Concerned about Scrappers.


Acemace

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by William_Valence View Post
Again, I've got to ask. What does this actually do?

As much as J_B likes to carry on about the caps; the issue doesn't come from the caps. The issue is the level of survivability Brutes can achieve combining with the aggro management tools that they've been given, which allows them to do the job of a Tank, while keeping superior damage.

A brute doesn't need to be at their caps to tank for a team, and they've been doing it since before IOs.

Add to that, the potential to be "Survivable enough", getting to the point where an equally built Tanker's mitigation advantage becomes rather pointless, and you've got my current perspective on the Tank vs Brute topic.
It makes it so, on a full team, a Tanker can still be buffed higher than a Brute on more than just higher hit points.

It gives a more deffinant view of the tanker having a higher peak survival.

Can Brutes still tank 4/8? Yup. Though, the thing that always seems to be forgotten, is that 4/8 tends to be either 1) easy enemies to begin with 2) enemies that factor into the tank/brutes strength.

For example, I've run 4/8 Arachnos and Rularuu. Neither which was an easy cake walk. And that was with WP a well rounded set that gets really impressive with IOs.

Most people who say "I run 4/8" are running specially tailored enemies or picking some of the known easy ones.

Get that 4/8 Knives of vengeance going!


BrandX Future Staff Fighter
The BrandX Collection

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrandX View Post
It makes it so, on a full team, a Tanker can still be buffed higher than a Brute on more than just higher hit points.

It gives a more deffinant view of the tanker having a higher peak survival.

Can Brutes still tank 4/8? Yup. Though, the thing that always seems to be forgotten, is that 4/8 tends to be either 1) easy enemies to begin with 2) enemies that factor into the tank/brutes strength.

For example, I've run 4/8 Arachnos and Rularuu. Neither which was an easy cake walk. And that was with WP a well rounded set that gets really impressive with IOs.

Most people who say "I run 4/8" are running specially tailored enemies or picking some of the known easy ones.

Get that 4/8 Knives of vengeance going!
I don't get what you're saying about 4/8; are you thinking that the balance is 4/8? Even then, do you think that an AT that does Solo ITFs and such is incapable of running at 4/8 against only "easy" groups? Even without IOs and being buffed by a team.

Thing is, even if the answer to both or either of those questions is yes, it doesn't matter. We know Brutes can tank for teams; they've been doing it this isn't theoretical. We know they have better aggro generation capabilities. We know they have better damage potential.

What do Tanks have? More survivability? Doesn't matter, because tanks have enough to fill the role as team damage taker. Damage? Brute have the ability to do more damage than tanks. The ability to move enemies about, as if on a leash, and manage aggro? I'd tell you if tanks could or not, but that brute won't let me take the aggro of her and wants to do it herself.

This is all without consideration of caps. Who cares if the Brute can "only" get 85% resistance; when anyone being honest in the discussion (and this was brought up against J_B's attribute cap argument) knows they don't realistically play at their caps.

Reducing the Brute's cap would be a cop-out that would not change gameplay in any meaningful way.


Murphys Military Law

#23. Teamwork is essential; it gives the enemy other people to shoot at.

#46. If you can't remember, the Claymore is pointed towards you.

#54. Killing for peace is like screwing for virginity.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by William_Valence View Post
Reducing the Brute's cap would be a cop-out that would not change gameplay in any meaningful way.
I'll have to disagree with that statement. The rage that was against dropping Brute resist cap to 85% in GR beta makes me think it would change gameplay, cause that was a lot of the complaints said in GR beta when it was suggested the first time.

"OH NO! I won't be as survivalable and die all the time now!"

No, I don't think the balance is +4/8 missions. I was using that as the reference because another poster stated many times that since Brutes/Scrappers can run 4/8 solo, that means they're as tough as Tankers.

To which I disagree, because those Brutes/Scrappers running +4/8 content, tend to be running content that they're suited to run at high difficuluty, and not all content.

Take that S/L Softcapped Electric Brute, run +4/8 missions filled with Rularuu. Are you staying alive just as well playing the same way as you are against +4/8 Council?

What about +4/8 /SR Brute against Rularuu?

But if I was to go by personal experience, then...My SS/FA Brute still needed to use heals when softcapped to Fire Damage (and S/L) on 4/8 Fire Farms.

