Kimuji

Indeed and Superman works as a comic book character not as a playable one in a video game. Taking Superman as a reference is just terrible: that character is so OP that they had to create Kryptonite as a plot device to keep him in check. Superman is basically in perma god mode unless he's completely depowered. We can't compare a CoH character with that.

Sorry if it has already been discussed but the thread is 35 pages long now, does the AoE and target cap increase also applies to taunt Auras? I mean making damage auras (like Blazing Aura or Death Shroud) hit 16 targets instead of 10 is a substantial increase but it isn't a massive imbalance, however auras that give a buff based on the number of affected targets are a concern. Invulnerability, Shield Defense or Willpower for instance (or even rad armor). The bonus increase from 10 to 16 targets would make those auras completely OP: massive regen for WP, huge defense for Invul, stupid damage for SD etc... Speaking of auras, and balanced changes, Willpower could certainly benefit from a longer duration of its taunt effect.

Scrappers can survive everything as well you know. 75% res+ soft capped defenses is enough to handle everything the game throws at you. I don't understand why people focus so much on Brutes. There are defenders who can solo everything, Controllers as well, Corruptors too... Even Blasters are a lot sturdier than they used to be. But all we hear is that Brutes are too tough compared to their damage (or deal too much damage compared to their toughness) and that it hurts Tankers. That's ridiculously selective, and besides it only applies to end game. And that's why I think that people who say that the problem is between OP Brutes and under performing Tankers haven't been playing Tankers as much as they claim. Because most of the times when I've felt useless as a Tanker it was not because of Brutes, it's the overall lack of need for tanks (brutes or tankers). And everyone has been so contradictory on the matter, you'll find a lot of players praising how CoH broke the Dps/Tank/Support trinity and on the other hand they're also complaining that Tankers are useless, go figure... And so, just because endgame IOs and incarnate powers are making all ATs super tough we're gonna give Tankers a big max endurance increase AND a massive AoE radius and target increase AND a large base damage increase AND a huge damage cap boost AND switch T1 with T2 attacks? That's completely out of proportion. The only thing we're achieving here is running even faster into the wall.

But Rage is being modified precisely because people whined about the def crash bug being fixed. If this topic even exists that's because it was fixed and a lot of people didn't want it to be fixed. I had no issues with the fix. But I certainly have an issue with the way SS is going to be completely altered just to accomodate those unable/unwilling to adapt to the way it had always been designed to work.

Rage is just as necessary as Build Up. Yes if you remove Build Up and Rage StJ will pull ahead, if you add Rage SS WILL take the lead and if add Build Up StJ should be slightly pulling ahead again. But it is just as disingenuous to compare SS without Rage to StJ with Build Up.

I call this broken.

The imbalance is more about going from 1 crash every 2 mins for 1 rage and 1 crash every minute for 2 rages to no crash for 1 rage and a bigger crash every minute for two rages. Stacking Rage was already 'punished' with a crash that occurs twice as often. Stacking Rage already came at a bigger price but now the gap is even bigger: Rage is free and double Rage still comes at a very high cost. Balance has been completely thrown out of the window.

This is just the death of Rage stacking. Who's gonna bother going double Rage when every 60s you get your defenses decreased, your resistances decreased and your damage reduced to zero when a single Rage comes at absolutely no cost? There is no real benefit to stack rage anymore. It's a massive punishment for a marginal increase in sustained DPS: The whole point of stacking rage is to deal more damage if keeping Rage to a single instance doesn't incur a damage penalty when stacking means that you get your damage reduced to zero for 10s every minute then it completely defeats the very purpose of stacking Rage. The 10s -999% damage debuff should at least remain for 1 instance of Rage to make double Rage even remotely desirable.

Well I won't beat around the bush: I'm terrified by most of these changes. 😅 But first the good: - the base endurance increase. Very welcome. - the cones increase. Welcome change as well. Now the scary stuff. The removal of Bruise, it was a team oriented passive power. Tankers are team players, I don't like the idea of removing this aspect to replace it with a substantial damage increase. Especially with such a massive change for the damage cap as well. 600% with a base damage multiplier of 0.95 means that Tankers have a higher damage potential than Brutes. Bring a Kinetic in the team and the Tanker will clearly out damage all the Brutes, especially when combined with the buffed AoEs. I'm ok with the buffed angle for cones because most of them suck, but making all AoE 16ft+ that's completely over the top and it also contributes to the uniformization of all sets. So I'm not that enthusiastic regarding the AoE buff. Just buff to 10ft all AoEs with a radius inferior to 10ft but anything above that would be too much. I don't like being forced to take the T2 either, most T1 are better are low level thanks to their faster recharge (there are very few exceptions to that rule, like Eneregy Melee's T2 being faster than the T1). I'd rather keep the T1 or being given the choice between T1 and T2.

On the matter of PVP IOs half of their set bonuses are already disabled for PVE so there's that.

Apologies accepted.

Did you even read the answer before giving your +1 to a completely baseless accusation thrown at the wrong person? I have openly spoken against any sort of nerf affecting other ATs in order to make Tankers "better". Since people are too lazy to follow links and more akin to strawmanning I'm gonna quote myself: Is that proof enough?

And big ass mob pulls are the Tankers and Brutes' department.

