Questioning the MMO Trinity?
By
Ahmon,
Posted on: 2009-07-26 05:07 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
Johnny actually has a point, though his mannerisms tend to obscure that. The point is that a hero who is incredibly tough and practically immortal, but also largely harmless, is not cool, not threatening and not interesting. He is an object. I'm reminded of a hero from... Somewhere, I don't remember, whose entire super power was that he was immortal and could regenerate any injury. He literally could not be killed. But aside from that, he had no actual offensive super powers. Any two-bit thug could just walk up to him and beat him up like a little girl, he just couldn't be killed.
"Tanks" in fiction are not intimidating because they're hard to kill. A steel safe is hard to kill, yet people aren't terribly intimidated by those. No, tanks in fiction are intimidating because they are dangerous AND cannot be stopped. They pose a danger that cannot be averted - the tank will keep on coming and keep on coming, though anything you throw at him, until the danger he poses turns into your own personal reality. A hero who is unstoppable... And pretty much just that is lame. For a hero's unstoppability to actually matter, there has to be a reason why stopping that hero is important and, by extension, why the impossibility of stopping this hero is intimidating and... Well, cool!
In this game, and indeed in many other MMOs, a Tanker is, at best, an annoyance. Yeah, he's big, fat and hard to kill, but he can't actually DO all that much. Artificial Taunt mechanics aside, what does a villain stand to lose by simply ignoring the Tanker and ripping his team a new one while the Tanker puffs his cheeks and swings his fists? Not a whole lot, let me tell you. Not compared to what a Blaster or a Defender can do if left to live for too long.
Interestingly, the Thing was mentioned already, and described as someone who's very tough but not monstrously strong. Which is interesting, since the Thing, in all occurrences that I have seen him, is proclaimed to be the strongest man in the world, and that's in a universe that has wet dreams about the Incredible Hulk. "World's strongest man" really ought to mean something there, and while I don't know about the comics, what I've seen of him in both the Fox cartoons and the recent Cartoon Network cartoons is a lot more of him punching things really, really hard, throwing really, really heavy things around and breaking really, really big things apart. If there were any instances where he stood between the Fantastic Four and a ray gun or a Hulk punch, I've missed it. The way he protects his friends is by ensuring that HE is the one engaged in hand-to-hand combat and anyone who's not fighting him but instead aiming for his friends is in trouble. He doesn't do that by being hit a lot. In fact, whenever he is, he's usually thrown across the room. No, he does that by kicking serious amounts of [censored].
Which brings us all the way back to the tank-mage, that "perfect character," that night terror of all men, women and children. Surely a character who can do everything would ruin the game and make it so no-one ever plays anything else. Except... Masterminds can do pretty much everything. They have SIGNIFICANT survivability, easily on par with a lot of melee ATs. They have serious damage output. Not the greatest, admittedly, but pretty damn good for how hard they are to kill. They have support. Maybe not the best support there is, maybe not the second best, but still PLENTY. So does that mean that the whole game can be played with one Mastermind to tank them all, one Mastermid to heal them, one Mastermind to bring them all together, and in darkness kill them? Well... Yes! Strange, then, that everyone isn't playing Masterminds all the time. Oh, but they're weird, they can be hard to use, they have all these pets, they need a lot of micromanagement, they don't do enough by themselves. There are plenty of factors that make Masterminds just plain weird, and a lot of people don't want to hide behind henchmen. But then if we have an AT that's pretty much as close to a tank-mage we're ever going to see and people are STILL playing other characters, shouldn't that mean that it's possible to have a "perfect" character such that people will still play other things?
Personally, I feel the notion of a Tanker as it is executed here is flawed in its inception. The very idea of aggro control and management is a kludge designed to justify creating all ATs with one arm missing and avoid having to make each of them a threat on its own. The simple fact that "threat level" is an abstract variable entered by hand based on how threatening a character is supposed to be, rather than a result of actions demonstrating how threatening a character actually IS, is clear evidence to that. This whole thing is a kludge to make Tankers APPEAR threatening without actually BEING threatening. And though it may fool the AI, players aren't as easily convinced by intent when they can see the reality of the game.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
[ QUOTE ]
The point is that a hero who is incredibly tough and practically immortal, but also largely harmless, is not cool, not threatening and not interesting.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tell that to the people that keep making stories with Vandal Savage. 
[ QUOTE ]
Somewhere, I don't remember, whose entire super power was that he was immortal and could regenerate any injury. He literally could not be killed. But aside from that, he had no actual offensive super powers. Any two-bit thug could just walk up to him and beat him up like a little girl, he just couldn't be killed.
