well, until they get rid of rooting effects, this will stay in your dreams. interesting idea though.
couple of things.
First, I can already hear BAB's screaming in pain at the thought of animating different styles for each power.
Second, a blaster is only going to be in melee range for two reasons. First: they got overwhelmed and couldn't help it: Second, they are finishing an enemy off.
Still, interesting idea if the game ever moved to a rag-doll system where Bab's could simply determine points of an animation and allow the computer to handle the task of generating the affects to that point of animation. Granted, such a system would blow the processing requirements sky high, so this might be an option in 2 or 3 years if NCSoft looks towards a CoH2.
That would be cool but it's way too late in the game to add something major like that.
Quote:
My blasters are ALWAYS in melee range.
|
Originally Posted by je_saist
Second, a blaster is only going to be in melee range for two reasons. First: they got overwhelmed and couldn't help it: Second, they are finishing an enemy off.
|
Quote:
yeah your probably right....sigh
|
Originally Posted by Clebstein
That would be cool but it's way too late in the game to add something major like that.
|
I dont have a siggy.....sad huh
This would be awesome, but if we say that too loudly, BAB will /kill us all./ It's unnecesarry and unreasonable, despite how cool it would be.
...And yeah, a lot of blasters live in melee.
NPCs: A Single Method to Greatly Expand Bases
I always considered 'power styles' to be expressed by AT. It's not so much that a Blaster uses 'brute force' or 'flashyness', but rather a Blaster uses a Blaster style.
It's more obvious on the melee ATs: Scrappers are fierce strong fighters, Brutes are clumsy but overwhelming, Tankers dutiful and a foundation of reliability and Stalkers are surgical and calculating.
During powerset proliferation, I was always an advocate of (and still am) stylizing the powersets to those ATs. Rather than a straight port with maybe a little jumbling with the numbers, I always though having 1 unique power for each of those ATs that epitomize their style was the way to go. It'd reserve the uniqueness of each AT and give you a reason to play each.
It's a shame, really. Dual Blades doesn't really feel brutish to me. I tried it and dropped it for Axe. But I could imagine replacing one of the cones (or the PBAoE) with a fast activating double bladed downward 'SMASH' that did KD would help the overall feel.
Instead of the Weaken combo on a stalker, I would have loved something more 'fitting' of a stealthy surgical fighter, perhaps something more controlly like a 'Sword Flash' combo that did -ToHit and a chance to confuse.
Anyway, I thought it was a cool idea and would definitely make me want to play different sets over across ATs moreso than I do now.
Quote:
I'm not sure I can agree with your interpretation of Brutes as clumsy, as that would write pretty much every Brute I've ever made out of existence. I rather see them as the kind of characters who would pick to use a "brute force approach," whether or not it involved literal brute force. An assassin, for instance, can choose to lie in wait, sneak around and pounce in his victim, then slip away into the night, and that would probably be a Stalker (in theory, if not in practice). An assassin can also choose to attack the victim openly, dispatch his guards with incredible speed and precision and then skewer him in front of a huge crown just to make a point. That would very much be a Brute, both in practice and theory. A Brute does not always survive by being tough, and often does so by avoiding being hit or debilitating his enemies. A Brute does not always win by flailing his fists as hard as he can, and indeed often strikes with precision. It's a question inflicting as much damage as possible, but that does not come with the burden of doing so in the most inefficient way.|
Originally Posted by Leo_G
During powerset proliferation, I was always an advocate of (and still am) stylizing the powersets to those ATs. Rather than a straight port with maybe a little jumbling with the numbers, I always though having 1 unique power for each of those ATs that epitomize their style was the way to go. It'd reserve the uniqueness of each AT and give you a reason to play each.
|
And, really, a Brute isn't just limited to the Huge model
As far as staying on topic goes, I have to agree with this. Sooner or later we ought to be getting some alternate animations in power customization, and I don't see why those can't be designed to impart different styles. That's a lot of what happened with Martial Arts, after all - the newer animations are a lot less refined and a lot more brutish. It's a lot of work, obviously, but it's work that should get done at some point, and I see no reason why it can't be done like this.
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 would love it if they took Power Customization to the next level and allowed things like the limited ability to customize where your attacks originated. For example, I'd like all of myy radiation blaster's ranged attacks to come from his eyes, while I'd prefer to have my gravity dominator's powers come from his mind.
It would also be cool to add some further level of customization to the look of the powers, but I'd be satisfied with origin points as a first step. And obviously this could be open ended, so there would be like 4 points to choose from: Hands, eyes, mouth, and head. And the center of the chest could be another possibility if you wanted to say you had a mystic sigil on as your chest emblem and it was the source of your powers.
