Charistoph

To be fair, it was better than Me at City of Heroes' launch, but 98SE wasn't that hard to get a hold of, either. XP would have also been rather easy to acquire as well.

I can't really disagree with most of what you said here. I don't know if Domination's the right way, but most often I'm getting an Offensive Opportunity on the Minion that just died from the attack I made without realizing it was Opportunity time, or having to change targets to go Defensive so it ticks while I change targets. Maybe not all, but some? Sonic (the first Sentinel I played and current highest Sentinel) doesn't have an Assault version, so would be left out of this. Or, this may sound a little weird, but just give them both options. The Sentinel could go Fire Blast or Fire Assault as they choose. This would actually get a better idea of desirability over all, as they can review the statistics. Let's face it, comparing Martial Assault vs Fire Blast isn't going to go over very well in terms of comparison.

This isn't a democracy. This "debate" isn't about coming up with a singular idea so that we can then go implement it. It's a show of interest in some change, and an examination of as many possibilities or permutations as we can manage specifically so the very small number of people who control the server's code can decide what they want. Having five, or ten, or thirty pages of (polite and reasonable) discussion is actually ideal, since it helps to show the general interest. But I will say... unlike you, I'm here because I enjoy it; even if nothing happens from the discussion, I like talking about this stuff. If you'd rather make your point and move back to playing... that's absolutely a sane and reasonable thing to do. Except it almost never stays a debate, it turns in to bickering. I only wish it stayed as a friendly debate. Some of it turned in to bickering because one person kept focusing on only one thing (their original suggestion), and started vehemently rejecting anything else, especially if it came from other experiences, without considering how it would even affect their suggestion. Well, that kind of falls short because having a reason to bring 3 of them means having less of a reason to bring others :P theres only 8 spots~ And yet, get any number of Defenders in a Team, and it always runs well, and no one gets offended (unless you didn't get on the team). A second Tanker only gets on a team if no one else wants to join. No other AT has that issue.

I remember Radiation Blasts -Def being very helpful for my Kinetics to connect. I remember when they released capes as an option... that you had to earn. I remember when the trams weren't united. You had to go to a place with both Tram's access in order to go from one to the other. I don't remember all the characters I never developed a strong backstory for.

That's largely because most of the actions involved. Honestly, anything can be considered a Natural build, it just depends on what is natural for the character. It is natural for Aquaman to swim fast and breathe water because he is Atlantian. It is natural for Kal-El to be energized by yellow sun frequencies which allow him to fly, punch reality, and be revived from Doomsday, because of his Kryptonian heritage. It is natural for my Earth/Fire dominator to use those powers because he is basically an earth elemental from the core of the earth. That having been said, having a Control set that you or I could use, would still be awesome. The huge array of web grenades, caltrops, etc, all done to 11.

One good example of why CoX is better than CO: You're here, and not there. If you weren't here and you were there, then you wouldn't need proof because you already think CO is better and you are welcome to it. If you are still here and not there, then you already have all you need to know why CoX is better than CO, and have fun enjoying the game!

This argument always rang hollow for me. It is incredibly rare for enemies to stack enough mezzes on you to overcome toggle mez protection from a primary or secondary set, so click mez protection being stackable just doesn’t seem like a real advantage. Before Sunset, I ran my Stone/Energy main into several packs of Tsoo's Green Ink Men in the overworld. You know, the Energy Melee guys with a chance on Stun? If I didn't get off my AoE and at least stun one or two of the pack, I would be Stunned through Rooted within a few of their attacks. I can't say about Practiced Brawler, but Shield Defense's anti-mez is little different. Since neither is an offensive ability, you don't have to stand and pose to activate the power. Since I have it on auto-activate it will pop while I'm running between mobs, and unlike Shield Defense's aura, it doesn't even interrupt the running animation.

