Quote:
1) "Incredibly poor damage" is a stretch, esp when talking about Fire, Elec or SS, esp in combination w/FA or SD (which is what many, if not most, scranker builds are). I can't see how any reasonable person would really think a SD/ELM tank is low damage, much less incredibly poor.|
Originally Posted by Berzerker_NA
You know, with the incredibly poor damage tanks do, something I've found in single player is that you can boost your total DPS quite a lot if you just take Taunt and slot the Perfect Zinger Psi Damage proc to it. It's only 20% likely to affect any one target it hits, but if you're surrounded by a whole bunch of enemies, you'll probably manage to damage at least one of them just about every time you fire your taunt off.
|
2) Taunt only hits 5. If you hit all 5, the odds of the proc going off at least once are pretty decent (around 67%), but hardly automatic. That said, if I'm taking Taunt, I'm usually 6-slotting w/Zinger for the set bonuses, so I end up w/the proc.
An Offensive Guide to Ice Melee
Quote:
I'm not mistaken, taunt is an auto hit power in PVE, so you always hit all 5 if there are five in the area of its effect. It's true you're only 67% likely to do damage any one time you fire it, but over the course of a lot of firings, you'll still average hitting one per shot. |
Originally Posted by dave_p
2) Taunt only hits 5. If you hit all 5, the odds of the proc going off at least once are pretty decent (around 67%), but hardly automatic. That said, if I'm taking Taunt, I'm usually 6-slotting w/Zinger for the set bonuses, so I end up w/the proc.
|
I guess that makes it about as effective as brawl, so ...yeah.... I guess it's not much of an addition to their arsenal. ;-(
Quote:
Yup, auto hit. What I meant by "if you hit all 5" was if you get all 5 mobs into the radius. If you're constantly surrounded, that won't be a problem, but then, if I'm constantly surrounded, I don't bother w/Taunt, relying more on my aura, and reserve Taunt for farther away foes. For damage purposes, I doubt adding Taunt to your attack chain would improve your DPS any. |
Originally Posted by Berzerker_NA
I'm not mistaken, taunt is an auto hit power in PVE, so you always hit all 5 if there are five in the area of its effect. It's true you're only 67% likely to do damage any one time you fire it, but over the course of a lot of firings, you'll still average hitting one per shot.
|
Bit of a tangent, but that Zinger proc is really nice for other tanker attacks. I proc out my Jab/Punch combo for my SS to use on Rage crashes and the like, so it's good to have multiple damage procs available.
An Offensive Guide to Ice Melee
Quote:
I don't like playing Tankers, but I leveled an Ice/Fire to 38 back when leveling was hard, so I must have played as much time as a 50 tanker today.|
Originally Posted by Berzerker_NA
I keep seeing Ice tanks champion the lack of a need for taunt. I think Ice tanks are a special exception. Between Chilling Embrace and Icicles, you really do get a lot of aggro, and the Chilling Embrace slow effect really helps.
If you don't take taunt, then you either need a lot of AOE's, or the damage auras, or both, in order to meaningfully protect your teammates. |
I decided I didn't need Taunt, when my teammates were in danger I toggled on Superspeed and used FSC, Combustion, Scorch, whatever, until I got all the mobs gathered on me. It worked well but man it was TIRING. I finally decided to take taunt, made a keybind for it and after testing I thought 'wow this is so much easier, mobs just come to me from a distance for me to AoE them'.
So I really do prefer Tankers who take Taunt, aggro management is much easier even on an Ice Armor which has the best aggro aura bar none.
And although I haven't finished leveling him and went back to my squishies (and Stalkers, well before the buff they were kinda like squishies with mez protection lol), I enjoyed Fire Melee's damage, I think a SS tanker wouldn't disappoint me either in this aspect because of Rage, although I'd have to get to 38 to do meaningful AoE. I actually made the ice/fire after seeing a fire/fire melting mobs very fast in a story arc, I went Ice for the extra tauntage in the auras and general higher survivability.
Tankers play tanks because it is natural. I say that as someone who started the game and immediately made a tanker. In all video games I tend to go for the heaviest build, whether it is. In a tank game like armored core I make a heavy, or in a swords and sorcery where I take a barbarian, or an armored knight if available.
