Wait, why Tank, Healer, Damage Dealer?
By
Adelie,
Posted on: 2009-12-21 03:59 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
I have 2 defender that break that "healer" mold.
My Storm/Elec def can out tank most tanks thru chaos and debuffs. It work well to. So far I've tanked most AVs, often pissing off real tanks because I do a better job than some. Doesnt mean I'm a real tank, but for about 95% of the game I can.
My Arch/TA def is just an offensive beast. I can do about blaster lvl damage on every group. It really breaks mold for defender because you can solo well with it, and team very well.
The fact is I didnt go seeking for these builds to play like that. IMO these were designed like that to break that thought that support is healorz and can't do anything else. This is one of the reasons I've stuck with this game for 5 1/2 years now. I can't wait to see what on the horizon.
Pinnacle: Hold my beer. Watch this!
Always remember that you are absolutely unique. Just like everyone else.
MA arc #117314!! Try it nao!!
Quote:
I'm guessing you have very little experience with good Tanks. |
Originally Posted by Cloud_Surge
I have 2 defender that break that "healer" mold.
My Storm/Elec def can out tank most tanks thru chaos and debuffs. It work well to. So far I've tanked most AVs, often pissing off real tanks because I do a better job than some. Doesnt mean I'm a real tank, but for about 95% of the game I can. My Arch/TA def is just an offensive beast. I can do about blaster lvl damage on every group. It really breaks mold for defender because you can solo well with it, and team very well. The fact is I didnt go seeking for these builds to play like that. IMO these were designed like that to break that thought that support is healorz and can't do anything else. This is one of the reasons I've stuck with this game for 5 1/2 years now. I can't wait to see what on the horizon. |
To say your Storm/Elec can out Tank MOST Tanks is a very ignorant and conceited thing to say...and I as a Tank take offense to that.
Sure...go ahead and say you can "Tank" when needed but do not outright state that you are better than most Tanks at doing what Tanks are made to do.
Quote:
Actually, I agree with you completely on this one, but I want to make a slight distinction here, between things that cannot be soloed and characters who cannot solo. Things that cannot be soloed, barring aberrantly powerful players, are generally fair to everyone. You need other people to do them. That's fine. In a game about multiplayer, it makes sense to have a few of those (even if I'm not a fan). Characters who cannot solo, on the other hand, are inherently disadvantaged, because they are incapable of taking part in activities other people can take part in solo based solely on class design, and sometimes build choices. By and large, there are few activities that work the other way around.|
Originally Posted by Oathbound
Being able to solo most things means that many (possibly most) people Will solo most things, and having things you cannot solo, in a game that is so solo friendly just makes people upset that they can't solo it.
|
Basically, I'm not against teaming, teamwork, or even so much forced-teaming content (escape clauses withheld for irrelevance), but it irks me when class choice inherently either locks you out of a lot of content, or at least hampers your ability to play it. As I've been saying for years, there are better ways to encourage teaming than to just slash off people's ability to solo.
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 actually agree with this assessment. Whether it goes far enough is subject to debate, but I'd lie if I said I wasn't pleased with the direction of CoV ATs. They're still largely balanced by CoH standards, just more in the middle, however, which limits how far they can go, but the thought counts. This is partly why I would really like to see five more ATs with Going Rogue. We already have all the boring ATs covered, most of the more interesting covered, and I'd be very curious to see what exotic ATs a new expansion pack backed up by years of experience and perhaps a little daring would bring. I doubt we'll see any, but I'll let that hope go only when I sit down on character creation and see no new ATs.
|
Originally Posted by DMystic
For Cities,I think CoH was designed using the Tank/Heal/DPS formula because of the Devs inexperience at the time. And while the game did a lot of things different, too much difference could be scary. Once they were more experienced we saw CoV where everyone was designed as a fighter/* or a */fighter.
|
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.
|
I was going to bring up the all-arrows Defender. This was the first class/powers combo that I had real fun with (partially since shooting people with arrows is so much fun) and while he does shine in a team, he's also fairly capable of soloing most missions. Maybe had a few panicked moments playing him, but I've had that with nearly every other AT I've played as well, many of which have had them more frequently. I will say that often when teaming with a good team, I do try to debuff as best I can, but often swap to just adding a bit of damage since everything is dying by the time I've fired off my debuffs.