(Sometimes, I wish there could be a Dev thumbs up button for quality posts, because you pretty much nailed it.) -- Ghost Falcon
Quote:
They're clumsy by comparison.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I'm not sure I can agree with your interpretation of Brutes as clumsy, as that would write pretty much every Brute I've ever made out of existence. I rather see them as the kind of characters who would pick to use a "brute force approach," whether or not it involved literal brute force. An assassin, for instance, can choose to lie in wait, sneak around and pounce in his victim, then slip away into the night, and that would probably be a Stalker (in theory, if not in practice). An assassin can also choose to attack the victim openly, dispatch his guards with incredible speed and precision and then skewer him in front of a huge crown just to make a point. That would very much be a Brute, both in practice and theory. A Brute does not always survive by being tough, and often does so by avoiding being hit or debilitating his enemies. A Brute does not always win by flailing his fists as hard as he can, and indeed often strikes with precision. It's a question inflicting as much damage as possible, but that does not come with the burden of doing so in the most inefficient way.
And, really, a Brute isn't just limited to the Huge model As far as staying on topic goes, I have to agree with this. Sooner or later we ought to be getting some alternate animations in power customization, and I don't see why those can't be designed to impart different styles. That's a lot of what happened with Martial Arts, after all - the newer animations are a lot less refined and a lot more brutish. It's a lot of work, obviously, but it's work that should get done at some point, and I see no reason why it can't be done like this. |
Compared to a Scrapper who sometimes strike with overwhelming power or a Stalker who strikes with style and precision or a Tanker who is more concerned for his allies than truly busting heads. The Brute would be more concerned with results than a particular style. And that's just by virtue that Fury enhances every attack indiscriminately, just hit things until there's nothing left standing.
But in Brute's defense, Scrappers have nearly the same tactic. The only difference is Scrappers have the 'focused strike' mechanic through criticals.
Your example of 'assassin' and 'stalker' are, IMO, tactics not styles and should be used in relevant situations. There are times I want to isolate a target so would take your 'stalker' approach but often there is no reason not to take the 'assassin' approach. The difference is, Brute doesn't have a place using either approach. Not because they can't or even that Fury won't allow them. I say that simply because Brutes *don't* do it. I've never seen it, I've tried it on some myself and reverted to the old SMASH, and I've never heard players bragging they sneak around on their Brute and 'assassinate' a target. Anything more is just a guise for standard SMASH.
That isn't to say 'clumsy' and 'SMASH' is flailing your arms about randomly. It's simply not 'precision' or 'focused'. It's blunt and heavy...like a Brute. And really, saying the contrary is as much a disservice to my precise Stalkers as the 'clumsy' generalization was in the previous post.
It's funny you didn't bring up the Tanker generalization as I don't think it truly captures the style of a Tanker.
I don't know where you're getting all of this "clumsy" business. Is it somewhere in the character description and I just missed it? Brutes are defined as powerful, to the best that I can find, and that does not entail clumsiness in itself. In fact, depending on how you read Fury, it could mean a few things, itself. I keep quoting Zero on this, but as the line goes: Time to get serious. A Brute is easily viewed as someone who is constantly displaying elegance by pulling his punches so as not to exert himself, but who WILL hit hard if things will just not go down.
There are, obviously, alternate interpretations of these things, but I don't see how you can just cherry-pick one and display it as THE interpretation. You may have never seen Brutes played subtly (and, by the way, the one I described was for a Stalker, not a Brute), but I have. I have, in fact, played Brutes like this, myself. And given the fact that both Energy Aura and Dark Armour give you a cloak as part of your powerset, I can't really see how you can argue against it. And, yes, I'm aware of how some people play their Brutes like spastic monkeys on skates. Not everyone does.
All of this is to say that, no, I obviously can't claim your view on Brutes is wrong, because it isn't. But you can't really claim mine is wrong, either, which is why I want the door left open for them to be played and represented as the player chooses, rather than being railroaded into being a glorified Hulk.
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:
This is a perfect description of my boyfriend's Brute.
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
A Brute is easily viewed as someone who is constantly displaying elegance by pulling his punches so as not to exert himself, but who WILL hit hard if things will just not go down.
|
Quote:
I recently made a fire/dark scrapper that I've decided would fit better to wait and build her as a brute since the mechanics of that AT fit her more.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
And, really, a Brute isn't just limited to the Huge model |
Basically, she has a technique that basically causes her to convert a particular emotion into usable power. In her case the emotion is fear.
Basically, the more scared she gets, the more powerful she becomes. In addition, she tends to be rather selfless, she isn't really afraid of what could happen to her except in the way that would effect others. She's afraid of failing OTHER people and "allowing" them to be harmed.
Thrythlind's Deviant Art Page
"Notice at the end, there: Arcanaville did the math and KICKED IT INTO EXISTENCE." - Ironik on the power of Arcanaville's math
Quote:
I should think it's more the word brute itself. While it may be possible to play a Brute with a lot of finesse such a character couldn't really be called a brute.