That's why I was suggesting it be split. As Unknown was speaking of, it would be like the VEATs who have 3 separate primary powersets to choose from over the course of their character development. And aside from a base thematic connection, which has easy reasons to be altered in some of my examples above, the Attacks and the Summons lines aren't quite as cohesive as the majority of Blaster's Manipulation lines are. Unless they're willing/capable of customizing damage type along with the colors, I don't really see how this would be anything different than what we have access to now. Don't get me wrong, I think it would be healthy to be able to customize the Summons more as well (Vanguard/Arachnos for Soldiers, the two types of Clockwork for Robots, etc), but that could also include more programming hurdles as well. That's the basic mechanic I was thinking about using, but I am not aware of the programming hurdles that would be needed to overcome to make this change in the system. Obviously setting up the Sets to be accessible is something the Homecoming Team is more than capable of doing, but I'm not sure of the challenges of creating new sets and linking them up in that VEAT manner. Personally, I would set them up as selecting either Summon or Attack at Creation and then selecting the other later on. However, I do see an issue with that that I'll go in to a bit later. This would be another programming hurdle to be implemented. A script would have to be run accessing all the MM character profiles and adjusting them to fit the new system, but automatically connecting everything up as they are currently established. In addition, a obvious respec would have to be implemented. From there, would the respec allow them to alter their Attacks? I haven't run any VEATs high enough to do a respec to know if they can alter which path they choose with a Respec or Build. Would it have to be a special respec which allows them to adjust their Attacks this one time? I was not aware of this. Beast Summoning is new and I have not taken time to play with it, as interesting as the concept is.

I know this will probably be a devil and a half to program, but one thing I hate about the Mastermind class is that the Attacks of the Primary are indelibly linked to the Pets you summon. Want to use Dual Pistols with your Soldiers? Want to blast people with Shadows your Demons are attacking? Too bad. Get Soldiers, get automatic rifles. Go Undead if you want Dark Blasts. Barring the difficulty of programming this in, and assuming the level access stayed the same across the powers, who would be up for separating the Attacks from the Pets? Another advantage of this would be increasing the number of Attack Powers available to the Masterminds, such as Fire and Electric. Thoughts?

Considering I was just countering your spin doctoring, that's the Black Cauldron calling the pot dark. And the only derailing was that you didn't focus on what I said, but other subjects associated with them. Oddly enough, I DID bring that up right after approving your original ideas. Didn't see anyone much talking about it.

Yeah, until Willpower came out and Dark Armor was shifted over, Stone was the only Tanker Armor for anti-Psionic. Combine that with Granite and Rooted, and you have a very strong and diverse, if incredibly slow, Armor set.

Literally never did i imply that. For someone throwing around bullshit like "blind" you certainly didn't read anything. You said, "We are dealing with a current build", to dismiss a suggestion someone made about changing how something has been since classic. You must be trolling at this point. World of Warcraft pre-max level content is beyond rushed through. Even with the changes made to leveling that allow you to try and finish one or two storylines before advancing the content is overpaced to match the 120 levels you have to go, it's a shame coh doesn't have some sort exemping system to let you do old content even at max level..oh wait. And you can go back a solo any of that content from the previous expansions without breaking a sweat (with a couple of exceptions). But again, still missing the entire point of why I brought up WoW. Thank you for continuing to do so and further proving me right. Projection is an ugly practice. You have completely dismissed anything else that anyone has said about Tankers in the game because you want to completely focus only on your aggro changes. If you bothered to even consider paying attention to them instead of dismissing them out of hand, then you would know that I have repeatedly made statements regarding that. And if we're not giving you high-fives on the subject, you are completely dismissive of it in trying to push your own power trip. Neat. go make your own suggestion thread. I haven't said nobody is agreeing with me. Every time someone tries to hijack the thread to push their own ideas instead of actually contributing to the idea put forth, I try to steer it back. This isn't "What can tankers get done to them to help their overall lackluster feeling" It's "Hey this might be cool". I appreciate open discussion but thats not whats going on here. Then go read what I quoted to you to understand what you quoted. The only person who is being dismissive of open discussion has been you because we aren't only focusing on your Taunt suggestion. I disagree, if you think they need help in other fields go make another topic. As i said before, thats about all the time I'm giving someone who is only interested in mud-slinging and putting words in peoples mouth. And cutting out the part that actually ADDS to the concept of the original topic. Way to go. Talk about not wanting to have an open discussion and putting words in other other people's mouths. I didn't misquote. I provided context for what I quoted. You may have not intended it to be taken that way when you quoted, but then you are taking everything I say out of context and putting your own spin on it, so...

