Quote:
IOing out a Scrapper to the extent that they typically do on the Scrapper forum is not "not that hard." We're talking builds requring multiple sets of purples, and in many cases assuming the PvP +DEF IO.|
Originally Posted by _Deth_
But let's face facts here, IO'ed out brutes and scrappers are not that uncommon. IOing a toon out is not hard, nor that expensive, especially with a little planning. By the time GR comes out, IO'ed scrappers and brutes will be the norm, not the exception. |
Not that it can't be done, but the vast majority of people who do IO out characters are going to settle for cheaper builds. While it's true that defensive bonuses are typically cheaper than offensive ones, it's also true that a Scrapper who concentrates on +DEF to the detriment of other bonuses generally will not have world-beating offense.
Not just because he'll lack the global +recharge for the best attack chains, or because he'll lose the opportunity to slot multiple procs -- but also because the enhancement values on many of his most important powers will be in some way sub-optimal.
I think you're under-estimating just how much easier it is to add meaningful amounts of defensive bonuses to a Tanker than it is to add them to a Scrapper.
As to the rest of what you've said, you imply if not explicitly state some innaccuracies in support of your case. Brutes' defenses are, all else being equal, the same as Scrappers'; their caps and their hps are higher. Also, since the game has gone live, there haven't been any wholesale Tanker-damage nerfs, unless you're referring to the Burn changes, or ED, as some sort of holistic offensive nerf to the AT.
Tankers' AT damage modifier was actually raised at one point, from (IIRC) 0.71 to 0.8. Before that, IIRC, several Tanker powers which had been designed around primarily control (like KO Blow) were given huge damage.
All of that said, I do agree on one point: Brutes are, IMO, the best melee AT in the game; assuming they can maintain a decent amount of Fury, they're more sturdy Scrappers and have access to what are, in isolation, generally superior (formerly Tanker-only) attack sets. No AT is going to die out because Brutes are available to both sides, though -- any more than Defenders died out because of all the theory to support the overall superiority of Controllers.
Speaking of Defenders and Controllers and all other squishy ATs, the fact remains that Tankers don't appear to understand just how good they have it. It was true in Issue 1, and it's true now. The sort of attitude displayed by some posters in this thread is unattractive, I think, to many people, because it evokes memories of the worst Tanker-primadonna mindset that has ever plagued this forum and the in-game environment.
Quote:
| I have been on teams already with scrappers that can more than hold their own against the average tank. I have been in groups where the group leader actually told the tank NOT to take lead and let the scrapper do it. Now, if I were the tank in said group, I would have told them were to stick it, and went on my merry way. This is a serious issue. |
This (whatever this is, exactly) is not a serious issue. There is no general trend among the playerbase to replace Tankers with Scrappers; in fact, in the AE, Tankers are more desirable than they've been in years.
If you exclusively run in SG-only teams where everyone knows one another and everyone is well built, then you can make a lot of cases -- that grouped buff/debuff trivializes everything else, that Scrappers are better than Tankers, that Blasters are better for teams than Scrappers, and on and on. Perhaps my perceptions are different, though, because I play primarily on PuGs when I do group; the unpredictability is fun to me.
And for what it's worth, I've never seen so many Tanker-reliant teams, or so many Scrapper face plants, as I've seen recently. Many of the Scrapper faceplants seem to occur when the aggro cap is invoked, in fact -- which, oddly enough, points to the aggro cap as an incentive to recruit a second Tanker. When you're fighting whole (huge) spawns of bosses, almost everything Tankers routinely complain about -- Scrapper survivability, the efficacy of hard controls -- goes right out the window, barring huge IO investments on the part of everyone except the Tanker.
The larger picture shows that Tankers are in no danger as a species.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
 |
pretty much agree with what MunkiLord said earlier
removing the aggro cap can be a good thing...for probably the solo player (especially when i16 rolls out), since herding beyond huge mobs will make controlling that aggro difficult because taunt auras, gauntlet and taunt has only so much effect and X amount of bad guys and inevitable lost aggro would be bound to happen on a team.
slightly raising the aggro cap would be alright...make it a nice round number like 20.
