Discussion: Formspring.me 4/23 Dev Q&A Transcript
By
AliasiSudonomo,
Posted on: 2010-04-23 17:17 in News, Events and Announcement Discussion
Quote:
It wouldn't, if you could give a definition of "fun blasts" that:|
Originally Posted by StratoNexus
Is the average or outlier "performance" of defenders and corruptors likely to be so high with increased base damage mods that it trumps fun blasts?
|
1. Most defenders would agree were fun.
2. Most blasters would agree didn't trivialize theirs.
Blasters and Defenders are placed more or less as far away as possible without (deliberately) making Blasters too strong at the high end or making Defenders too weak at the low end. We could debate the numbers, but I think that's really the real issue. Defender damage is as high as it needs to be, not as high as it possibly can be. And that's not likely to change without someone making an extremely deft argument that causes a major reevaluation of archetype definitions.
Its not impossible: a similar seismic shift occured with Dominators. I think the argument might be a little harder for Defenders. But I think people were far more successful arguing that the archetype concept for Dominators was wobbly than they ever did arguing that Dominator numbers "were not fun." Because there aren't really any fun and unfun numbers.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Something else to keep in mind, I think, is the matter of themes and the expectations of other players. While I know a lot of people call this nonsense or an imaginary issue, it _does_ affect other players. We already have numerous players telling others "You're doing it wrong" for chosing to play their characters in particular ways. And No. It isn't as simple as just ignoring such people, for numerous reasons both social and personal (although the latter clearly depends on the individual).
City of Heroes / City of Villains uses Archetypes. They have roles. There isnt a rule saying you need to play within that role, but the Archetypes are designed towards fulfilling those roles.
For example: While I will agree that the current change to Vigilance is the wrong way to go, I think our reasons for stating that differ, Strato. I think increasing the Damage of the Defender is giving the wrong message. "Damage is the only viable option. Everything needs to be about Damage."
The Defender Archetype offers some extremely varied Powers in their Primaries, some of which are damage dealers, but most of which are not. I believe that even while solo, a Defender can rely on their Primary Powers to help them significantly. Certainly some are team- or ally-only, but in my experience Ive gotten further as Defenders thanks to Buffs, Debuffs, and Heals while solo than I do as a Blaster with all their potent Damage, or even Corruptors. Clearly, others mileage varies, significantly.
While the entire Issue 17 edition of Vigilance situation seems to present evidence to the contrary (which has kept me rather baffled with Castle's change since Closed Beta), the Devs also have to 'balance' the game while keeping themes in mind. Why don't we see Defenders getting their Damage Modifier raised? Well, I'd like to think it's because the Devs are trying to keep Defenders true to their theme. It probably doesn't factor in as much as I hope it would, but it is something else that I'm sure the Devs contemplate before making changes.
I am just happy to get such a detailed response from a redname as to why something is not possible.
In the future I would love to make a "Manly" girl villain. I thank David Nakayama for giving me and the community such a clear reason to why something is hard...instead of the dev just telling us its hard.
http://s305.photobucket.com/albums/n...stumes%202011/
Quote:
There probably are numbers which are fun and numbers which are unfun.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
It wouldn't, if you could give a definition of "fun blasts" that:
1. Most defenders would agree were fun. 2. Most blasters would agree didn't trivialize theirs. Blasters and Defenders are placed more or less as far away as possible without (deliberately) making Blasters too strong at the high end or making Defenders too weak at the low end. We could debate the numbers, but I think that's really the real issue. Defender damage is as high as it needs to be, not as high as it possibly can be. And that's not likely to change without someone making an extremely deft argument that causes a major reevaluation of archetype definitions. Its not impossible: a similar seismic shift occured with Dominators. I think the argument might be a little harder for Defenders. But I think people were far more successful arguing that the archetype concept for Dominators was wobbly than they ever did arguing that Dominator numbers "were not fun." Because there aren't really any fun and unfun numbers. |
Scourge and criticals generate fun numbers. A lot of people seem to like Big Orange Numbers. Watching tons of DoT numbers fly above an enemies head after using Rain Of Fire, Hot Feet, and Burn is fun to me. I assume most MMOs have damage and healing numbers above character's heads because they think the players will find that fun. Old defiance could generate a fair amount of damage increase and might have been viewed as more fun if it generated its own number visible to the player. A lot of people seem to have fun with the number 45 when it is applied to defense. 2,000,000,000 seems like an unfun number when applied to an IO cost for many, while for others it is a very fun number. I have fun with the numbers 8 and 144 for no rational reason.