Mentioning COV as a good example of the type of classes wanted by the OP is good, as I've certainly found that whilst playing it. My SOA really hates COT missions, but other than that, so far, he's got to lvl 30 without having to team...I've done some SFs and event stuff, but can quite happily smoosh most enemies, even if I do sometimes need prep-time. 
@craggy see me on Union for TFs, SFs (please!) or just some good ol fashioned teaming.
Quote:
Are we playing the same game here? The way the game is setup a balanced team is by no means required for most tasks. Team play is ludicrously unbalanced in favor of defenders and controllers to the point that a team of 8 of them will make mincemeat out of most content (they might have trouble with the STF although they can do it). I believe the overall best team is generally considered to be eight Fire/Rad controllers with leadership. How is that in any way a balanced team composition.|
Originally Posted by Scarlet Shocker
Hard to make too many sensible comments re Lost Vikings because I've never heard of it before, but one thing that struck me when I first started playing this game is how similar it is to AD&D in team make-up where the characters have their specific roles they must fill and only a good balanced team can make a real impact - whereas in some other games I sense that things are less clearly defined.
Personally I like the diversity here - I have no problem playing a character that's impossible to solo - in many ways that's what makes the game fun for me and I've tended to stay away instinctively from toons that can solo because for the most part I find soloing kind of dull. That's my own take and not everyone else will feel the same (I hope) but I don't mind the fact that some ATs - or to be more correct some power combinations - don't solo very well. |
In general you can make a team with any eight ATs you want, you just have to adjust your play style a bit. Got 8 scrappers? Berserk scrapper-lock. 8 Blasters? The spawn melts before it can do much damage. 8 Tanks? Herd the entire map and take your time.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Vitality
I'm guessing you have very little experience with good Tanks.
To say your Storm/Elec can out Tank MOST Tanks is a very ignorant and conceited thing to say...and I as a Tank take offense to that. Sure...go ahead and say you can "Tank" when needed but do not outright state that you are better than most Tanks at doing what Tanks are made to do. |
I'm in the opposite camp from the original poster. I've played a couple of games where everyone can fight (AoC, CoV), and overall I find it dull. Too much self-sufficiency takes the fun out of teaming for me. CoV in particular often feels like a group of people soloing together.
Virtue
Angel Witch II - Chord of Souls - Storm Witch II - Princess of the Dawn - Standing Horse - Witch of Xymox
Silent Scream - Shadow Witch II - Liquid Serenade - Nebulous Dawn - Ghost Witch II -Xiberia
Angel Witch II - Chord of Souls - Storm Witch II - Princess of the Dawn - Standing Horse - Witch of Xymox
Silent Scream - Shadow Witch II - Liquid Serenade - Nebulous Dawn - Ghost Witch II -Xiberia
Quote:
Sounds like CoH too |
Originally Posted by Tangler
You do realise you're describing CoV here?
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gorgar
I'm in the opposite camp from the original poster. I've played a couple of games where everyone can fight (AoC, CoV), and overall I find it dull. Too much self-sufficiency takes the fun out of teaming for me. CoV in particular often feels like a group of people soloing together.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cloud_Surge
I have 2 defender that break that "healer" mold.
My Storm/Elec def can out tank most tanks thru chaos and debuffs. It work well to. So far I've tanked most AVs, often pissing off real tanks because I do a better job than some. Doesnt mean I'm a real tank, but for about 95% of the game I can. My Arch/TA def is just an offensive beast. I can do about blaster lvl damage on every group. It really breaks mold for defender because you can solo well with it, and team very well. The fact is I didnt go seeking for these builds to play like that. IMO these were designed like that to break that thought that support is healorz and can't do anything else. This is one of the reasons I've stuck with this game for 5 1/2 years now. I can't wait to see what on the horizon. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Vitality
I'm guessing you have very little experience with good Tanks.