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I don't know where you're getting all of this "clumsy" business. Is it somewhere in the character description and I just missed it?
|
Quote:
The only problem with the 'pulling your punches' deal is you don't have a choice. You're *forced* to pull your punches and if you don't want to pull your punches you gotta keep flinging attacks.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I don't know where you're getting all of this "clumsy" business. Is it somewhere in the character description and I just missed it? Brutes are defined as powerful, to the best that I can find, and that does not entail clumsiness in itself. In fact, depending on how you read Fury, it could mean a few things, itself. I keep quoting Zero on this, but as the line goes: Time to get serious. A Brute is easily viewed as someone who is constantly displaying elegance by pulling his punches so as not to exert himself, but who WILL hit hard if things will just not go down.
|
And it's just a stylized comparison and mostly an over-generalization. But for the most part, a Brute, by definition, is a character that *relies* on purely harsh physical (brute) force. Instead of putting away the sledge hammer in lieu of the screwdriver, a Brute will smash on with the hammer.
Quote:
| All of this is to say that, no, I obviously can't claim your view on Brutes is wrong, because it isn't. But you can't really claim mine is wrong, either, which is why I want the door left open for them to be played and represented as the player chooses, rather than being railroaded into being a glorified Hulk. |
Awesome-sounding, but I wouldn't count on this happening in the near future.
to 
TO THE END!Villains are those who dedicate their lives to causing mayhem. Villians are people from the planet Villia!
Quote:
Much in the same way, a Scrapper does not get to choose when he will aim for the eyes and look to score critical hits. The only way a Scapper can get a critical is by random chance on a random attack at some point. You could say that he's aiming but missing, but then that just means he's aiming at vital points all the time anyway, which would make that his status quo and, as such, make criticals still just as random and not dependent on choice to score. In practice and in mechanics, Scrappers score criticals not because they aim to score them or because they're very accurate, but simply because blind luck lands their hits in the right place. The fact that higher accuracy does not make critical hits more likely is an easy example of this.|
Originally Posted by Leo_G
The only problem with the 'pulling your punches' deal is you don't have a choice. You're *forced* to pull your punches and if you don't want to pull your punches you gotta keep flinging attacks.
|
Even something as simple as Vigilance has the same problem. A Defender tries harder in the face of adversity, but that Defender has no way to decide when this adversity is. He can only try harder when someone is low on health, even if that someone is actually perfectly fine at that level of health. A Defender can also not try harder if the situation is visibly really bad, but people haven't dropped dead yet. He has no control over his destiny, yet we accept this.
Why, then, do we not accept the same for a Brute - that the abstract of the mechanic can model someone like, say, Superman, who will never unleash his full power unless he realises it's absolutely necessary? The mechanic is not a perfect example of this, no, but neither is it a perfect example of anger, either, because, speaking for me, at least, the things that make me angry tend to make me blow up up-front without any process of becoming more and more angry. Yes, yes, I'm aware that "madder Hulk get, stronger Hulk become," but even THAT is not realistic, if we're really looking of realistic depictions of human interaction. It's an abstract concept, and it ought to be viewed in an abstract sense.
Quote:
| And it's just a stylized comparison and mostly an over-generalization. But for the most part, a Brute, by definition, is a character that *relies* on purely harsh physical (brute) force. Instead of putting away the sledge hammer in lieu of the screwdriver, a Brute will smash on with the hammer. |
As such, branding a Brute as clumsy and inelegant because of what the word "brute" means is a bad path to take.
Quote:
| I never said make it so every brute is a Hulk wannabe, I said replace a power more suited for the AT's style. You can debate forever on how different players play their Brutes and what not but you cannot deny that the Brute AT excels with a specific attack type. A Claws or Stone Melee brute is placed above a similarly built Axe or Energy Melee brute because attacking fast and numerous is more easily supported by fury compared to slow and long animating. |
Brutes are designed to equate time in combat with damage, and are furthermore designed to equate speed with damage. Time in combat could be achieved by being too tough to kill or just plain too hard to hit and speed is just the result of a no-accountability mechanic. Furthermore, "more damage" does not have to imply "more strength" or "more power" or indeed even "more determination." It can easily imply more focus, less restraint or, hell, even more fun.
This mechanic could easily describe a character who doesn't take anything seriously and always approaches every fight like a joke, but because he actually holds tremendous power, he has vast reserves to call upon when his enemies prove to be tougher than they look. Yes, I'm aware how people play Brutes. The way I play them, I have the most Fury in the situations where the fight is the toughest and my enemies the most numerous.
