[ QUOTE ]
Besides the obvious name? or the "rage meter" they have. But if you need a more obvious hint; " Brutes live to fight, and as a brute you revel in hand-to-hand combat. With power offensive sets to inflict pain and impressive defense to take it, your the best there is in a straight fight. Protracted battles only makes you mad, and the madder you get, the more damaging your attacks become." - CoH Brute description.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's just the "default" AT description. Players are free to role-play their characters however they choose.
[ QUOTE ]
Please, show me where the mistake is and why. Don't use comics to justify it.
[/ QUOTE ]
The lead designer of the game used comics to justify it.
To paraphrase:
"Our Tankers don't play like comics Tankers. This is a valid problem".
"Players rolled them(Tankers) expecting characters like the Hulk, but they weren't. This was a mistake."
The mistake being Tankers not playing as the heavy hitters they are in other media.
Despite the changes to made to them, a number of people in this thread and other can have made a decent case they still don't play like their comic counterparts. If it was justified by that reason then, it's good enough to be justified now.
.
[ QUOTE ]
This unrequited dev love needs to stop. Their human, they make mistakes. Fautline being one of those famous mistakes. And finally "fixing" Hollows after four years. Yes its an error, just because they don't admit to it doesnt make it any less a mistake. See passed the love for red names and use some objectivity.
[/ QUOTE ]
It isn't unrequited dev love regardless of your ad hominem. I was directly responding to a quote that J_B made that they were admitting that there is an error regarding tankers which once he quotes that will be 3-4 years old prior to changes that have been made.
[ QUOTE ]
Besides the obvious name? or the "rage meter" they have. But if you need a more obvious hint; " Brutes live to fight, and as a brute you revel in hand-to-hand combat. With power offensive sets to inflict pain and impressive defense to take it, your the best there is in a straight fight. Protracted battles only makes you mad, and the madder you get, the more damaging your attacks become." - CoH Brute description.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ah yes because the game descriptions are the only things that we can go by.
Please also keep in mind the following descriptions:
"In comparison to the other Archetypes, the Blaster is by far the most damaging to the enemy."
- Except that they aren't...
"The Controller has few offensive attacks and possesses the fewest hit points. But the Controller has access to a range of powers that no one else has: the Control power sets."
- Except for those offensive powers... and the other AT's that have control powers...
"However, Scrappers do not have any ranged attacks, so they rely on the other Archetypes to help in battles requiring long-range punch."
- Except for those ranged attacks they have.
The Corrupter description says absolutely nothing about the support aspect of the class.
It is lack of imagination pure and simple.
I've seen Kheldians in the game who are not nictus. I've seen masterminds controlled by their pets. I've seen evil heroes and good villains.
Concept is what you make of it.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please, show me where the mistake is and why. Don't use comics to justify it.
[/ QUOTE ]
The lead designer of the game used comics to justify it.
To paraphrase:
"Our Tankers don't play like comics Tankers. This is a valid problem".
"Players rolled them(Tankers) expecting characters like the Hulk, but they weren't. This was a mistake."
The mistake being Tankers not playing as the heavy hitters they are in other media.
Despite the changes to made to them, a number of people in this thread and other can have made a decent case they still don't play like their comic counterparts. If it was justified by that reason then, it's good enough to be justified now.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
That same developer also admitted that increasing tanker damage to compensate was a mistake as well.
Just to add some perspective...
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
[ QUOTE ]
That same developer also admitted that increasing tanker damage to compensate was a mistake as well.
[/ QUOTE ]
Did he now?
And what quote would that be?
I'm remembering the interview where he sought a modifier increase for Tankers but was told that couldn't happen. We don't know if any thought was put into special mechanics or temporary damage increases. Circiumstances are different now anyways, and what was unacceptable before might be possible now.
Once upon a time, infinite respecs, cross factional teaming and flashbacks weren't possible or were things that were argued shouldn't be done. Things change. I don't think it's out of the question to re-examine Tankers.
.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That same developer also admitted that increasing tanker damage to compensate was a mistake as well.
[/ QUOTE ]
Did he now?
And what quote would that be?