To say your Storm/Elec can out Tank MOST Tanks is a very ignorant and conceited thing to say...and I as a Tank take offense to that. Sure...go ahead and say you can "Tank" when needed but do not outright state that you are better than most Tanks at doing what Tanks are made to do. |
Quote:
I, for one, look forward to when you release your findings on this. It'll be an interesting read if nothing else.
|
Originally Posted by Bill Z Bubba
The point of all this? A scrapper will pump out more DPS than a defender. I don't care what that defender is. Two scrappers will dish out X amount of DPS. A scrapper plus a defender will push out Y DPS. Two defenders will push out Z DPS. I don't know what those values represent but I am very curious if what groups like the Repeat Offenders are capable of is grounds enough to leave defender damage where it's at. I'm betting the answer is yes.
|
Head of TRICK, the all Trick Arrow and Traps SG
Part of the Repeat Offenders
Still waiting for his Official BackAlleyBrawler No-Prize
Quote:
Question... If you dislike being unable to solo, then why would you play a class that's not capable of soloing? Like the Defender powersets? Roll a Corruptor. Like the Tanker powersets? Roll a Brute. No one's forcing you to justify the existance of this thread.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Basically, I'm not against teaming, teamwork, or even so much forced-teaming content (escape clauses withheld for irrelevance), but it irks me when class choice inherently either locks you out of a lot of content, or at least hampers your ability to play it. As I've been saying for years, there are better ways to encourage teaming than to just slash off people's ability to solo.
|
For what it's worth, I'd like to see a suggestion for an un-soloable combination of powersets, regarless of which archetype it ends up being. In this game, I'm confident no one can find one.
Quote:
You know, that's actually an interesting point that's well worth looking into. There is something I've always enjoyed about teaming, and that almost no game, movie or indeed even story. It's exactly this self-sufficiency, which comes from team-mates being able to take care of themselves in all ways. I grew up on traditional Tank/Healer/Damage Dealer RPGs, where my biggest concern was never survival, but rather keeping my ranger and/or wizard alive. I also grew up on your typical story of "knight save princess" and plenty of escort missions protecting weak, helpless, worthless "allies." It has given me a sense of teaming not unlike a mother duck, in that I (or someone else, rarely) is tasked with protecting the rest of the team which, though made up of useful members, is still utterly dependent on being protected. Truth be told, it kind of used to be like that.|
Originally Posted by Gorgar
I'm in the opposite camp from the original poster. I've played a couple of games where everyone can fight (AoC, CoV), and overall I find it dull. Too much self-sufficiency takes the fun out of teaming for me. CoV in particular often feels like a group of people soloing together.
|
However, being that I'm a fan of all things novel and unusual, a different type of teaming experience caught my heart early on, participating in all-Scrapper teams. Those are the polar opposites of what I described above. They are teams of equals, where everyone is well capable of taking care of himself, well capable of surviving on his own, and where I don't dread leaving someone behind, leaving someone alone, or leaving someone to fend for himself. Because they'll be just fine, and probably beat me to the objective, anyway. Easily the most fun I have ever had was a Bastion TF comprised of 6 Scrappers (myself among them) and a Bubble Defender. Not only was it a frightening sight, but I neither cared about protecting, nor was indeed able to keep track of, my team-mates. We basically focused fire on the big threats, then scattered like cockroaches to mop up what's left. No stress about having to protect someone, no stress about needing someone to protect me. It was about as simple and pure of fun as it gets in this game, or indeed in any game whatsoever.
We can go around and about, but the fact is that, I guess, I'm biassed, in that I inherently dislike the kind of structured, themed, role-dependent teaming that a lot of RPGs are basically shoving down our throats. Teaming in most of these games tends to come down to what everyone IS, rather than what everyone DOES, which is part of why I loved teaming in things like Unreal Tournament so much, and why I enjoyed Battlefield 2142 over Battlefield 2. With fewer roles and more general purpose gear, it always came down to having team-mates who were on the ball, and on whom you could rely to do the right thing. There was a guy in UT2004 once upon a time, who was incredibly skilled and with a solid head on his shoulders, so I knew I could leave him alone at a control node, and it wasn't going anywhere any time soon, giving me plenty of time to mount an effective offence by myself.