I mean, it's only fair. A lot of people have used "ooh, look big bad corporations are going to shut us down!" to try and bully people into ceasing making copycats :p Telling people to not poke the bear is the same as telling people to shut up about poking the bear? Got it. So, me reapeating, constanlty I'll grant you, my opinion that the chances are small and worrying is silly, is bullying, where others are trying to get players to turn on each other, and I am the bully? Nope. Continuously calling it FUD, and telling people to stop spreading the FUD, when no one has mentioned FUD, would be bullying. Continuously calling people names to dismiss their opinions and suggestions, is bullying. Continuously emotionally projecting on to other people's statements, and then lambasting them for those emotional projections, is bullying. Discussion is good, but let's keep it civil. And how many of us have actually deliberately tried to actually spread fear and anxiety in this thread? You are the one projecting that in to other people's statements. No one has said that the sky is going to fall if everyone makes a Marvel character. All I've seen is people saying we shouldn't poke the bear, and we should be self-policing at most. Since when is stating caution spreading fear and anxiety? At the very most, I've been an advocate for self-policing in that the Homecoming Team takes the initiative only as far as the original team did before Sunset, as that would easily provide a counter-case against anything the Team would have to fear in this regard. The actual Homecoming Team are the only ones to have anything to fear, not us. The players are not going to have the FBI banging in our door, or $200,000 suits handing court summons to us. The only thing to "fear" is that we lose access to what we've accomplished on these servers. It's happened before to me, so I would only find it disappointing, nothing to be fearful or anxious about. And if the Team being handed a summons is enough to cause YOU fear, then maybe you shouldn't be trying to spread FUD about people talking with concern about it as if was something to fear. And as an FYI, I never reported someone who made an IP violation, even before the Sunset. I never did it because it was no skin off my nose, and, more than likely, they were already reported before I did by someone who did feel their nose was put out of tweak. I saw a lot of Hulk and Goku Analogues all the time. When Shield Defense came out, I don't have to tell you how many Steve Rogers homages came out, I even tried out a similar concept on Test, but only remotely near costume design.

