Coyote

I agree with this. The story works as it's written, but it would be more villanously elegant to betray Harris early and discard him as the crazy tool that he is, while capturing Lt Page for Arachnos. Letting him kill her to no gain is not nearly as much fun as betraying him, IMO.

Correction: NO ONE should have to die for ANYONE to deal with their shit. But yeah, equality amirite? OR! We can just accept that there is writing we do not like and do our best to make better products in the future. Rail on about how you can do it better, sure. You however open yourself up to just as much criticism so be prepared. I totally agree with you! Nobody should have to die for anyone to grow emotionally. So Page shouldn’t have to die for Harris to get his emotional redemption. MCM No, Page has to die so that I can get my money from Arachnos ;) But for the story arc, in stories, someone often has to suffer a great loss in order to grow. In a story, that's often the death of someone else, who they love. It makes sense that in order for Harris to grow and realize his madness, Page has to die. It could have been written another way, but I don't really see why it's wrong to make this a "lesson learned from death" story for Page, and a "use the crazy man as a tool for doing evil" story for your villainous character.

+1. Nice original post. I even think it's a pretty good idea. I had a similar idea for a melee-oriented pet class where you lead several henchmen, and do it with melee attacks and some personal defense, unlike an MM who stays behind the henchmen and uses them to protect himself. Doing it with a single henchman instead of multiple is just as viable, and would focus more on attacking than on being a pet class. For that reason, I prefer my version, just to have a melee-centric pet AT, but I can definitely see this version as being playable and interesting. And I do appreciate the amount of detail and effort put into the suggestion.

Electric was my choice, it offers both an End Discount power (perma-able) and Power Sink.

What? Tanks can totally keep the aggro cap without using Taunt. Punchvoke, properly applied, is strong enough unless you're herding or pulling. If you jump in and grab aggro with Punchvoke, you don't need Taunt. And... on the original topic... Dark Blast is not only fine, but great. It's DIFFERENT from other Blaster sets since it doesn't do as much damage in the first few seconds, but there are other sets for people who don't like DoTs. In damage output per second, it's fine in both AoE and in single-target, and its defense and utility are probably the best in the AT. If you dislike the best defensive set in the AT that also happens to be average in damage, then it's not that the set is a problem... it's that you're playing a set that you don't like. That happens, but it's not a reason to change the set.

Well written argument. I agree that the "girlfriend" should be changed to Lt Page. I think that Lt Page should be more scary at the end than a weak Lt. But it's not very important. I think that otherwise, it's a villain-side arc about a mentally unbalanced person bent on unreasonable revenge. I think there are nastier arcs out there, and I think that players playing villains can realize the difference between the evil of their characters and reality. I mean, we have characters spreading plague, destroying city blocks for fun, killing helpless bystanders and prisoners just because, and so on. This doesn't seem worse. Edit: before I get accused, this has nothing to do with misogyny. I would have the same exact opinion if the genders of the characters were reversed, and for the same exact reasons.

A "shatter" mechanism would be great, but may require a lot of coding and rewriting of descriptions. Adding -Res or -Regen to powers would help. Adding damage to AA would be another way to improve the set. Also, increasing its Confuse duration a bit. Shiver is not very useful, since the set wants to be in the middle of opponents for AA, and already has a ton of -Recharge. It needs to do something extra like -Res, -Regen, or damage.

It's working as written in the database, which is how computers usually work ;). I would want a Dev's comment to know what is working as intended, however. Regardless of balance issues, other patches do benefit from Accuracy slotting. And I would want to know if the Thugs and Assault Bot powers also are limited in not getting a benefit from Accuracy, and the same for Enflame and for Ignite. And with that, I would then want the Devs to say "it's a bug", or "it's intended". Players can have wildly varying opinions on what is intended, and they can't all be right.

I don't really think that Serum needs replacing with other powers or with options for other powers. It's a valid power concept for the set, and it could be a good power. If it had stats exactly like Painbringer, I don't think anyone would be complaining. So it's not really a problem because of the concept or what it does, it's a problem because of its statistics which are laughably bad. So, fix the stats on it, maybe change the kind of buffing that it does, maybe make it an AoE, and it could be a good power. I think that we sometimes get carried away with new ideas and say "wouldn't it be great if we had THIS...", but it's easier for the devs and for balance to change a power's statistics than what the power does.