[/ QUOTE ]
Immortal Man? Resurrection Man?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The point is that a hero who is incredibly tough and practically immortal, but also largely harmless, is not cool, not threatening and not interesting.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tell that to the people that keep making stories with Vandal Savage.
[/ QUOTE ]
Vandal Savage is anything but "harmless".
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The point is that a hero who is incredibly tough and practically immortal, but also largely harmless, is not cool, not threatening and not interesting.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tell that to the people that keep making stories with Vandal Savage.
[/ QUOTE ]
Vandal Savage is anything but "harmless".
[/ QUOTE ]
Of course, but that has nothing to do with his POWERS, well not exactly.
That's the thing though. Yes, certain MM powerset combos can come very close to tank-magery, at times, but all those fiddly bits are there precisely for that reason.
Sure they're durable, but not when they're trying to max their offense..no bodyguard. The longer a fight goes, the more likely a MM is going to lose henches, leading to a decrease in both offense and defense. Sure, they can get close to awesome survivability, and yeah, they can lay out serious hurt, but generally speaking not at the same time, and not for very long.
But then this whole discussion is somewhat moot anyway. It's not like any of this tanker discussion is new, to us or the devs.
Tanks are somewhat a silly concept if you look at them literally, or from a comic standpoint. Just like chesspieces move limitations look silly if you look at them literally.
Just like tanks, they're just pieces in a game that do what they do in order for the game to work as the designers intended.
Would anyone *really* want the AI hatelist prioritized based on actual threat the PCs represent to a given mob, (big damage spike= kill that PC, massive heal delivered= kill that pc) without requisite wholesale changes to all the ATs?
That change, i'd suspect, would end up with a lot of homoginization. We'd loose those extremes of damage and toughness and such that a lot of people enjoy...i know i love big orange numbers 
Furio--Lvl 50+3 Fire/Fire/Fire Blaster, Virtue
Megadeth--Lvl 50+3 Necro/DM/Soul MM, Virtue
Veriandros--Lvl 50+3 Crab Soldier, Virtue
"So come and get me! I'll be waiting for ye, with a whiff of the old brimstone. I'm a grim bloody fable, with an unhappy bloody end!" Demoman, TF2
It was me who made refernce ot the Thing and it was an incomplete thought. What you describe the thing doing is pretty much what I was going to say. The reason I said he isn't all that tough is he generally doesn't want to hurt anyone. He tries to treat things with kid gloves until he HAS to start flexing his muscles.
Also in comparison to characters like Superman and The Incredible hulk I don't concider him uber strong. He is just Uber stong compared to Captain Nomraleverydayman.
A Tank should be ABLe to dish ou tthe damge when it's crunch time but Tanks, as heros, pull their punches. They want to protect. Superman doesn't rip start Tossing Semi trucks at purse snatchers just because he can. It takes a serious threat...
You know. Maybe we could play around with a modification of the Fury system here. The longer a fight goes on the more "fury" he builds up. It would only build over time as the tank is actually hit and delviers punches. It builds very slowly, drains quickly, but can't drain if you've attacked or been hit recently, let us say 2-5 seconds. This way they can't really keep their "fury" built up between battels but long drawn out fights will make them want to "end the fight before more people get hurt"
I, personally, really like that idea.
It fits with the whole "World of Cardboard" approach that most of the 'tankers' (and I use that term loosely) in the Comic books have.
Against normal thugs they're not going to unleash their full might, I mean you don't see Superman punching that bank robber as hard as he could, he'd liquify the poor guy if he did.
However against certain he will just let loose, "show you how powerful he really is" and unleash his full might against someone he knows that can take it, in CoH case, this would be AVs.
Brutes are about smashing their way through people, battering them aside and racing from one group to the next, Tankers would be about taking out those tough targets, perhaps, with AVs/Signature Heroes, have them even surpass Brute/Scrapper damage at the very high end of it but only if the fight lasts a while, (say longer than 3-4 minutes)
Eh it's just a random thought from a random person, don't look at me for balancing issues 
[ QUOTE ]
Johnny actually has a point, though his mannerisms tend to obscure that. The point is that a hero who is incredibly tough and practically immortal, but also largely harmless, is not cool, not threatening and not interesting. He is an object. I'm reminded of a hero from... Somewhere, I don't remember, whose entire super power was that he was immortal and could regenerate any injury. He literally could not be killed. But aside from that, he had no actual offensive super powers. Any two-bit thug could just walk up to him and beat him up like a little girl, he just couldn't be killed.
