I would actually think maybe all Scrappers should be given the choice to become either Brutes or Stalkers because I think that would take care of all the options.
I agree with you that Scrappers and Brutes basically make the same toons. If the Scrapper doesn't make a good Brute then he probably ought to be a Stalker. The Scrapper criticals are very similar to Stalker criticals.
Tanks are the melee archetype that is clearly different. They are basically melee controllers. The other melee archetypes are different types of damage dealers.
Logistically this would be hard to implement and the benefit of eliminating Scrappers seems minimal to me. I think the same thing could be said for changing all Corrupters to Defenders or visa versa. But from a purely technical question of do we have too many Melee archetypes that essentially do the same thing. I would answer yes.
I will also throw out there that I'd love a Debuff Buff/Melee archetype
:E
Keep your hands off my Scrappers!
The thing I like about Scrappers is that they DON'T have a Fury bar. They don't worry about gathering aggro to maintain Fury, or setting up an assassin crit combo. They walk right up to the enemy and hit them in the face, no setup required, no other considerations to weigh. I don't dislike Fury - I've got plenty of Brutes - but I don't want it for my Scrappers either.
I get why Scrappers and Brutes can appear redundant, but as an avid melee player, I would absolutely not be happy if that "redundancy" was removed.
Quote:
They already get that choice: at character creation.|
Originally Posted by Talionis
I would actually think maybe all Scrappers should be given the choice to become either Brutes or Stalkers because I think that would take care of all the options.
|
Quote:
|
I agree with you that Scrappers and Brutes basically make the same toons. If the Scrapper doesn't make a good Brute then he probably ought to be a Stalker. The Scrapper criticals are very similar to Stalker criticals. Tanks are the melee archetype that is clearly different. They are basically melee controllers. The other melee archetypes are different types of damage dealers. |
[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.)
Quote:
I think Tankers do play more like controllers with the taunt effects. Playing a Tank, I don't think primarily about doing damage, (I do with Scrappers, Brutes, and Stalkers). The powersets are closer to the same for Tankers, Brutes, and Scrappers than Stalkers because Stalkers get the Assassination powers. |
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
If any of the melee archetypes is fundamentally different from the others, its stalkers. Brutes, Scrappers, and Tankers have the largest overlap design-wise. If this was a beginning of time decision, there should have always been only one of those. But merging them today is impossible, because no matter how similar they are in an absolute sense, the playerbase has grown to focus on the differences between them, inflating the importance of those differences to the point where eliminating them would serve no good purpose.
|
Arcana, I actually agree with you that no change can be made now without a lot of anger from existing players and I see little to no reward for removing Scrappers from the game
Quote:
Yeah, that. While personally I see no difference conceptually and only choose one or the other based on mechanics. A great many vets still consider Brutes to be brutish despite the fact I'm playing a 5'3 inch 99 lb rapier, waving ballerina!|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
If any of the melee archetypes is fundamentally different from the others, its stalkers. Brutes, Scrappers, and Tankers have the largest overlap design-wise. If this was a beginning of time decision, there should have always been only one of those. But merging them today is impossible, because no matter how similar they are in an absolute sense, the playerbase has grown to focus on the differences between them, inflating the importance of those differences to the point where eliminating them would serve no good purpose.
|
The way -I- sort the roles in my head (and This is just me) Is Scrapper =DPS, Brute=Hybrid Tank/DPS (perfect for off tanking) and Tanks=Well, Tanks! Looking at it this way you can see how each can serve purpose.
On a unrelated note... Arcanaville, you have two names!
Quote:
No, five!
|
Originally Posted by Athena Six
Arcanaville, you have two names!
|
Oh I forgot to add.. the one good thing that would come from combining is there would be a heck of a lot fewer Scrapper Vs. Brutes Posts and debates!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Athena Six
Oh I forgot to add.. the one good thing that would come from combining is there would be a heck of a lot fewer Scrapper Vs. Brutes Posts and debates!
|
But a lot more "why role a tank when..." threads.
Throwing darts at the board to see if something sticks.....
Come show your resolve and fight my brute!
Tanks: Gauntlet, the streak breaker and you!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PapaSlade
Rangle's right....this is fun.
|
you can have this just as soon as controller/dominators are rolled into one. Controls/Assault/Debuffs all in one. 
Counter-Proposal:
TANKERS
Give Tankers a new element to their inherent: Determination! As the Tanker is attacked and attacks she receives a damage buff up to 200%; lower base melee damage mod to .75 to compensate.
BRUTES
Increase Brute melee resistance/defense mods to 1.0.
SCRAPPERS
Change Criticals to Combat Mastery, which would increase the critical chance against minions to 10%; and add a scaling critical chance (up to 31%) for each teammate around the Scrapper.
The City of Heroes Community is a special one and I will always look fondly on my times arguing, discussing and playing with you all. Thanks and thanks to the developers for a special experience.
As a concept? Sure.
As an actual suggestion of re-implementation? What the hell? You're insane. No!