Now that was running them at 4/8 and in my experience, so yes, I think lowering the max resistance would have a effect.

Would this be a factor in all content? Especially with a buff/debuff backing you up? Nope. Will it have an effect though? Yuppers.


BrandX Future Staff Fighter
The BrandX Collection

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by William_Valence View Post

What do Tanks have? More survivability? Doesn't matter, because tanks have enough to fill the role as team damage taker. Damage? Brute have the ability to do more damage than tanks. The ability to move enemies about, as if on a leash, and manage aggro? I'd tell you if tanks could or not, but that brute won't let me take the aggro of her and wants to do it herself.

This is all without consideration of caps. Who cares if the Brute can "only" get 85% resistance; when anyone being honest in the discussion (and this was brought up against J_B's attribute cap argument) knows they don't realistically play at their caps.

Reducing the Brute's cap would be a cop-out that would not change gameplay in any meaningful way.
I agree, and will add that People are quick to suggest increasing Tanker survivability to distance them from Brutes and defeat my caps argument. Give them more (Max)HP, give them Absorb, give them high base regen, etc.

I ask a simple question: does this make Tankers more fun to play?

ATOs brought with them the Tanker +Res proc. This little beauty, I'm at capped S/L resists even when I'm exempted down to level 15 to run the new Steel arcs. Previously, these arcs wouldn't have stressed my Tanker, but now, my HP bar doesn't even move on them.

Did it make them *any* more fun to play on my Tanker? No. If anything, removing any danger or risk to them makes them more boring. It certainly doesn't improve Tankers' rep as slow and boring.

I ask another question: What would improving Tanker survivability do for them? I can already tank all the content in the game. I can already stand up to all the "soloing challenges" in the game like AVs and now Giant Monsters; survivability isn't even my hurdle in defeating them, it's damage. My Brute has a greater chance of overcoming BOTH of those hurdles compared to my Tanker and does.

Neither my Tanker, nor my high end Brute really sweat the new DA content on most settings. I still have to use my self-heal on my Brute, and my Tanker can for the most part ignore his HP bar. That doesn't make the Tanker any more advantageous or fun. The Brute can still survive the content and do so while dealing more damage. And that is the case for 95% of the content in the game. Even if you dropped his resistance cap to 85%, that wouldn't really change anything presently because he's not at the cap and doesn't HAVE to be for the vast majority of content in the game.

Increasing Tanker survivability further is nonsensical and pointless. People are so committed to not improving their damage that even if they can see and admit there's a problem with Brute and Tanker survivability versus damage levels, the only thing they can think of is to meaninglessly increase Tanker survivability or nerf Brutes when neither really improves Tankers and makes the more fun to play.

On the one hand you've got supreme survivability at the cost of a good deal of offense. On the other you've got survivability that's still plenty tough to get the job done and doesn't give up any offense. The answer of which most people are going choose is obvious. Making them 'super extra supreme' survivability won't change the answer and ticking everyone off by nerfing their beloved Brutes won't help anyone.

Bring Tanker damage caps in line with Brutes adjusting for the Max HP difference and Bruising, let Tankers get the full benefit from stuff like Hybrid Assault and team damage buffs and don't do anything in the future that gives either a serious edge over the other. Problem solved AFAIC.


.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane View Post
I ask a simple question: does this make Tankers more fun to play?
This is the thing right there.

Unfortunately any thoughts I have to make Tankers more fun to play (for me) make them into brutes or scrappers just as any thoughts I have to make defenders more fun to play (for me) turn them into blasters or corruptors.

To me both are anachronisms of an increasingly irrelevant concept of the trinity and with power set proliferation I just don't have any reason to play either of these ATs.


total kick to the gut

This is like having Ra's Al Ghul show up at your birthday party.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane View Post
I agree, and will add that People are quick to suggest increasing Tanker survivability to distance them from Brutes and defeat my caps argument. Give them more (Max)HP, give them Absorb, give them high base regen, etc.

I ask a simple question: does this make Tankers more fun to play?
for people who enjoy the traditional 'tanking' role in MMO groups?

yeah, it would.


The Nethergoat Archive: all my memories, all my characters, all my thoughts on CoH...eventually.