[/ QUOTE ]
Take your pick. Both are joke characters.
I find Emery especially reflective of CoH Tankers because they actually use him as such twice in his sole appearance. Once to draw the fire of a system of lasers and once as the worst hostage in the world for a supervillain to take.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterball_(Emery_Schaub)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._Immortal
[ QUOTE ]
"Tanks" in fiction are not intimidating because they're hard to kill. A steel safe is hard to kill, yet people aren't terribly intimidated by those. No, tanks in fiction are intimidating because they are dangerous AND cannot be stopped. They pose a danger that cannot be averted - the tank will keep on coming and keep on coming, though anything you throw at him, until the danger he poses turns into your own personal reality.
[/ QUOTE ]
OK so far, but...
[ QUOTE ]
A hero who is unstoppable...
[/ QUOTE ]
Here I disagree. Every character I consider a Tanker, from Superman to the Thing to Colossus, are capable of being defeated. Often they are tougher than their teammates, but they all have their limits.
Often even have specific things they are highly endangered by. Psionics, magic, Kryptonite, poison, mez, etc.
[ QUOTE ]
And pretty much just that is lame. For a hero's unstoppability to actually matter, there has to be a reason why stopping that hero is important and, by extension, why the impossibility of stopping this hero is intimidating and... Well, cool!
In this game, and indeed in many other MMOs, a Tanker is, at best, an annoyance. Yeah, he's big, fat and hard to kill, but he can't actually DO all that much. Artificial Taunt mechanics aside, what does a villain stand to lose by simply ignoring the Tanker and ripping his team a new one while the Tanker puffs his cheeks and swings his fists? Not a whole lot, let me tell you. Not compared to what a Blaster or a Defender can do if left to live for too long.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. This is why the concept behind Gauntlet makes be snicker. Why would I as an enemy, pay attention to the medium damage love taps of a Tanker as opposed to the massive hits of a Brute or the Scrapper who keeps poking me in my critical areas.
A lot of sound and fury, signifying nothing. That's what taunting is.
[ QUOTE ]
Interestingly, the Thing was mentioned already, and described as someone who's very tough but not monstrously strong. Which is interesting, since the Thing, in all occurrences that I have seen him, is proclaimed to be the strongest man in the world, and that's in a universe that has wet dreams about the Incredible Hulk. "World's strongest man" really ought to mean something there, and while I don't know about the comics, what I've seen of him in both the Fox cartoons and the recent Cartoon Network cartoons is a lot more of him punching things really, really hard, throwing really, really heavy things around and breaking really, really big things apart. If there were any instances where he stood between the Fantastic Four and a ray gun or a Hulk punch, I've missed it.
[/ QUOTE ]
For most of their career, the Thing has been physically weaker than the Hulk. Hulk is strongest there is. That's the rule. However, Ben's fighting experience, intellect and toughness makes up the difference when they fight in neutral territory.
In the end, it can go either way.
[ QUOTE ]
The way he protects his friends is by ensuring that HE is the one engaged in hand-to-hand combat and anyone who's not fighting him but instead aiming for his friends is in trouble. He doesn't do that by being hit a lot. In fact, whenever he is, he's usually thrown across the room. No, he does that by kicking serious amounts of [censored].
[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed. There's few MMO tanks in comics. Most are Bricks. There few Defenders. Most are Corruptors. Support classes are an outdated MMO trope. Players should have the option to act in a support role if the situation calls for it, but entire ATs dedicated to it like Tankers and Defenders don't represent characters with similar traits and powers found in comics. This is a design failure that should be remedied.
[ QUOTE ]
Which brings us all the way back to the tank-mage, that "perfect character," that night terror of all men, women and children. Surely a character who can do everything would ruin the game and make it so no-one ever plays anything else. Except... Masterminds can do pretty much everything. They have SIGNIFICANT survivability, easily on par with a lot of melee ATs. They have serious damage output. Not the greatest, admittedly, but pretty damn good for how hard they are to kill. They have support. Maybe not the best support there is, maybe not the second best, but still PLENTY. So does that mean that the whole game can be played with one Mastermind to tank them all, one Mastermid to heal them, one Mastermind to bring them all together, and in darkness kill them? Well... Yes! Strange, then, that everyone isn't playing Masterminds all the time. Oh, but they're weird, they can be hard to use, they have all these pets, they need a lot of micromanagement, they don't do enough by themselves. There are plenty of factors that make Masterminds just plain weird, and a lot of people don't want to hide behind henchmen. But then if we have an AT that's pretty much as close to a tank-mage we're ever going to see and people are STILL playing other characters, shouldn't that mean that it's possible to have a "perfect" character such that people will still play other things?