I'm remembering the interview where he sought a modifier increase for Tankers but was told that couldn't happen. We don't know if any thought was put into special mechanics or temporary damage increases. Circiumstances are different now anyways, and what was unacceptable before might be possible now.
Once upon a time, infinite respecs, cross factional teaming and flashbacks weren't possible or were things that were argued shouldn't be done. Things change. I don't think it's out of the question to re-examine Tankers.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
And yet... what they said before seems to have been a large foundation of your rebuttal argument for increasing damage. At least I'm assuming it is with the frequency that you bring it up.
If you do have some additional remarks or reasons (maybe with some data or tests to back it up) for why you feel so strongly that there is a problem with Tankers... and that the problem is damage related, I've never heard it.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That same developer also admitted that increasing tanker damage to compensate was a mistake as well.
[/ QUOTE ]
Did he now?
And what quote would that be?
[/ QUOTE ]
I remember, for instance, when players were complaining bitterly that Tankers just didn't do enough damage. Heck, they've got "Super Strength"! Shouldn't they be able to destroy things with one punch!". I pounded my fist up and down that Geko should change their damage...this only led to more issues down the lane. I don't think I came up with a good, measured response back then. I'm far more likely to be analytical now.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm remembering the interview where he sought a modifier increase for Tankers but was told that couldn't happen. We don't know if any thought was put into special mechanics or temporary damage increases. Circiumstances are different now anyways, and what was unacceptable before might be possible now.
Once upon a time, infinite respecs, cross factional teaming and flashbacks weren't possible or were things that were argued shouldn't be done. Things change. I don't think it's out of the question to re-examine Tankers.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
Fair enough, and folks here in the tanker forums have come up with some interesting and varied ways of re-examining Tankers that dont include a damage increase.
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
And:
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think I came up with a good, measured response back then. I'm far more likely to be analytical now.
[/ QUOTE ]
Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson
"I was just the one with the most unsolicited sombrero." - Traegus
[ QUOTE ]
And:
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think I came up with a good, measured response back then. I'm far more likely to be analytical now.
[/ QUOTE ]
[/ QUOTE ]
Corrected...
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
[ QUOTE ]
Actually, McBoo, I think I responded to someone posting above you in quick reply, and it tacked your name on it. Sorry for the confusion.
[/ QUOTE ]
No worries... responding actually helped me blow off some steam from work related..... stuff. 
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
[ QUOTE ]
And:
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think I came up with a good, measured response back then. I'm far more likely to be analytical now.
[/ QUOTE ]
[/ QUOTE ]
Translation:
"I should have known a blanket damage increase wouldn't fly. Perhaps if I had pushed for some kind of special mechanic."
A measured response in this case isn't blindly calling for a massive increase in damage. Nor is it ignoring the problem and pretending no one is complaining or that their complaints have no weight, as the present devs have.
A measured response would be looking for a solution to the problem that doesn't include blowing balance out of the water. Ignoring the issue isn't a response. It's the lack of a response.
.
So your "special mechanic" is more damage?
Have you ever actually READ anything JB has posted before flaming him? He's described his "special mechanic" many, many times.
Which basically boils down to "more damage". Something many disagree with as a solution to whatever tanker problems may exist.
"the reason there are so many sarcastic pvpers is we already had a better version of pvp taken away from us to appease bad players. Back then we chuckled at how bad players came here and whined. If we knew that was the actual voice devs would listen to instead of informed, educated players we probably would have been bigger dicks back then." -ConFlict
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And:
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think I came up with a good, measured response back then. I'm far more likely to be analytical now.
[/ QUOTE ]
[/ QUOTE ]
Translation:
"I should have known a blanket damage increase wouldn't fly. Perhaps if I had pushed for some kind of special mechanic."
A measured response in this case isn't blindly calling for a massive increase in damage. Nor is it ignoring the problem and pretending no one is complaining or that their complaints have no weight, as the present devs have.
A measured response would be looking for a solution to the problem that doesn't include blowing balance out of the water. Ignoring the issue isn't a response. It's the lack of a response.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
That would be your translation. From another perspective, a good, measured response could be something other than a damage increase. Also bear in mind that Fury was originally the mechanic planned for tankers but internal play testing proved that it was unbalancing.