What seems to be a little different about CoH is that tanks do not do a lot of damage. Please read carefully. I am not saying tankers do not do damage. Doing damage is half a tanks job. I am only saying they do not do a lot of damage. This is in comparison to Blasters, Scrappers, Stalkers, Corruptors, and Brutes. Many people, myself especially, have been "socialized" to the fact that in video games a heavily armored character tends to have one of the Alpha attacks in the game. There are usually huge trade offs in speed, loss of certain special abilities, etc. Does not matter to players like me. Give me an avatar that can take a unearthly amount of pain and smack back hard enough to one shot half the stuff around, and I am happy.
In CoH it seems they had a completely different role in mind for their super heavy. Regulated to guard duty. Now, again, please read carefully. I am not saying you have to build every tank as a guard for the team. Build your Scranker, enjoy. I am only saying, from observation, that the Devs went in a different direction with how they favored Tankers with special abilities. You can build against this type, and if you really work against it, you can effectively make a light damage scrapper (only light dam compared to scrappers with crits, extra base damage) that can survive anything in the game.
To make a long story short, Tanks were alien to me when I made one. I was like "why am I struggling to kill normal stuff?" So, off to redside and the joy of smash.
I think we will always see Scrankers. But I think once Rogues comes out they will become rarer. Brutes will invade blue territory. My main is a SS/Will Brute. Not the most survivable non-squishie, but wow, the damage. I found in him the wonderful sweet spot of trade off between survivability and damage dealing. Now if he could only blast, lol.
I recently went on Scrapper area to ask what is the best scrapper. Right at the top of their boards is a sticky post. In reading it I discovered the best scrapper (for damage) is in fact a brute. So, with armors near tank level and damage better than scrappers it makes for a good build.
My brute does not have taunt. I wish I could take it, but no room. As a will brute you have to take the fighting shields, 3 power choices gone. There is zero flexibility in my power choices, sigh. The reason I want taunt on my brute is the reason all brutes want taunt (whether they know it or not) - Agro Agro Agro. Brutes are powered by Agro. And once they hit blueside watch out. The only thing bad about an all brute team is when we all start competing for the agro.
Brutes are greedy for agro. Be warned, they are coming to a city near you, and they want your agro. A Tanker with taunt will still be able to hold the agro from a brute (sad panda), but a Scranker with no taunt will be left on the battles sidelines, unless he follows the brute around. Have a smashing good day.
Quote:
Granted, Brutes really on aggro for their damage. But they don't need all the aggro to do it. I think when GR comes out, Brute and Tank combos will actually be very welcome to teams. If the rest of the team is squishy, you could have quite the efficient steam rolling team.
|
Originally Posted by Blue_Centurion
Brutes are greedy for agro. Be warned, they are coming to a city near you, and they want your agro. A Tanker with taunt will still be able to hold the agro from a brute (sad panda), but a Scranker with no taunt will be left on the battles sidelines, unless he follows the brute around. Have a smashing good day.
|
@Rylas
Kill 'em all. Let XP sort 'em out.
Quite right Rylas. My main gaming for a long time with my SS/Will Brute has been in Task Forces (Yes, he said Task Forces). Lady Grey and ITF are two of my main runs. I really appreciate it when there is a serious tanker in the ITF. My Brute is semi-squishie. I do not mind the deaths (I got a Rez power in my build after all), but when you die so does agro lol. So following a tank into the battle, letting them absord the alpha, then starting out with my AoEs is a beautiful tactic. Any squishies following us two are at least relatively sure we sponged up the agro. Since the mob sizes are generally over the tankers agro cap I get as much agro as I need, without having to take 10,000 spears in the face to get it. Makes for, to quote someone in the know, "a steamroller" effect.