Numbers themselves may not be the source of fun, but seeing larger chunks of an enemies health go away after shooting it is probably more fun than barely seeing the health bar move at all. In order to make that happen, somewhere, a number is likely to be changed. Finishing off an enemy (or at least seeing more impressive chunks of health removed) is probably more fun that shooting it 4 times to get it to half health and then the scrapper comes over, hits it once and kills it.
The dominator changes altered a lot of numbers.
I am fully aware that the numbers themselves are usually not where the fun comes from. But the numbers are often what needs to change in order to reach for a concept or definition that is failing to be met (or failing to be fun).
Defender damage is as high as it needs to be to do what? To make them meet the minimum requirements for solo speed? To allow most players to feel like they should take, slot, and use their secondary? To keep the population within whatever range is deemed acceptable? To allow most players to feel like blasting contributes to a team of 2? of 4? of 7? To make sure a lot of defender players barely blast on large teams?
Is corruptor damage high enough to ensure that their secondaries do not totally overshadow their primaries? Is it high enough after the buffs to doms and stalkers and the introduction of Veats? Is it high enough to fulfill their role as a specialist in dealing out massive ranged damage? Is it high enough that they should still be labeled as High damage?
I do not think the devs need to reevaluate the archetype definitions for defenders or corruptors. I do, however, think that a few of the numbers currently assigned to some of the AT mods are failing to fulfill those definitions as presented to the players. The definitions seem to make sense. The gameplay does not always seem to match those definitions for a lot of players. I cannot say if it is enough players to warrant any change. Perhaps simply increasing a defender's solo speed slightly will have a big impact on player perception.
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.
Quote:
If the devs want to keep defenders from blasting too much by keeping the damage low, I cannot fault their decision. I do not agree, but I have no real argument against it except that I think people would find it cooler if the blasts were more potent. |
Originally Posted by VileTerror
Something else to keep in mind, I think, is the matter of themes and the expectations of other players. While I know a lot of people call this nonsense or an imaginary issue, it _does_ affect other players. We already have numerous players telling others "You're doing it wrong" for chosing to play their characters in particular ways. And No. It isn't as simple as just ignoring such people, for numerous reasons both social and personal (although the latter clearly depends on the individual).
City of Heroes / City of Villains uses Archetypes. They have roles. There isnt a rule saying you need to play within that role, but the Archetypes are designed towards fulfilling those roles. While the entire Issue 17 edition of Vigilance situation seems to present evidence to the contrary (which has kept me rather baffled with Castle's change since Closed Beta), the Devs also have to 'balance' the game while keeping themes in mind. Why don't we see Defenders getting their Damage Modifier raised? Well, I'd like to think it's because the Devs are trying to keep Defenders true to their theme. It probably doesn't factor in as much as I hope it would, but it is something else that I'm sure the Devs contemplate before making changes. |
I do not believe defenders were originally designed to not blast much and I do not believe they were originally presented that way and I do not believe they are currently presented that way. I do believe that they are currently implemented in a way which could be seen as such and I also believe that new vigilance will reinforce that concept.
I argue against the theory that they cannot increase defender and corruptor base damage because it would make them overpowered. I argue against the idea that increasing their base damage would make other ATs obsolete, less fun, or underpowered relatively. I can disagree with the call to emphasize their primaries (or secondaries in the case of corruptors) even more than they are already, but that is a subjective decision I can't really argue against.