Quote:
not that hard? correct| IOing a toon out is not hard, nor that expensive, especially with a little planning. |
nor that expensive? opinion
a little planning can go either way...you get lucky with lowball bidding...or you sit for a while waiting to get a low bid.
I like the aggro cap on Tankers simply because it discourages an extremely tedious playstyle. That is, a tanker runs around the entire map collecting up every mob for the rest of the team to nuke. With the limit on targets for AoEs, there's really no reason to collect that many mobs at once.
It's just boring for the rest of the team to stand around doing nothing for five or 10 minutes. Plus, if the tanker happens to lose aggro (for example, by dying), the rest of the team is surrounded by 50 or 100 angry enemies who will make mince meat of them very quickly.
Finally, Superman generally didn't run around a city to collect a screaming mob of 100 villains and then slaughter them. In the comics superhero fights are generally small and tactical -- you might be outnumbered three to one, but 50 to 1 is pretty rare. It's a fantasy trope for a lone knight to slaughter an entire army.
Superheroes didn't shop at a swap meet, either. So, to base what a game can do, on what heroes do is kinda pointless, imo.
50-1...Shoot, Bruce Lee wasn't a superhero, but he had a movie where he single handedly faced mobs running at him. Probably, 30 guys or so. See above statement.
I don't have a clue as to how many a tank should be able to handle but my tank can hold the cap of 52 bosses easily. With a good /kin or healer i have maintained 54 bosses at the cap. But i don't think i could control a map of them. Yea, i could taunt them, but without a team, it'd do no good.
Doubling the tanker aggro cap, but leaving every other AT at 17 would be a great solution. There's nothing worse than being at the cap, and then a team-mate aggro's another group. There is literally NOTHING you can do to take aggro off-of them.
THIS dynamic needs to be fixed. A tanker is, in my eyes, supposed to control aggro. Taking damage is just a part of that. If a tanker can only hold as much aggro as a scrapper/brute/whatever else then his role as the meat-shield is diminished.
There is a big difference between increasing the tanker aggro cap...and giving tankers unlimited aggro. I think ~34 is a good number for tankers to be able to have aggro'd at once. It would allow the tanker to do his job, and wouldn't create a herding mentality. (What would be the point in herding anyway if the rest of your team-mates can only hit 17 of the enemies you've got aggro'd to you tanker?)
Irrelevant Dev-search Buzzwords:
Castle. BAB. Back Alley Brawler. Positron. Dark Watcher. Manticore. Sunstorm. Arcanaville. TheOcho. Moderator 8. Devs. Developers. Nerf. Overpowered. Powerleveling. 1-50 in a day. 1 billion in a day. Farming. Twitter. Con. I quit. Game breaking. PVP. Hack. Hacked. Cheat. Money back. Banned.
Quote:
Tedious to some, fun for others. Options are good; removing the aggro cap would not prevent anyone from playing exactly how they do today.|
Originally Posted by Rodion
I like the aggro cap on Tankers simply because it discourages an extremely tedious playstyle.
|
Quote:
| With the limit on targets for AoEs, there's really no reason to collect that many mobs at once. |
I don't see this making any difference. You still have AoE caps. Of course if you want everyone's aggro cap to go to 40 but leave AoE caps where they are then yeah that would be interesting. In that holy **** the squishy just pulled 40 mobs and is now spray painted on the wall kind of interesting.
Quote:
Take IOs out of the equation and see what happens to Scrappers. I'm curious to whether or not they can do the RWZ challenge without them.
|
Originally Posted by Lacrymosa
See shannon, after IO's came, players decided to "maximize" their Scrappers that they had shelved. And take on AV's and do RWZ challenges and further prove that they are "1337", the rest just wanted to feel more durable while doing tons of damage. I found it a bit cheap that scrappers could have more life and stronger regenration than Tanks. That kind of killed it for me. As its like making a Rogue in WoW take on more than three mobs. It's ridiculous but, you can't stop the ball from rolling.
|
Quote:
The challenges were around long before IOs|
Originally Posted by Atheism
Take IOs out of the equation and see what happens to Scrappers. I'm curious to whether or not they can do the RWZ challenge without them.
|
edit: not denying that more scrappers can "win" the scrapper challenges now, but so can more tanks.
edited again: For those that don't know, the RWZ isn't the only scrapper challenge. I'm referring to, well, the ones that existed long before IOs.