The tone is much more about assuming and stating how the OP should feel...that small chested women are just men, and you should be proud to have a big chest because it makes you hot. There was nobody saying "I find large chests hot". It never came up... Since it is specific about women's gender, felt like a gender based insult... Okay, I can see what you're basing it on. I happen to disagre... I think that if the gender of the posters were reversed, the argument would have gone down in exactly the same way, and therefore I can't see it as being sexist. To me, it feels more like someone wanting options to make more realistic human bodies, and someone else saying that we're playing a super-hero game, so having just heroes who look like they belong in a comic book is fine. I don't see it as being sexist, more as being a difference between someone who wants more options, and someone else who wants to limit options so that they better fit his idea of how heroes look in the CoH universe. But since the particular argument is about a female body option, I can see how someone may consider the argument to be sexist.

I'm not sure if I agree with the suggested changes, but I do agree with the view that Serum is currently a problem. It's far worse than other comparable powers, and it's not in one of the top sets that would be fine even with an underperforming unique-style power. Whether it's made into an AoE temporary buff for all henchmen, or into a perma-able buff for a single one, it should become more useful.

No, it isn't sexism. It's tactism. Telling ANYONE to be calm and passive when arguing on the internet is just good advice. If you claim that it's sexism then you're probably trying to start an argument where one is not warranted. Or else you believe that anyone who has a disagreement with you while knowing that you're a woman is being sexist. Listen to the wisdom of an argument or the lack of it in the argument, and respond to that. Adding in side notions of "if you say this then you're sexist" just makes me think that you're trolling. Telling anyone to be passive is a bad idea...People should be assertive...not aggressive, not passive...They don't have to lay down and take it just because it's the internet. The OP shouldn't have to "go along" with gender based insults she received. It triggers me, and I'm a guy... And she certainly wasn't aggressive or mean in her response...just stating that insulting her was hurtful... So it coming across a bit, unfair True, but she used the word "passive" in her post. I just didn't want to change it in the reply. I agree, she shouldn't be PASSIVE, she should just be polite. And I don't see where there were gender-based insults. Someone said that a character could be made with large breasts who is hot, but that's all... I don't see how that implies that someone without large breasts cannot be hot. It feels like there is a rush to be offended in this thread, and it is taking the tone downhill. Fast. Is it really unusual to read something disagreeable and just disagree with it, without being offended?

Yes, because hinting "you mad bro?" is an AWESOME way to keep the conversation flowing. Seriously? I just said that people should be polite when arguing on the internet. How does this get characterized into a snarky comment like "you mad bro?". I keep wondering how so many of the posts in this thread seem to get mischaracterized in their responses.

The thing is, the Controller already can mez 30 mobs at once. And, sure, Radiant Infection can't hit 34 targets, but Freezing Rain or Tar Patch can -- your example is specific to a type of behavior that wouldn't change, just like Blazing Aura wouldn't. Your point about difficulty is taken; it is difficult to mez 30 mobs at a time. So wouldn't "difficult" be a more appropriate position for Tankers holding aggro against 30 targets, rather than "impossible"? No, I think that you're conflating two kinds of effects and taking only the side of the argument that is beneficial to Controllers, and ignoring the side that is beneficial to Tanks. Yes, Controllers can mez more than 17 mobs, by using multiple mezzes, but the mezzes generally don't have an uptime of 100%. Very few Controllers can perma-mez 2+ spawns without using Sleep powers. So while their max number of mezzed targets is higher than 17, their control uptime is not 100%. The Tank is limited to 17 at one time, but easily maintains 100% uptime on the aggro control. Same with Defenders with aura debuffs. It could be an interesting calculation to see, with 50 mobs in the area, what % of those mobs would be free to act under the influence of a Tanker (33/50, 100% of the time) versus some Controller builds (different numbers at different times, and also we may have to make huge assumptions, like how likely is a Controller to hit two completely different sets of mobs with two AoE controls)... this may give a better idea of the actual control ability of Tanks vs Controllers. However, the main point is to just be aware that such a calculation is warranted, rather than assuming that because a Controller can mez 34 mobs at one time... he can do it all the time. A Tank is limited to 17, but can do it all the time, and this needs to be considered when comparing their controlling abilities. Also, if we compare the controlling abilities... should we, or should we not, include the ability of a Tanker to keep more than 17 mobs from attacking the team, by including their attacks that also have control effects? It would be quite difficult, given that we wouldn't know which mobs just got knocked down by Footstomp while aggroed on the Tanker, versus while over the aggro cap and aggroed on someone else. The point is that the damage mitigation provided to a team by one character is very complicated, and I think that it's a design weakness to only look at one factor (aggro cap for an AT that uses aggro control as its main source of damage mitigation for the rest of the team), and then use that to argue that a major change should be made to the game. For the amount of effort that will be required to calculate the situation and then make a change, I think we'll get a better game if that developer effort is spent towards coming up with some new ability that will make Tanks useful in other ways than just making them more able to do what they already can do.