"You don't lose levels. You don't have equipment to wear out, repair, or lose, or that anyone can steal from you. About the only thing lighter than debt they could do is have an NPC walk by, point and laugh before you can go to the hospital or base." -Memphis_Bill
We will honor the past, and fight to the last, it will be a good way to die...
Ahem:
Open Archetype Suggestion thread!, Kirsten's Epic Weapon Pools, Feudal Japan, Etc., Alignment specific Rularuu iTrials!
If Masterminds didn't suck, they'd be the most powerful AT in the game.
So would they be Scrutes or Brappers?
I'd prefer a Stastermind- the power of AS + Ranged nukes + Bots!
*drools at the thought of a StJ/Archery/bots
Interesting idea Bill. I did read it all. And..no. Please no.
I WILL admit that the gap, performance wise, between the 4 melee ATs is very close. Even closer with IOs, incarnates etc etc. Further split up, I would say Tanks and brutes are closer to the same than brutes/scrappers.
So then we have...tank-brute and scrapper-stalker.
I know the numbers on scrappers and brutes are VERY similar, in regard to secondary..but..also from a secondary view, SO are they for scrap vs stalk. In fact. with teh recent stalker buff, to hp and AS, I would go so far as to say..stalkers basically play LIKE a scrapper, with better and more controlled crits.
Again, not talking from a numbers point (and you did say your not a hard core numbers guy) I still see ENOUGH difference in the ATs to influence my choices when making them. Not always just the inherent either, or wanting powers soon. It is the feel of the AT. Sure, my stalkers can scrap, my brutes can tank. Does that suddenly make them into the other AT? Not for me.
May as well make the argument to merge corrs and fenders..do you want buffs sooner, or attacks? Again..no thanks. I can kinda see where your coming from, with side switching and creation allowing us to start on either side..but again..no.
Quote:
There doesn't appear to be any particular advantage to combining them (Other than the 'advantage' of having one less option to pick from), it would be development intensive to do (which would be better spent elsewhere) and would mess around with peoples established characters (which would annoy some people).
|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
If you disagree - and I'm sure many people will - first, I ask you to read through the full suggestion, and then say just what advantage there is to keeping them separate.
|
Always remember, we were Heroes.
Quote:
See, I feel enough difference exists between tanks (just in what you get emphasized first) and brutes/scrappers where brute/tank doesn't make sense to me as a combination. And Stalkers still feel unique to me, where they're not stepping on Scrapper/Brute toes, even if they're less punished for staying and fighting it out now (which has pretty well always been my playstyle with them.) But:|
Originally Posted by MisterD
Interesting idea Bill. I did read it all. And..no. Please no.
I WILL admit that the gap, performance wise, between the 4 melee ATs is very close. Even closer with IOs, incarnates etc etc. Further split up, I would say Tanks and brutes are closer to the same than brutes/scrappers. So then we have...tank-brute and scrapper-stalker. I know the numbers on scrappers and brutes are VERY similar, in regard to secondary..but..also from a secondary view, SO are they for scrap vs stalk. In fact. with teh recent stalker buff, to hp and AS, I would go so far as to say..stalkers basically play LIKE a scrapper, with better and more controlled crits. Again, not talking from a numbers point (and you did say your not a hard core numbers guy) I still see ENOUGH difference in the ATs to influence my choices when making them. Not always just the inherent either, or wanting powers soon. It is the feel of the AT. Sure, my stalkers can scrap, my brutes can tank. Does that suddenly make them into the other AT? Not for me. May as well make the argument to merge corrs and fenders..do you want buffs sooner, or attacks? Again..no thanks. I can kinda see where your coming from, with side switching and creation allowing us to start on either side..but again..no. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dr_Darkspeed
There doesn't appear to be any particular advantage to combining them (Other than the 'advantage' of having one less option to pick from), it would be development intensive to do (which would be better spent elsewhere) and would mess around with peoples established characters (which would annoy some people).
|
Expand on it - I don't see it, but I could well be missing something (an dthis is, after all, fairly pie-in-the-sky.)
I guess it also depends on what a person 'feels' are the more similar ATs. Like I said, for me, scraps and stalkers feel similar.
I should clarify...stalkers WITh the AS changes and the ATO proc in AS. Being able to get 5 crits out of 7 attacks, almost all the time (my dm stalker can do this) makes them more scrappy than scrappers. Just having Hide..which can be blown off as 'stealth' doesnt do it. Sure..you CAN play them different, as I do, because scrapping on my stalker..um..wtf..Ill go play a scrapper if I 'wanted' to scrap. But the overlap is there. Likewise..you can build a tanky brute, that can tank. But you dont have to play a brute that way.
Playstyle comes into it to.
Quote:
Ehhh. The existence of Scrappers is the foundation of my enjoyment of this game. I think that a more, uh, cogent design implementation would in fact have included only one of those things... and I'm extremely happy that that did not occur.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Brutes, Scrappers, and Tankers have the largest overlap design-wise. If this was a beginning of time decision, there should have always been only one of those.
|
(There are actually a great many design accidents of the game that I am extremely hopeful they carry forward despite being observably bad hacks.)