Honestly, i don't want the cap raised.
I'm not a fan of herding and more so of lazy teammates. I think that upping the cap would really just make it so the Tank does all the work and would really limit teaming. If one tank can hold the whole map, then you really make the other AT's rather pointless. The fun for me is in doing what tanks should do, work to protect his team, i know that if a limitless Aggro cap, you still have to work but it makes the game way too safe and easy. It's easy enough really, letting a Tank hold whole maps would just be far too much.
I'd be for lowering the cap really. This game is so easy and you really have to work hard to get a solid team wipe. It would seem to me to invite people to be lazy or lazier than they normally are. I've seen the AE Farms with a good granite tank, i think i slept through the whole map.
So,i'm good with the cap as is, perhaps lowering it somewhat. Perhaps i fear that with a higher cap that it would make teams only want Stone Tanks, the one Tank that can take the kind of punishment that a high cap or an unlimited one would breed. I know my fire tank is tough but can't do the old dumpster diving anymore after ED, even sofcaped in defense. I think i'd make cookie cutter teams, one Stoner and all blasters. If one tank could hold all that aggro, you'd never need any other AT, maybe a kin
I might be over thinking things but really, the game is easy enough as is, we don't need a higher cap. People need to learn to be better players and play smart. If you see a tank try to herd giant rooms, or huge outdoor maps, let him die or save yourself. I can see the joy of tanking a huge map and you're just buried in mobs, but really it isn't realistic or superheroy to be able to do something like that. I guess it breaks my immersion to see one guy hold the aggro of 20 or 50 badguys at once. Makes little sense to me.
Keep the cap.
In 5 years of playing in a variety of circumstances, I think I've seen the aggro cap in action like, four times, and those were in AE missions designed to spawn massive overloads of dudes. The OP's post slants the commentary by positing the status quo as being retarded, and then proposes something that won't really do all that much to help 99% of the game, while under a title that claims this is fundamental to the nature of being a tanker.
I'm unconvinced.
Agreed. I don't see a reason to up the Cap myself, besides, half the fun of the game is over pulling and trying to use your wits, skills and prayers to overcome it. I like being knee deep in badguys, trying to keep myself alive and watching a good tank, or if i am that tank at the time, fight to save the team. There is much more drama in that than just standing in one spot waiting on a Tank to bring back the map to a spot, nuke, get a drink, and do it all over again.
Even without the aggro cap, that policy won't work so well, because there are still target caps...
... which won't stop people from trying it.
Even with target caps for nukes and the like, it really won't matter if you don't have to worry about getting agro. The key is how safe would you be with the tanker holding everything to him/her/it's self? Think of a team with one Stone, a huge AE farm map lt's/bosses, and all the rest blasters. Herd then nuke, reset map. I'd almost consider it an exploit if one tank could hold the attention of say 30 or more mobs at once while the rest of the team does there thing with no fear.
Reiterating something again, as I continue to see it posted. If you're worried about teammates and tanking well because a second mob was aggroed, that's a GOOD thing. That does not mean you should be calling for an increase to the aggro cap or removing it altogether. If a game is a walk in the park and has no risk, it is FAR more easy for players to get bored with it and leave. This game is easy enough as it is, and raising the cap or removing it makes it easier.
With the cap at 17, you need either a tank to handle more aggro than that, or teammates good enough and strong enough to handle some aggro themselves. If you just need one tanker to lock everything down and everyone else can go brain dead, it threatens the fun, strategy, and longterm survival of the game, not to mention making some other types of heroes unneeded.
If you think Tankers need a boost (and I like mostly at DPE for needed improvement), fine, but the aggro cap is not where you want to go. Find a way to tweak Tanks that maintains the quality of the game and other ATs, not to mention having a second tank on the team.
Guide: Tanking, Wall of Fire Style (Updated for I19!), and the Four Rules of Tanking
Story Arc: Belated Justice, #88003
Synopsis: Explore the fine line between justice and vengeance as you help a hero of Talos Island bring his friend's murderer to justice.