*edit*
I should also note that I am not a fan of how small attacks give as much Fury as large attacks and Fast attacks give as much as slow attacks. It creates a really one-sided system where only speed of execution determines how much Fury you generate, such that the small pimp slaps end up being more "fury-inducing" than hitting someone with all the strength of a massive earthquake. As well, getting pricked with a needle infuriates as much as getting your liver shot off. Not my idea of perfect balance.
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 think you're taking my words a little too literally...but then I probably didn't word my post well...oh well.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Much in the same way, a Scrapper does not get to choose when he will aim for the eyes and look to score critical hits. The only way a Scapper can get a critical is by random chance on a random attack at some point. You could say that he's aiming but missing, but then that just means he's aiming at vital points all the time anyway, which would make that his status quo and, as such, make criticals still just as random and not dependent on choice to score. In practice and in mechanics, Scrappers score criticals not because they aim to score them or because they're very accurate, but simply because blind luck lands their hits in the right place. The fact that higher accuracy does not make critical hits more likely is an easy example of this.
Even something as simple as Vigilance has the same problem. A Defender tries harder in the face of adversity, but that Defender has no way to decide when this adversity is. He can only try harder when someone is low on health, even if that someone is actually perfectly fine at that level of health. A Defender can also not try harder if the situation is visibly really bad, but people haven't dropped dead yet. He has no control over his destiny, yet we accept this. Why, then, do we not accept the same for a Brute - that the abstract of the mechanic can model someone like, say, Superman, who will never unleash his full power unless he realises it's absolutely necessary? The mechanic is not a perfect example of this, no, but neither is it a perfect example of anger, either, because, speaking for me, at least, the things that make me angry tend to make me blow up up-front without any process of becoming more and more angry. Yes, yes, I'm aware that "madder Hulk get, stronger Hulk become," but even THAT is not realistic, if we're really looking of realistic depictions of human interaction. It's an abstract concept, and it ought to be viewed in an abstract sense. I'm not sure that's a good road to take, trying to infer AT design from the meaning of the word. For one thing, a "Tanker" is either someone who drives a tank or a large vehicle or vessel designed to carry large quantities of liquid. The connotation of the name comes from the word's similarity to the word "tank," in the sense of armoured combat vehicle, even despite the fact that real-life tanks are not designed to take damage instead of other ground troops so much as to give their main gun enough protection to be out in open country and for the crew of that gun to not die instantly. A true "tank" if we wanted to go by that concept, would be someone who's incredibly dangerous yet incredibly hard to kill, but suffering mobility limitations. Because of the abstract nature of player classes and the needs for balance in design, our "tanks" are incredibly tough, designed to be hit first and foremost and not designed to be very dangerous. As such, the meaning of the term "Tanker" is less derived from the meaning of the actual word "tanker" and more with the connotations of what the class usually called by a similar name does in other RPGs. As such, branding a Brute as clumsy and inelegant because of what the word "brute" means is a bad path to take. No, I can very much deny that a Brute excels at a specific attack type. From what you mentioned, Stone Melee is brute force indeed, but Claws very much is not. It's speed, and, at least to my eyes, precision. In fact, it's LESS strength by design, as it deals less damage and costs less endurance. Dual Blades are not brutish, either, nor is, to be honest, Dark Melee. Or, heck, Fiery Melee. And while Brutes no longer have it, Ice Melee wasn't very thuggish, either. And I don't see why it has to be. Brutes are designed to equate time in combat with damage, and are furthermore designed to equate speed with damage. Time in combat could be achieved by being too tough to kill or just plain too hard to hit and speed is just the result of a no-accountability mechanic. Furthermore, "more damage" does not have to imply "more strength" or "more power" or indeed even "more determination." It can easily imply more focus, less restraint or, hell, even more fun. This mechanic could easily describe a character who doesn't take anything seriously and always approaches every fight like a joke, but because he actually holds tremendous power, he has vast reserves to call upon when his enemies prove to be tougher than they look. Yes, I'm aware how people play Brutes. The way I play them, I have the most Fury in the situations where the fight is the toughest and my enemies the most numerous. *edit* I should also note that I am not a fan of how small attacks give as much Fury as large attacks and Fast attacks give as much as slow attacks. It creates a really one-sided system where only speed of execution determines how much Fury you generate, such that the small pimp slaps end up being more "fury-inducing" than hitting someone with all the strength of a massive earthquake. As well, getting pricked with a needle infuriates as much as getting your liver shot off. Not my idea of perfect balance. |
1. I was told in a Scrapper vs Stalker thread that a Scrapper isn't aiming to get their criticals, it's just them 'unleashing'. The description of their inherent only says they are fierce fighters and no one can compare. Nothing about aiming. So, if anyone's pulling their punches, it's Scrappers.