Quote:
You seem to cherry pick answers to your questions, both on that scrapper thread and here. Yes, brutes are on top, but for specific reasons as Werner pointed out (and you acknowledged). Plus, Bill's calcs were for ST damage, which a lot of scrappers are into because of AV/GM/Pylon soloing numbers, but aren't really indicative of a set's prowess (seriously, EM isn't going to make too many tops of lists other than for soloing hard targets, and do you really think ELM & Spines rank that low?). Many number crunchers will still take scrappers over brutes for various reasons.|
Originally Posted by Blue_Centurion
I recently went on Scrapper area to ask what is the best scrapper. Right at the top of their boards is a sticky post. In reading it I discovered the best scrapper (for damage) is in fact a brute. So, with armors near tank level and damage better than scrappers it makes for a good build.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Blue_Centurion
Brutes are greedy for agro. Be warned, they are coming to a city near you, and they want your agro. A Tanker with taunt will still be able to hold the agro from a brute (sad panda), but a Scranker with no taunt will be left on the battles sidelines, unless he follows the brute around. Have a smashing good day.
|
I know, I know, why play tanks in the first place then? Because brutes and scrappers aren't as tough on the whole, nor do they control aggro as well, with or w/o Taunt. A well played tank on a decent team isn't there to take & hold all the aggro, but to shape the fight, and the fights to come. That means staying ahead of the team and aggro-stealing brutes & scrappers, and setting up the fight for the damage dealers. Yes, a brute, scrapper or controller can also do this job, but again, not as well. Sometimes, you need to stand firm in a +4, X8 spawn while your team catches up with you; tanks do that better than anyone, all w/o Taunt. Yes, there are exceptions which have been pointed out (mostly the STF).
If all you cared about was making sure no one shot at the squishies, bring a controller.
An Offensive Guide to Ice Melee
Yeah, I made the statement Brutes deal more damage than scrappers. Is that always correct? NO No No. There, I said it. In fact, Super Strength, my preferred method of destruction, is middle of the packish, below some scrappers. It happens to work very well in my build, due to 4 sets of purps and LOTG, with huge global Rech I can always double stack rage, and with any help/buffs triple stack it.
You made some good points. You alluded to tanks working well with brutes. I agree. The whole point of this discussion is taunt. I will disagree with you on one substantive point. A brute will steal agro from a non-taunting tank. I am not gonna data mine the tables of present detailed explanations here. I have been playing brutes alongside tanks for years. Brutes steal agro from non taunting tanks, in my experience.
And because I like it soooo much: "Beware, Brutes are coming to a city near you. They will steal your agro!"
Quote:
I am old school and still a firm believer that taunt on a tank makes him/her better. Blasters, high dmg, heavy AoE, and other effects can and will overcome agro auras like icicles, invincibility, and mud pots, to name a few. Taunt, the power does a better job of gaining and retaining aggro AND if cases, when a heavy dmg blaster is doing an excellent job of drawing aggro because he/she is pwning face, then I am glad to have "Taunt", press it, and draw that group of runaways back to me and away from squishies.|
Originally Posted by Blue_Centurion
I see a lot of Tanks without taunt. I play brutes mainly, have a couple 50 tanks, and am starting to Blast a lot.
I have a thoughtful reason why they do need taunt. It is based on team synergy, and letting blasters/scrappers kill fast and efficiently while the tank sponges up agro. I could go into doctoral length discussion on that type of blue side tactic, but nuff said. Does anyone have a thoughtfuul reason tanks do not need taunt? |
I don't even bother with the arguments that this or that aura or effect does a great job of aggroing. The way I see it, whatever you can do to gain and hold aggro, which does not involve using "Taunt", you can do better by having 'Taunt' and using it along with it.
Pulling from a distance with Taunt is also tactically more sound to do in some situations.
My two cents.
Have fun.
Repeat Offenders forever !
Make all IO's available in Paragon Market! NCSoft, the chinese are making BIG money selling influence and other stuff in the game. Best way to stop them = make the paragon market a place to buy all IO's and perhaps other things as well.
Quote:
I agree with this sentiment completely.|
Originally Posted by Commando
I am old school and still a firm believer that taunt on a tank makes him/her better. Blasters, high dmg, heavy AoE, and other effects can and will overcome agro auras like icicles, invincibility, and mud pots, to name a few. Taunt, the power does a better job of gaining and retaining aggro AND if cases, when a heavy dmg blaster is doing an excellent job of drawing aggro because he/she is pwning face, then I am glad to have "Taunt", press it, and draw that group of runaways back to me and away from squishies.
I don't even bother with the arguments that this or that aura or effect does a great job of aggroing. The way I see it, whatever you can do to gain and hold aggro, which does not involve using "Taunt", you can do better by having 'Taunt' and using it along with it. Pulling from a distance with Taunt is also tactically more sound to do in some situations. My two cents. Have fun. |
In regard to the OP, with the availability of dual builds, there's really no good "why not" for taunt.