A measured response is also not changing tankers into part time brutes when the data mining doesn't show it to be necessary just because some people believe it will work.
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
[ QUOTE ]
This is a strawman argument, and really needs to stop. There is no unrequited Dev love here, no matter how much you'd love to foist it off on players that disagree with you.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually I dont "foist" it off to just players of one type, I apply it to those that do. Simple as that, blindlessly following everything a dev says to the point that they defend things like Tank offense, and how it should stay the way it is because the devs deemed it so. Fallible dev, does not a god make.
[ QUOTE ]
And they have admitted to some mistakes before. We know that they make mistakes. However, that does not mean that the current Tanker situation is one of them.
[/ QUOTE ]
No human, you see it as perfectly normal. the key word in there was YOU. Others do and have not cared for the weakness in offense with tanks since I4. It's a reoccuring theme. Your very statment is a perfect example of what I'm posting about. Disregarding an issue just because the devs didn't admit to it being an error. So when they do, what then?.
[ QUOTE ]
The Hollows were great when they first came out. Sure, they had some problems, but the story in the zone tended to be better than the one outside of the zone at that level, so people still did the content. After four years of having the same content, however, less people were doing it. The minor inconveniences of the zone became more pronounced, so they 'fixed' them.
Faultline had a story to go along with it, the Devs just never had the resources to get to it. As soon as they had the resources, they finished the story for it. Hardly makes it a mistake. An incomplete zone meant to be completed? Sure. A mistake? Not really.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not once did I ever see a thread about the devs saying Hollows or Faultline was incomplete. Maybe its just me, but they gave the impression that it was "good just the way it is" four years ago. Only when people complained did we see a change. But on that note a hero trainer was placed four years after?....I think thats an error if there ever was one. Forget about the hospital or the mission range, no hero trainer till four years after?.
[ QUOTE ]
Please, show me where the mistake is and why. Don't use comics to justify it. Use actual game balance issues. Are Tankers hurting with the current setup? Is that because of a lack of damage, or because of a lack of a ranged attack in most of the secondaries. Show us exactly why and where Tankers are hurting. Bring some evidence, instead of just saying it's a mistake.
Just because you think it's a mistake doesn't make it a mistake.
[/ QUOTE ]
Where people hurting because Hollows or Faultine werent "fixed"?, no, people dealt. Thats all we can do. Just because people deal with the problem, doesn't mean it isnt an issue that needs to be fixed. Are you that delirious or that glib?. No it isn't a major issue like say, unyielding keeping the player grounded. That was a problem. But the matter at hand is still an issue.
[ QUOTE ]
See PAST your own opinion and use some objectivity yourself. If you think that you have a case, bring some evidence to back yourself up.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm always objective when it comes to issues like this. Did it take four years for Hollows to be "fixed"?, yes. Was leaving Faultline the way it was a bad decision?, clearly yes. That's the thing here, you assume I'm not using an evidence when I clearly show all the facts. Devs make mistakes, why are you so against change in an MMO that HAS to eventually change. Your too enamored by the "way it is" mentallity. See past both our opinion's and ask yourself "why not" or "what if". Is it so hard to see a class with more power or in some cases more defense?. Does it actually bother you this much?. I think I've been plenty objective here.
"If you can make a girl laugh, you can make her do anything"
"You're like Giraffe's, the way you look down on me, with your vegetarian scorn."
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is a strawman argument, and really needs to stop. There is no unrequited Dev love here, no matter how much you'd love to foist it off on players that disagree with you.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually I dont "foist" it off to just players of one type, I apply it to those that do. Simple as that, blindlessly following everything a dev says to the point that they defend things like Tank offense, and how it should stay the way it is because the devs deemed it so. Fallible dev, does not a god make.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't see people saying Tanker offense should remain the same because the devs say it's fine, though I see alot of 'Tanker offense should change because a dev who doesn't work on CoH anymore said it should have changed four years ago' and ignore the fact that he said changing it was also a mistake later. Most are saying Tanker damage should stay the same because increasing it would be damaging to overall game balance. The closer tanker offense gets to scrapper offense, the less reason there is to play a scrapper. It's that simple.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And they have admitted to some mistakes before. We know that they make mistakes. However, that does not mean that the current Tanker situation is one of them.
