For ice tank, fire res or smash/lethal res
By
Call Me Awesome,
Posted on: 2009-09-26 10:49 in Tankers
Quote:
Well, S/L amounts to over 70% of the damage you face... Fire amounts to around 5%. Which do you think would help you more?|
Originally Posted by Thunderwolf
In my build I am trying to decide on tough vs permafrost, without perma frost I only have 18% fire res and 15% fire def, with it I have 37% fire res and the same fire def. With tough I have about 20% smash/lethal res, and 0% without it.
I am softcapped to everything but fire, cold and psi. So which would be more important, fire res since I have no fire def, or smash/lethal res since its the most common damage? |
Your primary goals should be first reaching the 45% defense soft cap for S/L and preferably E/N; then increasing your S/L resistance as much as you can. I see you've gotten the first part of that done already. I'm not familiar enough with Ice to offer specific advise but going by the numbers that's the way to play it.
Prior to IO's Permafrost was widely regarded as one of the worst powers in the entire game... it's only real purpose now is to act as an IO mule for set bonuses.
COH has just been murdered by NCSoft. http://www.change.org/petitions/ncso...city-of-heroes
As mentioned s/l is far more common and many fire attacks have a s/l part to them so at times you will be covered by your other defenses anyway.
tough vs. permafrost? Tough will take two selections to get vs. the one for permafrost what else is getting adjusted in your one or the other build? Do you think it is worth it?
37% fire defense.. permafrost adds resistance so I don't understand hw it is adjusting your defense value. I am assuming you don't have weave since you are thinking about tough. You may want to post your build. My thought is that you have devoted alot of slots and IO's to reach 37% defense to fire. A task I would not set for myself.
Quote:
I think he means 37% resists and no change in defence.|
Originally Posted by Dissolution
As mentioned s/l is far more common and many fire attacks have a s/l part to them so at times you will be covered by your other defenses anyway.
tough vs. permafrost? Tough will take two selections to get vs. the one for permafrost what else is getting adjusted in your one or the other build? Do you think it is worth it? 37% fire defense.. permafrost adds resistance so I don't understand hw it is adjusting your defense value. I am assuming you don't have weave since you are thinking about tough. You may want to post your build. My thought is that you have devoted alot of slots and IO's to reach 37% defense to fire. A task I would not set for myself. |
I've not got permafrost on my Ice tank and not found it an issue, although I have been tempted to take it I can't fit it in.
If it offered the same amount of psi resists I'd bite your hand off for it.
L50s: Tanks: Cryofission - Ice/EM - Dr Celsius - Fire/Ice - Saint George - SD/SS | Controllers: Psichosis - Ill/Kin - Major Chaos - Ill/Stm | Scrappers - Neutron Crusader - DM/SR
Currently Levelling: Angelic Blade - BS/WP Scrapper | Seeds of Destruction - Plant/Kin Controller
In my build I am trying to decide on tough vs permafrost, without perma frost I only have 18% fire res and 15% fire def, with it I have 37% fire res and the same fire def. With tough I have about 20% smash/lethal res, and 0% without it.
I am softcapped to everything but fire, cold and psi.
So which would be more important, fire res since I have no fire def, or smash/lethal res since its the most common damage?