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by David Nakayama
Bottom line, it's a massive undertaking that wouldn't really get us a lot of bang for the buck. Three scalable body types covers the vast majority of characters that players want to make, so while it'd be nice to have another one, the price is unfortunately too high.
|
Would it be possible to change the scales to make muscular arms and upper bodies available for women, rather than just fatter arms and bodies?
I hear some people have been exchanging the female "skin" for the male "skin" in order to get better muscle tone on their female characters (only visible for themselves and others who do the same, but still); a six-pack and muscular arms, for example. Could we get something similar that didn't require tampering with the game files?
Winner of Players' Choice Best Villainous Arc 2010: Fear and Loathing on Striga; ID #350522
Quote:
Have you heard the one about the Rabbi, and the lottery ticket ?|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
JOKE |
For something thats pretty darn accurate it manages to be singularly vague and open to interpretation. Kind of appropriate for the religious theme of the comedy.
Just to take from the BotZ thread the balance point became a problem when too many people were doing it ? (It still undefined and classes exhibiting the problem still unknown)
Or to go back to your joke, using you to convey this information is like God holding out his hand to the drowning man and yanking it back while making rude noises
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by StratoNexus
If the devs want to keep defenders from blasting too much by keeping the damage low, I cannot fault their decision. I do not agree, but I have no real argument against it except that I think people would find it cooler if the blasts were more potent.
. |
There is the simple argument that a defender shouldn't be less effective against a guy with a baseball bat, than a frightened store keeper with a saturday night special
Quote:
So it sounds like what you guys need is some sort of automated tool that scales these things for you within certain parameters. |
Originally Posted by David Nakayama
Creating alternate versions of a given costume part requires a character artist to rescale and refinish each one by hand. The process is repeated for each other category, so adding a 4th category would require that much more time for every single piece that's in the game. It's neither simple or fast.
So to get Female Huge, the tradeoff would've been losing at least a quarter of everything else in the game: 25% fewer costumes, 25% fewer enemies, etc. On top of that, you have to take into consideration the animation time involved. Every category receives custom-scaled animations whenever there's a weapon, cape, or other object involved (so the hands fit properly). Bottom line, it's a massive undertaking that wouldn't really get us a lot of bang for the buck. Three scalable body types covers the vast majority of characters that players want to make, so while it'd be nice to have another one, the price is unfortunately too high. |
IE: Sexy Jay Makes "Ulterior" Chest for men. Then some sort of tool modifies that piece to fit on a female figure, huge figure etc.
I'm not an artist and I have no idea how the devs are doing things in this game, so I don't know the specifics, but I'm willing to bet each piece goes through the same basic changes even if the details change.
At the very least the cool could do most of the routine stuff for you and let you guys do the light touch up or finishing, cutting down on, hopefully, a large part of the work.
Again, I have no idea what you're process is like, and I'm no artist, it seems to me their could be some sort of tool or program to do this.
Though at this point it'd be more of an idea to include for CoH 2 (If it ever happens.) I'm sure.
"Where does he get those wonderful toys?" - The Joker
Quote:
i would liek to second this question as well, as this is a good one. to me the demand for a huge female would be at elast somewhat addressed by allowing the physique bar make their arms and legs appear more muscular, rather than just thickening the body, and adding a muscular pattern to tights, and, ideally, a number of the tights with skin options. i realize this may mean some extra work, but id jsut like to see the female character's biceps and triceps get larger, as well as growing the caps on their shoulders when i up the slider. not gigantic, but defined in the vein as she hulk. she is mostly do-able here(poor choice of words? or exactly right?) but the lack of size in her arms and legs hurts the physique. and of course, if i could get some defined arms, shoulders, back and abdominals, well all the better. for muscular im going with rachel mclish(ms Olympia, also from iron eagles 3) type look, or a slightly thicker cammy, from street fighter 2 check for pics at your leisure. I learned the hard way, do not look for explanatory pics of female bodybuilders without setting safe search first..shudder...|
Originally Posted by Pep_Cat
If we can't get a Huge Female model, what about just having a muscular body texture option on the normal Female body, such as what Males have (even if it's just a Tights pattern). That, plus increasing the various sliders, would gain us a strong-looking female appearance. <_<;;
|
oh and i double checked, physique does not add definition of female quadriceps on the legs, nor the caps on their lats when i move the shoulders slider..is this possible with the current models? or are we in glove hands territory. could this be addressed pweeze?