Basically, I enjoy teaming done in such a way that I can rely on other people to do their thing without me necessarily constantly hovering over them like some spastic guardian angel. Not mere helpless artillery, best left at the side lines or back in the rear, but capable combatants who just all happen to bring their own skills aside from direct combat to the table.
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:
|
Originally Posted by Bill Z Bubba
I forgot dropped missions. So it IS possible. Although not possible before the servers are shut down.
|
Pretty sure it could be done way before then, just not completely with dropped mishes.
Off-the-top-of-my-head List of non-combat, solo xp:
- Dropped missions
Certain glowies (yes, some still give xp tho very tiny)
Stealthable glowie missions (with mission end xp!)
Exploration badges
Patrol "phone booth" missions
University intro arc (just drop the 1 combat mission)
Vanguard intro arc (drop combat missions)
Introduction missions ie. Hollows, Striga, PvP zones, Croatoa, Cimerora
Delivery missions ie. see Azuria about X, talk to Paco Sanchez about capes, etc
Minimal damage required xp (Hammi & LW if you're leeching):
- Embalmed Vahz
1 hit on Hamidon
1 hit on Lord Winter (actually not sure if you even need to hit him or if everyone in zone gets some if he's defeated)
And "creative combat" where your personal damage output doesn't really matter:
- Street sweeping in Recluse's Victory with a Heavy
Leeching off a level pact
All this, of course, x2 during double xp weekends or with rested XP.
I probably missed a couple more, but it's definitely doable. Boring, but doable.
Craft your inventions in AE!!
Play "Crafter's Cafe" - Arc #487283. A 1 mission, NON-COMBAT AE arc with workable invention tables!
Quote:
No-one is, so I don't. This isn't about my ability to solo, but rather a general design philosophy where balance is based not around denying certain characters even basic skills and performance in, frankly, the very basic of talents in any game about killing stuff, but rather around what ELSE they can do. And again, THIS game is a done deal. It's over. It's not getting rebalanced in any way, shape or form five years in. That doesn't mean I have to like its frankly olf-fashioned approach to in-team balance. It works, it's just not very exciting.|
Originally Posted by GuyPerfect
Question... If you dislike being unable to solo, then why would you play a class that's not capable of soloing? Like the Defender powersets? Roll a Corruptor. Like the Tanker powersets? Roll a Brute. No one's forcing you to justify the existance of this thread.
|
Quote:
| For what it's worth, I'd like to see a suggestion for an un-soloable combination of powersets, regarless of which archetype it ends up being. In this game, I'm confident no one can find one. |
By all means, let players help each other, let teams be stronger than just the sum of their parts, let content be built such that it requires multiple people. But don't design these dynamics at the cost of self-sustainability. It isn't necessary.
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:
There isn't one. Especially now when we have the ability to lower the diff to -1.| For what it's worth, I'd like to see a suggestion for an un-soloable combination of powersets, regarless of which archetype it ends up being. In this game, I'm confident no one can find one. |
There are, however, some combos that are so slow that soloing them can easily be described as not fun. That doesn't mean that there isn't someone out there that would have fun doing it anyway.
Be well, people of CoH.
Quote:
This is in direct contrast to my personal experience with each of the archetypes. I base my evaluations on builds slotted with Single Origin Enhancements and without Health or Stamina, and I'm still of the opinion that all combinations of powersets for all archetypes (Defender included) are perfectly suited for solo play.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
All ATs can solo. Not all can do so well enough and, crucially, not all can do so at an even REMOTELY comparable basis.
|
Defenders deal less damage per attack, yes, but all that means is that they don't solo as quickly as, say, Arachnos Soldiers. But I've never seen an Arachnos Soldier nullify an aggro cap's worth of enemies by making them unable to use any of their attacks. I've never seen an Arachnos Soldier drain an Arch-villain of all its Endurance. I've never seen an Arachnos Soldier take on a Giant Monster and win. I have seen Defenders do each of these things. I don't believe that the argument of "more damage equals more power" is applicable in this situation.
