golstat2003

Yeah we have a volunteer dev team. If we keep trying to let the perfect be the enemy of the good and try to stick every suggested change in every patch, nothing will ever go out. The changes are for PVE , get them out. And then FInALLY get out the Tanker changes that have been held up forever. You can then work on pvp-focused changes for masterminds next or later.

I tried it and on some maps I find it very blinding. On others it's great. I would suggest a tweak to the density of some of the effects, but for other reasons I don't ever plan to get a character to 50 on that server.

Pretty much how I was going to respond. it's often the reason the big bad is able to get away for several issues/episodes. lol

I think there needs to be a separate patch for dealing with mm issues in pvp, versus this patch.

Yeah I can see the pet changes definitely being able to go before the tanker changes, especially since it sounds like CP already confirmed that at least one more patch will be in testing related to the tanker changes.

Pretty much.

It rewarded killing meaning less units because of the superhero fantasy of a lone hero beating up countless grunts. Hell we see that fantasy in shows like Titans also, where the group regularly beat up a bunch of guys that probably had no chance against them. Also at the time they could not create missions fast enough for their to be "completion of a lot of different missions". The number of missions we are all enjoying right now came over literally YEARS of mission crafting.

Possibly. But then they should not have built a building that large and plopped them in nearly every zone. I think the Devs wanted it to be a big thing cause everyone was on the User Generated Content idea at the time for MMOs. What I would have done is attach it as part of the overall mission system by have the UGC missions be accessible via set doors around the city. That would have got player subsets of all types interested. Also I would have limited it to the structure of how developers create their missions. For instance, I think allowing custom mobs was opening a can of worms that they really didn't need to.

Because they knew if they did that 90-95% of the playerbase would never have stepped foot in AE. Well, they probably would have run one mission, found out it gave zero rewards that mattered and never looked at it again. The devs spent considerable resources (time, dev coding time, art time, testing time, beta time) on AE. Showing that all that work was pointless by making it so that a supermajority of players would not touch, would have been a bad look.

Trying to balance IOS would probably take much longer than trying do balances passes on one or two ATs at a time. I think the general concesus is that folks playing this game would like to see changes released sometimes before the heat death of the universe. 😜

NO. I would not trade stackable bruising for the damage buffs being toned down on Tanks. No thanks. They should just add bruising back as it exists and call it a day.

The buffs to Tank damage are not only for when a Tank is teamed, as per Captain Powerhouse. Tanks getting better damage overall also helps teams more than bruising ever could. Now if they offered some REAL improvements to bruising that would be a different story. We have quite enough debuffs flying around on typical COH teams that I don’t think anyone notices bruising in it’s current state, on average teams.

I honestly wouldn't loose sleep if they left it out. I suggested them putting it back for the folks who apparently love the mechanic. That doesn't include me.

I completely disagree. The age of incarnates has made it so that the tankiness of tankers isn't really needed as much. They need something in addition to damage, but tankiness just isn't needed as much in the era of IOs + Incarnates. I would say put BACK bruising. And maybe add a mechanic that when a tank is on the team buffs, debuffs and controls increase by 5-10% in effectiveness and call it day.

I did not say Brutes couldn’t Tank. What I said was that most teams cared more if a Tank didn’t take taunt than if a Brute didn’t. And most teams looking for aggro control looked for a Tank most of the time. I see nothing wrong with giving Tanks some more damage as well as the other changes on test. Most teams just won’t care which archetype does more damage.

Nope, I’ve never seen ANY team I’ve been expect a Brute to take taunt. Usually the teams I’m on get a Tank to do that. Nothing in these changes will change that. And I am NOT suggesting a Brutes lose anything. It’s not necessary. At all.

Ummm not really. If someone wants to play a team protector I would suggest they play a tank, as that AT is expected to take taunt. If they just want to hit things I would suggest they play a Brute. Brutes are not expected to take taunt and none of mine ever will.

Ummmm are you sure Conceal is the right word? I think you are saying that the wider AOE and damage change is on the right path as no one being able to rip Aggie off them fits with them being a TANK, but just making sure.

I'm sure they could do this, but it probably take months. Especially if it includes moving mission doors and storylines to other zones.

I play multiple and Doms. I feel very useful. Mixed in with my buffs and debfuffs I feel just fine. In fact Dominators are my faviorite class with how overpowered I often feel on them.

As an interesting counter to some of the things said in this thread, please read this thread . . . especially about the first page. I would say be careful what you wish for.

And I completely disagree. The value of certain ATs has not been erroded. Certainly not for controllers, dominators, defenders, etc. Your experience just isn't what I've been seeing since COH HC came online.

How long are you waiting wait around for that team if what you need isn't on? 15 minutes? 30, and hour? Personally when I form teams I adjust my expectations and go. If a team leader forming a tf is waiting around for "such and such" I pretty much excuse myself and get on a team that is already to go with whoever answers the tells. We pretty much do fine. Incarnate Content/trials different story. I can see why those would wait for the right mix depending on the trail. Anything outside of that . . . . ummm no. I'm sorry but this game just isn't that difficult. And I'd bet a vast majority of folks prefer it that way if a poll was run. We have some content that requires that kind of setup where more balanced teams are a good thing, and hopefully the devs will build more. I just don't think outside of Incarnate content it's needed to be encouraged.

Pretty much this. I avoid those teams like the plague.

I don't think that needs any encouragement at all. Others disagree. /shrug.