My City Was Gone

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nethergoat View Post
for people who enjoy the traditional 'tanking' role in MMO groups?

yeah, it would.
I've got two responses to that:

1. Objectively speaking, those people are fewer in number. Damage dealing ATs are extremely popular and making Tankers tougher doesn't make them more appealing to the majority, especially given the most common complaint about Tankers I see by people who don't like them is their damage. If the goal is to broaden Tanker's appeal, you won't do that by doubling down on something they already do really well when they're already at a point where it can be superfluous and doesn't really give an advantage in many situations.

2. Increasing Tanker damage caps does nothing to harm or take away anything from the people who do like them for their tanking role. What it does do is:

-Increases their damage potential on teams and thus the value of additional Tankers.
-Allows all Tanker sets and combos to get the full benefit from damage buffs and things like Hybrid Assault or whatever they cook up in the future.
-Brings them in line for total performance potential with the other tanking AT, Brutes. Right now, when choosing between Brutes and Tankers for who is the better investment, Brutes are the clear winner.
-Allows them to be closer to their heavy hitting comic counterparts. If someone wants to argue that it doesn't and would require a special mechanic or something for that, I disagree. Stuff like Hybrid and future offense improving powers can do it; but the caps as they are currently don't permit them to.




.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrandX View Post
I'll have to disagree with that statement. The rage that was against dropping Brute resist cap to 85% in GR beta makes me think it would change gameplay, cause that was a lot of the complaints said in GR beta when it was suggested the first time.

"OH NO! I won't be as survivalable and die all the time now!"
I think you need to take things that people argue about with a cup of salt, when it comes to situations like that. There are almost always people who will almost always engage in a kind of indirect hyperbole, discussing a valid edge case as though it is far more common than it actually is. The smart ones don't make outright claims about how commonly something comes up. Instead, they just bring up the edge case in ways that make it easy to infer that it comes up a lot more than it does in practice.


Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA

 

Posted

I'm just throwing this in here because I don't particularly have the time to read through this entire thread and I apologize for that. But, since my main is a Scrapper I feel the need to put my own thoughts forward for consideration.

I don't feel that Scrappers need a niche that's different from Brutes and Stalkers. I think it's perfectly fine that all three of those perform the same role in different ways. Brutes are the most survivable (sometimes), Stalkers have the highest damage (sometimes), and Scrappers fall in the middle (sometimes). Sure Scrappers don't have any unique tricks, but that doesn't really negatively impact my play experience. It's not like how Stalkers needed an update because they were just flat out broken. Or for that matter how Blasters currently need an update because they are flat out broken.

That Scrappers are not solo specialists anymore should come as no surprise. Everything is a solo specialist in the modern game. Of more significance is a Scrapper's role on the team. Like Brutes, Scrappers have the ability to become a tank for the team if needed. Like Stalkers, Scrappers have the ability to score critical hits - potentially out damaging a Brute (especially with the second round of ATOs coming down the pipe, but whether that counts is debatable).

In short, Scrappers have no unique niche. But nothing really does in this game. It doesn't make me not want to play Scrappers. I'm more concerned about Blasters, Defenders, Kheldians, and MM pet AI than I am about Scrappers. And yes, that list is in order from highest priority to lowest.


@Rorn ---- Blue Baron ---- Guardian

 

Posted

Scrappers are fine.

Using this and other non related threads to crusade for Brute and Tanker changes is low brow.


The development team and this community deserved better than this from NC Soft. Best wishes on your search.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrandX View Post
I'll have to disagree with that statement. The rage that was against dropping Brute resist cap to 85% in GR beta makes me think it would change gameplay, cause that was a lot of the complaints said in GR beta when it was suggested the first time.

"OH NO! I won't be as survivalable and die all the time now!"
People hate nerfs. They just do, and most players (which includes me enough times) don't know enough about balance to gauge what the performance hit would be from the whining about the buff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrandX View Post
No, I don't think the balance is +4/8 missions. I was using that as the reference because another poster stated many times that since Brutes/Scrappers can run 4/8 solo, that means they're as tough as Tankers.
That clears up my confusion. My argument isn't that they can do 4/8. My argument is that they can do the Tanker role, and do more damage. Take damage away from tankers. Now take aggro management away from tankers. What's left?

