Quote:
If they move claws over to tanks, they'd have to tweak it a little. A cone knock-back power isn't ideal for most primaries. Not to mention it having two range powers, which may be a little outside the realm of tanker concepts (from a game point of view).
|
Originally Posted by ZataWave
Does anyone know if there has been talk of opening up the Claws set to Tanks? Also, will there be any changes to which sets AT's can take when the new issue goes live? Or do you think they'll save it for GR?
Thanks. |
@Rylas
Kill 'em all. Let XP sort 'em out.
I wouldn't see it as a big problem, I haven't heard any complaints Redside that the Brute is KBing the baddies.
Quote:
Well, back in the day of Axe doing KB instead of KD, many tankers complained about it. A seemingly overwhelming majority of tankers. That's why there might be a problem. Brutes don't play as tankers, so I can see why there's not an issue with the set. They're purpose for getting aggro isn't the same as the tanker.
|
Originally Posted by ZataWave
I wouldn't see it as a big problem, I haven't heard any complaints Redside that the Brute is KBing the baddies.
|
@Rylas
Kill 'em all. Let XP sort 'em out.
Quote:
I would start playing Spines on a tanker at the drop of a hat if it were made available, but the issues seem to be fairly similar. On the other hand, the Kinetic attack set they're planning on introducing seems to have a number of short range attacks, and Stone Melee has always had one.
|
Originally Posted by Rylas
If they move claws over to tanks, they'd have to tweak it a little. A cone knock-back power isn't ideal for most primaries. Not to mention it having two range powers, which may be a little outside the realm of tanker concepts (from a game point of view).
|
<《 New Colchis / Guides / Mission Architect 》>
"At what point do we say, 'You're mucking with our myths'?" - Harlan Ellison
I agree that the play style is somewhat different, but the Brute is still the AT going into the fray and absorbing the alpha. After that it's a free for all.
I think they should just tweak the Claws set all together and get rid of the KB component and replace it with KD like they did with BA.
It seems counter productive for a melee AT to have a KB component in any of thier attacks. Focus is the ranged attack in Claws and even though it's has a KB effect, my scrapper has seen it do more KD. I would guess mostly because the mobs are +2 +3.
I just think it would be fun to be able to play that kind of set on a tank. It's really not too much different then say BA or WM. I could see why the Dev's wouldn't want to give Spines to a tank, but Claws, come on, it's not that overly powerful of set to keep them from us.
Claws will eventually get proliferated to tanks, and I would think with minimal changes.
@Catwhoorg "Rule of Three - Finale" Arc# 1984
@Mr Falkland Islands"A Nation Goes Rogue" Arc# 2369 "Toasters and Pop Tarts" Arc#116617
Quote:
Focus is knockdown|
Originally Posted by ZataWave
It seems counter productive for a melee AT to have a KB component in any of thier attacks. Focus is the ranged attack in Claws and even though it's has a KB effect, my scrapper has seen it do more KD. I would guess mostly because the mobs are +2 +3.
. |
Shockwave is knockback
@Catwhoorg "Rule of Three - Finale" Arc# 1984
@Mr Falkland Islands"A Nation Goes Rogue" Arc# 2369 "Toasters and Pop Tarts" Arc#116617
Quote:
As has Super Strength as well. But those have had minimal damage attached to them, haven't they? Kinetic's short range is still short. But Claws' ranged attacks have a fair bit of range to them. Add in the ability to get Fire Ball, and that's three mid- to long-range attacks on a tank. It kind of stops feeling like a tanker set at this point. |
Originally Posted by Heraclea
I would start playing Spines on a tanker at the drop of a hat if it were made available, but the issues seem to be fairly similar. On the other hand, the Kinetic attack set they're planning on introducing seems to have a number of short range attacks, and Stone Melee has always had one.
|
I'm not saying it wouldn't be a fun set for a lot of tankers to play with. But it would need tweaks. Personally, I wouldn't be bothered with it being brought over, but it doesn't fit the Tanker concept in my opinion.
@Rylas
Kill 'em all. Let XP sort 'em out.
There really isn't much more for us to play. I have tanks with SS, DB, NrgM, FM, WM, BA,EleM and StoneM. I deleted my WP/Dark tank, never played him. I love the AT and would like some more choices.
I really don't think Claws should be out of reach for us. I can understad that it's not a "typical" tank set, but I have a great idea for a Inv/Claws. I have him rolling as a Brute which I plan to bring over Blueside, but I'd like the option to play him as a Tank AT.
Quote:
Hurl actually does a fair amount of damage if taken, but I've seldom taken it; most of my Super Strength tankers have Fly and Air Superiority on at least one of their builds. Fault is a no-damage attack, but it does have range, and the range can be increased; you can get it out to thirty feet or so if you want to slot that way. Which is kind of interesting.
|
Originally Posted by Rylas
As has Super Strength as well. But those have had minimal damage attached to them, haven't they?
|
<《 New Colchis / Guides / Mission Architect 》>
"At what point do we say, 'You're mucking with our myths'?" - Harlan Ellison
Quote:
Shockwave could be used in the same way as Shield Charge just with a better rechg timer, instead of soaking an alpha, you give it.
|
Originally Posted by ZataWave
I agree that the play style is somewhat different, but the Brute is still the AT going into the fray and absorbing the alpha. After that it's a free for all.
|
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 is true ND. You could start of with Shock Wave then SC your way into the mob.