People go back and forth on this all the time, like they are here, but my MO is more practical than theoretical. If I invite a Tanker to a PUG team and they don't have taunt, I give them a mission or two to prove they can hold aggro without or do some serious damage. If they fail, I find another tanker. That doesn't usually mean kicking the first, but I will be very vocal with the second about how it is his/her job to hold aggro, not the first one's.
As far as my running crew, none of us will build a tanker or brute without taunt. At worst, it gets pushed back a bit. There's simply no good reason to drop it outside of concept. You don't see any Stalkers dropping Assassin Strike or Placate for "concept" though.
More power to Tankers who don't take taunt, but at that point the question for me is "why team?" More importantly, "why would I want you on my team?"
@Gilia1
I play heroes on Champion.
I play villains on Virtue.
Quote:
Totally agree with this, based on my experience on the 'best taunt aura Tanker' (Ice/Fire) and my Fire/Fire Blaster who was always drawing aggro from other Tankers (maybe because of all the dot from Fire, i don't know, he was the only blaster I played past 30).|
Originally Posted by Commando
I am old school and still a firm believer that taunt on a tank makes him/her better. Blasters, high dmg, heavy AoE, and other effects can and will overcome agro auras like icicles, invincibility, and mud pots, to name a few. Taunt, the power does a better job of gaining and retaining aggro AND if cases, when a heavy dmg blaster is doing an excellent job of drawing aggro because he/she is pwning face, then I am glad to have "Taunt", press it, and draw that group of runaways back to me and away from squishies.
I don't even bother with the arguments that this or that aura or effect does a great job of aggroing. The way I see it, whatever you can do to gain and hold aggro, which does not involve using "Taunt", you can do better by having 'Taunt' and using it along with it. Pulling from a distance with Taunt is also tactically more sound to do in some situations. My two cents. Have fun. |
Taunt makes managing aggro so much easier, and from a distance, especially now with the range debuff.
I could grab all the aggro with my Ice Tanker by superspeeding through all the mobs and attacking them, but it was tiresome compared to binding Taunt to a key and calling the mobs to me.And as Commando wrote, it's much better tactically to draw attention to you from a distance. You can prevent deaths more effectively this way, like taunting the mobs the blaster just threw a fireball at.
Quote:
For those who IO there characters and don't have the inf to do it with the two builds, no matter what the second one looks like, it will always suck when compared to the IOed one. You might have taunt, but you'll be half as tough, have endurance problem and do a lot less damage. =P|
Originally Posted by Gilia
In regard to the OP, with the availability of dual builds, there's really no good "why not" for taunt.
|
Quote:
| As far as my running crew, none of us will build a tanker or brute without taunt. At worst, it gets pushed back a bit. There's simply no good reason to drop it outside of concept. You don't see any Stalkers dropping Assassin Strike or Placate for "concept" though. |
Quote:
| More power to Tankers who don't take taunt, but at that point the question for me is "why team?" More importantly, "why would I want you on my team?" |
"It's a scrapper. If he can't handle it, no one can." -BrandX
Quote:
This is absolutely true for mediocre players. On a team of people only mildly experience and not really pushing the edge of what their characters are capable of doing, Taunt is indeed an excellent power.
|
Originally Posted by Commando
I am old school and still a firm believer that taunt on a tank makes him/her better. Blasters, high dmg, heavy AoE, and other effects can and will overcome agro auras like icicles, invincibility, and mud pots, to name a few. Taunt, the power does a better job of gaining and retaining aggro AND if cases, when a heavy dmg blaster is doing an excellent job of drawing aggro because he/she is pwning face, then I am glad to have "Taunt", press it, and draw that group of runaways back to me and away from squishies.