2. Thinking of Fury as using your full potential but only when absolutely necessary, like Superman? I guess you can think of it however you want. But a Brute without Fury is crap >_> so I guess the 'absolutely necessary situation' is 'all the time'? IMO, Fury is simply adrenaline. I certainly feel it when I'm playing so I can imagine my character feeling the same. Exactly *what* is enhancing their attack is all concept.
3. You speak of claws, fire melee, etc not being 'Smashy' enough but I'd disagree. You only need small and fast attacks (with a heavy hitter somewhere in there) to qualify, IMO. Because small and fast build fury better than big and slow. And if they decided to change a power to interact as desired with Fury or replace a power to make the set *look* more 'Smashy', I'd be all for it. Because that would just give more reason to play the set on Brute AND other ATs. The powersets would be different in function (currently) AND form (not currently). It's the reason I can play an Elec melee Stalker and an Elec melee Brute or a MA Stalker and a MA Scrapper.
4. As for small attacks giving the same amount of fury: Oh well, that's just how the game works.
Quote:
Possibly we just disagree on interpretation.|
Originally Posted by Leo_G
I think you're taking my words a little too literally...but then I probably didn't word my post well...oh well.
|
Quote:
| 1. I was told in a Scrapper vs Stalker thread that a Scrapper isn't aiming to get their criticals, it's just them 'unleashing'. The description of their inherent only says they are fierce fighters and no one can compare. Nothing about aiming. So, if anyone's pulling their punches, it's Scrappers. |
Quote:
| 2. Thinking of Fury as using your full potential but only when absolutely necessary, like Superman? I guess you can think of it however you want. But a Brute without Fury is crap >_> so I guess the 'absolutely necessary situation' is 'all the time'? IMO, Fury is simply adrenaline. I certainly feel it when I'm playing so I can imagine my character feeling the same. Exactly *what* is enhancing their attack is all concept. |
Quote:
| 3. You speak of claws, fire melee, etc not being 'Smashy' enough but I'd disagree. You only need small and fast attacks (with a heavy hitter somewhere in there) to qualify, IMO. Because small and fast build fury better than big and slow. And if they decided to change a power to interact as desired with Fury or replace a power to make the set *look* more 'Smashy', I'd be all for it. Because that would just give more reason to play the set on Brute AND other ATs. The powersets would be different in function (currently) AND form (not currently). It's the reason I can play an Elec melee Stalker and an Elec melee Brute or a MA Stalker and a MA Scrapper. |
Furthermore, if they chose to give alternate, "more smashy" attacks for certain melee powersets, what sense does it make for them to land-lock them on a Brute, rather than tossing them into the general custom animations pool for everyone to use? Sure, you view your Brutes as low-brow bruisers and your Scrappers as able fighters. That's perfectly fine, and you'd be perfectly capable of choosing the animations that represent that and go with it. But why should I be lumped together with your tastes and forced to play things out the same when I disagree? Why shouldn't I be allowed to pick the animations that would fit my character concept as I have designed it?
Let's say Brutes had Martial Arts available to them. Would you suggest they ONLY have access to the new animations while Scrappers ONLY have access to the old ones? If you answer "yes" to the above, then this discussion is over on the spot. But if you answer "no," then I will expand this to ask "Well, then, why not let the same happen for all sets that eventually get alternate animations?" That's the whole point - let people choose what THEY think is appropriate, rather than what YOU believe the proper interpretation is.
Quote:
| 4. As for small attacks giving the same amount of fury: Oh well, that's just how the game works. |
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.
|
Man, Sam, I think you're taking my posts waaaaay too seriously. >_>
For the most part, I'm speaking out of opinion but I do try to validate that opinion with examples of the generalized scope of the game and reasoning I've heard from other players.
Quote:
Well, that isn't to say a Scrapper can't aim, it's just not how one would get the majority of their critical hits. Actually, my Kat/SR is *constantly* aiming because he analyzes all his foes and strikes at their weak points. However, to facilitate the concept of crits, it's only occasionally that he'll be in a position to fully exploit that weakness by unleashing fully. You may know that the weak neck section in a Crey armored unit is the place to strike but you might have to catch them off guard or push the assault forward to get the opportunity to finally 'unleash' on that weak point.| Yeah, that's someone's interpretation of Scrapper criticals, but I don't like it. |
Quote:
| I can think of it however I want. That's my point. The entire reason I'm still arguing is not to tell you that you are wrong, but rather to defend the position that I'm not wrong in believing what I chose to. To be perfectly honest, I don't play Brutes or feel like you do when playing them. A Brute without Fury is Crap? Doesn't look like it to me, considering what my Brutes can do. Yeah, yeah, they're better with Fury. When that's actually needed, it builds up on its own. I don't play my Brutes like a rollercoaster of adrenaline, and if the game forced me, I wouldn't be able to play them at all. You are free to play how you choose to play, but understand that so am I. |
The adrenaline thing comes *after* that. I suppose if you take 1-3 min breaks between fights, you can completely eliminate that factor but I don't even do that on my doms. They're more apt to adrenaline rushes that Brutes because of domination.
