappers don't have is practically a powerset proliferation to scrappers, if both archetypes have equal freedom to play both sides. Just considering the number of players blue-side that might want to play an electricly-themed melee hero suggests that such choices will likely be more important to overall numbers than performance ones (I'm not making a specific judgement on either electric powerset here, except to say I believe most players wanting to play such a combination on the blue side are unlikely to want to do so for numerical reasons).
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
I think some tweeking will need to be in order. And i think keeping katana and broadsword on scraps and giving brutes and scraps sets that make them them, would help to keep them with some of their own flavor. I would love to have some tanks redside, especially for masterminds so they dont have to lose their pets as much. But my Eng/Stone brute can tank through pretty much anything a stone/eng tank could, and it does far more damage, and it has a pet. I think giving tanks something special, that isnt related to damage or HP, would help. Maybe have their taunts have some extra sort of special effect that can happen- im sure that would make it interesting.
But really, im not too worried. As others have said, many people play their brutes like scraps and never take taunt anyway. So tanking still has a roll. What i will have a problem with is that brutes have to have aggro to build fury. So if a tank and a brute are on the same team in one spawn, the brute will start to do closer to tanker damage because the tank is holding the aggro. heheh.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
actually yes, i have a katana/sr scrapper at 38. brutes have the same numbers power for power defense wise. their advantage is in more hp which helps when a hit gets through
although have you tried a katan/sr scrapper? soft capped defense to melee and lethal at level 8. actually, over 50% to lethal
[/ QUOTE ]
Compared to Scrappers, Brutes are about as survivable overall, about as good offensively overall, but have slightly more diversity in powerset choices. My guess is based on the belief that the number of casual players for which that will be a factor is likely to exceed the numbers of more performance-minded players that look at any other feature of the archetypes. In a sense, every powerset brutes have that scrappers don't have is practically a powerset proliferation to scrappers, if both archetypes have equal freedom to play both sides. Just considering the number of players blue-side that might want to play an electricly-themed melee hero suggests that such choices will likely be more important to overall numbers than performance ones (I'm not making a specific judgement on either electric powerset here, except to say I believe most players wanting to play such a combination on the blue side are unlikely to want to do so for numerical reasons).
[/ QUOTE ]
Am I the only one that thinks that Brutes will be hugely popular Blueside because of the fact that they'd be able to team with Defenders constantly? Brutes are the most buffable AT in the game, and bringing them around Controllers and Defenders just seems like it'd make Brutes into powerhouses. I'm not saying anything negative about Tanks, I just think that will be a distinctly popular reason to take a Brute onto a team. They have damage comparable to Scrappers, and can achieve Tanker defenses, and all they really lack is an AoE version of Gauntlet, since their sets have aggro auras. Use Taunt and they could tank fairly well.
And on the other side, I think Tanks would be fairly popular Redside just because they're still the only AT with defensive sets as their primary, solving the issue of having Brutes and/or Masterminds off-tanking when Tanks can do it better in a low-buff environment.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
actually yes, i have a katana/sr scrapper at 38. brutes have the same numbers power for power defense wise. their advantage is in more hp which helps when a hit gets through
although have you tried a katan/sr scrapper? soft capped defense to melee and lethal at level 8. actually, over 50% to lethal
[/ QUOTE ]
Compared to Scrappers, Brutes are about as survivable overall, about as good offensively overall, but have slightly more diversity in powerset choices. My guess is based on the belief that the number of casual players for which that will be a factor is likely to exceed the numbers of more performance-minded players that look at any other feature of the archetypes. In a sense, every powerset brutes have that scrappers don't have is practically a powerset proliferation to scrappers, if both archetypes have equal freedom to play both sides. Just considering the number of players blue-side that might want to play an electricly-themed melee hero suggests that such choices will likely be more important to overall numbers than performance ones (I'm not making a specific judgement on either electric powerset here, except to say I believe most players wanting to play such a combination on the blue side are unlikely to want to do so for numerical reasons).
[/ QUOTE ]
Am I the only one that thinks that Brutes will be hugely popular Blueside because of the fact that they'd be able to team with Defenders constantly? Brutes are the most buffable AT in the game, and bringing them around Controllers and Defenders just seems like it'd make Brutes into powerhouses. I'm not saying anything negative about Tanks, I just think that will be a distinctly popular reason to take a Brute onto a team. They have damage comparable to Scrappers, and can achieve Tanker defenses, and all they really lack is an AoE version of Gauntlet, since their sets have aggro auras. Use Taunt and they could tank fairly well.
And on the other side, I think Tanks would be fairly popular Redside just because they're still the only AT with defensive sets as their primary, solving the issue of having Brutes and/or Masterminds off-tanking when Tanks can do it better in a low-buff environment.
[/ QUOTE ]
i'll be three boxing mine with my empathy and kinetics defenders
fortitude +15% defense to all....speed boost on stone melee....MMMMMMM
[ QUOTE ]
Am I the only one that thinks that Brutes will be hugely popular Blueside because of the fact that they'd be able to team with Defenders constantly? Brutes are the most buffable AT in the game, and bringing them around Controllers and Defenders just seems like it'd make Brutes into powerhouses. I'm not saying anything negative about Tanks, I just think that will be a distinctly popular reason to take a Brute onto a team. They have damage comparable to Scrappers, and can achieve Tanker defenses, and all they really lack is an AoE version of Gauntlet, since their sets have aggro auras. Use Taunt and they could tank fairly well.
And on the other side, I think Tanks would be fairly popular Redside just because they're still the only AT with defensive sets as their primary, solving the issue of having Brutes and/or Masterminds off-tanking when Tanks can do it better in a low-buff environment.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're not the only one who thinks that Brutes will be popular blue-side. They're popular red-side, and they'll be very common side-switchers. I think what's being said by many in this thread is that they won't be popular blue-side to the detriment of the Tanker population.
Overall, I agree with Arcana in that Brutes will probably displace more Scrappers than Tankers, even though they'll probably displace the odd Tanker here or there (while Tankers will be doing the same, or better, red-side).
I'm hoping to try out a Hero Dominator, myself.
I'm hoping to be able to want to play a Dom again once Castle makes his proposed changes.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm hoping to be able to want to play a Dom again once Castle makes his proposed changes.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, that's partly the reason I'm hoping to play them. I love idea of a Control/Assault combo, but so far haven't really been able to get into them. The changes, plus being able to play Hero-side, could do the trick.
Depending on how the new box expansion mechanics work, the only new tanks I'd roll would be for AT unique powersets. Other than that, I'll be rolling brutes for both red- and blue-side instead of tanks.
Nothing to do with numbers...I just really don't like tanking for teams .. too much like being the de facto team leader. 
-- Placeholder
The only problem I have with the non-instanced game is the computer power it will take the average person to play: will this require more power from your computer to play? When this game was first released, it could be run VERY easily on a rather mid-range computer. Ever since and especially with CoV, the strain has been really increasing, IMO. I guess they could mitigate this with more instances of maps like Atlas Park 1, 2, 3, etc. (if needed).
I do see your "limited resource" arguement as valid, but so far the game has had a good track record for being rather forgiving in that reguard.
As for freedom of side-switching at will. Need more developement there. Spys, vigilante, trancendent being, and outright good/bad alginment in general may now be more important than *origen!!*
Edit: grammer/clarity
Miss Arc #147491: Rise of Bedlam
AKA Iron Smoke @Champion Server