I don't even bother with the arguments that this or that aura or effect does a great job of aggroing. The way I see it, whatever you can do to gain and hold aggro, which does not involve using "Taunt", you can do better by having 'Taunt' and using it along with it. Pulling from a distance with Taunt is also tactically more sound to do in some situations. My two cents. Have fun. |
Quote:
You are not disagreeing with me; you are once again entirely missing my point. It doesn't matter if brutes steal a bit of aggro from tanks, and in fact, brutes should *want* to. Hell, I hope tanks don't Taunt when I bring my brute over blue-side so I can build my fury bar all the faster or I'll start picking on new spawns. There are very few tasks in the game (again, prolly only the STF on blue-side, and only the end fight at that) that *might* require the tank to hold all the aggro all the time.|
Originally Posted by Blue_Centurion
I will disagree with you on one substantive point. A brute will steal agro from a non-taunting tank. I am not gonna data mine the tables of present detailed explanations here. I have been playing brutes alongside tanks for years. Brutes steal agro from non taunting tanks, in my experience.
|
As for any team that requires the tank to hold all the aggro, I'll likely be quitting those before I'm even felt unwelcome regardless of the AT I'm playing. If I'm tanking, I'll constantly be moving ahead of the pack to grab new spawns, which will no doubt cause protests, as if a decent team won't have the situation fully in control by the time I leave (yes, I stay behind to babysit the crappy teams, which is exactly what you're doing at that point). If I'm a scrapper (or brute) and see the tanker lollygagging with the last minion w/a sliver of life left, I'll leap on ahead and gather my own damn group. If I'm a controller... well, I don't really need a team, but I'll let you all tag along anyway.
If I'm on my Fire blaster? Sure I follow the tank and of course it's best if it keeps aggro off of me. Yes, it's a waste of time for me to have to kill a stray mob coming for me interrupting my AoE chain, but few blasters have gapless AoE chains anyway--I think I can afford an odd Blaze to finish something off. Or, hey, how about I jump over the pack to let the peeled aggro run back through the tank? Is it really that difficult for each toon to manage their own aggro w/o sacrificing much, if any, efficiency?
Seriously, the main divide seems to be players who want the tanks to micromanage every bit of aggro in this game, which to me is a horribly inefficient way to play. Jump in, soak the alpha, get a tight grouping, when you see the mobs melt away, jump to the next spawn, repeat. If you enjoy playing the game with picture perfect tactics and well formed roles for each toon, more power to you. I'd rather kill more things, faster.
An Offensive Guide to Ice Melee
Quote:
What's also very true is that for good players, using 'Taunt' along with any other tools makes it even better. Like I said, for gaining, holding, and managing aggro, whatever can be done without 'Taunt', I believe it can be done even better along with 'Taunt'. That's why I don't argue too much about Auras vs Taunt.|
Originally Posted by Jeminiks
This is absolutely true for mediocre players. On a team of people only mildly experience and not really pushing the edge of what their characters are capable of doing, Taunt is indeed an excellent power.
|
Also, like the poster above said, some nasty pwning blasters are capable of overaggroing even the tanks with the best auras. 'Taunt' works a bit different, especially well slotted.
Repeat Offenders forever !
Make all IO's available in Paragon Market! NCSoft, the chinese are making BIG money selling influence and other stuff in the game. Best way to stop them = make the paragon market a place to buy all IO's and perhaps other things as well.
Quote:
I agree with Dave_P on the idea of how the team plays the scenario. The point I will make is the following: method chosen to handle critters. Some methods are based on the tank pulling and holding aggro, or tanks jumping in and holding aggro. Some methods of handling critters may involve something totally different. Superteams are just one of many examples (fire/rad trollers, for example). I will not say there is a best way, especially for PUGs. I don't believe there is a best way for everything.|
Originally Posted by dave_p
You are not disagreeing with me; you are once again entirely missing my point. It doesn't matter if brutes steal a bit of aggro from tanks, and in fact, brutes should *want* to. Hell, I hope tanks don't Taunt when I bring my brute over blue-side so I can build my fury bar all the faster or I'll start picking on new spawns. There are very few tasks in the game (again, prolly only the STF on blue-side, and only the end fight at that) that *might* require the tank to hold all the aggro all the time.
