Haijinx

Nice. I guess I was mainly thinking Brutes, but you are right, looks like for Tankers my statement is incorrect. On tankers, maybe Dark and Rad can get a lot of 90s too?

That, and the fact that fury boosts dots but crits don't. I'm sure the extra resist now that its easier to get doesn't hurt.

I would not have thought to ascribe nefarious motives to the other posters in this thread, no. But now that you have enlightened me i now see that Galaxy Brain, Dsorrow, and Hopeling clearly work for Nemesis. Thank you.

So .. lets see. A-Global Warming exists! B- No it doesn't because you wear crocs! C-Therefore Climate change requires extraordinary proof. Hmm. Not sure I follow. A-Elizabethans didn't wear powered wigs that much, that mainly happened later. B- You are wrong because you wear crocs. C-Still need extraordinary proof. Really missing how its relevant. My point was that whether or not someone wears crocs it has nothing to do with their argument. ====== While your post had a lot to do with the subject of climate change, whether or not you agree it exists. As you brought up several topics related to it.

On the 3x damage thing .. Its probably an exaggeration to think anyone outside of granite tankers is hitting 90% resist on more than 3-4 damage types.. Some sets its just S/L. Some sets its none. Example- EA brute vs EA scrapper, the heal/regen is better on the brute, but the resists and def are going to be similair.

Trying to ascribe motives to people beyond what they actually post is problematic. The original poster said he thought TW was OP and should be toned down. That is enough information about motive without having to just guess at additional agendas.

My post had nothing to do with climate change. It was only used as an example. You can change "climate change" in my example to "Elizabethan Fashion".

It definitely affects damage in a real play sense since blasters have far less END issues The snipe changes improve ST damage

Not really 3 times the survivabilty, just take 1/3 as much damage is some(many?) instances The scrapper usually does not face any content that overwhelms her defenses either.

It actually has nothing to do with rules, they are descriptions of poorly constructed arguments. In the ad hominem example - if i attack someone for how they dress, therefore their ideas about climate change are wrong .. I'm not breaking a rule, instead i am making a bad argument. Whether or not they dress badly is irrelevant.

A certain Intellectual detachment is a learned skill as well. Human nature tends towards us both being emotionally invested in our arguments, and conditions us that when confronted to use anything we can to "win" (or flee) You diminishing it to being just the "debate rules handbook" is actually the same sort of thing. People tend to make emotional, illogical statements to support their side. They also tend to make emotional, illogical statements when confronted with issues with their previous statements. Everyone does it. It takes work to learn how to avoid it. One of those you can get better but never perfect things.

KOB is pretty good too

I think games that lose the battle to gold farmers should just sell in game money to players. That said, preventing the farmers in the first place is definitely better.

The reason these things are discouraged, isn't because of debate team reasons. Its because the use of repeated logical fallacies when discussing subjects means you aren't discussing the relative merits of an idea. Instead, you end up obscuring those and bogging the discussion down. Often in emotional arguing. Which is sometimes the motive behind the fallacies in the first place. Destroying any reasoned debate on a topic will often preserve the status quo.

Its cause of the doyble rageoholics and them not wanting a crash. So it will be another 10 years at this rate.

Coh already has almost no downtime. I never even use rest.

That seems so backwards. Except for AV fights or something, the proposed changes will be more useful. And battle-axe can still slot -res.

Interesting Battle Axe and Broad Sword are so close so far - considering the sets are extremely closely related

who are you referring to? And don't we already have 20 pages litigating this?

Brutes have a big self damage buff, don't they? They are at Scrapper damage at 65-70 fury nominally. So new tanker damage at a fair amount less than that. So whatever that comparable fury amount to whatever fury they actually have is more than the tanker is running.

Keep in mind the brutes will hit the max cap much easier. Most the time the Tanker will be 75%-80% or so of a brute.

I'm a little confused. Are you all saying that conceptually a tanker normally doing 75% as much damage as a scrapper, and a maximum (with hella buffs) of 90% as much damage as a Brute is a problem? How much damage conceptually do y'all think they should do?

Pylons have like 20% resist to all, one of the reasons they were chosen.

Good point. Corruptor could work too, As long as the assault set is checked/ balanced/etc to fit, basically like they did with the Sent defense sets.

Sr only has a taunt aura on Brutes and Tankers. Don't think Brutes and tankers get ninjitsu Just a couple of things to keep in mind. Certain sets lend themselves to survival at low levels if that is a consideration. WP and EA come to mind.