You're misunderstanding (again) the relation. You've basically implied that Tanker = the tank and because of that brutes shouldn't do it as opposed to how you should be using it where Tanker = A tank. This is how I've taken what you're saying and if its not your intention than it's only a misunderstanding. Then you haven't really bothered to read ANYTHING I've said. I didn't ever once say Brutes shouldn't Tank, I just said that they should get to certain aspects of Tanking DIFFERENTLY. For example, Brutes keeping their overall caps, just not being able to reach those caps on their own (even with IOs). Not really sure what you're on about here. Nobody said they did, only that they've changed how powers function (see snipe, web nade etc). The point I'm getting at, if you bothered to read what I wrote along with what I quoted, is that the design of the ATs has not changed from when City of Villains launched. A few numbers in a powerset here, maybe a change in a Melee Power there that was reflected in both, yes, but the basic designs of the Tanker and the Brute have not had any significant changes since before they could Go Rogue. You implied that they have completely changed since Homecoming launched, because we are dealing with a current build. World of Warcraft content starts and stops at the max level. Leveling is a joke, old raids are a joke, old dungeons only relevant during time-walking. WoW is "Balanced" around max level in raid gear. All of their high end content is designed in DPS/Healer/Tank in mind. Sure, you can get around that in open world no problem. You can also get around basic dungeons once you're fully geared up. Thats about where it stops. Raids/Mythic + dungeons (which is like, 50% of the content btw) absolutely require a healer and a tank. To say otherwise would be 100% incorrect. That's a bull's load. Might as well claim that Hamidon and Oroboros is the only real content in City of Heroes. Trust me in that I've leveled up every single class in WoW. All that "leveling is a joke" is about training you how to do your job when you reach the latest content, if anyone bothered to pay attention. To be fair, though, to get to the latest content, you're talking about 2x the levels to progress through than City of Heroes has had, and three times expansion's worth of content. But I guess, you're one of the ones that only ever focuses on Hamidon or Miss Liberty's TF in City of Heroes, right? And part of the problem with the last few of WoW's expansions have been that there is been so little content in the released content, especially when compared to years past. Each equivalent of an issue comes out with barely a dungeon and a Raid or two, and new areas, which have the actual majority of content, are sparse in release. While the latest dungeon's Mythic+ and Raid are 50% of the content the population focuses on, it's not actually 50% of the content being played. Most of the players don't even touch Mythic dungeons, much less Mythic+, and as for Raids, most are content with LFR. The noisiest and the streamers do focus on the Mythic+dungeons and Mythic Raids, but those are the vocal minority, not the significant majority of players. And it was that core idea of tanking, and the different approaches to tanking, I was talking about if you even bothered to read any of the paragraphs I wrote in context. My only problem is this is effectively increasing their damage and i don't think the damage is the problem. The tanker as it is now isn't really shunned just not preferred until its time to tussle with hamidon. I feel my change would just make them more interesting to play/play with than it would make them any stronger. They're plenty strong and depending on what EPP you pick you could have more AoE or even debuffs. A good example of this would be a Fire/Fire tank with the Fire EPP. Combustion, FSC, Burn, Breath of fire and then having their epp of fireball and a debuff in melt armor. Not every set would be this aoe thick but enough would be. They don't need that much help in the way of AoE/cones in my opinion. (Whirling hands needs some love, poor EM) Then you are blind, but then you've already demonstrated that, repeatedly. No one has discounted or dismissed the idea of increasing the aggro-gathering ability of the Tanker. In fact, I think that aside from the coding difficulties, everyone who posted in this thread was on board with doing so. Your problem is only focusing on that one aspect, which is blinding you to other possibilities which could be added on in addition to it. Damage is a Tanker problem. It's been part of discussion the entire time, partly because it is an aspect in which the Brute excels past the Tanker, while the survivability is only mildly different between them. Keep in mind, that when I said, "splash damage", I'm not talking about having the attack's full power being used, but a reduced affect as it "splashes" on to nearby targets. We're talking about a roughly 50% of the current power's ability spread across a 2-3 yd radius. It brings more damage to the Tanker AT, but only if the Tanker is gathering together the mobs and properly funnelling them up for the DPS's AoEs. Beyond that and tying it back in to increasing aggro caps, the more targets an Attack hits, the more range Gauntlet has to affect other mobs in addition to being able to affect MORE of them at the same time. You know, the AoE taunting affect Tankers have and we're talking about increasing the aggro ability of the Tanker, along with making them valuable for groups beyond grabbing the surprise group of mobs the TF hands out.