As for any team that requires the tank to hold all the aggro, I'll likely be quitting those before I'm even felt unwelcome regardless of the AT I'm playing. If I'm tanking, I'll constantly be moving ahead of the pack to grab new spawns, which will no doubt cause protests, as if a decent team won't have the situation fully in control by the time I leave (yes, I stay behind to babysit the crappy teams, which is exactly what you're doing at that point). If I'm a scrapper (or brute) and see the tanker lollygagging with the last minion w/a sliver of life left, I'll leap on ahead and gather my own damn group. If I'm a controller... well, I don't really need a team, but I'll let you all tag along anyway. If I'm on my Fire blaster? Sure I follow the tank and of course it's best if it keeps aggro off of me. Yes, it's a waste of time for me to have to kill a stray mob coming for me interrupting my AoE chain, but few blasters have gapless AoE chains anyway--I think I can afford an odd Blaze to finish something off. Or, hey, how about I jump over the pack to let the peeled aggro run back through the tank? Is it really that difficult for each toon to manage their own aggro w/o sacrificing much, if any, efficiency? Seriously, the main divide seems to be players who want the tanks to micromanage every bit of aggro in this game, which to me is a horribly inefficient way to play. Jump in, soak the alpha, get a tight grouping, when you see the mobs melt away, jump to the next spawn, repeat. If you enjoy playing the game with picture perfect tactics and well formed roles for each toon, more power to you. I'd rather kill more things, faster. |
When I wrote in this thread, I should have written I was approaching the issue with the method of tank gaining, holding, and managing aggro, to take care of critters. What I wrote does not apply at all when teams are picking different methods to handle critters.
Heck, I am in Repeat Offenders, and when we roll, how we used Tanks are perhaps best explained by the name of one of our many SGs, 'Tanks for Nothing'. RO is just another level of play alltogether.
Repeat Offenders forever !
Make all IO's available in Paragon Market! NCSoft, the chinese are making BIG money selling influence and other stuff in the game. Best way to stop them = make the paragon market a place to buy all IO's and perhaps other things as well.
Quote:
This is an incredibly specific set of circumstances. They have just enough influence for one build, they IO'd out early enough to make such a substantial difference that they are gimped when they change, and they somehow couldn't fit taunt into the first concept/build. This poor player... I'm glad he or she is in the minority!|
Originally Posted by FireWyvern
For those who IO there characters and don't have the inf to do it with the two builds, no matter what the second one looks like, it will always suck when compared to the IOed one. You might have taunt, but you'll be half as tough, have endurance problem and do a lot less damage. =P
|
That wasn't the point anyway, clearly.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FireWyvern
I've seen it happen. Dark/dark stalker that played like a brute. And she was still better then 90% of the people i've seen in this game. Could she have been better with AS? Probably. But in a game where the balance is based on SOs, i don't see any reason to not accept someone like this, unless i plain refuse anyone without a fully IOed build on my team.
|
The game being balanced to SOs isn't terribly relevant to most people playing with IOs. I mean, do you ever play at +0 x1? Like after level 10 perhaps? I balance the game to my build and/or team.
My point about Stalkers w/o Assassin Strike was that there is no other keystone powers debated like Taunt is. The reason, I believe, is Taunt only helps the team (for Tankers)... those other powers help the player.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FireWyvern
Same question could be asked to you. Why team if you want everyone to play exactly your way? Wouldn't you be better playing MMs solo or dual(or more) boxing?
|
If I had a build that was clearly not team appropriate, yes you can ask that question, and no I probably would not team. If I had a build that was clearly not for soloing, I probably would not solo. I can't believe this sort of thing needs to be explicit.
Anyone who intentionally gimps their build then intends to team with it is essentially leeching.
As I said, I always give Tankers a chance to prove they are capable before assuming they are not for a lack of taunt. The problem is (on Champion, mind you, Tanker Tuesdays and all) this is extremely (yes extremely) rare. Like I would put it at about 1 in 10. It is so low that on PUG teams that I'm not leading, I see Tankers getting kicked for lacking taunt regularly.
Now, if a Scranker or conceptually built Tanker can act in such a way that the team is better for having him or her, then that's fantastic. The problem with all this broad stroke in theory talk that happens in these debates, from my perspective, is the inability to differentiate subjective for objective impressions. The people playing that way think they are helping no matter what. After all, they are still Tankers, they are probably still standing after everyone else has died. What they don't realize is the Tanker who left for real life last mission never let anyone die. That guy didn't have any IOs and was 10 levels lower too. Boy, it's a shame that I'm not describing rare circumstances. Soooo many teammates we'd be better without because of what was it... concept builds? Hmmm...