No, it isn't sexism. It's tactism. Telling ANYONE to be calm and passive when arguing on the internet is just good advice. If you claim that it's sexism then you're probably trying to start an argument where one is not warranted. Or else you believe that anyone who has a disagreement with you while knowing that you're a woman is being sexist. Listen to the wisdom of an argument or the lack of it in the argument, and respond to that. Adding in side notions of "if you say this then you're sexist" just makes me think that you're trolling.

I think that it's not reasonable to discuss about aggro or AoE limits being different for one AT compared to others. Tanks have a limitation on how many mobs they can aggro... Blasters can only hit a limited number of targets, Defenders can only debuff a limited number of targets, and so on. I don't see why a Tank should be able to aggro 34 targets... and then the Defender cannot debuff all 34 with Radiation Infection. Conceptually, the idea of setting Tanks up as a special exclusion feels wrong to me. It does seem likely that they could use a role refining, but expanding their aggro limit doesn't seem to be a useful way to refine their role on teams. Rather, it feels more like someone finding something they don't like in the game, and then wanting it changed so that their character doesn't feel limited... by a limitation. But that's the point of limitations. Tanks could probably use something interesting to make them more interesting to play. I'm not sure that there is much that could be added to the concept of "damage-absorbing sponge" to make it interesting, but just letting it absorb more aggro is not the kind of refining that they need. It's more of the same ability that is just failing to make them useful when stacked on teams. Then we'll have people complain that their Tanker is made superfluous by the other Tanker on the team, which is exactly the problem now. Frankly, I wonder if a SMALLER aggro cap, which would make having multiple Tankers become more useful, might not be a better solution to the problem of Tankers on a team. And as for the problem of a single Tanker wanting to be the hero and hold all the aggro... I don't think it's a problem any more than one Controller may have difficulty mezzing 30 mobs, or a Blaster blasting 30 mobs, and so on. As the team gets larger and multiple spawns are aggroed, I think it's reasonable that one character can no longer fulfill all of the tanking, mezzing, or debuffing needs for the team.

Just make a male character... You obviously rather hide all female qualities that make men and women vastly different from each other. I don't have a six-pack IRL but I make badass FIT looking super villains and play them regardless. You should be proud of a hot female FICTIONAL SUPER HUMAN in a sci-fi video game. It sort of sounds as if you're saying that women who don't have a huge chest can't be attractive, and are basically just men. Is that really what you mean to say? Because as a woman with a small chest, that's really a very hurtful thing to say, if that's really what you meant. He didn't say that. It's starting to get unpleasant in this thread with everyone assuming that every post that they don't agree with is implying the worst. Logic: He implied that a female character with large breasts is hot. Not that all hot female characters have large breasts. Crows are birds, crows are black --> all birds are black. It is a fallacy to assume that a one-way example (make a hot character with large breasts) implies anything in the other direction (large breasts are required for hotness). When people are eager to jump to conclusions in order to be offended, put on the mantle of victim, and use that to assume moral high ground and get a +5% positional bonus to their next argument, the thread goes downhill. Take a deep breath, slow down your responses, and read carefully what a person posts. Don't assume that they implied something if it's not clear in their post. Doing this will hopefully keep this thread civil.

I'm not sure. Warshades have a better Dwarf form with both Mire and the Drain. But they don't get much by dropping to Human form on occasion for buffs like Hasten. Peacebringers get Dull Pain and Photon Seekers. They also have the option of going perma-Lightform, as I recall, and that may be an interesting viable option. Also, I think that they can slot -Def sets, so they can set up Achilles Heel debuff on the AV. All in all, I would say that PBs have a better chance.