Going back, I think a lot of players are wanting to know some of the important detail around GoRo and expected the Q&A to answer some of that. It didn't and now, 2 - 3 months before launch, players are wondering exactly what they are in for.
That the GoRo site isn't updated with all the info released from various sources doesn't help either.
Quote:
O_o ....
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
(Thank god Castle saw this post before BaB, or I might have been "a fun ride for the whole family" instead.)
|
@Catwhoorg "Rule of Three - Finale" Arc# 1984
@Mr Falkland Islands"A Nation Goes Rogue" Arc# 2369 "Toasters and Pop Tarts" Arc#116617
Quote:
David, I understand the concerns about adding an entirely new character model, but what's your take on "faking it," as it were? What I mean is, have you guys considered adding, say, an alternate skin texture that has more muscle definition like what you did for the Male chests (Smooth vs. Muscular)? That in itself would help so much it's difficult to describe.|
Originally Posted by David Nakayama
Though it'd be cool to have additional body types available, the reality of the situation is that it'd take many, many months of Art time to go back and create Huge Female versions of the thousands of parts that exist in the game currently. Then consider that all future costume parts would have to be built with that fourth category as well, and you'll start to understand the problem: if we did this, all other character work would grind to a halt.
|
Additionally, have you considered just retweaking, extending or expanding the sliders? That would help a great deal, as well.
The reason I'm saying this is because I don't believe we need a whole new model, per se. Just a few more specific costume options and other tweaks. The model in itself is fine. The problem with the much-discussed "huge female" is how it scales and what textures we have access to. Those shouldn't need such a massive expenditure of resources.
...
Should they?
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:
As a possible compromise I'd like to ask:|
Originally Posted by David Nakayama
Creating alternate versions of a given costume part requires a character artist to rescale and refinish each one by hand. The process is repeated for each other category, so adding a 4th category would require that much more time for every single piece that's in the game. It's neither simple or fast.
So to get Female Huge, the tradeoff would've been losing at least a quarter of everything else in the game: 25% fewer costumes, 25% fewer enemies, etc. On top of that, you have to take into consideration the animation time involved. Every category receives custom-scaled animations whenever there's a weapon, cape, or other object involved (so the hands fit properly). Bottom line, it's a massive undertaking that wouldn't really get us a lot of bang for the buck. Three scalable body types covers the vast majority of characters that players want to make, so while it'd be nice to have another one, the price is unfortunately too high. |
Have you ever tried, say, just extended the upper end of the female body type's scalars (say, Shoulders and Physique, and maybe Waist) by about 10-20%?
I've seen several decent attempts at making a large buff female, but the upper body (especially the thickness of the arms) always let it down.
EDIT: Hah, look at that. Samuel_Tow beat me to it by a minute. What he said and ditto on the muscle texture idea.
Quote:
Or body scaling like the males have.
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
David, I understand the concerns about adding an entirely new character model, but what's your take on "faking it," as it were? What I mean is, have you guys considered adding, say, an alternate skin texture that has more muscle definition like what you did for the Male chests (Smooth vs. Muscular)? That in itself would help so much it's difficult to describe.
Additionally, have you considered just retweaking, extending or expanding the sliders? That would help a great deal, as well. The reason I'm saying this is because I don't believe we need a whole new model, per se. Just a few more specific costume options and other tweaks. The model in itself is fine. The problem with the much-discussed "huge female" is how it scales and what textures we have access to. Those shouldn't need such a massive expenditure of resources. ... Should they? |
"Samual_Tow - Be disappointed all you want, people. You just don't appreciate the miracles that are taking place here."