@Gilia1
I play heroes on Champion.
I play villains on Virtue.
Quote:
Far from rare. A lot of people might have enough to get one miracle/numina unique, but two for the same character? That's a huge difference. Where's talking of more or less 500 mil or 500-ish merits. For one set. And considering most people don't have just one character, it's normal to prefer having 10 characters IOed then just 5 but with two builds each. You are a lot more versatile if it's 10 different characters you can offer.|
Originally Posted by Gilia
This is an incredibly specific set of circumstances. They have just enough influence for one build, they IO'd out early enough to make such a substantial difference that they are gimped when they change, and they somehow couldn't fit taunt into the first concept/build. This poor player... I'm glad he or she is in the minority!
|
Quote:
|
Someone in the top 10% took the time to IO out a character then intentionally gimped it? Wow. That's saying something about us as a whole. I'm exaggerating of course, I can imagine circumstances where this would be all right. The game being balanced to SOs isn't terribly relevant to most people playing with IOs. I mean, do you ever play at +0 x1? Like after level 10 perhaps? I balance the game to my build and/or team. |
I've brought the SOs in, because she was clearly a better attition to the team then pretty much all SOs build i've seen, and better then a lot of IO builds. Are you so elitist as to refuse to team with anyone who's not a good minmaxer with an IOed character?
Quote:
|
That's not the question at all. Everyone's goal should be upon entering a team to somehow better that team. The capabilities of the team should increase. Therefore, the best of the players' skills, resources, and brains should be used every. single. time. I don't care if someone plays totally differently than I do. What I do care about is if they intend to team with me, that they intend to actually help me. Along the same lines as the aforementioned two builds, as I believe you suggested, the IO build should come out, even if the power choices are less appropriate. Probably, anyway. Why? Because that's what best serves the team. If I had a build that was clearly not team appropriate, yes you can ask that question, and no I probably would not team. If I had a build that was clearly not for soloing, I probably would not solo. I can't believe this sort of thing needs to be explicit. Anyone who intentionally gimps their build then intends to team with it is essentially leeching. |
Tauntless tanker, or AS-less stalker can enter a team an greatly improve it. They won't if you can only play the tanker-healer-DPS trinity. If they entered my team, they be helping me, so why aren't they helping you? Because they don't play like you do.
SO for you, there build is not team appropirate, but that's entirely subjective.
"It's a scrapper. If he can't handle it, no one can." -BrandX
Quote:
And some blasters are capable of overaggroing even the tanks with taunt. =P|
Originally Posted by Commando
What's also very true is that for good players, using 'Taunt' along with any other tools makes it even better. Like I said, for gaining, holding, and managing aggro, whatever can be done without 'Taunt', I believe it can be done even better along with 'Taunt'. That's why I don't argue too much about Auras vs Taunt.
Also, like the poster above said, some nasty pwning blasters are capable of overaggroing even the tanks with the best auras. 'Taunt' works a bit different, especially well slotted. |
Aggro is dertermined by a lot of things: AT threat modifier, who aggroed it first, the damage you do, the mezz you do, how close you are and the different taunt effect.
Generalizing it as "taunt always work" isn't true.
As for auras + taunt works better then just auras. That's true. But it can be said about a lot of things. A regen or WP scrapper can become more survivable if he take aid self. But they don't necessarily need it. Specialy not when they have to trade something for it.
And if the exemple doesn't work cause "surviving" is the secondary job of scrappers. Why don't all scrappers take assault, tactics and hasten? It helps there primary, and apparently it's doesn't matter what they sacrifice for that.
"It's a scrapper. If he can't handle it, no one can." -BrandX
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Commando
What's also very true is that for good players, using 'Taunt' along with any other tools makes it even better. Like I said, for gaining, holding, and managing aggro, whatever can be done without 'Taunt', I believe it can be done even better along with 'Taunt'. That's why I don't argue too much about Auras vs Taunt.
Also, like the poster above said, some pwning blasters are capable of overaggroing even the tanks with the best auras. 'Taunt' works a bit different, especially well slotted. |
If a tanker is relying on just their auras to hold Agro, theyre a mediocre tanker at best, a terrible one at worst.