Quote:
| Furthermore, if they chose to give alternate, "more smashy" attacks for certain melee powersets, what sense does it make for them to land-lock them on a Brute, rather than tossing them into the general custom animations pool for everyone to use? Sure, you view your Brutes as low-brow bruisers and your Scrappers as able fighters. That's perfectly fine, and you'd be perfectly capable of choosing the animations that represent that and go with it. But why should I be lumped together with your tastes and forced to play things out the same when I disagree? Why shouldn't I be allowed to pick the animations that would fit my character concept as I have designed it? |
Quote:
| Oh, well indeed, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. As you've mentioned yourself, this has the unfortunate implication of shafting some sets and outright making others impossible. And I don't believe it needed to. |
Sure, let's get the devs to make two or three different animations for the thousands of powers present in the game. What a great idea.
I think it is a cool idea. I'm not sure the return is worth the investment overall at this late date - but it would be definitely cool. If they ever launch a sequal or do a major engine rewrite - it ought to be added in.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Leo_G
Man, Sam, I think you're taking my posts waaaaay too seriously. >_>
|
Quote:
| Nah, that's just how I talk. If I were really taking it personally, you'd see a lot more FULL WORD CAPITALIZATION and a lot more Yahtzee-inspired rhetoric. |
Quote:
| Okay, I can accept the rest of your post but this part makes no sense to me. Baring the whole adrenaline thing (that's a general sense too as I'd say more than just Brutes experience this), but honestly, are you arguing that a Brute can, by some miracle of gameplay, function without resorting to fury? A Brute without fury is crap. Once you start attacking, you'll see that (needing to take 3-4 shots to take out a +1 minion?). After that point, you'll have fury. It's technically impossible to play a brute without Fury. I don't even think stopping to let your fury decay will do it as a foe will still keep hitting you. |
As for not being able to play without Fury... You can and you can't. While it's true that in the purely technical sense of the wording, you can't, as everything you do generates SOME Fury. On the practical side, however, that much fury matters exactly zilch. In fact, it isn't until I start getting in the neighbourhood of 40-50 Fury that I start feeling the impact in such a way that I can detect without scanning the numbers, and by that point, I can acknowledge that I am well "furious" enough for it to count.
I'm going to describe the combat strategy I tend to ascribe to my Brutes via the use of Dragonball Z. When Vegeta and Nappa first come to Earth, they're dicking around with plant men and so forth, but when those get blown up, it starts to get relevant. At first, Nappa is just playing around with Earth's underpowered heroes, crushing them one by one, but when he starts taking hits and his pride is on the line, he gets serious and starts really blasting them to pieces. Up until Goku shows up and basically one-shots him. Then Vegeta steps in and they duel, apparently on even footing, but it's clear Vegeta is just completely messing with him and isn't serious at all. Goku powers up and seems to finally match him, but again, Vegeta just laughs, powers up and shows that he's a LOT more powerful. Goku powers up again, beyon what he ought to be capable of and manages to actually hurt Vegeta, to which he responds by transforming into that cheesy cop-out ape thing and basically crushing Goku for the remainder of the fight
The rest of the fight plays more like a power-DOWN as everyone gets progressively more beat-up and weaker, but the above is a good example of how I play my own Brutes. For my Stone/Stone, for instance, it tends to go like this:
He's basically unkillable by the little things, so he doesn't have to put out much effort. Even without Fury, Stone Melee is just NASTY. But every so often, things get tense, and Fury builds up on its own. When Fury isn't enough, Earth Embrace resets the fight and makes him tougher. When even that isn't enough, Granite Armour + Hasten come to the rescue. And when even THAT isn't enough, he has a huge stash of inspirations to draw on. And, quite frankly, it's been rather rare that even THAT isn't enough.
My Scrappers open the fight with the highest Burst they can manage, aiming to kill the thing as quickly and brutally as possible. By contrast, my Brutes open the fight with a relatively low level of output, but thanks to their greater staying power, are capable of continually powering up to meet the challenge as it increases and sustain the battle as it drags on. And, furthermore, since I play at -1x3, Fury as a mechanic is rarely absent, because I rarely find instances where the enemies are SO weak they don't need anything to fight. But even so, I don't see a reason to draw my Brutes as inelegant.
