Neiska

My build is a little out of date, or I would post. But my Bots/Electric wasn't my strongest MM, but it was the most versatile, which in itself is a kind of outstanding feature. I could farm with it, solo with it, play healer with it, be on +END and status duty with it, go GM hunting with it, and more. This was all pre-change to the robots, however. And I doubt I could do the same things I could before, at least not without rebuilding. But I suspect it is still quite a good pairing. It won't stand out damage-wise, but it will stand out in nearly every other way.

Starting to think that perhaps I was a bit premature in my earlier post when I had highlighted that people started to disagree, but then agreed to disagree. Because I am starting to wonder which is worse, the forums or the discord. From where I sit, when a (relativity) small community such as this attacks itself, everyone loses. And besides that, there is never any "winner" in an online argument. It doesn't matter what the argument is, be it change XYZ, or AEs, or Farming, or grouping, it's always the same - two or more parties involved exchange banters until one simply stops replying. You can please some people all the time, or all people sometimes, but you cannot please all people all the time. I just wish that most changes didn't seem so uni-directional, or aimed to encourage some gameplay, and discourage others. I hasten to add that I said "most" which is a far cry from "all."

I haven't played much since the last big update. Some of the changes I was against, but I won't go into detail. But I have found fewer of my friends on as well, and my SG pretty much exists in name only. But the more they change, the less I find myself enjoying it. But that is my mere opinion. Others most likely enjoy them. And that is okay too. So yes, I have barely logged in for a few months now, but it wasn't only due to the latest batch of changes, but that certainly affected my desire to play. But I do hope that those who enjoy all the changes continue to do so. Change isn't always a bad thing, just these last few (namely with Masterminds) weren't for me, and neither was the dialogue/arguments that arose during the beta-peroid.

I cannot claim to be an expert on the matter, but don't some powersets still shine better on one AT vs another? As an example I have made both a Bio Armor/Savage Tanker and Brute, and that seems to perform far better on the brute, with barely noticeable differences in durability. I mean, there is many more sides to this to my mind. But tankers definitely favor target-saturation situations, where brutes seem to perform equally in most situations, so long as you are pushing that rage bar/playing at a fast pace. There are exceptions of course. But I do wonder what a full comparison of all melees might reveal as well, not just Tankers vs Brutes, or Brutes vs Scrappers, but a Tanker vs Brute vs Scrapper vs Stalker 4 vs 4 comparison. I would expect each would shine differently in different situations, even more so with different melee power/armor powersets. And I would be fine with that, as I expect many people would. Each having their own niche is more or less its own kind of balance. But back on topic. Were brutes over-nerfed? No, I don't think so. They can still do the things they could do before. Ranking them against tankers is a bit of an apples to oranges to my mind though, given the differences in target caps and the like. Instead of having a comparison of AT vs AT, a comparison of AT vs activity be revealing as well. I would still bet that Brutes beat Tankers on farm maps as an example. (not that I am arguing that should be used as a metric for comparison, only illustrating context.) TLDR - In order to have a true measurement, you would have to compare more than just AT vs AT, but a comparison of armor and melee sets as well, as well as different activities, which is far more than an X vs Y comparison. Personally I still think both are in a good place. I still remember a time before the tanker change where there were so few tankers being played that fully gearing one up was actually quite cheap to do. Just my musings and opinion on the matter.

I think the more important question is - Autobot or Decepticon? For Autobot - Forcefields, Time, Electric, Empathy, Thermal, Kinetics all fit thematically. For Decepticon - Dark, Time, Electric, Cold, Pain, Traps, Radiation. Even Sonic can work if you count Soundwave. I can't visualize Storm, Nature, Poison, or Trick Arrow really fitting the "Transformers" theme. But that's just my opinion.

My favorite /Storm was a Robot/Storm who focused entirely on flying and AOE knockdown strategy. Funfact: If you are flying, enemies who cannot fly themselves run directly under you, making it quite easy to target things with your AoE's. They even save you the trouble of rounding them up into a pile and do it themselves for you. Fish in a barrel, really.