[/ QUOTE ]
MMs were intended as the Tanking class for CoV. The way they get their damage and their survivability is through stances. They can switch to go on the offensive and defensive at will.
I once suggested such a system for Tankers and Castle said he had worked on one at one point but stopped for an undisclosed reason.
[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I feel the notion of a Tanker as it is executed here is flawed in its inception. The very idea of aggro control and management is a kludge designed to justify creating all ATs with one arm missing and avoid having to make each of them a threat on its own. The simple fact that "threat level" is an abstract variable entered by hand based on how threatening a character is supposed to be, rather than a result of actions demonstrating how threatening a character actually IS, is clear evidence to that. This whole thing is a kludge to make Tankers APPEAR threatening without actually BEING threatening. And though it may fool the AI, players aren't as easily convinced by intent when they can see the reality of the game.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think they hoped to "encourage" teaming by cutting the legs and eyes off of one guy, cutting the arms off another and telling them both to work together. Aggro monkeys don't feel super heroic to me. Neither do glass cannons.
The question is Samuel, short of waiting for CoH 2, what can we do about it?
Especially when Castle and the other devs don't see a problem or at least wont admit the flaws and wont work on improving them system?
.
[ QUOTE ]
I, personally, really like that idea.
It fits with the whole "World of Cardboard" approach that most of the 'tankers' (and I use that term loosely) in the Comic books have.
Against normal thugs they're not going to unleash their full might, I mean you don't see Superman punching that bank robber as hard as he could, he'd liquify the poor guy if he did.
However against certain he will just let loose, "show you how powerful he really is" and unleash his full might against someone he knows that can take it, in CoH case, this would be AVs.
Brutes are about smashing their way through people, battering them aside and racing from one group to the next, Tankers would be about taking out those tough targets, perhaps, with AVs/Signature Heroes, have them even surpass Brute/Scrapper damage at the very high end of it but only if the fight lasts a while, (say longer than 3-4 minutes)
Eh it's just a random thought from a random person, don't look at me for balancing issues
[/ QUOTE ]
We talk about ideas like this all the time in the Tanker forum. We talk and talk and debate and deal with trolls and talk and debate and nothing ever happens and no progress is ever made because a red name never comes in and validates the discussion or says "yeah, we'll think about this".
It's massively frustrating for all parties involved and the fact it's gone on as long as it has (even before Jack promised Tankers Fury and even after they got a damage scale increase instead) is a joke at this point.
.
Johnny, why do you even play this game? From all your posts it seems like you hate it with a passion.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I, personally, really like that idea.
It fits with the whole "World of Cardboard" approach that most of the 'tankers' (and I use that term loosely) in the Comic books have.
Against normal thugs they're not going to unleash their full might, I mean you don't see Superman punching that bank robber as hard as he could, he'd liquify the poor guy if he did.
However against certain he will just let loose, "show you how powerful he really is" and unleash his full might against someone he knows that can take it, in CoH case, this would be AVs.
Brutes are about smashing their way through people, battering them aside and racing from one group to the next, Tankers would be about taking out those tough targets, perhaps, with AVs/Signature Heroes, have them even surpass Brute/Scrapper damage at the very high end of it but only if the fight lasts a while, (say longer than 3-4 minutes)
Eh it's just a random thought from a random person, don't look at me for balancing issues
[/ QUOTE ]
We talk about ideas like this all the time in the Tanker forum. We talk and talk and debate and deal with trolls and talk and debate and nothing ever happens and no progress is ever made because a red name never comes in and validates the discussion or says "yeah, we'll think about this".
It's massively frustrating for all parties involved and the fact it's gone on as long as it has (even before Jack promised Tankers Fury and even after they got a damage scale increase instead) is a joke at this point.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
You are aware that Jack doesn't work for Paragon Studios quiaff? You cannot hold the current dev team responsible for what Jack may or may not have said. Jack said alot of things. Some would say he said too many things.
If ideas are meeting with general approval then it can be submitted ot teh devs. Any change needs to pass teh BS test though. I think alot of people would like to see Tanks get some love but nobody wants to see tanks become the new godmode.
I've really not followed these dieas very closely. I know how my experience playing Tanks is and I know how tank like characters are generally portrayed in comics. From waht I understand you have been championing change for tankers. Thats all well and good It's something you obviously care about. I would agree Tanks need something.