Because Brutes don't exist at their caps, yet still manage to fill the role of the Tank, that tells me adjusting the cap is the wrong way to go about addressing the issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane View Post
I agree, and will add that People are quick to suggest increasing Tanker survivability to distance them from Brutes and defeat my caps argument. Give them more (Max)HP, give them Absorb, give them high base regen, etc.

I ask a simple question: does this make Tankers more fun to play?
If they made tankers gainfully more survivable than brute, I mean you can really feal the difference survivable, in at least one area; as well as making them the kings of aggro management, they would be more fun to play.

Maybe not for you, but you've show a bit of hate for the aggro management roles. That's ok, because you don't have to play a tank.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane View Post
I ask another question: What would improving Tanker survivability do for them? I can already tank all the content in the game. I can already stand up to all the "soloing challenges" in the game like AVs and now Giant Monsters; survivability isn't even my hurdle in defeating them, it's damage. My Brute has a greater chance of overcoming BOTH of those hurdles compared to my Tanker and does.
If you went with my previous suggestion, of Tanks resisting unresistable damage and avoiding autohit damage, that would seriously change the feel of the AT.

The ability to Brush off a disintegrate one of Maelstrom's Marked for deaths, while a brute has to run around like they're about to die, would be a huge change in perspective.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane View Post
Bring Tanker damage caps in line with Brutes adjusting for the Max HP difference and Bruising, let Tankers get the full benefit from stuff like Hybrid Assault and team damage buffs and don't do anything in the future that gives either a serious edge over the other. Problem solved AFAIC.


.
Again my counter-suggestion; which actually fixes the issue with tankers.

Make Tanks the kings of aggro management. A brute should never pull an enemy of a tank that the tank doesn't allow, not the other way around.

Make Tanks stronger against the most dangerous types of attacks, specifically autohit attack and unresistable damage attacks, which should greatly change the feel of the AT for the better.

Forget the damage cap, all it helps is some SS, and Shield tankers. Its a waste of effort for too little return, and ignores the fact that these characters are not the only ones to be able to cap their damage themselves (thus making additional outside damage buffs pointless) yet I don't see Warshades, defenders, or corruptors getting a damage cap buff.


Murphys Military Law

#23. Teamwork is essential; it gives the enemy other people to shoot at.

#46. If you can't remember, the Claymore is pointed towards you.

#54. Killing for peace is like screwing for virginity.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by William_Valence View Post
Make Tanks stronger against the most dangerous types of attacks, specifically autohit attack and unresistable damage attacks, which should greatly change the feel of the AT for the better.
Quote:
The ability to Brush off a disintegrate one of Maelstrom's Marked for deaths, while a brute has to run around like they're about to die, would be a huge change in perspective.
No.

Unresistable damage and autohit attacks were put in for a reason. All ATs should be in danger from something. Well built Tankers are already all but unkillable in 95% of the game's content. They don't need any less challenge than they already face or have even more risk removed.

If you get Marked for Death, learn to break line of sight.

Quote:
Forget the damage cap, all it helps is some SS, and Shield tankers. Its a waste of effort for too little return, and ignores the fact that these characters are not the only ones to be able to cap their damage themselves (thus making additional outside damage buffs pointless)
Any Tanker will hit their cap with one Kin on the team. Don't tell me the cap only affects SS and shield because that's BOGUS. It makes Build Up and Hybrid Assault pointless for Tankers on most leagues. Why should Brutes be allowed get great benefit from Hybrid Assault AND Hybrid Melee and have high survivability and huge damage when buffed and not Tankers? That's not a cue for you to invent a reason for the toughest AT in the game to get more survivability they don't need in the vast majority of the game's content, because the majority of the game's content ISN'T unresistable damage and autohit.

Quote:
yet I don't see Warshades, defenders, or corruptors getting a damage cap buff.
Don't compare apples to oranges.
Defenders and Corrs are walking force multipliers. Four Tankers with a 500% damage cap couldn't buff each other AND ALSO debuff the enemy like a half team of Kin and Rad Controllers could. Not to mention, Corrs "defy" their cap a good amount with Scourge.

Warshades are an even stranger fruit with their form shifting and flexibility in role. I'm no expert on them, but I'd think they should loose some total potential for being so adaptable. But really, I'm not going to argue for or against them having their caps looked at too. All I can say is, maybe Khelds need a counterpart to myself to argue for them.