A few thoughts. The first, I am glad to see this ship of a topic begin to flounder and start to resemble many others but then right itself. Not something we see a lot of and its refreshing, IMO. The second, not everyone is going to agree with what is "good" or "best." And that's okay. The third, "how" you say something is often just as important as "what" you say. If I see someone floundering, first I ask if they would like some input. Its only polite, and as is often the case, you might find out you, (the would be mentor) are the one making the assumptions in the scenario. Often enough, the person knows its not the kiss-your-elbow optimized, but they might just be having fun, trying something new, or theory crafting. You are only assuming they may not know what they are doing, when the reality is you are taking them at face value which can lead to you, yourself being the one assuming things. The fourth, is if people refuse your guidance, however well-meaning or mathematically superior it might be, then accept their decision. It's their character. You can't dictate or lecture to them how to play. Your goal might be to be as effective/fast/powerful as possible. But that's not everyone's goal. Other people might just want to have fun, or take powers they like, or be building on a theme (theme builds are often far from optimized). And your suggestion might only be the best in a specific situation or goal, namely beating the game as much as possible. Finally, for the record, I would sooner play with a new player who is polite with a bad build, than someone with the best possible build but who can be a jerk trying to tell me how to play, and how to build my character "their" way, and how I'm bad/newb/whatever if I do anything else. CoH used to be the "play your way" game. They even incorporated it into the game design, where nearly any team combined out of any powersets can complete all activities. The only difference is "how", the time required, and the difficulty. And lets not forget, that different people react differently to different kinds of instruction. Some learn best by reading. Others by visualizing. Others by actually doing and learning through trial and error themselves. And trying to force the issue can go south, fast. As we see in this topic. And honestly, a team full of kiss-your-elbow min/maxed meta builds full of purples and t4's can be pretty dang boring. But that's just my opinion. Mentorship is well and good, admirable in fact. But how you communicate as well as receive other opinions are just as important. Most of communication is actually non-verbal. Tone of voice, body language, gestures, facial expressions, and the like. And on the internet we loose all of that. All we have is text. It's impossible to tell if someone is telling a "hard truth" but in a kind manner. It's can also be difficult to tell when someone is being snarky. Unless of course, you are Snarky, then it's all the time. TLDR - Mentorship/Guidance can be awesome. It's like passing the torch and sharing your knowledge. But how you do so is important, and often can decide how well your proteges learn, more so than the information itself. My two cents, for what it's worth.

Bots/Electric was my main before the change. (Vet level 400 or so.) I have since shelved it. But I will help where I can. Bots are not as squishy as some others, particularly if you play to their strengths which is ranged. You can use things like Tar Patch, Slows, Holds, Bonfire, and/or things like group fly which overall results in very sturdy pets. Electric is fantastic with Robots (as well as thematic.) You don't really need to slot pets for END specifically if you have your energize slotted well. That alone was more or less enough to give me infinite END. The loss of -regen was a bit of a hot topic that I will not elaborate on as that argument was done to death. All I will say is, is that personally I would try to keep at least 1 of them for even a single watered-down effect useable on demand. I can't comment on maintenance drone, but for me Insulating and rejuvenating was plenty for me, so I would likely skip the drone. My pets defenses were around 35 IIRC, with resists in the high 60s. My own defenses were higher. My pools were leadership, fly, teleport, and flying. (teleport for fold space in case you were wondering), and Fire for my epic pool. (for bonfire.) Those defenses/resists are plenty if you are built around ranged combat, especially with your fast recasting heals and absorbs. I was trucking along in +4/8 just fine with little to no difficulty, the only issue I really had was once in awhile I would get hit with -fly and drop, sometimes this can put you out of bodyguard range. One thing worthy of special mention - since you have infinite END you don't need Ageless, and with Faradays Cage you don't need Clarion either. This means you are free to take Barrier for your Incarnate. Playstyle wise it was very sturdy, with infinite healing, end, and absorb for everyone, with status protection from cage. Group fly was more of a solo tool except for certain missions, as most other players dislike it, and its not really needed if you are on a team. Honestly the only MM I had that was sturdier than my robot/electric, was my demons/electric which had stupid levels of durability. More than some tankers, effectively. I would post my old build but it's outdated and I haven't bothered to update it. But I hope this helps.

Bit disingenuous Song, Snark never said he could solo Synapse. In your quoted topic he was speaking about group play, and in this one he said he has a friend who likely could. He never made the claim or insinuation that he personally could as you suggest.

"Icoulddobetter" Am I doing it right?

In my experience, tanks come in a few general varieties. Type 1. Large. Loud. Made of metal. Really terrible gas mileage. Most often armed with a cannon of some sort. Effectiveness varies according to country of origin and design. Type 2. Begins every battle by leaping Testicles first into the fray with a loud cry of "FOR VALHALLA". Doesn't wield weapons, only dual wields the corpses of his fallen enemies. Swings both them and his scrotum around in combat. Doesn't have blood, but molten iron runs through his veins. Is so metal that his very presence causes infants to sprout full length beards and 6 pack abs. Drinking buddy of Chuck Norris. Beat the God Aries in a Thumb War. Often dog lovers. Can often be identified by their Kilts and Beer Hat. Type 3. Leisurely strolls through the mission. Allows weaker enemies to wither and perish all on their own, pausing to occasionally bonk minor threats on the noggin, or best them with a finger flick. Whistling a minor tune, makes a mental note to pick up milk on the way home. Pauses to help the guard with a crossword puzzle on the way to the big bad evil guys room. Slaps them around and retrieves the plot mcguffin. Returns home only to remember they forgot the milk. Often great sources of insight to fights, and often have a calm good natured character. Type 4. Snarky. Both the English language as well as available space here are woefully insufficient to adequately convey. Please see appendix XVII, attachment 7, and reference 9.b.