[/ QUOTE ]
No human, you see it as perfectly normal. the key word in there was YOU. Others do and have not cared for the weakness in offense with tanks since I4. It's a reoccuring theme. Your very statment is a perfect example of what I'm posting about. Disregarding an issue just because the devs didn't admit to it being an error. So when they do, what then?.
[/ QUOTE ]
Pining for the days of issue 4, where Fire/Fire and Invuln/SS tankers were soloing maps spawned for 8 and Burning or Foot Stomping mobs to death by the score, illustrates just what you think of game balance. God mode isn't coming back, nor should it.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please, show me where the mistake is and why. Don't use comics to justify it. Use actual game balance issues. Are Tankers hurting with the current setup? Is that because of a lack of damage, or because of a lack of a ranged attack in most of the secondaries. Show us exactly why and where Tankers are hurting. Bring some evidence, instead of just saying it's a mistake.
Just because you think it's a mistake doesn't make it a mistake.
[/ QUOTE ]
Where people hurting because Hollows or Faultine werent "fixed"?, no, people dealt. Thats all we can do. Just because people deal with the problem, doesn't mean it isnt an issue that needs to be fixed. Are you that delirious or that glib?. No it isn't a major issue like say, unyielding keeping the player grounded. That was a problem. But the matter at hand is still an issue.
[/ QUOTE ]
You haven't shown it to be an issue with any objective data to back up your premise.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
See PAST your own opinion and use some objectivity yourself. If you think that you have a case, bring some evidence to back yourself up.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm always objective when it comes to issues like this. Did it take four years for Hollows to be "fixed"?, yes. Was leaving Faultline the way it was a bad decision?, clearly yes. That's the thing here, you assume I'm not using an evidence when I clearly show all the facts. Devs make mistakes, why are you so against change in an MMO that HAS to eventually change. Your too enamored by the "way it is" mentallity. See past both our opinion's and ask yourself "why not" or "what if". Is it so hard to see a class with more power or in some cases more defense?. Does it actually bother you this much?. I think I've been plenty objective here.
[/ QUOTE ]
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
[ QUOTE ]
Objective: adj. expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations
[/ QUOTE ]
You are not being objective at all. The burden of proof is on the people who want change to prove that it's necessary, using hard data like in-game numbers recorded in controlled conditions, not subjective arguments such as personal interpretations of comic books, how tankers 'feel' to play, etc. Those people who want tanker damage to increase have not provided objective evidence to support their premise. Instead, the people who post data to back up their arguments are the ones who posit that tanker damage should remain where it is.
If you want tanker damage to increase, you're not going to prove that it needs to be increased by saying the people who say it shouldn't are just expressing unrequitted dev love.
[ QUOTE ]
Pining for the days of issue 4, where Fire/Fire and Invuln/SS tankers were soloing maps spawned for 8 and Burning or Foot Stomping mobs to death by the score, illustrates just what you think of game balance. God mode isn't coming back, nor should it.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is what it boils down to. People are STILL upset that their tanker can't solo an entire map in 5 mins as they could pre-i4. Get over it. That kind of undeniable power in a video game was completely and totally boring. There was absolutely zero challenge in the game at that point, and it was what made me stop playing.
Running around a map, moving to a spot, waiting a couple minutes for everything to get to you, hitting 1 or 2 buttons and having everything die, and then leaving to do it all over again... was quite possibly one of the more boring situations in a game I've ever played.
That isn't dev love, that is not wanting the game to be broken again to the point where I decide to leave. I LIKE the game as is, and more to the point I LIKE tankers as is. That isn't being in love with everything the dev's say or saying that they are infallible, that is my wanting to continue playing a game and an AT that I like.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Objective: adj. expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations
[/ QUOTE ]
You are not being objective at all. The burden of proof is on the people who want change to prove that it's necessary, using hard data like in-game numbers recorded in controlled conditions, not subjective arguments such as personal interpretations of comic books, how tankers 'feel' to play, etc. Those people who want tanker damage to increase have not provided objective evidence to support their premise. Instead, the people who post data to back up their arguments are the ones who posit that tanker damage should remain where it is.