Tankers have some of the strongest burst sets available to them in the game, and not once have I ever had an issue holding agro against any AV against a Blaster, and especially not against an AoE centric blaster.
Of course maybe Im just magical or something, but on most well played teams, taunt is just a waste of 2 seconds you could use to kill that boss that much faster. Most people can handle themselves.
And well slotted? 3 Recharge, 3 Taunt, if you even really need it, though a single recharge does it.
Besides being a nice IO Mule, and the -Range component being pretty useful, the fact that its an agro control tool is kinda weak compared to what most sets get in the rest of their primary.
Quote:
Strawman much? I was intentionally vague in saying I expect them to help and make the team better. It has nothing to do with tanker-healer-DPS and it has nothing to do with playing the way I do. Again, I can't believe we have to be so explicit about such common sense material.|
Originally Posted by FireWyvern
Tauntless tanker, or AS-less stalker can enter a team an greatly improve it. They won't if you can only play the tanker-healer-DPS trinity. If they entered my team, they be helping me, so why aren't they helping you? Because they don't play like you do.
SO for you, there build is not team appropirate, but that's entirely subjective. |
My "preferred team layout" is actually delineated by which ATs I will /search for in what order. I have ended up with teams of 8 blasters a number of times and never had a problem. You don't run into a lot of Blasters who have decided they don't really need to do damage though. Most of them build for what you'd expect, and the way they help is apparent.
@Gilia1
I play heroes on Champion.
I play villains on Virtue.
Quote:
http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Threat|
Originally Posted by FireWyvern
And some blasters are capable of overaggroing even the tanks with taunt. =P
Aggro is dertermined by a lot of things: AT threat modifier, who aggroed it first, the damage you do, the mezz you do, how close you are and the different taunt effect. Generalizing it as "taunt always work" isn't true. |
Attacking first just means you have the threat first, it isn't relevant once other players are "noticed." Plus, Taunt is by far the biggest modifier (presumably, we don't technically know what debuff offers). If a Tanker is being out aggroed by a Blaster, his taunt probably just didn't hit the Blaster's targets. It's more a statement about Taunt's 5 target max than anything else.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FireWyvern
As for auras + taunt works better then just auras. That's true. But it can be said about a lot of things. A regen or WP scrapper can become more survivable if he take aid self. But they don't necessarily need it. Specialy not when they have to trade something for it.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FireWyvern
And if the exemple doesn't work cause "surviving" is the secondary job of scrappers. Why don't all scrappers take assault, tactics and hasten? It helps there primary, and apparently it's doesn't matter what they sacrifice for that.
|
Surviving is part of doing damage in this game. So yeah, it "matters what they sacrifice" because they won't be doing damage if they're face planted. Tankers who opt to do a little bit more damage in exchange for the ability to tank well? That's a "sacrifice" that matters, because what they lose is better than what they gain.
This irrelevancy is compounded by the fact that you are citing a lot of power pools. Power pools are available to everyone. You can't make the argument that Scrapper's leadership numbers are as important to fulfilling their role as a Tanker's ability to hold aggro... if you did, you would be claiming all character should have Leadership (either Manuevers for survivability or tactics/assault for damage). Moreover, the restrictions of power pools (limited to 4) and number of power picks it can take (like it takes 2 power picks if you want Aid Self) AND their relatively lower numbers to primary/secondary sets makes them less preferable, and more importantly, totally irrelevant to the Taunt debate. You might as well ask if the SoA should take TT:Manuevers or Leadership:Manuevers, it's almost that silly of a question.
@Gilia1
I play heroes on Champion.
I play villains on Virtue.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jeminiks
This is absolutely true for mediocre players. On a team of people only mildly experience and not really pushing the edge of what their characters are capable of doing, Taunt is indeed an excellent power.
|
The opposite of what you innaccurately said can also be true.
He will honor his words; he will definitely carry out his actions. What he promises he will fulfill. He does not care about his bodily self, putting his life and death aside to come forward for another's troubled besiegement. He does not boast about his ability, or shamelessly extol his own virtues. - Sima Qian.
That might make it valuable to scrankers. I don't know. Maybe still not valuable enough?
With IOs, you can get pretty good % with only 4-5 slots. Wich leaves you the place for 1-2 procs.
"It's a scrapper. If he can't handle it, no one can." -BrandX