Um, no, it isn't "DiScRiMiNaTiOn." Discrimination based on what, exactly? Race? Gender? Religion? Preferences? None of those factors come into play, since we are all faceless strangers to one another. Secondly, if a person wants to play with only their friends, or only people in their supergroup, or any other specific group of people for whatever reason, they are entirely allowed to do so. No one is obligated to play with you, or anyone else. If someone helps a friend, they are under no mandatory obligation to then offer that to everyone else. And to suggest that reeks of entitlement that I usually go out of my way NOT to team up or play with. Heck, I have refused to help or team with specific people based on what they have said in general, or how they acted in teams before, or even posted here on the forums. And I am entirely within my ability to do so. To play with whomever I like in whatever manner I choose. This game is an open sandbox. We must do "nothing" aside from share the world. That is all. Now many can and do more, and it is good for a community to do so. But if a person wanted to offer to power level everyone in the game EXCEPT you, then by all rights they could. They don't have to like you, play with you, or put up with another person's BS, and thank God for that. And I take a pretty dim view of someone telling another person what they can or cannot do if they are not a staff member.

Whelp, that didn't take very long.

Here's what I was doing, 3 boxing MMs. Here's a discussion/guide about it, but it is a little out of date. But still has lots of good information and a video.

I ran a Demon/Rad for a time. My biggest complaint was it relies on debuffs and toggles, which are pretty small in size. If they were a bit bigger it would be more manageable, but even if you group the pack into a tight ball it may not affect everything, which your pets more or less rely on to survive. It's not terrible or anything, it can be potent. Its debuffs are just so teensy in size that it can be frustraiting to play. If too bosses are standing a good distance apart, which one do you debuff and so on.

This is 100% just me musing here, but I imagine if it is like any other sort of team of people it varies person to person. But overall, the general feel is that they aren't "anti-farm," only anti AFK farm. Or at least, making that more challenging to do and not so simple. I never disagreed with a line being drawn, only where that line is and how they arrived to it. Not to sound cliche here but, I will use WoW to demonstrate my point. There were two main modes of the game - PVE and PVE. Now, the different classes had the same powers in both game modes. Some powers would do extra things in one mode or another, or simply not work at all. As time passed, they began to "bleed" the different modes, which left neither side happy. The PVE people saw their powers gutted and trimmed down, which made every class a 4 button rotation with an extra cooldown to use now and then. While the PVPers saw it as an overall nerf across the board. Not a PVPer myself, but it was described to me as they turned the game of chess into checkers, or even rock-paper-scissors. I fear the similar thing happening here. I don't want them to use one form of gameplay as a sort of "measuring stick" to balance everything else against. If it were up to me, it would be give and take. Gain some, loose some. Knock down the big stuff a few notches but bring up a few other things as well. To their credit they have done that somewhat, with the new prism salvage and the like. It isn't 100% even yet, but it's gotten closer, at least where the economy is concerned. But to be clear, I make no claim that they used any particular mode to balance everything around. Only that's what it feels like, at least from my side of the fence. One part of game play has been propped up, while the other has taken a few notches down. In this case, ITFs and the like vs Farming. Now before you light your torches, I am not making the case that INF should be put back to where it was. But it would be nice if "something" was given to farmers as well, even if it was something minor or cosmetic. Even if it isn't EXP or INF based. Just something that says "Hey we see you, and we value you as a part of the community too." Because from the farmers side of things, it's been nothing but lost ground. And this need not even be farming specifically, but I would make it based off AE use or Map creation. As far as what that something might be? I confess, I have no idea what would be acceptable or even possible. Again, if it was my decision, there would be badges or perhaps a costume or something for AE map creators, or even if someone made a map that got so many great ratings and the like. Even if it was just a title like "Creator" or something, that little bit can go a long way to soothe ruffled feathers when only one side has gotten all the bells and whistles. I do honestly believe that the Devs aren't out to get anyone. They could nuke the AE from orbit if they wanted to, just to be sure. But they haven't. They did make afk farming more difficult, true. But not impossible. The rewards for AFK vs Active farming is more noticeable now as well, but I don't think anyone would argue against that, even among the farmers. Just my musings on the matter.

