Profit

It's a valid strategy that I have used in the past, depending on insp count and available buffers etc. if I don't have the insps or we don't have the right buffs (revenge aura and adrenaline boost mostly although a dedicated kin with transfusion and speed boost, or a dark dark fender can work to) then I will hover tank. I have never heard of hiding behind a flag though. Usually you just make him continually jump the light pole. Hit me up when you see me on and I'll be glad to show you.

How dare you defile the sacred text of our lord and savior UniqueDragon! Pray the lord is feeling merciful and offer up rares to his will in penance!

I'm ok with that to, but quite honestly the vocal majority around here seems to get thing's changed. re:always on instant snipe, AE, DFB, probably ITF next. So what's the harm in offering up suggestion and seeing if it sticks?

So, funny story. I started hami raiding in issue 3, my inv/ss tank. My first 50. Learned how to lead the raids etc. And started leveling up an ill/emp with group fly just for raiding. Was a great toon, could PA drop, hami bait heal, hold hami. I had nearly all the bases covered. The week I got him to 50, got ready for the weekly justice weekend raids ... and the new hami raid was pushed out. >< I was so mad.

How about we make it a branching power. For brutes and tanks only, you get the choice when you take the power of having it like is currently, or you get a always on passive dmg boost of some yet to be determined percentage. Then you port SS to stalkers and scrappers, but because of their increased chance for criticals they only get the passive version of the rage power? There is precedence in one AT getting a different than another AT, scrappers only get a single target taunt for instance. This way everyone is happy. I get to keep my rage I like and you, whoever you are, can get a version of rage that functions completely different.

No, This is literally the only non negotiable thing on the list for me. Just no. So long as the self damage was balanced to what could reasonably be considered equal to expected damage from the -Def, then I don't see why it can't possibly be an option. At least self damage affects everyone the same, unlike -Def. It's really no different from the same things Energy Transfer does in Energy Melee. Oh, you meant self damage which is much different than -HP. Ok, yeah sure, I don't care if Rage crash causes me damage. But HP is to important to do -HP with on a tank. Every point of hp is basically a regenerating point of resistance once you are over the cap. Dull Pain for example, basically gives you an entire extra bar of HP. If dull pain were remade today it wouldn't be +HP it would be absorb. The reason is, +HP effects regeneration. So when you -HP you're not only taking away the top hp you can have, you are literally lowering the regeneration. So we can't just go around having crashes that all willy nilly lower the hp total. That would be death for any tanker using it.

No, This is literally the only non negotiable thing on the list for me. Just no.

History time! So after issue 4/5ish, there was much debate on the tank forum as to why take a tank instead of a scrapper. Jack Emmert (Statesman), became heavily involved in the discussion and began to work with us to develop a mechanic to make tanks more comic booky. The mechanic that the entire tank forum and Statesman developed you ask? We called it Fury and it revolved around tanks doing more damage as they got hit because they knew they needed to put the enemy down fast. World of Carboard and all that. And then Jack, bless his heart, promised that the mechanic was going to be implemented and given to tankers. Fast forward to COV beta, and the post from Jack that said, hey, brutes got an awesome new mechanic called Fury, you're gonna love it, go play it. And there was salt for every tanker, forever and ever. edit:ocd and spelling :/

OH I see what your asking. Yeah, don't know if that will work or not. I use powexec_location:up for wormhole though. It's awesome fun, not what you're looking for, but still fun.

Sorry, I was unclear. Yes the dps hit sucks unless you use the work around of temp powers for the duration. And it is a work around, but it does work. Again, when we start balancing sets around temp powers... Don't put words in my mouth, I never suggested balancing because of temp powers. If any balance in this situation occurs I would expect the temp powers be made to accept the rage crash and no longer do damage. I was simply offering a 'workaround' if you were concerned about dps.

Could you provide some more context here? What armor set are you using? Is this an SO build? I ran an IO SS/Elec Brute. As a resist set, the -Def didn't really affect me. But even with Power Sink, I still needed to pay attention to Rage crashes. And I wasn't toting around temp powers to patch the -Dmg. Now, PS made the end crash manageable, but I still had to pay attention to when I needed to make sure I had PS available. The Rage crash still dictated gameplay in my situation. It wasn't a "click it and forget" power. My main is an INV/SS tank. I had energy mastery for my epic pool. This would be with an SO build + HOs. And I found it an inconvenience, once I got inventions it was even less of an issue. Yes I did have temp powers for dps during the downtime, but mostly downtime was footstomp, Air Superiority something still standing, and knockout blow something else still standing. Handclap if I really needed a breather. But I never did click and forget, and honestly if I was in a team of 8, I used rage as needed, because I was there to hold aggro not be a brute. But I also used DP before I entered a fight, so what do I know. Being at max hp causing a higher regeneration rate due to increased hp was a better option for me than a burst heal.

This is incorrect. I can rage crash and still footstomp, which means I can still knockdown nearly the entire mob. And if they are getting up, they aren't wailing on me. So it is incorrect to play like you're helpless because of no damage, you're not helpless, just not doing what you think you should do. This is what's incorrect. Many of the mobs that are going to be most dangerous will also have at least some kd protection. And the end crash means you may not be able to Footstomp anyway, even if they are vulnerable to knockdown. You sound like a brute player not a tank player. Two different things. As a tank player, I can tell you I have no problems knocking anything shy of an AV from it's feet. And the End crash never runs me dry. Drops me to a little less than half sometimes, but never dry. No, I'm a tank player, and a pretty good one from what people who've grouped with me have said. Of course, that's neither here nor there, as none of that changes what I've said. There's simply no need for a def crash in Rage, as it makes the power unusable in high-level content. The dmg and end crashes are more than enough for balance. Rage pretty much just brings SS up to par with the other melee sets, and without it SS underperforms. Our anecdotal evidence then is quite different as I used Rage in high level content all the time (STF,ITF,LRSF,Eden) and find it only a minor inconvenience. I will whole heartedly agree that rage is needed to bring SS up to par with other melee sets however.