On the other hand, as fruit, Tankers and Brutes are way more comparable. They're both in the Tank AT catagory. They share most of the same power sets. They share the same goal, both want aggro: One to generate more damage and one to protect the team. I'd venture to say one is a Golden Delicious and one is a Gravenstein.


.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane View Post
No.

Unresistable damage and autohit attacks were put in for a reason. All ATs should be in danger from something. Well built Tankers are already all but unkillable in 95% of the game's content. They don't need any less challenge than they already face or have even more risk removed.

If you get Marked for Death, learn to break line of sight.
*Snrk* Superman wouldn't need to break line of sight!

Seriously though, if you're saying that any tanker primary, when played by the average player with SOs, is unkillable in 95% of the games content, you're either deluded or outright lying.

Sets have strenths and weaknesses, Invulnerablility isn't going to do so hot against Carnies, Psychic clockwork, and other Psi damage enemies. Dark has issues with energy damage. There are weaknesses in all the mitigation sets, and there isnt one that ignores all content with ease, let alone all of them doing so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane View Post
Any Tanker will hit their cap with one Kin on the team. Don't tell me the cap only affects SS and shield because that's BOGUS. It makes Build Up and Hybrid Assault pointless for Tankers on most leagues. Why should Brutes be allowed get great benefit from Hybrid Assault AND Hybrid Melee and have high survivability and huge damage when buffed and not Tankers? That's not a cue for you to invent a reason for the toughest AT in the game to get more survivability they don't need in the vast majority of the game's content, because the majority of the game's content ISN'T unresistable damage and autohit.
Right right, kins. I forgot that individual powerset balance, and cross AT powerset balance was based on what they can do with a pocket kin. Because every team has one, all the time, no matter what they're doing!

If that's the case, Brutes -DO- exist at their caps. Stone brutes with a pocket kin or two? Hoo-boy!

Here's the thing, some ATs get more from some things than others. There's a reason why Shields is a better Scrapper set than a Brute set, and the reverse it true for Fire. Hybrid is screwed up to begin with, as it doesn't actually help shore up weaknesses, and is ideal for doubling down on what you're already good at.

To answer you're question more directly; why? Why should they get great benefit when Tanks don't? Because they're supposed to. That's they're whole schtick. They do amazing while buffed, that's what a brute is; something that has an amazingly high celing for buffs. That's one of the reasons (But a very minor one) why lowering the Brute resist cap isn't something I'd suggest. Not only would it accomplish very little, it would go against what Brutes are supposed to be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane View Post
Don't compare apples to oranges.
I didn't, you said they could reach their caps, and needed a cap boost so they could benefit from all the damage boosting powers available to them. I gave exaples of others who could reach their damage cap, that don't get a cap boost, thus not benefiting from all the damage boosting powers available to them.

Thing is, they're not your baby, so they shouldn't get this super special consideration.

I was comparing apples to apples, stop trying to paint one of them orange I'm not buying it.


Murphys Military Law

#23. Teamwork is essential; it gives the enemy other people to shoot at.

#46. If you can't remember, the Claymore is pointed towards you.

#54. Killing for peace is like screwing for virginity.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by William_Valence View Post
*Snrk* Superman wouldn't need to break line of sight!

Seriously though, if you're saying that any tanker primary, when played by the average player with SOs, is unkillable in 95% of the games content, you're either deluded or outright lying.

Sets have strenths and weaknesses, Invulnerablility isn't going to do so hot against Carnies, Psychic clockwork, and other Psi damage enemies. Dark has issues with energy damage. There are weaknesses in all the mitigation sets, and there isnt one that ignores all content with ease, let alone all of them doing so.
I said 'well built'.

I'd wager any Tanker power set with Destiny, Hybrid Melee and smart Alpha and slotting choices is damn tough for just about anything, especially when played well on a team that works together.

Destiny, Hybrid and other Incarnate powers only apply to VIPs right? Thankfully VIP/Incarnate content is where most of this unresisted damage is showing up.

Quote:
Right right, kins. I forgot that individual powerset balance, and cross AT powerset balance was based on what they can do with a pocket kin. Because every team has one, all the time, no matter what they're doing!
I'm willing to wager the average team/league is going to have Leadership buffs, misc other damage buffs, and now in Incarnate content, Hybrid support and the like. I can say for a fact every team I'm on has Call to Justice. I will also wager that they will only add more damage buffing powers (powers that buff everything for that matter) as time goes on. If you care to bet against me on that, just a few weeks ago I was making the same assertion and people said that it was unlikely...and then Hybrid was unveiled. So yeah.