However, I would submit to you that whatever it is you have been peddleing for, as Rachel stated, 2 and a half years isn't flying with people. You may want to step back and look at a differnt change or approach. Noone, includeing me, is going to agree to a blanket Damage increase for Tanks. Regardless of what Jack said They don't need the Brutes Version of Fury. That WOULD be overpowering and would replace Scrappers completely as well as Brutes.
Even in this modified Fury Idea you have to be careful. I didn't mention any numbers because I'm really not good at making those up. All I have is a general idea. Weather or not it would work needs to be debated. We have been discussing this topic in tehi thread is why I posted it here. I think alot of these discussions you are mentionign is just getting buried. Bring it out for others to see. Changes to Tanks like this is important to everyone.
After reading through and admittedly not thinking too hard about it, I have a suggestion.
How about a "Restraint" bar? Starts out full and goes down while in combat. As it goes down, the Tank does more damage or their powers recharge faster. Maybe their Gauntlet gets stronger too.
Factors that could lower it would be teammates taking damage or even just getting aggro. But that doesn't help solo. I'd make it so...
As long as the Tank has some aggro, the bar will tick down. Allies getting attacked may take off a chunk or two here and there. But the bulk of it comes from getting aggro. The more foes the Tank is fighting, and the higher their rank, the faster the bar lowers. So, the Tank doesn't need to unleash his full strength on several minions. But a boss thrown in there, yeah. More so, an AV would make the bar drop quickly.
It's effectively a Rage bar. But the idea is that it works in reverse. Brutes get stronger from their anger. Tankers were already strong enough and are just being careful to measure it out.
The only other thing I could thing of to make them more comic booky/fun is to redo their powersets. But that's not happening
Thought I'd post this to provoke some ideas, who knows, maybe someone will come up with the one perfect idea if people keep talking about it.
[ QUOTE ]
PP, why do you even play this game? From all your posts it seems like you hate it with a passion.
[/ QUOTE ]
Didn't you know it is cool to spend money on stuff you don't like for the sheer ability to complain about it, and have every right to do so because you ARE paying for it?
My Gosh PK Get with the times...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The point is that a hero who is incredibly tough and practically immortal, but also largely harmless, is not cool, not threatening and not interesting.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tell that to the people that keep making stories with Vandal Savage.
[/ QUOTE ]
Vandal Savage is anything but "harmless".
[/ QUOTE ]
Of course, but that has nothing to do with his POWERS, well not exactly.
[/ QUOTE ]
I was specifically speaking about characters in a combat situation, and like Lex Luthor, Vandal Savage is not "tank." The plots a character weaves, his personality and vision and so on and so forth are things that aren't really very easy to depict, or indeed even relevant, when it comes to discussing combat mechanics and how they reflect the different themes of combat.
Take an in-game example - the Nemesis. He's written as forward-thinking criminal Mastermind who has infiltrated probably all there is to infiltrate, possesses unmatched technological resources and has plans going back 50 years. In actual practice, when you face him as an AV or EB, he isn't actually all that hard to beat, because his power isn't found in having monstrous strength and being unstoppable. So in terms of concept, he's one of the biggest bads, but in terms of combat mechanics, he's one of the easier ones, largely because he's noting more than an AV-tagged boss.
If we're talking realisation of combat themes into combat mechanics, a target that cannot be killed but barely fights back is pretty much a piece of the scenery.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
[ QUOTE ]
Sure they're durable, but not when they're trying to max their offense..no bodyguard. The longer a fight goes, the more likely a MM is going to lose henches, leading to a decrease in both offense and defense. Sure, they can get close to awesome survivability, and yeah, they can lay out serious hurt, but generally speaking not at the same time, and not for very long.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've seen this mentioned a few times, and it doesn't reflect my play experience at all. The fact of the matter is that the only thing a Mastermind really loses for going into bodyguard is basic convenience. He doesn't get who should die first, but with the amount of support, control and survivability an even halfway decent Mastermind has at his disposal, that rarely matters. About the only things of any meaningful threat these days are Longbow Flamethrowers and, to an extent, Malta Titans, with Scrapyarder Demolitionists serving that role in the 20s. And even then, they're not dangerous because they can kill you, they're dangerous because the AI goes bonkers from Burn patches. I'd sooner my henchmen held their ground and burned than run around like idiots.