Quote:
I have to disagree, here. A Perez Perk sized spawn of Hellions is going to utterly wipe the floor with my little level 10-14 bubble-fender. A level 10-14 scrapper might be okay with that kind of spawn, but (especially) low level defenders and controllers are not. So then you have to start adjusting spawn size based on archetype. And then you have to start accounting for force-multiplier effects of high level defenders. Pretty soon you're adding adjustments on top of adjustments on top of adjustments, and it gets complicated and crazy and something breaks. Instead we have the difficulty system. If you feel that the guys you're fighting are too weak, go adjust your difficulty. You have every opportunity to fight large spawns if you want to, but suggesting that the each spawn should adjust based on each player's AT and powerset choices is the wrong direction.|
Originally Posted by Thremaine
However what feels weird in CoX that it doesn't matter that much if the enemy is a gun and baseball wielding thug clad in street clothes, crossbow and torch wielding luddite, trained submachine gun wielding soldier, or energy rifle wielding body armored rikti - they are all treated equally when it comes to spawns. It's small things like these that chip away from the "fun factor" for me.
If devs ever get around to creating CoX2 I'd like to see "standard" spawn having varied amount of opponents based on power level while the reward stays same. So those gun wielding thugs would come in Perez Park sized groups where as (power) armored soldiers would come in regular spawns and true enemy "supes" being one vs one enemies. There should be a clear rule what makes a mook so we don't see paragon protectors as mooks and even mooks should have different levels of power. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by StratoNexus
I can see that. Obviously, on large teams, having 2 or 3 defenders is a huge boon. Would 2 or 3 MMs on large teams be the same kind of boon? Possibly not. So a big team with a few defenders could perform better than a big team with a few MMs. That could even happen quite regularly.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by StratoNexus
Defender damage is as high as it needs to be to do what? To make them meet the minimum requirements for solo speed? To allow most players to feel like they should take, slot, and use their secondary? To keep the population within whatever range is deemed acceptable? To allow most players to feel like blasting contributes to a team of 2? of 4? of 7? To make sure a lot of defender players barely blast on large teams?
|
Even with my TA/Arch, I see a difference. She doesn't have the self defense that my bubbler does, and yet it was often a case of "whichever one of us gets the next hit in, the bad guy or me, is gonna win this fight." And because Defenders do so little damage on live, the bad guys would win the fight. Doing just a little more damage makes up for the lack of self defense here, because I can kill the guys with enough additional speed that it keeps me alive.
I realize this solution doesn't make everyone happy, but it works for me, so I have no complaints at all. I'm sorry not everyone sees it that way, but that's what makes it so hard: the Devs can't please everybody.
Quote:
But MMs get lots of force multiplication. The team you mentioned had tons of -resistance and -defense and -regen. They also had tons of -to-hit and -damage as well as lots of +defense and +resistance.|
Originally Posted by Sapphire7
I don't have numbers to back this up, other than a recent all-MM ITF (2 bots, 2 ninja, 1 necro & 3 mercs // 2 dark, 2 FF, 1 pain, 1 storm, 1 TA, 1 Traps) took about three hours, and we did quite a bit of face-planting in the final fight. Granted we were playing a bit sporadically (the way MMs are wont to do), but a team of 8 Defenders would have eaten that fight alive. At that point the force multiplication (I know, sorry I have to keep using that term) of eight Defenders overrides the damage output of 8 MMs without the massive -Res and -Def. I'm not making any judgment on the balance of MMs versus Defenders, I thoroughly enjoy both ATs.
|
It is mind boggling to me that a team with 2 Darkest Nights, 2 Tar Patch, 2 Twilight Grasps, 2 Shadow Fall, Flash Arrow, PGA, Acid Arrow, Disruption Arrow, Hurricane, Steamy Mist, Freezing Rain, Anguishing Cry, Suppress Pain, World of Pain, Acid Mortar, PT, Seeker Drones, FFG, Triage Beacon, and 2 Dispersion Bubbles could have trouble with any AV fight, much less one that features negative energy damage.
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.