Quote:
Here's the thing, some ATs get more from some things than others. There's a reason why Shields is a better Scrapper set than a Brute set, and the reverse it true for Fire.
The problem is compared to Tankers, Brutes get more FROM ALL THINGS. Damage buffs, survivability buffs, pretty much everything. They get nearly the same survival potential as Tankers but way more damage potential.

THAT. ISN'T. FAIR. OR. BALANCED.

And no, that's NOT their "schtick." That's the devs having a quantifiable and irrefutable double standard when it comes to Tankers and Brutes and them saying "f*** tankers" while throwing them under the bus.


.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane View Post
I've got two responses to that:

1. Objectively speaking, those people are fewer in number. Damage dealing ATs are extremely popular and making Tankers tougher doesn't make them more appealing to the majority, especially given the most common complaint about Tankers I see by people who don't like them is their damage. If the goal is to broaden Tanker's appeal, you won't do that by doubling down on something they already do really well when they're already at a point where it can be superfluous and doesn't really give an advantage in many situations.
Playing a tank appeals to people who like playing tanks.
People who like doing a lot of damage play other ATs.

If you're advocating for a new AT that is potentially extremely survivable AND does a lot of damage, that's called a Brute.

If you want the sort of reliable survivability embodied by the tank coupled with substantially more damage, that's not ever going to happen, at least not in this game.


Quote:
2. Increasing Tanker damage caps does nothing to harm or take away anything from the people who do like them for their tanking role.
No group of players will ever complain about an unexpected increase in their game effectiveness.

But in the MMO verse, when you don't see any smoke, there's no fire.
And as I noted earlier, your crusade to get tanks a damage buff is still a one-man show.

This tells me players who like tanks are happy with the status quo.
Players who would prefer to do more damage have other options.

I realize this observation won't dampen your enthusiasm for the cause, but it's something to keep in mind.


The Nethergoat Archive: all my memories, all my characters, all my thoughts on CoH...eventually.

My City Was Gone

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Megajoule View Post
orrrrr (in fairness), many tank players have simply become resigned to doing the kind of damage they do. I'm one of those.
Tankers might actually have a chance to get something looked at if there was a proper case made in the proper place. Cross posting crusades by people the devs have long ago put on ignore is not the most effective way of getting that done.


The development team and this community deserved better than this from NC Soft. Best wishes on your search.

 

Posted

For the love of Mike!
Here's a suggestion: One of the people who keeps arguing over the relative merits of Brutes versus Tankers start a thread here titled something like "Concerned about Tankers" or "Concerned about Brutes" or "Concerned about Not Getting What I Want and Deserve". Then we can let this thread either die off because the original topic has pretty much been covered, or people can continue to discuss the actual topic in the name.

Seriously, start a new thread with an accurate title instead of suborning someone else's thread. What are you afraid of, that if they know what you're actually discussing no one will care?

(In the case of at least one poster anyone who sees that they're posting already knows what they're going to be posting about since they nearly always post just to complain about one topic regardless of what the rest of the thread is about. "I like the particle effects of the new dark hold power." "Yeah? Well, it's unfair that the Devs still only give Fruit Baskets one lime per basket." "Uh, what's that have to do with the dark hold?" "The Devs gave dark a new hold graphic, but i still don't have more limes in my Fruit Basket and that's totally unfair!" "...")


Dr. Todt's theme.
i make stuff...

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane View Post
I said 'well built'.

I'd wager any Tanker power set with Destiny, Hybrid Melee and smart Alpha and slotting choices is damn tough for just about anything, especially when played well on a team that works together.

Destiny, Hybrid and other Incarnate powers only apply to VIPs right? Thankfully VIP/Incarnate content is where most of this unresisted damage is showing up.



I'm willing to wager the average team/league is going to have Leadership buffs, misc other damage buffs, and now in Incarnate content, Hybrid support and the like. I can say for a fact every team I'm on has Call to Justice. I will also wager that they will only add more damage buffing powers (powers that buff everything for that matter) as time goes on. If you care to bet against me on that, just a few weeks ago I was making the same assertion and people said that it was unlikely...and then Hybrid was unveiled. So yeah.