I think you are misreading what I wrote. I play Brutes and I tank with them. I wrote it did you miss it? So no I don't think that Tanker should be the only AT "allowed" to tank. And I've been defending Brutes against suggestions aming to cripple their aggro management abilities on this very thread. So that accusation doesn't work here. If you don't believe me go check these posts: https://forums.homecomingservers.com/topic/6271-addressing-the-tanker-brute-connundrum/?do=findComment&comment=71317 https://forums.homecomingservers.com/topic/6271-addressing-the-tanker-brute-connundrum/?do=findComment&comment=71326 https://forums.homecomingservers.com/topic/6271-addressing-the-tanker-brute-connundrum/?do=findComment&comment=71455 And there are more I didn't link them all. What I was talking about was strategy and optimization when you have a Tanker and a Brute on the same team. The Tanker assuming the main tank role and the Brute the off-tank's just makes sense. Brutes are better damage dealers than Tankers so if the Brute spends most of its time herding mobs while there is somebody else with a lower damage output able to fill that role then the Brute is lowering the team's dps for no practical reason. And it's the same against AVs, a Tanker spaming Taunt hurts the team's dps much less than a Brute spaming Taunt instead of using an optimized attack rotation. And yes making a point at pulling the aggro from the Tanker while it's its biggest contribution to the team is a bit dickish, especially if you are playing an AT that have the possiblity to contribute in a different manner. It's a good way to make them feel useless and then you can't be surprised if threads like this one appear on the forum.

They bring diversity to builds, (they also tend to trivialize the game...). What does a +rech inspiration bring to the game aside from giving one more tool to deal with its already inexistant difficulty?

The vast majority of incarnate trials I've played involved Tankers chosen as the main tank for the whole trial. Same for Hamidon raids. I've yet to meet that team refusing to invite a Tanker because they can have a Brute instead. And I'm not saying that nothing can or should be done for Tankers, I've made several suggestions on this thread. I was just pointing out that when a Brute is trying to pull the aggro from a Tanker it is a suboptimal play from the Brute (and potentially a childish move as well). Despite their short coming Tankers are fun too play (and again it doesn't mean that I think that nothing should be done for Tankers). And EM is broken because the devs broke it.

If the Tanker is using taunt and attacking a Brute will need to taunt as well to pull the aggro from the Tanker (because a brute doesn't do 400% more damage than a Tanker) which means that the Brute is not doing its job as a Tank/DPS hybrid and is wasting its DPS potential by including taunts in its rotation when there's already a tank in the team. It is suboptimal play. I've seen it myself on a few occasions against AVs, me on my Tanker and Brutes spaming taunt trying all they could to pull the aggro from me (and to what end? prove something to themselves?) instead of spaming their attacks and adequately contribute to the team's dps. Conversely when I'm on my Brutes even if I build them to be able to be the main tank if needed I'll only play off-tank if there's a (competent) Tanker in the team. Because if the Tanker is doing its job my Brute is better used as a dps source than a competitor for the main tank spot.

Like EM *subliminal idea*

This thread has become more confrontational that it should indeed. If the devs think that they can cook up a (non trivial) pvp alternative to obtain the accolades without stretching their time and resources too thin... I've seen more unreasonable requests that this one the forum. lol (genuine lol, not a sarcastic one).

One question, does the game need it?

Yes and that's why the removal of the -def as long as the player doesn't stack Rage (and gets the -def if rage is stacked) was an ok solution, but we went much further than this.

And yet some acheive that even if they have to go through some pve content to min max their build. Again what is the issue here? There are pvp players getting an advantage because they are willing to go through the accolade acquisition process, those unwilling to do it feel like it is an unfair advantage. I'm sorry but how is it unfair when the only thing preventing you from getting the same bonuses is your unwillingness to do what is required to have them?

Give me some credit here, I never meant that you wanted to give SS to defenders. I meant available to all melee ATs. And it's not just one more AT, if you're giving it to Scrappers then there is no reason to deny Stalkers the possibility to have it as well. I strongly disagree with that, ATs are much more than numbers. That's what make CoH's system richer. Just like "Rage's crash ruins SS", it's an opinion not a fact.

That sort argument is easily reversed: only your attitude can rob you of enjoying SS in its current form. We could close most of the suggestions on this forum with that argument. If when I create a new character and check the available powersets I realize that they're all available for all the ATs, yes, it is an obvious layer of distinctive flavor between ATs that has been removed. It weakens the game's personality. I'm not taking away that myself, it's something that has been changed in the game, it's not just in my head. It is an aspect of the game that has been removed. ATs are more than just dmg/def/res modifiers. Devs didn't only restrict certain sets to specific ATs for balance sake, there was also theme and identity reasons behind it. And some happen to like it. And you are right the majority of the powersets have been proliferated between ATs, but can't we at least keep a couple of them exclusive? Is that really too big of a concession? To me the concessions going in the other direction have already made several times: a lot of former exclusive sets have been made available to other ATs. Why making just one or two is so unacceptable?

Yes I think it was worth mentioning, it can potentially shed light on certain motivations. And another question never found an answer: how is it going to make pvp more appealing? Is it the kind of tweak that could potentially attract more players to pvp? I mean where are we getting these new players from? Not out of thin air but from the pve crowd. And there's already a pve way to get these accolades. I don't see how a stats buff given to everyone is going to acheive that since it's not going to change the experience at all (no one or everyone -> exact same result). What is the problem with accolades and PVP currently? The pvp players who also go through the pve process to get the accolades have an advantage over those who don't want to go through this? I'm sorry but I can hardly understand how it is unfair.