Quote:
| What sense does it make to land-lock Brutes' sets? Effect. While I wouldn't protest alternate animations for powers, I wouldn't want them AT specific. But a different power with its own effect would be in the same vein as giving Stalkers Assassin Strike. It facilitates a concept and style that differentiates it from the other 3 melees. |
Quote:
| I wouldn't say it makes it impossible, you just have to build those brutes differently. But with regards to future sets, I'd like them to take the Claws route. That set is certainly brutal and I'm not just talking about Spin. |
Personally, I'm VERY disappointed with how Fury is generated by Brutes, because it naturally discredits slow, hard-hitting sets, which really ought to be the Brute's "thing." I'd much rather see the Juggernaut punch his fist through a tank and deep into the street below in a slow, wide, cinematic arc than to see him run about like a monkey, shin-kicking military jeeps really fast. And pretty much every cartoon that has ever depicted any combination of The Hulk, The Juggernaut, The Thing and Colossus squaring off against each other has done so via a series of slow, deliberate, DEVASTATING blows traded, rather than some kind of "float like a butterfly, sting like a bee" fast-paced boxing match. If anything, that's Scrapper territory as they plain lack the "heavy" sets on their side. Brutes don't really need to be inelegant, and I don't mind them being fast and accurate, but I do not want to see the old standbys of hard-hitting, deliberate sets completely ignored. I'm sick and tired of people ragging on Battle Axe because it doesn't generate enough Fury when Fury should have been designed to be generated by output, not just speed.
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:
That is a *GREAT* disservice to Tankers. Seriously. A Brute without Fury is a Tanker!? Even with Fury, a Brute isn't going to draw aggro as well as a Tanker. Without Fury, a Brute has the survivability of a Scrapper, less aggro than a Tanker and less damage than both.| Huh? "Technically" Brutes without Fury are crap? Brutes without Fury are Tankers in all but name for all the effect that has on the small scale. That purely depends on what you want out of the game, as far as I'm concerned. If you want the so-called "perpetual motion," then they may very well be crap in your eyes, but then understand that by my estimate taken in the same way, Defenders, Controllers and Dominators are "crap." |
But I think you're confusing 'min/max non-stop smash Brute' with 'General Brute'. Fury isn't like Domination where you can choose to use it or not. You start attacking a minion and you're already going to need to throw out more attacks than normal. By the time you've taken it out, you're near ready to start one-shotting minions.
Yes, a Brute without Fury is crap (just like a Stalker is crap without hide or crits and a MM is crap without pets). But a Brute is rarely, if ever, without Fury.
And no, you don't need 50% fury for it to 'matter'. Just get around 20%, hit Build up and it's nearly the same. More than that is just *better*.
Quote:
| Yeah, no. In no way do I find Claws to be the most iconic Brute set. |
First off, what is a werewolf? It doesn't quite fit a Tanker, Scrapper is a tad closer and Stalker is right out. Brute? Perfect.
So you've got a village, its late, the sun is going down and everyone is getting ready to lock up inside their homes for safety. Then you hear a scream. Everyone rushes to find a mutilated corpse. Further inspection belies a beast attack. The men gather with their guns, torches and pitchforks to find the culprit. They span out into the nearby woods and suddenly you hear muffled screams. The rest of the group quickly move to the victim in order to ambush the beast but only a forest clearing with more gnarled meat. The men start to discuss what to do in the clearing and *SPLLCH!* One man collapses in a bloody mess. Everyone looks to him but see nothing. Behind, another falls. And another until finally, in the bright moonlight and torch flames, a hulking beast with claws dripping with blood. It's too late for these poor souls as they only have a few men left with guns and none with silver bullets. They'll be ripped apart before they can flee to the edge of the woods.
Verily how my Claws/Energy Aura werewolf brute plays. You can say he rips apart enemies with most of them none the wiser until it's too late. I guess Energy Drain is him devouring their flesh.
IMO, Claws fits Brute *perfectly* because how brutal and efficient it is. It doesn't even need an enemy throwing punches at it to gain ridiculous amounts of fury. Fury, in that instance, isn't anger, adrenaline or taking off the kid gloves, it's just a bar.
Quote:
| Wait, so you're talking entire power swaps on the mechanical level? That I actually wouldn't mind, but I honestly don't think I can agree with you as to the direction these alterations need to take, since: |
Quote:
Yeah... A Stalker without Hide is only very slightly short of a Scrapper. Stalkers have Scapper defence numbers, almost Scrapper health, almost Scrapper melee and defence sets. I guess if you want to discount random criticals, that might change things ever so slightly, but random Criticals are a really, REALLY minor improvement on overall damage output. The only thing Stalkers do markedly worse than Scrappers is melee damage, which is down by 12.5 percent points, but even that doesn't make THAT much of a difference. They're weaker, obviously, but not weak enough to be called "crap." Not in the slightest since I scrap with my Stalkers pretty much all the time (as the alternative is just silly) after my Hide and Placate are used up, and I suffer almost nothing for it. That was the point of the Stalker changes, in a nutshell.|
Originally Posted by Leo_G
Yes, a Brute without Fury is crap (just like a Stalker is crap without hide or crits and a MM is crap without pets). But a Brute is rarely, if ever, without Fury.
|
As for a Brute, when I say "a Brute without Fury," I mean a Brute who isn't running around like a spastic monkey with its head cut off, e.i. a Brute which is not built and played around the need to build and maintain Fury. That is still a perfectly decent Brute, partly because Brute damage isn't THAT bad even without Fury, and partly because, as you said yourself, it comes up on its own.