If you want tanker damage to increase, you're not going to prove that it needs to be increased by saying the people who say it shouldn't are just expressing unrequitted dev love.
[/ QUOTE ]
So very very very THIS that I had to quote it for emphasis.
[ QUOTE ]
You are not being objective at all. The burden of proof is on the people who want change to prove that it's necessary, using hard data like in-game numbers recorded in controlled conditions, not subjective arguments such as personal interpretations of comic books, how tankers 'feel' to play, etc. Those people who want tanker damage to increase have not provided objective evidence to support their premise. Instead, the people who post data to back up their arguments are the ones who posit that tanker damage should remain where it is.
If you want tanker damage to increase, you're not going to prove that it needs to be increased by saying the people who say it shouldn't are just expressing unrequitted dev love.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm using facts everytime I post, you just need in game numbers for it to make sense to you. But did in game calculations matter when they "fixed" those zones I mentioned?. No, it didn't hinder anyone's performance, numbers wise. And it was never an issue about performance, rather a concept. I haven't used any bias regarding the matter, just because YOU see it as such, doesnt make it true. Don't falsely accuse me because you can't see past your own opinion.
My main question is this, why not?, what if?. Why does it bother you if tanks get more offense?, in this case more ranged or blast powers. How will effect your gameplay?. Tanks already get a few ranged attacks (Hurl Boulder, Torrent, Hurl), I merely just asked for more "blast" powers. It's and idea they clearly thought of implementing, but didn't exactly flesh out.
Certain decisions have nothing to do with in game numbers. Thats fact. For example, adding a trainer to Peregrine had nothing to do with in game numbers, or player statistic. Some thing's are made for comfort or even concept. How am I not being objective when I ask for change?. I assume you like the way everything is now?, thats fine. But I actually want change via tank offense or anything else. Your posting sounds glib. A bit too fascist if you ask me. Let me get this clear, you don't want more tanker offense?....
"If you can make a girl laugh, you can make her do anything"
"You're like Giraffe's, the way you look down on me, with your vegetarian scorn."
[ QUOTE ]
This is what it boils down to. People are STILL upset that their tanker can't solo an entire map in 5 mins as they could pre-i4. Get over it. That kind of undeniable power in a video game was completely and totally boring. There was absolutely zero challenge in the game at that point, and it was what made me stop playing.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wrong, I never asked for what you posted. In fact thats way off the issue. Thats something you dislike personally. I asked for more blast like powers.
[ QUOTE ]
That isn't dev love, that is not wanting the game to be broken again to the point where I decide to leave. I LIKE the game as is, and more to the point I LIKE tankers as is. That isn't being in love with everything the dev's say or saying that they are infallible, that is my wanting to continue playing a game and an AT that I like.
[/ QUOTE ]
And theres nothing wrong with your opinion. Except I and many others like and want change. You can stay just the way you are , hence why I would like if more tank offense was an OPTION. Not a mandate. You focus on the wrong parts of my posts, address my questions. Or atleast some reasons to why you think tanks are fine just the way they are.
"If you can make a girl laugh, you can make her do anything"
"You're like Giraffe's, the way you look down on me, with your vegetarian scorn."
Dear god... Can it be that I'm in AGREEMENT with Electronite?!
I can die now, I've seen everything.
[ QUOTE ]
You are not being objective at all. The burden of proof is on the people who want change to prove that it's necessary, using hard data like in-game numbers recorded in controlled conditions, not subjective arguments such as personal interpretations of comic books, how tankers 'feel' to play, etc.
[/ QUOTE ]
Stated goals for the recent Dominator changes, Castle's words:
[ QUOTE ]
Eliminate Jeckyll and Hyde feeling.
Improve "feel" of low level play.
Have minimal impact on "perma-dom" players.
Increase Dominator vs. Controller viability.
[/ QUOTE ]
The first two of the stated reasons for the Dominator changes are very subjective.
The last, is arguably so at least in part.
Castle uses words like "feel," which is a qualitative term, not a quantitative term.