If everyone had equal aptitude for dispatching their enemies (and thusly soloing the game content at comparable levels), then the only noteworthy difference between classes would be that secondary specialty. I strongly disagree with your suggestion that this would make the game more interesting. I'd much rather have a healer here, a tank there, and a damage dealer over there than have City of Warshades.
The original design considerations for City of Heroes may very well have been the three-fold axiom of online team play, but that vision has obviously changed since then and there are more options available for those who don't want to be forced into those roles. It all comes down to a matter of preference; there is no flaw in allowing people to choose their preferences.
Quote:
I don't think the question is: 'Can they all solo?' Sure, every powerset combination can play the game solo. I certainly don't agree that the rate at which every combination solos is acceptable. For me anyway. And I think most people would find soloing an earth/ff controller to be tedious at best. Containment or not.|
Originally Posted by GuyPerfect
This is in direct contrast to my personal experience with each of the archetypes. I base my evaluations on builds slotted with Single Origin Enhancements and without Health or Stamina, and I'm still of the opinion that all combinations of powersets for all archetypes (Defender included) are perfectly suited for solo play.
|
Quote:
| Defenders deal less damage per attack, yes, but all that means is that they don't solo as quickly as, say, Arachnos Soldiers. But I've never seen an Arachnos Soldier nullify an aggro cap's worth of enemies by making them unable to use any of their attacks. |
Quote:
| I've never seen an Arachnos Soldier drain an Arch-villain of all its Endurance. |
Quote:
| I've never seen an Arachnos Soldier take on a Giant Monster and win. |
Quote:
| I have seen Defenders do each of these things. I don't believe that the argument of "more damage equals more power" is applicable in this situation. |
Quote:
| If everyone had equal aptitude for dispatching their enemies (and thusly soloing the game content at comparable levels), then the only noteworthy difference between classes would be that secondary specialty. I strongly disagree with your suggestion that this would make the game more interesting. I'd much rather have a healer here, a tank there, and a damage dealer over there than have City of Warshades. |
However, most of the games I've played in those veins are single player or just standard multiplayer games. Strict class roles work great for Team Fortress 2 because you never play that game solo anyway. Someone's gonna be the engineer, another guy is gonna be the medic and someone else may play the demo man or heavy etc. Valve purposely removed grenades from the game like they were in TF 1 specifically to achieve a better sense of distinction between classes.
In Unreal Tournament, anyone can use any weapon so 'classes' are non-existent. That doesn't make the game any less fun either IMO.
Quote:
| The original design considerations for City of Heroes may very well have been the three-fold axiom of online team play, but that vision has obviously changed since then and there are more options available for those who don't want to be forced into those roles. |
What the devs have done is try to create less of a gaping chasm between the extremely effective solo combos and the uninformed player's random powerset choices. Whether they have achieved that is still a touchy thing, but it's not quite as bad as it was earlier.
Quote:
Definitely we're in it for different things, then; I've tried all-scrapper teams and found them really dull. I'll always switch to either a tank or defender so that I feel I have something to do. In fact, that's really all I want out of the game: something I need to do to make the team succeed. If it doesn't matter if I do anything at all, I lose interest pretty quickly. Same goes for all controller groups, and I'd imagine all tanks, though I'd be willing to try all blasters or defenders.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
However, being that I'm a fan of all things novel and unusual, a different type of teaming experience caught my heart early on, participating in all-Scrapper teams.
|
Really I prefer duos over anything else, sometimes with characters that can handle a couple of roles at once: dark/dark scrapper or tank, who can tank but also does a bit of control and doesn't need buffing, energy blaster with self-heal and damage mitigation via knockback, dark/sonic defender with lots of control, storm/energy that can serve as a light-duty tank.
Virtue
Angel Witch II - Chord of Souls - Storm Witch II - Princess of the Dawn - Standing Horse - Witch of Xymox
Silent Scream - Shadow Witch II - Liquid Serenade - Nebulous Dawn - Ghost Witch II -Xiberia
Angel Witch II - Chord of Souls - Storm Witch II - Princess of the Dawn - Standing Horse - Witch of Xymox
Silent Scream - Shadow Witch II - Liquid Serenade - Nebulous Dawn - Ghost Witch II -Xiberia
CoH isn't balanced between archetypes on any level really. You definitely can't out heal the damage done to you in PvP if you are a healer.