Quote:
| And no, you don't need 50% fury for it to 'matter'. Just get around 20%, hit Build up and it's nearly the same. More than that is just *better*. |
Quote:
| Verily how my Claws/Energy Aura werewolf brute plays. You can say he rips apart enemies with most of them none the wiser until it's too late. I guess Energy Drain is him devouring their flesh. |
Quote:
| IMO, Claws fits Brute *perfectly* because how brutal and efficient it is. It doesn't even need an enemy throwing punches at it to gain ridiculous amounts of fury. Fury, in that instance, isn't anger, adrenaline or taking off the kid gloves, it's just a bar. |
Brutes, as Fury is currently designed, are encouraged to do just that - do lots of fast, small attacks to build up and maintain Fury. In fact, ALL attacks give the same 5 points of fury per attack, irrespective of their speed or the damage they do, so a simple dinky Brawl will do as much as an earth-shattering Energy Transfer. That's just not right. In fact, if I go by Fury Per Power, some sets end up CLEARLY better than others, as do powers within the same set, and in a very counter-intuitive way. You'd expect a huge, slow, devastating attack that all but turns an enemy inside out would, to stick to the in-game description, infuriate a Brute who couldn't take that boss down with it much more than if his little pimp backhand didn't manage to take down that huge hulking robot.
To go back to Dragonball Z, that's exactly what Vegeta does... Shortly before getting killed by Freeza. He basically fights him as hard as he can, doesn't do anything, and in a moment of desperation, he freaks out, flies up and does his best to summon up all his strength in one spectacularly over-the-top fireball. Oh, sure, it fails as a plot device, but the point remains - big attacks ought to give more Fury than small attacks, at the VERY least so that it's balanced. And if we go by my example of pulling your punches, when would I decide I need more power? Would it be when I backhand an enemy and he doesn't explode into ludicrous gibs? Wouldn't that be just a simple example of me not actually doing anything? Wouldn't I REALLY tell that I need to power up when I throw my big, powerful, show-stopper punch and see that that's STILL not enough that I decide that, hey, I might need to hit EVEN HARDER?
Personally, I feel that Brutes would have been much better served by giving each power an amount of Fury comparable with its animation length, possibly scaled a little in favour of animations that do more damage. Just as a fun exercise, here's what Fury Per Second of animation Energy Melee has:
Barrage: 3.759
Energy Punch: 6.024
Bone Smasher: 3.333
Whirling Hands: 2.000
Total Focus: 1.515
Stun: 2.778
Energy Transfer: 1.873
Pretty much anything that isn't part of the first three attacks forming the basic attack chain is crap for building Fury. And when you consider that Total Focus has a DPA of 44.994 and just Energy Punch has one of 51.458, big attacks aren't even all that good at padding up maximum damage attack chains. To me, that's an *** backwards way to balanced an AT which does, at times, need to be all about the raw strength.
*note*
On the subject of Brutes without Fury, the numbers I'm getting for DPA surprise me, in that they're not too much worse than the Scrappers I've dealt with. No scientific or numerical comparison at this time as I have neither the time nor the inclination to do a full workup on Energy Melee, but JUST its base stats are not as low as I'd have expected a Brute to be. I guess the smaller attacks just have good DPA.
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.
|
This would require a lot of work, let me just state that
)
I clean windows for a living, glamorous huh? One day as i was working i started to notice how each of my coworkers works. some are very efficient, some are sloppy, some are elegant. Myself, i tend to be a bit showy (as much as a window cleaner can be
thoughts at work quite often get me thinking about city of heroes, in some sort of weird way. So i started thinking, all of the powers we have look relatively the same. A blaster blasts the same way, scrappers have relatively the same animations for melee strikes, a tank dodges attacks mostly the same way.
I was thinking, it would be pretty sweet, actually, if we had the option to choose styles for our powers. Say a blaster chooses "brute force" for his style. He lights a fireball in his hand, runs jumps and smashes it into the enemies face. then does a backflip back to where he was. A rather lavish example i admit. and i cant seem to come up with any more
It would be a lot of work, obviously, because of the animations required to make anything close to this come to fruition. But i think it would be cool.... am i being to wishful?
i dunno, thoughts?
I dont have a siggy.....sad huh