Changing Dominators so they feel better in low level play or so there's less of a Jeckyll and Hyde feeling is no different than changing Tankers so they feel more like their comic counterparts and there's more of a feeling of them being heavy hitters.
.
I think people should stop using the word objective.
Seriously.
It doesn't exist.
Just acknowledge that what you're saying is always subjective and try to back it up with provable facts. That's what people aren't doing in this debate, pretty much on either side.
Now all the cosmetic stuff is something different. Most of that can't be debated with provable facts because it's just what people want. Proving that a majority of people want it is difficult at best. The best thing you CAN do is propose it, hope a dev sees it, and agrees with you.
Personally, I can say that I don't want property damage on the level that is shown in the clips of Captain Marvel vs. Superman because, quite frankly, it seems to me to be the antithesis of being heroic. I'm not against big epic battles. But causing that much damage to stop superman from investigating a bomb that you think isn't a bomb is like cutting off your nose to spite your face. Just....meh.
Anyway, a great deal of the other stuff is RPing. There already is screenshake, there already are cracks in the ground. Hell, one of my scrappers is an SS scrapper who happens to be weilding an unbreakable broadsword. My stone tank happens to be super strong (in another incarnation she is a fire/SS tank...her powers are a bit weird) but wields an axe.
To play this game you almost have to ignore some of the mechanics to get your character across. Because you can have a character concept as a God or a Demi-God, but then you can also play a normal guy who happens to be well trained. How do you balance that in the game? You can't. You just have to provide the powersets and hope people have a good enough imagination to make it fit.
The mechanics aren't perfect; but I don't know how you would change it, and I don't think that the ones proposed here, in this thread and in others, are the way to go if a direction is at all necessary.
"Be a beacon?"
Blue Mourning: lvl. 50 Katana/DA
Bree the Barricade: lvl 50 Stone/Axe
Last Chance for Eden: lvl 50 Fire/Kin
Myra the Grey: lvl 50 Bots/Traps
1 Minute to Midnight lvl 50 Spines/DA
[ QUOTE ]
Others do and have not cared for the weakness in offense with tanks since I4.
[/ QUOTE ]
But...Tankers don't have a weakness in offense. They're strong in offense. Your argument that they should be stronger does not in any way make them weak.
If we are to die, let us die like men. -- Patrick Cleburne
----------------------------------------------------------
The rule is that they must be loved. --Jayne Fynes-Clinton, Death of an Abandoned Dog
[ QUOTE ]
This unrequited dev love needs to stop.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is a strawman argument, and really needs to stop. There is no unrequited Dev love here, no matter how much you'd love to foist it off on players that disagree with you.
[ QUOTE ]
Their human, they make mistakes.
[/ QUOTE ]
And they have admitted to some mistakes before. We know that they make mistakes. However, that does not mean that the current Tanker situation is one of them.
[ QUOTE ]
Fautline being one of those famous mistakes. And finally "fixing" Hollows after four years.
[/ QUOTE ]
The Hollows were great when they first came out. Sure, they had some problems, but the story in the zone tended to be better than the one outside of the zone at that level, so people still did the content. After four years of having the same content, however, less people were doing it. The minor inconveniences of the zone became more pronounced, so they 'fixed' them.
Faultline had a story to go along with it, the Devs just never had the resources to get to it. As soon as they had the resources, they finished the story for it. Hardly makes it a mistake. An incomplete zone meant to be completed? Sure. A mistake? Not really.
[ QUOTE ]
Yes its an error, just because they don't admit to it doesnt make it any less a mistake.
[/ QUOTE ]
Please, show me where the mistake is and why. Don't use comics to justify it. Use actual game balance issues. Are Tankers hurting with the current setup? Is that because of a lack of damage, or because of a lack of a ranged attack in most of the secondaries. Show us exactly why and where Tankers are hurting. Bring some evidence, instead of just saying it's a mistake.
Just because you think it's a mistake doesn't make it a mistake.
[ QUOTE ]
See passed the love for red names and use some objectivity.
[/ QUOTE ]
See PAST your own opinion and use some objectivity yourself. If you think that you have a case, bring some evidence to back yourself up.
Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson
"I was just the one with the most unsolicited sombrero." - Traegus