Thanks. This seemed right with what I recall of the IO's coding, but there have been so many changes that I wanted to be sure...

The thing is that has absolutely nothing to do with enhancement converters. It's always been possible to make tones of inf from the market. Now in terms of time:inf yes it is one of the most profitable things you can do in game but that's because relatively few people are interested in doing it. If you removed converters it would still be the most profitable way to make inf (it was on live after all, even long before converters were available). So removing converters won't stop people making billion of inf at low levels by playing the market, it will just increase costs for everyone else and personally that smacks of telling people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. It has everything to do with converters. I didn't "play" with the market, nor did I spend any meaningful time learning the market. All I did was take worthless enhancements and instantly turn them into enhancements worth millions of infamy. It's not one of the most profitable things to do in the game it is THE most profitable. So? I'm not seeing the problem here. Can you please spell it out for a simpleton like myself? What's wrong with people getting things really easily in a game whose purpose is to entertain, rather than frustrate? When can I chose what level I want to be when I make a new character? I also want a button that will instantly take me wherever I want to go in the game because I find it frustrating at times to press my direction keys. Et cetera.... Slippery slope argument. Do you see every character in the game have every IO in any set that they want? No? Then why make ridiculous metaphors? The converters make it easier for people who play story arcs and task forces to raise a lot of money, but that only matches up to what other players could do by playing the market. I've made millions by using the market to obtain and use converters, and it's good that players who just want to run missions have access to a methodology of earning IOs that compares to playing the market or farming.

Does anyone know how Force Feedback's proc IO works in untargetable pet powers like Tornado and Lightning Storm? Do you get a +Recharge bonus when first placing them, and nothing else after that? Do the pets get a possible +Recharge to their powers (useless for Tornado, but useful on the storm cloud)? Or do you get a +Recharge bonus whenever they trigger?

The only AV I soloed as a Warshade was using a Shivan, so I'm not sure that it can be done. It looks as if you're trying to do it in Dwarf Form, which is what I also tried. If you do this, you will want all of the attacks more heavily slotted, and slot the Drain as part of your attack chain. Also, slot up the Mire with the Damage/Endurance IO rather than the Damage... you lose a bit of damage, but it's a heavy endurance drain. Both the Smite and the Strike need to be 6-slotted, probably with more Endurance reduction in there. Also, as a side note, why is Gravitic Emanation slotted up for damage? You can actually get decent damage out of it using Procs, but if you're going to slot for its effects, slot for Accuracy/Recharge/Stun. And add a KB to KD proc in there.

Note that slotted with Damage IOs, Jolting Chain does about 100 damage at level 50. That may seem underwhelming, but it's on an 8 second recharge... powers on Controller scale that recharge in 16 seconds would only do a bit more damage than that. It's actually a strong damaging power for Controller AoEs. And while spamming AoE attacks with 8 second recharge is usually tough for the Endurance, Electric is a set that should have no problems doing this, given End recovery from its single-target attacks, Conductive Aura, and the Sleep field.

I've mapped out a few Ice Control characters who are tremendously strong defensively. They all have something in common: a strong -ToHit effect. Time, Rad, Dark and even Plant secondary all turn Ice Controllers into super debuffing Controllers. The mobs still attack... slowly. And often at each other. And for less damage than usual. And the little damage that comes through is easily healed. So you can build Ice Controllers who are strong on the defensive side... their -Recharge adds to those of the secondaries, and their Immobilize and KD abilities reduce damage even more, and the Confuse adds to that. You're not stopping mobs from acting, you're just making their acting almost irrelevant. The problem with them is damage, especially low-end. I'm not sure where it could be added, or if Arctic Air's Confuse effect should be a bit stronger, but while they can play very safely, they don't do much damage. The Prestige attacks help a lot with this, but I don't like saying that a set is fixed because it has Prestige attacks available to it.

In most gameplay, Earth works well with anything since it has such good control. I like /Rad also with it, since Earth has -ToHit from Earthquake... stack it with Radiation Infection for flooring just about every mob. However, two interesting choices are Thermal and Cold. Either one of these will allow you, if you take the Pet Defense/Resist IOs, to have Stoney tank AVs. And since both of these have -Regen and -Resist, you can actually damage the AV solo. And you don't need to build an expensive character. Which makes this one of the cheapest AV-soloing characters out there, though not especially fast at it. And both builds would be excellent for teaming.