Outside of CoH, this is one of the reasons that I think Champions Online sucks so much. If Champions Online was Champions the RPG online, then it would have been a whole different ball game. They didn't transfer over the points system and combat system and without both the mechanics the online game just does not function the same as the RPG.
Champions the RPG was the most balanced RPG that I have ever played and virtually every aspect of the game has a numerical component.
We have reached the point that all the calculations that were in a Champions game could have been used in a computer game in real time. There are action in the game that would have needed to cause a "bullet-time"/time dialation effect for character with a higher speed that could have caused problems in game - but even with the SPD trait removed (which I think could have been worked around), the system as a whole would still be functional to keep a balance game.
Why not? The excuse is apparently that players don't know how to design balanced character (classes) and will make their characters unplayable.
They had the chance to make the game you are describing, but threw away the ball that they were holding in their hands because they already "knew how to play the game". They got a face full of lip from Champions RPG players about that fact too. So sad.
However, I'm glad they failed, because I really do love City of Heroes.
Quote:
I was trying to convey my impression, and sure you can team with 8 similar ATs (as you could in AD&D but it was tough with lvl 1 wizards I recall) |
Originally Posted by Adeon Hawkwood
Are we playing the same game here? The way the game is setup a balanced team is by no means required for most tasks. Team play is ludicrously unbalanced in favor of defenders and controllers to the point that a team of 8 of them will make mincemeat out of most content (they might have trouble with the STF although they can do it). I believe the overall best team is generally considered to be eight Fire/Rad controllers with leadership. How is that in any way a balanced team composition.
In general you can make a team with any eight ATs you want, you just have to adjust your play style a bit. Got 8 scrappers? Berserk scrapper-lock. 8 Blasters? The spawn melts before it can do much damage. 8 Tanks? Herd the entire map and take your time. |
There will always be those who try to maximise advantage and that's not always a bad thing but I've found that a balanced team is generally efficient enough and fun to be in a team with.
The real point here is that to me, the important thing about the game is the teaming aspect.
Thelonious Monk
Quote:
"Giving up" is not the right way to think about it. The right way to think about it is, using CoH as the example, everyone starts off with Defender damage and no range. Then Defenders got range and buffs. Scrappers got more damage and self-defense. Blasters got more damage and range. No one really "gave up" anything to get what they got, except from a relative perspective.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Giving up combat prowess for the sake of other specialization just doesn't sit well with me
|
As to the thesis of the OP, I think that's a much more complex question than it is usually portrayed as. I'll just say this: if I were designing CoH from scratch today, I would not use the tank/blaster/defender archetype-role system. I'd basically create skill tree-like options that start from a core, then allow branch outs to various options: think VEATs, but more complex. But unlike VEATs, I would not lock players into a single branch. Rather than force players to make decisions about what they want their tradeoffs to be for all time, I would allow players to make situational tradeoffs intrinsic in their powers and abilities.
For example, you could erect a force field around the team to protect them from damage. But you'd have to take some small percentage of that damage, and the cost in maintaining it would be less energy to devote to offense (and by the way, in my world no click buffs: buffing someone costs you power continuously; energy devoted to those buffs couldn't be used to fight with). In effect, a "tank" would be someone that took the right abilities that allowed them to burn a lot of energy protecting allies from damage. But outside of teams, with those powers turned off, they basically cease to become tankers, and cease to have to live under that tradeoff.**
To put it simply, I would not make tankers. Only powers useful to tanking. Someone who loaded up on them at the expense of offense would be making a build choice to trade the opportunity for more offense for the opportunity for more team-oriented defense. But there'd be a lot of room to compromise between "all offense" and "all defense" and everyone would be responsible for their own chosen trade offs.