The problem is compared to Tankers, Brutes get more FROM ALL THINGS. Damage buffs, survivability buffs, pretty much everything. They get nearly the same survival potential as Tankers but way more damage potential.

THAT. ISN'T. FAIR. OR. BALANCED.

And no, that's NOT their "schtick." That's the devs having a quantifiable and irrefutable double standard when it comes to Tankers and Brutes and them saying "f*** tankers" while throwing them under the bus.


.
If your going to use incarnate abiltiies in your discussion, you should only be using incarnate content.

It was already stated when Incarnate powers were released, they'd trivialize regular content.


BrandX Future Staff Fighter
The BrandX Collection

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schismatrix View Post
For the love of Mike!
Here's a suggestion: One of the people who keeps arguing over the relative merits of Brutes versus Tankers start a thread here titled something like "Concerned about Tankers"
A developer is at least likely to stumble in here based on how ridiculous the thread name is.

Putting "Tanker" in the thread name just ensures they won't look at it.


.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane View Post
A developer is at least likely to stumble in here based on how ridiculous the thread name is.

Putting "Tanker" in the thread name just ensures they won't look at it.


.
Okay, "Not Sure If Serious" is really the wrong meme to use since i'm quite certain you're serious, but i don't know any "Quite Certain Is Serious, Not Sure If Sane" image macros.

It's interesting to have you outright concede that you're deliberately derailing the thread because you're certain no will read what you have to say otherwise. However, i think that's also against the forum rules.


Dr. Todt's theme.
i make stuff...

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schismatrix View Post
It's interesting to have you outright concede that you're deliberately derailing the thread because you're certain no will read what you have to say otherwise. However, i think that's also against the forum rules.
There's no thread to derail because it never left the station. The OP took back the original comments. At the very least, it was under the larger issue of overall melee AT balance, of which Tankers and Brutes are a part of.


.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Megajoule View Post
orrrrr (in fairness), many tank players have simply become resigned to doing the kind of damage they do. I'm one of those.
well, it is a traditional role and game balance dictates that role can't change dramatically without dramatically affecting the whole game.

One of Johnny's points I agree with is if your problem with tanks is lack of damage the devs 'fixed' it by creating brutes, .

I have tanks, I have brutes- they play nothing alike and I enjoy them both.


The Nethergoat Archive: all my memories, all my characters, all my thoughts on CoH...eventually.

My City Was Gone

 

Posted

You no not every Arctype Set need to be buff, people who can't play the Arctype well are the ones that do much of the complaining and Pvpers who want a Overpower Arctype sets.

You Can't buff everything, when you do you create a Domino Effect once one Arctype Set get buff, there be people start complaining and Complaining about the next one. This Archtype set is bad and not working right, buff it next.

Stalker only got buff because it wasn't living up to how the Dev have Vision the Arctype Set and it was underplayed by many people in the Coh Community, it's not that people have stop Playing Scrappers, alot of people still do, I see them all the time.

There is now a increase of Stalker now and that even up thing now, people now can play them without a fear of dieing or running alway and go back into hide.

Face it Scrappers will never get a buff, why, because they are still living up to the Dev Vision, people Still play them alot, check out freedum and Virtue Servers. Alot of other Players in Coh Community don't see a real problems with them either, me and my friends don't see anything wrong with them.

For a Arctype or Power Set to be revamp, there need to be a problem with it first, Kheldians and Stalkers got buff, because people found problems with the set, do to low Survivability and lack of Damage, Powers not performing right or whatever.

Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it need to be fix and I will always be a Scrapper until my dieing breath.


Never play another NcSoft game, If you feel pride for our game, then it as well, I Superratz am Proud of all of you Coh people, Love, Friendship will last for a lifetime.

Global:@Greenflame Ratz
Main Toons:Super Ratz, Burning B Radical, Green Flame Avenger, Tunnel Ratz, Alex Magnus

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schismatrix View Post
It's interesting to have you outright concede that you're deliberately derailing the thread because you're certain no will read what you have to say otherwise. However, i think that's also against the forum rules.
And for some strange and odd reason that little red triangle is not working as intended. Works right away for some and never for others...interesting.


The development team and this community deserved better than this from NC Soft. Best wishes on your search.