Specifically, against a title battle against an elite boss or an AV, the difference between Bodyguard and not Bodyguard is practically moot. There's only one enemy to shoot at, and the henchmen will shoot at him regardless of given orders. Short of ordering them to move away or hold fire, they're gonna' shoot at the one enemy anyway. People talk about this as though a Mastermind in Bodyguard suffers a damage debuff or something, when the fact is that outgoing damage doesn't change while combat is going. It's simply harder to direct, but in my experience, the situation where Bodyguard is actually merited don't really have all that much use for directing your fire.
And then there's the fact that, as the fight goes on, you start to lose henchmen. Yes, that is true, but that's what support is for. A lot of Mastermind secondaries have heals and the ones that don't have lots of buffs and debuffs. A lot of Mastermind primaries have heals - Mercs have the Medic, Bots have the Protector Bots and Repair and Necromancy has a self-heal on every henchman. Even failing that, henchmen can be resummoned, and the longer a fight goes on, the higher the likelyhood is that your summons will recharge. Yes, it costs a lot of endurance to resummon and reupgrade, but that's what blue inspirations are for. I've fought battles where I went through three full sets of henchmen and I think a couple of extra sets of Soldiers on the side, a full tray of blues, but I still won and killed stuff I should have had no business even looking at.
A typical setup for my currently 49 Mastermind, when the situation calls for it, is Bodyguard with henchmen protected by a Forcefield Generator, enemies debuffed by a pair of Seeker Drones, compounding the forcefield's defence, debuffed by an Acid Mortar, making them easier to kill, and wallowing in a cloud of poison gas, killing their regeneration and stacking holds with the Spec Ops while my own henchmen are getting healed by a Triage Beacon, a Medic and myself with Aid Other. About the only problem is certain EBs with massive, massive AoEs, but even single-target heavy-hitters like Valkyrie aren't THAT big of a threat when they're well and truly debuffed.
I honestly don't see what Masterminds give up for all this, short of the need for some finer micro-management, and even that isn't really as bad or as vital as it seems. Heck, some people just run around in Bodyguard and play like Tankers.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
[ QUOTE ]
I honestly don't see what Masterminds give up for all this
[/ QUOTE ]
Living through their pets. You may not see it, but I sure did. I like to joke that "MasterMinds are the most powerful AT... until they're not."
Any AI effecting powers (as you mentioned Burn, or Caltrops, etc) give the pets fits. AoEs in general are especially nasty against them (more-so in bodyguard since they're taking normal aoe damage and some from you being hit) as are controls (lower tier minions are controlled for longer periods of time due to the purple patch, for example). Minion AI can cause them to do stupid things (ranged pets running into melee, melee pets spamming ranged attacks, chasing runners into mobs, etc).
Many of the Villain's original SFs have final missions that are really rough on them, too.
Tarikoss - Lava pits (Burn) and tight passages where you want/need minions to stand in specific areas, but they won't always listen.
Silver Mantis - A gigantic sea platform with tight footing where pets not standing where you want can cause unwanted aggro.
Renault - A final encounter with massive AoE knockback that scatters your pets to the wind and causes them fits (I believe the water spouts have the Avoid attribute on them like Burn)
Here is a video I stumbled across a while ago while rummaging through youtube. That fight took far longer than it needed to because of a combination of factors (controls, AI wonkiness, pets not focus firing in bodyguard mode, etc). For example, a Tank in that video could have popped a few BFs (for the fears) and went to town on the boss. A Master Mind can't exactly do that (since BFs only effect them and not their pets) and if they focused on the boss then they wouldn't be able to benefit from bodyguard.
I'm not saying Master Minds aren't a powerful AT; they can aoe farm, solo AVs/GMs, and out survive many squishies. However, they're not without their quirks that can be absolutely maddening at times.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree that a different system could be VERY fun and I'd love to try it. It's outside the scope of what you can do to an existing game though.
[/ QUOTE ]
Which is why we're not going to see any core progress until the devs stop milking this game and break ground on a sequel. The devs admit the old systems are holding them back, yet it seems they wont do what it takes to move forward. I'm going to have to assume that until they announce CoH 2. After over five years, I'd like to see core progress made and I really shouldn't have to look to the super hero MMO down the block for it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I totally agree that classes are dumb, and that is by far the most intriguing aspect of CO. However, why couldn't they just merge tanks, scrappers, and brutes into a singe AT that can toggle those styles as modes?
A game is not supposed to be some kind of... place where people enjoy themselves!