** Its the notion of actual meaningful tradeoffs that I think distinguishes my hypothetical system from the system implemented in Champions Online, which only has opportunity costs.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
What about my poor Mastermind who does less damage than a Defender? I'm giving up everything! |
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
"Giving up" is not the right way to think about it. The right way to think about it is, using CoH as the example, everyone starts off with Defender damage and no range. Then Defenders got range and buffs. Scrappers got more damage and self-defense. Blasters got more damage and range. No one really "gave up" anything to get what they got, except from a relative perspective.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PRAF68_EU
Dispari has more than enough credability, and certainly doesn't need to borrow any from you.
|
Quote:
In directly answering the title: mainly because that's how DnD did it and a lot of RPG mechanics, and well, tropes, are derived directly from it.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Old question, been done to death.
|
Quote:
| The problem, when it comes down to it, is why would anyone play a Fighter who can only fight, if a Healer can fight AND heal as just as well, possibly even better? |
One close to home example... One of my brothers derives the most satisfaction from his myriad of RPG-style games in the "Cleric" or supporting role (Defender, Corruptor, Tanker, Tanking Brute, Controller, that kind of thing). The other? Well, he likes blasting the hell out of the landscape or in general being a terror to the opposition in some way (Blaster, Brute, other methods of achieving that end result). As for me? Well, I just like to have a gimmick.
Quote:
| As long as the only way to triumph is to cause the other guy's hit points to bottom out, doesn't it make sense to give EVERYONE decent offensive abilities? And when I say decent, I don't mean "exist on paper," I mean offensive abilities that actually make a point. |
Comparatively, someone else might define the Fighter's damage focus as the bare minimum for being "decent".
Quote:
| As long as hit points depletion is the one and only way to succeed, doesn't it make sense to give everyone decent and equal(ish) tools to do that as a basic toolkit, and then give everyone something ELSE to define their class? |
Quote:
| I understand the need for balance, but I have to wonder - why can't everyone be good at the bare essentials, which are killing stuff, and then specialise from there? |
Quote:
| In fact, isn't that kind of how Warhammer 40 000 is designed? Even the medics and librarians wear power armour and carry around machine guns and axes. |
In the context of CoX, you can't afford to have that much disparity between the classes, which contrasts with my earlier point about how you can't have too much homogeneity. It's a balancing act outside of explicit "balancing" in the game. In my eyes? CoX has struck a beautiful niche on the line. Perhaps some don't share this but then, I just laugh at them because I don't want to argue something that is a different mindset.
Quote:
| I understand the draw of specialization, but wouldn't it really make sense to let everyone be decent at fighting for his life? One would think all super heroes would need to be, in order to have survived long enough to level up, right? |
Blue: ~Knockback Squad on Guardian~
Red: ~Undoing of Virtue on [3 guesses]~
Quote:
You get six friends who will never outlevel you, who are always logged in the same times you are, and who cannot quit your team no matter how many times you get them killed.
|
Originally Posted by Dispari
What about my poor Mastermind who does less damage than a Defender? I'm giving up everything!
|
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
I'm not an expert in DnD (and my knowledge of anything past 3rd edition is practically non-existent) but I don't think DnD ever really had a "Tanker" class in the way MMOs tend to implement it; especially as CoH implements it.|
Originally Posted by LostHalo
In directly answering the title: mainly because that's how DnD did it and a lot of RPG mechanics, and well, tropes, are derived directly from it.
|
I mean, the "fighter" class (and all its variants) tended to be melee, and tended to be more hardy, but they seem to be more scrapperish than tankerish to me. The critical difference seems to be that in DnD, if the magic user runs up to the monster and hits it with his staff, the monster doesn't ignore him and attack the fighter, the monster turns to the left and eats the magic user's head. In DnD, the melee-fighter could take more damage, but they didn't have the near-perfect control of aggro that they do in CoH.
Perhaps my memory of DnD (its been a long, long time) or other PnP games is incomplete, but I never ran into a PnP game where there was the same capability of aggro control. In PnP games, it seemed the advantage of being the fighter was that you could jump right into the fight. If you were not the fighter, you were not relying on the fighter to lock aggro and make you free to act in any way you wanted: you were supposed to keep your head down or attack from a different zip code.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
That would be awesome.
That would be awesome.