I think instead, we should combine PBs and Warshades. Maybe have them in the same kind of branching leveling interface that the SOA and Widows use. Especially the level 24 respec, because that's critical.
I mean, they're basically the same thing, right?
My story arcs: #2370- Noah Reborn, #18672- The Clockwork War, #31490- Easy Money
Sartre once said, "Hell is other people." What does that make an MMO?
Quote:
Enough to annoy some people? Yep. If I'd wanted a fury bar, I'd have made a Brute. You'd be undoing peoples choices for them, without asking. And for no benefit that I can see. If this were done, how would the game be better than it is now?
|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
... if you're not min/maxing for every quarter-percent of (insert attribute here) - and I'm not saying that insultingly, I'm saying it as "the typical/casual player" - would it really mess with existing characters that much? |
Always remember, we were Heroes.
Quote:
If the devs only made one of them it would almost certainly have been scrappers, but with higher caps to allow them to be buffed into tankers on teams.
|
Originally Posted by Jack_NoMind
Ehhh. The existence of Scrappers is the foundation of my enjoyment of this game. I think that a more, uh, cogent design implementation would in fact have included only one of those things... and I'm extremely happy that that did not occur.
|
[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.)
I do not know the individuals involved, but that doesn't seem in line with other games. It seems more likely the melee archetypes would have been Tankers and Blasters.
Quote:
Blasters were never going to be a melee archetype. They are the primary ranged damage dealer in the game.|
Originally Posted by Jack_NoMind
I do not know the individuals involved, but that doesn't seem in line with other games. It seems more likely the melee archetypes would have been Tankers and Blasters.
|
The thought process Jack had at the beginning of time (or at least the beginning of 2003) at least as he documented it in his dev diaries was that first he thought it was obvious that a melee/defense archetype should exist, and then he decided that some focused on offense with some defense and some focused on defense and had some offense. But that "focus" should have always been a player build decision, not an archetype boundary. Because he (and the other developers presumably) arbitrarily decided that you could focus on range or melee/utility and still be a blaster, you could focus on control or support and still be a controller, but whether you focused on melee offense or defense determined if you were a scrapper or tanker, we have the melee proliferation we have today.
That one conceptual error, and it was an unforced error, created a lot of problems.
[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.)
I think the idea would cause far too much outrage if implemented, though it wouldn't affect me much. I rarely make Scrappers or Brutes. I tend to favour Tankers over them for the inherently higher defensive capability (particularly important for me as I tend to eschew Tough/Weave and do not diligently delve into IOs). And then Stalkers because I generally like stealth-based classes.
Goodbye may seem forever
Farewell is like the end
But in my heart's the memory
And there you'll always be
-- The Fox and the Hound
Disclaimer: I know the very first reaction to this is going to be "What the hell? You're insane. No!" Honestly, it's more a random thought inspired by another thread, a sort of "what if."
If you disagree - and I'm sure many people will - first, I ask you to read through the full suggestion, and then say just what advantage there is to keeping them separate.
The comment that inspired this was in the super strength adjustment S&I thread. Namely:
I don't know that I agree with that. I certainly think powersets should feel different when played, but I'm not sure that I think there needs to be this chasm of difference between Tankers, Brutes, & Scrappers. I also don't think we need all three of those ATs (and Stalkers) but that's another discussion.
For full disclosure, I tend to go for brute for the fury mechanic - but that, to me, is really the only difference (please note I'm not a numbers guy, I don't care about caps, etc.) between the two ATs unless I'm looking for one of the non-proliferated sets (spines or EM.)
I really see three AT choices:
Tank: I want more HP, and I want my defenses/resists faster.
Stalker: Controlled crit, stealth. (And actually the lower numbers did matter to me - I actually enjoy that more "on the edge" bit.)
Then there's:
Brute/Scrapper - Don't want to deal with stealth, want attacks faster.
They're just "combined" to me - flip a coin at character creation.
Now, the first issue, of course, is the inherent. For some people this is important - as I said, I like the Fury mechanic. Others like crits. So let's combine the two into (another, I know) new Fury. It behaves like Fury now, but adds the crit chance. Versus Bosses and above, however, it gives a possibility for a double-crit. Yes, damage, crit, second crit of the same amount. This will *cost* a little fury (say, 10%) - and makes it easier, for (say) the next ten seconds, to climb into that last few percent of Fury generation that's currently a bit hard to get to. (And to help that, gives another some-percent global recharge for the same period.)
Should you happen to keep doubling, the period will extend - but for less time (say, 10 seconds, 5, 3, 2, etc.)
Caps - aside from the fury cap (which may need adjusting) most of the numbers should either be at the lower or a midpoint between scrapper and brute numbers - just to add some additional differentiation between the melee ATs.
IOs - yes, they get to use both scrapper and brute ATOs. So add others for the other ATs, or allow crossover where it makes sense (Corr/Def, for instance.)
Just throwing it out. Let the tearing apart proceed.