[ QUOTE ]
Any AI effecting powers (as you mentioned Burn, or Caltrops, etc) give the pets fits. AoEs in general are especially nasty against them (more-so in bodyguard since they're taking normal aoe damage and some from you being hit) as are controls (lower tier minions are controlled for longer periods of time due to the purple patch, for example). Minion AI can cause them to do stupid things (ranged pets running into melee, melee pets spamming ranged attacks, chasing runners into mobs, etc).
[/ QUOTE ]
The big thing is that Masterminds don't survive on just their pets. It's true, and I've said it many times - for the most part, a Mastermind can forget he has a secondary and not slow down much for the most part. But while a Mastermind can work entirely on just his primary, the secondary does help a LOT. In my case, 15% defence against everything from Forcefield Generator on top of double stacked 12.6% to-hit debuff from Seeker Drones, on top of 20% damage resistance debuff and 20% defence debuff from Acid Mortar makes a LOT of difference. It's usually the difference between an elite boss spam-wiping my henchmen and one-shotting me and an elite boss struggling to take down more than a couple of henchmen at a time and failing, for the most part.
Masterminds are more than just pets. They have a LOT of support which, though not as powerful as support-centric ATs, is still a significant strength on their side. Though the henchmen, both individually and together, may be weak and fragile, with enough support they CAN survive and deal some impressive damage. Imagine taking, say, a Dark/Dark Tanker and giving him access to Dark Miasma. It's not quite THAT bad, but that's pretty much how I see Masterminds, and how I see them play. They may not be the fastest out there, but they have... Well, EVERYTHING. Range, damage, defence, support, control... What else is there?
As for bodyguard and focusing fire, it's true that can be problematic, but it's also true that a Mastermind can go a long time without actually GETTING aggro, himself. The henchmen don't have any means to control aggro themselves, that is true, but they still have a higher threat rating than the Mastermind himself, and if sent into the thick of the action first, can do a pretty decent job of tanking for the Mastermind and, by extension, for the rest of the team. Direct Mastermind attacks have the tendency to incur aggro, but pure controls tend to do that a lot less so, especially with a secondary that's more buff-centric and less debuff-reliant, like Traps or Forcefields.
I don't pretend to be an expert on Masterminds, bit I'm a sworn Scrapper at heart, and if even I can admit Masterminds are as close to tank-mages as we're going to get, trust me that this counts for something.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
[ QUOTE ]
I don't pretend to be an expert on Masterminds, bit I'm a sworn Scrapper at heart, and if even I can admit Masterminds are as close to tank-mages as we're going to get, trust me that this counts for something.
[/ QUOTE ]
Like you, I'm not an expert MM player by any means. I'm also not saying that MMs don't tread close to Tank Mage territory. What I'm saying is that MMs have issues to deal with that makes them different than having Tanks become Tank Mages (by dealing Scrapper damage or having support like Dark Miasma).
A Tanker is in full control of their abilities, not AI.
A Tanker won't freak out when hit by Burn or Caltrops.
A Tanker doesn't need to worry about mezzes (for the most part).
A Tanker can 'focus' on one target without sacrificing defense.
Etc.
That's what I was trying to say. Sorry if I wasn't clear, it was a short night. :\
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't pretend to be an expert on Masterminds, bit I'm a sworn Scrapper at heart, and if even I can admit Masterminds are as close to tank-mages as we're going to get, trust me that this counts for something.
[/ QUOTE ]
Like you, I'm not an expert MM player by any means. I'm also not saying that MMs don't tread close to Tank Mage territory. What I'm saying is that MMs have issues to deal with that makes them different than having Tanks become Tank Mages (by dealing Scrapper damage or having support like Dark Miasma).
A Tanker is in full control of their abilities, not AI.
A Tanker won't freak out when hit by Burn or Caltrops.
A Tanker doesn't need to worry about mezzes (for the most part).
A Tanker can 'focus' on one target without sacrificing defense.
Etc.
That's what I was trying to say. Sorry if I wasn't clear, it was a short night. :\
[/ QUOTE ]
For what you stated and many other reasons, I'd still rather play a tank. My mms (two) are the only ones who have been stuck at the levels they are for ages. (one is 46, the other is 32). I used to have fun with them till I tried out numerous other alts on a whim one day. MANY of those alts (including tanks--who supposedly NEEEED MOAR DAMAGE desperatly--pffft) have hit 50 while my mms have languished.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you want an offensive melee toon, play a scrapper. You seem to want the tank to be as indestructible as they are now, but to have the power of scrappers or blasters.
