Archetype desirability on teams.

This is my evaluation of the desirability of various archetypes on teams, and is based on my personal opinions and experiences. As such it should be taken with both a grain of salt and a middling sized salt cellar.

Any and all ATs when played by unpleasant and/or incompetent players: Low.

Any and all ATs when played by entertaining and/or highly skilled players: High.

Any and all ATs when played by players who are not especially good or bad: Medium, depending on team composition and ratio/presence of previous two categories.

That's pretty much it.

I'll just say that, since I've been mainly playing with a blaster lately, I enjoy having a tank or brute on the team. Even if they aren't that good/bright, they can still be convinced to run headfirst into a mob to soak up some damage as I kill everyone.

Better (and more true) than the original StickInTheMud post.

As long as it´s only the tanks who die repeatedly, they can complain as much as they want because they still did a good job.

@Redcap

I usually play characters powerful enough to solo just about anything set for 8 so I prefer good company over "more useful" characters.

In the middle of a swamp of "I love everyone and all men are equal" posts, I'm going to say that some situations will make certain archetypes more desirable than others.

If I'm on an ITF forming and there's a bunch of Tankers on the team, I'm going to think twice about going through with it--I've seen too many encounters with Romulus fail due to insufficient damage.

Likewise, if I'm on a LRSF and the team consists entirely of Masterminds and Blasters, I'll gracefully bow out before Atlas Park becomes a smear fest.

As far as my experiences go, you can run all of the even level content in the game with any mix of ATs and powers and do fine.

The exception to this, however, is when you are doing max difficulty content. I'm not talking about the itrials here (those you can run with nearly any mix of ATs). When you run regular missions at +4/x8, generally you have a certain set of roles that you want to fulfill on the team, and certain ATs fulfill those roles better than others. For example, if you need someone who can run into the group and soak up aggro, you're best bet is a tank or a brute, and your worst bet is a blaster.

When it gets to that level, what each AT and even what each power set brings to the table needs to be considered.

I'll take any combination of AT's that come along.

Really.

Despite what others may say, there is no such thing as a 'useless' AT or powerset. There are, however, less than useful players.

You can have the best built, most purpled, slickest character, character in existence, but if they're run by a lousy player, they are worse than useless.

You all know the feeling. The one where even the simplest of missions (TF's ect.) go completely wrong because of that one fool that just can't seem to do their job right or just doesn't seem to have any idea what to do with the powers they have.

On the other hand, You could have the most vanilla, most basic AT, run by a good player and they will always be a benefit.

So, to sum up, If I'm building a team, feel free to sign up. Just be aware I might get rid of you if you're more trouble than you're worth.

As I said in the other thread, in my opinion it's the skill of the players and what you already have that matters. If I'm on a team of controllers and tanks, a blaster is going to be more welcome than another tank because it's damage we are low on; not safety. But if the team already has 6 blasters, then something more tankish or supportish would be nice.