Quote:
and pep and fred and me. this may be a popular suggestion |
Originally Posted by _Echoo_
EDIT: Hah, look at that. Samuel_Tow beat me to it by a minute. What he said and ditto on the muscle texture idea. |
Quote:
I've shared several of your posts with my wife. She doesn't even play this game and found you to be a fun ride for the whole family.
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
At least its now official and a guideline of what to expect in the future:
Arcanaville is "pretty darned accurate" and "points to the truth" raves Paragon Studios official spokesperson Castle. I'd like that to be my new forum title if it will fit: "Pretty darned accurate truth-pointer." (Thank god Castle saw this post before BaB, or I might have been "a fun ride for the whole family" instead.) |
Be well, people of CoH.
Quote:
Serves me right for replying as soon as I read the devpost instead of the rest of the thread. |
Originally Posted by rian_frostdrake
and pep and fred and me. this may be a popular suggestion
|
hey, the more the merrier. either it will push it as a priority, or at least dave will let us know why not, either way, its all good in the hood. i will suspect marcian is with us too unless he pops up and registers dissent.
Quote:
This is the best you can come up with, and you're wondering why the devs don't come to the forums and personally discuss game design with you?|
Originally Posted by Another_Fan
There is the simple argument that a defender shouldn't be less effective against a guy with a baseball bat, than a frightened store keeper with a saturday night special
|
The only responses I can think of involve yanking my hand back and making rude noises.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Let's say I'm a lvl 50 Dominator and I switch sides to become a hero. I respect and now can no longer choose from PPP, but have to chose from APP powers. Will new APP power lists be generated for Dominators, Masterminds, Stalkers, etc., or will they be shoehorned into one of the heroic ATs' lists, and if so, which ones? Will my Dominator choose from the Blaster lists or the Controller lists?
Also, why is it Cole Memorial Hospital if he isn't dead?
Lastly, I wish someone had asked whether the Incarnate system will be open to side-switched characters, and if so whether there will be any benefits for never switching sides.
(Sometimes, I wish there could be a Dev thumbs up button for quality posts, because you pretty much nailed it.) -- Ghost Falcon
Quote:
If something is simply not going to happen, I'll always try to level with you guys and explain why it's the case. Thanks for understanding!
|
Originally Posted by Shadow Wail
I am just happy to get such a detailed response from a redname as to why something is not possible.
In the future I would love to make a "Manly" girl villain. I thank David Nakayama for giving me and the community such a clear reason to why something is hard...instead of the dev just telling us its hard. |
David Nakayama, Lead Concept Artist
COH Concept Art Gallery now open at http://pixelsaurus.deviantart.com/
Thus the stance that defenders should not be buffed on bigger teams.
That being said, is it FUN to have anemic blasts on a large team?
I find it hard to believe that a real increase to defender (and corruptor) base damage would ramp their outlier performance up beyond any guard rails, considering what outliers already exist. My sarcasm in previous posts comes from this belief. Considering what MMs (controllers, brutes, scrappers) can do as an outlier, it is hard to believe that defender base damage cannot be increased without ramming into a guard rail.
It is possible the average may be increased too far, but I find that hard to buy, since defenders are already regularly improving damage levels with much higher values. When you consider that many defenders are likely to be spending a lot of time not blasting, I do not believe increasing their base damage mod is going to have a large impact on team's speed through missions, because scrappers and blasters (as well as doms, brutes, and stalkers) will still be contributing the most direct damage (with defenders and corruptors increasing that through buff/debuff). I do think it would make the blasts not anemic and more appealing.
But, considering the thought process of a large team with two or three defenders/corruptors as opposed to two or three MMs, I concede it is possible it is not the edge cases that may be seen as problematic, but rather the average or typical case instead that causes concern over higher defender/corruptor damage mods.
Is the average or outlier "performance" of defenders and corruptors likely to be so high with increased base damage mods that it trumps fun blasts?
I really invested far more energy into this than I should have, considering the fact that even if no change is made to defenders at all, they will still be great fun and highly desirable to me (both to play and to team with). I love defenders and corruptors that blast even at their current damage mods and I find blasting to be fun.
I still think the current vigilance change is the wrong way to go.
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.