When we start balancing sets around temp powers, I'll concede this as a valid argument. Sorry, I was unclear. Yes the dps hit sucks unless you use the work around of temp powers for the duration. And it is a work around, but it does work.

I think we need to refrain from using the word intent. The original intent of the devs was that tanks would have the fury bar, not brutes. How did that turn out? The original intent of the devs was that tankers would be the only AT that had a AOE auto-hit taunt power in their selection. How did that turn out? The original intent of the devs was that masterminds would be the tanking class in COV. How did that turn out? We really need to stop referencing the 'intent' of the original devs until such time as we prepared to make the two minor changes that will balance the brute and tank class and cause one to stop invalidating the other. But that won't happen because the uproar on any change to brutes is more than you guys will be willing to deal with. So we need to be conscious of use of the word 'intent'.

Fair enough point. But you're still going to have a substantial DPS drop. Not that I'm complaining about a drop, but it's certainly a downside. Yes, DPS sucks unless you use blackwand, nem staff, and sands of mu to fill that hole.

This is incorrect. I can rage crash and still footstomp, which means I can still knockdown nearly the entire mob. And if they are getting up, they aren't wailing on me. So it is incorrect to play like you're helpless because of no damage, you're not helpless, just not doing what you think you should do. This is what's incorrect. Many of the mobs that are going to be most dangerous will also have at least some kd protection. And the end crash means you may not be able to Footstomp anyway, even if they are vulnerable to knockdown. You sound like a brute player not a tank player. Two different things. As a tank player, I can tell you I have no problems knocking anything shy of an AV from it's feet. And the End crash never runs me dry. Drops me to a little less than half sometimes, but never dry.

This is incorrect. I can rage crash and still footstomp, which means I can still knockdown nearly the entire mob. And if they are getting up, they aren't wailing on me. So it is incorrect to play like you're helpless because of no damage, you're not helpless, just not doing what you think you should do.

Already in the game and has been since live. Example /bind CTRL+NUMPAD1 "unselect$$team_select 1$$powexec_name Heal Other" Will select the teammate occupying the first slot in the list and then use Heal Other on them.

It might mean the debuff could be removed, but we haven't run the numbers. Let's get some math in this thread and see if it needs it. I still think for comparison we need both the unaltered 3x numbers and the 'fixed numbers' along with suspected 'this is probably what it should have been numbers'. Edited to add: I also main an INV tank and consider it untouchable in terms of gameplay, to me it seems like the perfect set as is, but I still have this nagging curiousity and want to see the numbers on it. The numbers we have now might be better, might be worse, and I might be the only one but I would like to know.

So many names I remember! Was able to be at the TT earlier this month, I work second shift though so not sure I can make many more of them. But you guys grab aggro for me when I'm not there!

Seconded Shoot, I think I like this idea more then I want to admit. It's a bit of derailing but oh man I want this. Someone make this it's own thread.

That would be cool, dunno if possible but cool. In the meantime, I used to /clear_tray (i think it was clear_tray, I haven't respecd yet on this server) on my respecs. At least then you're not removing powers one by one, just adding powers back.

Rage needs the -def to help balance it's buff. Now, having said that, I think we only need to revisit the -def numbers. I don't know if many of you remember this, but when rage was given the -def, invincibility was pulsing 3x what it was supposed to providing 3x more def than it was supposed to. It was also doing this pulse when ED and GDN happened as well. Invincibility was 'fixed' shortly after Rage on live. So any defense tweaks were made on the basis of 3x the amount of defense it was supposed to give. The fix for invincibility after the pulse was to 'front load' the def, which you guys may also not remember. So that the first mob gave the most def and so on. What we need to do is this, we need the numbers for invincibility before ED and GDN, the 3x numbers. We need to figure out what the numbers should have been. Then we need to compare the numbers for 3x and regular invincibility with ED and GDN factored in. And at that point we calculate what the Rage -def should actually be, I'd almost bet doughnuts it comes out to less than the -20% it is now. This would also allow us to determine if invincibility should get a def boost to keep it in line with what happened to other defensive powers when ED, GDN, and the 3x pulse are all taken into account. I'd lay another doughnut on the line that invincibility needs a smallish boost upward.

They're moving so slowly, in fact, that they've yet to actually remove even one farming tool. This is going kinda like gas prices, slowly rising (or in this case removing effectiveness), while letting everyone get adjusted to the new status quo until suddenly, look everyone $20/gallon it's our lucky day! You remind me of those people who, after every patch, would loudly proclaim that the game would end because of (fill in the blank) change. And then went on about how they were right when the game finally shuttered, years later. So, when your prediction fails to come true, are you going to fess up to being wrong, or just continue to stress that its "just around the corner"? It is a slow burn your right, I'm going to need more popcorn. Nope Dr, if I'm wrong and they aren't actually anti farming/economy (which from the evidence so far seems to be exactly what they are) I will gladly proclaim I'm wrong AND serve up some juicy movie flavored popcorn for everyone! (add your own salt, because heart conditions)

They're moving so slowly, in fact, that they've yet to actually remove even one farming tool. It is a slow burn your right, I'm going to need more popcorn. This is going kinda like gas prices, slowly rising (or in this case removing effectiveness), while letting everyone get adjusted to the new status quo until suddenly, look everyone $20/gallon it's our lucky day!