I appreciate the gesture, but no thank you. It's mostly the "rushed" gameplay I detest so much. But I do appreciate the offer. Especially since we so often disagree with one another. Best wishes.

While I appreciate what seems to be genuine attempt to help, I have already attempted such things. If you make your own group, people will largely still do as they please irregardless. And it's likely better for everyone involved for me to just play alone or with friends.

"Few" being entirely subjective here. And I never said I refuse to play with anyone. Only that more often than not, I find random teams unenjoyable. Nearly every team unless specifically stated otherwise just runs ahead as fast as possible or as I call it, "gogogo" style of gameplay reminiscent of Leeroy Jenkins. That isn't a rare thing to happen. I would call it fairly standard when teaming with random strangers. So these days (at least certainly more recently) I find it far more enjoyable, faster, and more profitable to either play by myself or with those whom I am already acquainted with. I do get asked on occasion by friends to come on a team with other randoms, and I may or may not. It mostly depends on my mood and activity. But I never just join entirely random teams anymore, regardless of what the activity is, for reasons already mentioned here and elsewhere. But to summarize, the difference being - Not every farmer or player who enjoys AE has only done that activity, but biostem did clarify that. But nearly every team (or at least far more often than not) might as well be speed running.

I appreciate the clarification; however, I do think that your point is too vague. For starters, "where" is this massive number of new players, or players that have never done anything outside of the AE? With respect I think you might be painting the picture much larger than what it truly might be. It's not as if this is a new game, or that we have massive waves of new people. I hope we would agree that the massive wave of people have come and gone and we are now settled into a comfortably stable community. And no matter what you or the staff does, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't force it to drink. And were I a betting woman I would bet that the kind of players you describe would fall into the slim minority. There are likely more farmers, pure rpers, or even pure market-players than people who have done AE and "absolutely" nothing else. I would gather it is the smallest of groups of the community. Though to be fair, that is my mere opinion. We can't really say there isn't a large group of such people any more than there is one. But are you certain you aren't exaggerating their numbers here? Personally, I think it's borderline a non-issue but both a self-solving one and one not really worthy of trying to "fix" on the staff's part.

Your question is multi-layered, but I hope to answer best I can. 1. The reason why you are taking more damage is firstly, if you are fire, some fire primaries do -def now which you seem to be aware of. However they also changed the AI. Before if you were at aggro cap (and alone) the other mobs would twiddle their thumbs, or idly mill about meekly waiting their turn. That isn't the case anymore. Now they will use ranged attacks, if they have any. So you are facing more attacks than previously. The counters to this depends if you are an active farmer or afk farmer. But I would urge a bit more +def, plus ranged def as well, coupled with higher resists and/or passive regen. If you have to be selective, personally I've found that having a higher ranged defense and regen goes a long way. Many farming builds don't even look at ranged or regen, but that also largely depends if you are an active or inactive farmer. An active farmer wasn't as affected as inactive ones in most cases. 2. The amount gained was indirectly "nerfed," as in it wasn't targeted specifically like EXP was. Now it matters what you fight and what powers they have. A mob with few attacks and no ranged abilities won't give full INF. (I am uncertain if this affects their EXP as well, but I don't believe it does.) Some of the older maps with mobs just thrown together can award less INF compared to before. But many of the newer maps with actually well made enemies to fight award more closely than what you might be used to. My advice is to try some of the newer maps, or make your own. Hope this helps

I thank you and @InvaderStych 's kind words. But I do think there is malice, at least in part. Both there, and in the forums and discord as well. And personally, I don't care what the activity is or what the reward is. If there is malice present, I simply will not take part. And if there isn't malice, it certainly feels like it at times. If you enjoy certain activities or point out certain things you are shunned, shouted down or given the brand of cain. Honestly, it might be better for everyone if those that disagree begin to just ignore one another but were I a betting woman I would bet that wouldn't be what's best for the game either. But that's just me musing.

Oh, I agree wholeheartedly. The internet is going to internet and people are going to be people. But I never made the case about bugs shouldn't be fixed, or that things shouldn't be balanced. My original reply was to the original post that suggested players who enjoyed farming have unrealistic expectations and that's why they don't like random teaming. Some people like farming simply because they find it more enjoyable, or at least more enjoyable than other activities. There is no "right" or "wrong" in this. Different people are going to like different things. That is normal, to be expected in fact. But I do tire of seeing negative sterotypes about farmers and the moment you point out that there is negativity in teaming and that not every "nonfarmer" is a saint then people light their pitchforks.

Thank you for proving my point. I gave an example of a double standard, and you take it personal. All I did was point out that you ignored what he said and addressed mine. But that's fine, you can go on my ignore list too.