Grey Pilgrim: Fire/Fire Tanker (50), Victory
Quote:
The Rikti War Zone Challenge was not around long before IOs. Issue 9 introduced IOs. Issue 10 introduce the RWZ. Issue 11 introduced purple sets.|
Originally Posted by Dersk
The challenges were around long before IOs
edit: not denying that more scrappers can "win" the scrapper challenges now, but so can more tanks. |
Edit: Just clarifying timelines.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KaliMagdalene
The Rikti War Zone Challenge was not around long before IOs. Issue 9 introduced IOs. Issue 10 introduce the RWZ. Issue 11 introduced purple sets.
Edit: Just clarifying timelines. |
QFT, If you're going to lie Dersk, use actual information. Google or the cohwiki page is a new tab click away.
"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:
For clarifying timelines, the challenges that the "RWZ scrapper challenge" sprung from were in rikti crash sight and the storm palace, and were used for quite a while. RWZ with 3 +4 bosses wasn't the only challenge, which is why I said "challenges" |
Originally Posted by KaliMagdalene
The Rikti War Zone Challenge was not around long before IOs. Issue 9 introduced IOs. Issue 10 introduce the RWZ. Issue 11 introduced purple sets.
Edit: Just clarifying timelines. |
.I think the storm palace has always been a better place to challenge builds, but it's just too inconvenient, I guess.
I agree with raising the aggro cap but leave the buff toggles at their normal cap that way it stays balanced in a way
~Amidst the blue skies, a link from past to future. The sheltering wings of the protector~
Quote:
If you're going to accuse someone of lying, leave your ignorance and arrogance at the door. I didn't say the RWZ existed before IOs.
|
Originally Posted by Lacrymosa
QFT, If you're going to lie Dersk, use actual information. Google or the cohwiki page is a new tab click away.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dersk
If you're going to accuse someone of lying, leave your ignorance and arrogance at the door. I didn't say the RWZ existed before IOs.
|
I'm not the one trying to defend his inaccurate statement. The arrogance is left at the log in screen, and the ignorance is left in the wiki page.
"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:
Well, the RCS challenge was three even-level mobs, but click panic buttons made those trivial.|
Originally Posted by Dersk
For clarifying timelines, the challenges that the "RWZ scrapper challenge" sprung from were in rikti crash sight and the storm palace, and were used for quite a while. RWZ with 3 +4 bosses wasn't the only challenge, which is why I said "challenges"
.I think the storm palace has always been a better place to challenge builds, but it's just too inconvenient, I guess. |
What were the challenges equivalent to taking on the pylons or 3 +4 bosses at once?
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Quote:
I'm from NY too, and I had a friend who died in that, so? |
Originally Posted by Lacrymosa
I'm from NY, relax kiddo. Did you join OXFAM or Amnesty International afterward?. Go google Rwanda and then come back to me.
|
If I was from Darfur pics of slaughtered kids would be cool, because y'know, I'm from there? Idiotic.
Get another angle, I'm sure you can catch a citizen jumping from ninety stories for extra lawlz.
Quote:
The storm palace +2 brutes that were heavily resistant to status effects and knockback and mixed with eyeballs, or the +2 wisps with nearly 100% psi damage, or the flying endurance-draining energy-flinging clouds. Though, there have been more changes to scrappers than just IOs since then. My claws/sr scrapper can, sometimes, handle the +4 rikti spawns, but the storm palace is still a bit much without inspirations.|
Originally Posted by KaliMagdalene
What were the challenges equivalent to taking on the pylons or 3 +4 bosses at once?
|
Although, I didn't think pylons were much more than a means of measuring DPS, and were made easier by changes to scrapper animation times moreso than anything else.
I think it would be interesting if tankers could normally aggro 17. For every ally within 50', they can aggro 2 more enemies, for a total of 31 on a full team if they are all close enough.
This does not aid herding (much). It does allow a tanker to be more functional in an overflow situation. It might aid the Conga Line of Stupidity, but I do not think it would have a major impact beyond how silly that already is.
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.