[ QUOTE ]
Either way, I can easily see Broadsword Stalkers making sense just as much as Katana Stalkers do.
[/ QUOTE ]
Except that Stalkers weren't really supopsed to be using Katanas either. Yeah, the powerset is identical, but they changed the weapon model to look more like a Ninjato. Whether that's historically accurate or just Hollywood accurate, they made the effort to fit concept and give them a weapon that, at least in fiction, might be used by a ninja. 
Villains: Annie Alias, Dr. Amperical, Shade Golem, Knight Marksman
Heroes: The Clockwork Mime, Soccerpunch, The Fissioneer, Samurai Houston, Oversteer
Join The X-Patriots on Virtue!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
HADOKEN!
[/ QUOTE ]
They call me Shoryuken, cause I'm downright fierce.
[/ QUOTE ]
Good lord, you just won the internet.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Broad Sword isn't a re-skin of an existing Stalker set, unless you think it's the same as Ninja Blade simply because it uses a sword.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ninja Blade is just Katana renamed, and Katana is just Broadsword with shorter recharges and lower end costs and damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
And before issue 2 they had the same animations as well.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My First thought was why weren't they giving this to Brutes.
[/ QUOTE ]
Probably because of Parry. Same with Tankers, to a larger degree.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is why I ask questions. I don't think in terms of the specific powers in a set. I think a Sword wielding Tank would be cool.
You bring up an interesting point I hadn't really considered. Of course this raises a new question. They had to come up with a new power for the Stalker set while they could have just redone parry or added something different for Tanks and Brutes.
[ QUOTE ]
You bring up an interesting point I hadn't really considered. Of course this raises a new question. They had to come up with a new power for the Stalker set while they could have just redone parry or added something different for Tanks and Brutes.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, considering that Broadsword could quite easily follow the model of Katana because the 2 sets are fundamentally identical in power design, Broadsword for Stalkers is probably going to cough up Confront for Placate, Whirling Sword for the new assassin's attack, and have some minor reordering of the powers to fit more appropriately in with the traditional Stalker ordering.
For Tankers and Brutes, it wouldn't be as simple. Confront would be dropped for Taunt and Whirling Sword would remain because there is no reason to get rid of a PbAoE for those ATs, but there isn't a hard model for what would happen to DA/Parry. It would most likely need to be gotten rid of, mainly because it's simply too strong of a power to be put in the hands of an AT with automatic aggro capabilities. Like it does for some Scrappers, it completely removes the need for a secondary outside of that one attack and the argument of "lower damage for higher survivability" doesn't really apply whenever Tankers already do this and would have significantly better returns and Brutes wouldn't have an issue with it because it would functionally allow them to maximize their Fury without much effort (just run around using Parry and almost never getting hit but still generating Fury). However, in order to prevent an out of place rework of the set, it would still need to remain largely supportive. Turning it into a control type power might work but that would make the set closely resemble Battle Axe with a different secondary effect.
Feint. You wouldn't nesicerraly even have to change the animation. Minor Damage on Par with Parry's damage. Lowers Targets -def -res
Shanks for Stalkers!!!!
[ QUOTE ]
Feint. You wouldn't nesicerraly even have to change the animation. Minor Damage on Par with Parry's damage. Lowers Targets -def -res
[/ QUOTE ]
That might be interesting, though, I would predict that it would be more closely akin to Follow Up and Blinding Feint (+acc and +dam) than a -res/-def debuff. Either way, if it were to do something like that, but it would cause the set to act as if it had 2 Build Up type powers, something that Castle has seemed to avoid (for good reason). The would still need to have some kind of defensive power rather than an offensive support power in order to keep power function roughly similar.
That depends. the whole reason Parry seems unacceptable is because it does buff Defense. Brutes and Tanks generally are already doing alright in those areas which is why we are talking about changing it.
For a tank their damage is subpar anyway. An attack like this which would allow you do bypass their defense and damage wouldn't be unreasonable to me. With Brutes Their whole spiel is adding to damage.