[/ QUOTE ]
And if you want a powerset that's not available for Scrappers, or would like something half way between and don't want to be chained to the Fury mechanic you're out of luck.
From the looks of it, the upcomming super hero MMOs don't make the distinction between the melee class that deals damage and the one that tanks. Instead there's a system of stances.
This allows the same character to tank or deal damage OR even split the difference and be halfway between the two should they choose.
This also allows ranged characters not to have to be glass cannons and allows characters who want to heal and support to have soloability when they're not teamed.
In short, you're allowed to pick your own role, have a greater measure of flexability instead of the developers forcing you into one as they did and still do here.
[ QUOTE ]
To make the massive changes JB talks about really is more appropriate for CoX2.
[/ QUOTE ]
Allow me to give you a little golf clap.
[ QUOTE ]
I agree that a different system could be VERY fun and I'd love to try it. It's outside the scope of what you can do to an existing game though.
[/ QUOTE ]
Which is why we're not going to see any core progress until the devs stop milking this game and break ground on a sequel. The devs admit the old systems are holding them back, yet it seems they wont do what it takes to move forward. I'm going to have to assume that until they announce CoH 2. After over five years, I'd like to see core progress made and I really shouldn't have to look to the super hero MMO down the block for it.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
So it all comes down to you being pissed at the company because they won't develop you a new game? You may want to consider the fact that the devs don't have a say over what new games go into development. They're being paid to further develop this game. They can't just tell NCSoft "hey, we're going to take the resources you pay for and redirect them to a new game we want to work on. This one will just go into maintenance mode for a couple years."
Arc ID#30821, A Clean Break
The only problem with defeating the Tsoo is that an hour later, you want to defeat them again!
"Life is just better boosted!" -- LadyMage
"I'm a big believer in Personal Force Field on a blaster. ... It's your happy place." -- Fulmens
Methinks the author of the original article just wants a tankmage character.
MMOs don't have class roles because class roles are cool. Class roles force people to team. That's all there is to it.
If the role of tank is eliminated and instead mitigation capabilities are bestowed upon healers and DPSers, the game degenerates into tank-magery, people stop teaming, multiplayer aspect erodes and the game loses subscribers.
In general, making a tank-mage SHOULD be possible, but it should be extremely difficult (a CoX example would be a purpled-out Ill/Rad or a Tankermind - you can be a god, but it takes forever to get enough scratch to buy all those shiny enhancements). Or, a tankermind should be such an unattractive concept that only obsessed powerplayers would go for it - you get cruddy-looking gear, or your powers are visually lame. This way, tank-mages are few and far in between, and serve as a great "carrot" to dangle in front of casual players' noses.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't pretend to be an expert on Masterminds, bit I'm a sworn Scrapper at heart, and if even I can admit Masterminds are as close to tank-mages as we're going to get, trust me that this counts for something.
[/ QUOTE ]
Like you, I'm not an expert MM player by any means. I'm also not saying that MMs don't tread close to Tank Mage territory. What I'm saying is that MMs have issues to deal with that makes them different than having Tanks become Tank Mages (by dealing Scrapper damage or having support like Dark Miasma).
A Tanker is in full control of their abilities, not AI.
A Tanker won't freak out when hit by Burn or Caltrops.
A Tanker doesn't need to worry about mezzes (for the most part).
A Tanker can 'focus' on one target without sacrificing defense.
Etc.
That's what I was trying to say. Sorry if I wasn't clear, it was a short night. :\
[/ QUOTE ]
Also the point I was making....all the fiddly bits inherent with being a MM are the reason the Devs let them flirt with the edges of tankmagery.
Furio--Lvl 50+3 Fire/Fire/Fire Blaster, Virtue
Megadeth--Lvl 50+3 Necro/DM/Soul MM, Virtue
Veriandros--Lvl 50+3 Crab Soldier, Virtue
"So come and get me! I'll be waiting for ye, with a whiff of the old brimstone. I'm a grim bloody fable, with an unhappy bloody end!" Demoman, TF2
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One blaster, and a defender and I was a scrapper.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oi, pull the other one. It plays jingle bells! :<
(WARNING: This post may be entirely in jest.)
[/ QUOTE ]
True story, my latest love affair right now is with my Fire/Regen scrapper... though ironically enough I probably should have made him WP, because I specced into Fighting and other pool powers to give me more damage/resistance to balance out the regen.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not a combo I've tried yet, but I can see the appeal. High-damage, and usually decent survivability (debating Fighting on my Claws/Regen for much the same reason you are, honestly).