Quote:
Well, you can't take Claws with Shield...
|
Originally Posted by ZataWave
That is true ND. You could start of with Shock Wave then SC your way into the mob.
|
Whoops, I totally zoned out on that. Thanks G.
I dunno, Claws doesn't feel very "tankerish" to me. I mean, I'd love Spin on a tank, but I don't think the concept works all that well. Then again, I don't much like DB on tankers either. Both seem like finesse sets much more suited to scrappers or even brutes.
Now Broadsword... there's a tank-like weapon. No Kat either (tho a superior set, numbers-wise, but also a finesse set), just BS. JMO.
An Offensive Guide to Ice Melee
I agree, BS is awesome, I have a BS/SD scrapper and he's really fun to play.
I wish I picked a better secondary for my Kat. He's 50 and IO'd out, but just very lack luster compared to his BS/SD counterpart. I think it I went Regen, I would enjoy him much more.
It no longer matters if sets feel "tankerish" or "scrapperish" or "brutish".
Every one of these ATs have a primary that throws that arguement out the window.
As for claws having too many ranged powers...
...look at the new Kinetic Melee set.
All the melee ATs should share all powersets.
Quote:
I have to agree with this. Port 'em all. Same goes for the mitigation sets.
|
Originally Posted by Vitality
It no longer matters if sets feel "tankerish" or "scrapperish" or "brutish".
Every one of these ATs have a primary that throws that arguement out the window. As for claws having too many ranged powers... ...look at the new Kinetic Melee set. All the melee ATs should share all powersets. |
Be well, people of CoH.
Quote:
... This. I heavily disagree with. It SHOULD matter whether or not a set feels Tankerish, Scrappish, Brutish, or stalkerish.|
Originally Posted by Vitality
It no longer matters if sets feel "tankerish" or "scrapperish" or "brutish".
Every one of these ATs have a primary that throws that arguement out the window. As for claws having too many ranged powers... ...look at the new Kinetic Melee set. All the melee ATs should share all powersets. |
And no. All Melee AT's should NOT share all powersets.
Quote:
I never said whether it SHOULD or not...I just stated on how it no longer matters.
|
Originally Posted by je_saist
... This. I heavily disagree with. It SHOULD matter whether or not a set feels Tankerish, Scrappish, Brutish, or stalkerish.
And no. All Melee AT's should NOT share all powersets. |
Quote:
What *should* be is already meaningless.|
Originally Posted by je_saist
... This. I heavily disagree with. It SHOULD matter whether or not a set feels Tankerish, Scrappish, Brutish, or stalkerish.
And no. All Melee AT's should NOT share all powersets. |
Scrappers *shouldn't* have gotten fiery or dark melee.
Brutes *shouldn't* have gotten claws or dual blades.
Tanks *shouldn't* have gotten dual blades.
But they did. The old "rules" are meaningless now. After GR, they'll be even more so meaningless.
All that's left is AT modifiers and inherents.
Want aggro control and higher base mitigation? Go tank.
Want steady high damage at the cost of somewhat lower mitigation? Go scrapper.
Want to be a scrapper solo and a tank that actually deals damage on teams? Go brute.
What reasoning is left for scrappers not to get ice and energy melee? They've already got dark and fire. What are brutes lacking? Broadsword and ice?
Why shouldn't tanks get broadsword?
Be well, people of CoH.
Quote:
Mostly a question of curiosity here, but wouldn't parry have a higher +def bonus for tanks? Could that be taken as overpowered?|
Originally Posted by Bill Z Bubba
Why shouldn't tanks get broadsword?
|
Just to make sure I'm not misunderstood: I'd like to see all of the sets ported. Barring the cases where blatant overpowering can happen, I support total proliferation. Tweak the numbers if you must, but every melee character should be able to hit the enemy with everything.
Where to now?
Check out all my guides and fiction pieces on my blog.
The MFing Warshade | The Last Rule of Tanking | The Got Dam Mastermind
Everything Dark Armor | The Softcap
don'T attempt to read tHis mEssaGe, And believe Me, it is not a codE.
Yes, the +def would be higher from Parry and Divine Avalanche. Far as I'm concerned, those are both overpowered now. But if I'm wrong and they aren't OP on scrappers, then they won't be OP on tanks.
Where's the balance? Tanks don't get crits and have a lower damage modifier. Does this mean that the defense based tanks would have a ridiculously easy time softcapping to melee and lethal? Probably. But the same arguement is being made on why they shouldn't get SR.... yet tanks, scrappers and brutes all got shield defense.
Be well, people of CoH.
Quote:
Yes, they SHOULD. Let their inherent's and gameplay mechanics define the AT, not the powersets. IF I want a INV/Claws Tank then I should be able to make one. I already have a Claws/INV Brute...what's the flipping difference?
|
Originally Posted by je_saist
... This. I heavily disagree with. It SHOULD matter whether or not a set feels Tankerish, Scrappish, Brutish, or stalkerish.
And no. All Melee AT's should NOT share all powersets. |
Does anyone know if there has been talk of opening up the Claws set to Tanks? Also, will there be any changes to which sets AT's can take when the new issue goes live? Or do you think they'll save it for GR?
Thanks.