Besides. a debuff makes more sense for concept reasons. A Feint is tricking someone into lowering their guard in one exposed area by making them think the attack is coming from somewhere else.
The -def already has some precident in the Broadsword set anyway. Parry might even have it. I don't remmber. So basically we are just talking about a -res damage for a Lethal damage powerset. It wouldn't be exacly like Followup though. More utility. Maybe make the -res weaker than the +dam would be since everyone on the team would benefit from the effect.
[ QUOTE ]
For a tank their damage is subpar anyway. An attack like this which would allow you do bypass their defense and damage wouldn't be unreasonable to me. With Brutes Their whole spiel is adding to damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
The issue is that it allows Tankers to bypass any need to use anything except for Parry. Parry, thanks to Gauntlet, would have the AoE Taunt effect on it and would add to Tanker survivability. Losing a small portion of their already reduced damage isn't as devastating to a Tanker as it is to a Scrapper. For a Brute, it's more an issue of the Brute being able to skyrocket their survivability and generate Fury without risk. Parry would essentially act as a free +dam attack because it would allow the Brute to fight more targets with the same or higher level of survivability more than eclipsing the damage lost from using Parry rather than a more damaging attack.
[ QUOTE ]
Besides. a debuff makes more sense for concept reasons. A Feint is tricking someone into lowering their guard in one exposed area by making them think the attack is coming from somewhere else.
[/ QUOTE ]
Honestly, Parry would make more sense as a debuff mechanically than it would a buff, but that's how the game has been designed. The existing Feint mechanics operate as personal buffs. In general, it's better for the game to remain internally consistent than to make a single exception on account of reality.
[ QUOTE ]
The -def already has some precident in the Broadsword set anyway. Parry might even have it. I don't remmber.
[/ QUOTE ]
It doesn't. No power has both a buff and a debuff component for the same attribute. The only powers that do this use a pseudo-pet that activates a separate power in order to generate the effect and pseudo-pets can't target a specific individual.
[ QUOTE ]
So basically we are just talking about a -res damage for a Lethal damage powerset. It wouldn't be exacly like Followup though. More utility. Maybe make the -res weaker than the +dam would be since everyone on the team would benefit from the effect.
[/ QUOTE ]
It still doesn't address the entire issue that Parry is supposed to be the support power for the set. Replacing it with a power that is offensively supportive (like Build Up and the Follow Up clones) so that there are 2 in the set is beginning to tread into Fire's desmense as the offensive juggernaut, not to mention that it would still be the only attack powerset in game with 2 functional build up powers.
And this is probably why Broadsword hasn't been ported to Brutes/Tanks yet. It would require some balancing considerations whereas for Stalkers just plug it into the conversion formula and worry about 1 new animation.
For reference Stalker conversion formula
Taunt->Placate
PBAoE->Assassins ____(may require animation work)
Damage buff power->Build Up(if not already)
[ QUOTE ]
And this is probably why Broadsword hasn't been ported to Brutes/Tanks yet. It would require some balancing considerations whereas for Stalkers just plug it into the conversion formula and worry about 1 new animation.
For reference Stalker conversion formula
Taunt->Placate
PBAoE->Assassins ____(may require animation work)
Damage buff power->Build Up(if not already)
[/ QUOTE ]
The interesting issue is that, while there could easily be a basic Scrapper>Tanker powerset conversion protocol (it's not actually a formula unless deals with specific numbers), Broadsword, Katana, and Ninja Blade would still be seen as an exception to it simply because of Parry/DA which are already seen as being rather overpowered and out of place by the developers. Putting them into the hands of ATs that are already at the top for survivability would make the power even more powerful and capable of overshadowing any defensive power from their own, supposedly more powerful, defensive sets.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No idea about super strength.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hopefully it involves beating foes to death with live sharks.
That would make my Brute very happy. Especially if the sharks also have chainsaws.
[/ QUOTE ]
... or if they have fricken laser beams.
_______________________________________________