They were designed to be tanks. Until the day coh died. You misquote me as implying "Designed" means specifically conceptualized so neat job there i guess. You're right, they weren't designed to be tankers. It's super weird when i select "Tank" it has brute listed but ok. First off, do not confuse "Tank" with "Tanker". The first is a role, the second is an Archetype. Second, the Homecoming Team hasn't done much to alter how any class was played as of Issue 24. At most, they've added some Powersets and removed the no knockdown from Control Immobilizes. So, taking it form there, design hasn't really changed at all for either of them from when Paragon worked on them. This was not misquoting, this was going from the direction you gave. Again, missing the point. Don't shut it out because you don't want to hear about something else. It was about Tanking styles, and I acknowledged the difference between the two systems. A Monk doesn't tank the same way that a Druid tanks. For one, the cooldown for the only aoe attack the Monk has is on a much longer cooldown, and they have this thing where they don't have as much health, but the damage they take is parceled out over time. Druids have 2 aoes, with one on the global cooldown that can be spammed, meanwhile they don't have a lot of defensive tools other than a heavy health pool. Paladins, meanwhile, have to use a Talent in order to be able to have a ST ability on the global cooldown (i.e. spammable) or to make it an AoE with 3 charges instead of 2. Out of those I have tanked with (and I have tanked with all of them, mind), I prefer the ones where aoe attacks I could actively use on a quick and regular basis. I hated the ones where it was single target only and all on long cool downs. Now, City of Heroes comes with some advantages in that the Tank ATs come with an aura to help in that regard. This leads to design decisions in which ST attacks can be more prevelant and they can all be on cooldowns, as opposed to being able to use the auto-attacks WoW tanks can work with. Not to mention, City of Heroes does not rely specifically on gear, but directly improving the abilities themselves. Need I even mention the ability for every Tank has to just ignore most of the controls directed at them? I can't tell you how often I'd've killed for that ability on WoW or The Secret World. All that being said, the role of the Tank is the same in Everquest, WoW, City of Heroes, the Secret World, or any other MMORPG in which a player on a team can be set up to be the focus of attention. I've learned a lot from tanking on WoW, because I've done it for years, and I've learned from people who have done it longer and better. Those rules don't really change, except on the tools you have to do it with. They're not similar at all. In WoW, (in dungeons, etc,) you have to have a tank. You literally can't avoid it. It's mechanically integral to the game design. In CoH, in 95% of content, you don't even really need a tank on the team. Unless the everyone on the team just sucks at the game. No, you don't need a tank in much of WoW's content. You can avoid it. It helps, don't get me wrong, but you don't need it until you start getting in to the truly difficult content such as Raids (even questionable there, depending on what you're hitting). In much of the content, I've healed dungeons where our "tank" was an Arms Warrior or a Retribution Paladin. That's not a Tank. It's a class that can tank, but the spec isn't designed for it any more than expecting a Level 2 Stalker to be tanking the Positron TF. How did we get in to a dungeon without a Tank? Easy-peasy, and it can be done in one of two ways. 1) A class that can Tank can register to be the Tank, but doesn't change specs to their tanking spec when doing LFD or LFR (heck, I accidently queued for LFR as a Tank, but expected to be Ranged DPS and didn't notice it till I was booted). 2) If going in without using LFD/LFR, you can go in with any single team makeup you want, including completely solitary. Now, for certain content, you want to have a Tank, as a good Tank makes the going easier, or even possible when you get in to more difficult content. Even from there, much of the Raid content has been seen as requiring to have a SPECIFIC tank class for specific encounters, or at least, that certain tank class made tanking that encounter a heck of a lot easier. I know some people have only looked at using Stone Armor Tankers for some time, as they were the toughest, while Fire Armor Tankers were only used for farming. How much of addressing such tanking concerns in WoW is truly different than what we are discussing here, but trying to get a specific AT to be good at its primary job? I don't know if it require changing their Inherent to do so, but I wouldn't be against changing Gauntlet to have that modification, either. Either way, they're both intertwined, so I don't think it really matters. I do think that having more inherent abilities which are more group-oriented or group-friendly would be good to have. We've even discussed some of them. Tanker's Taunt reducing the range of mobs more to get them in to aura range, would be very useful. Tanker's armor also reducing the aoe radii of enemy attacks would also be useful, but could possibly be a pain to program in. I think adding a bit of "splash" damage to all Tanker's damage attacks would allow them to be useful both in team, and when they're not on a team. As for helping it so that a full Tanker team finds uses for everyone, that's a tall order without totally messing with the core design of the Tanker themselves. Unless all the Powersets gain Shield-like powers where they are able to help their buddies around them in non-redundant ways, I don't have an answer without making Tankers beasts in solo.

Secondaries? Bio Armor and Shield Defense. Shield Defense will buff your his Defense when you're around, and your Defense when he's around. Bio Armor has a modifiable aura that will reduce opponent's damage, just like Shield Defense. Dark Melee will reduce your opponent's chance to hit, as well as giving you an extra heal if you need it. Ice Melee has slows, increasing the time between attacks. Those would be the first ones that I would look at.

Let me put it simply:

Irrelevant, we're discussing current build. Relevant because you said, "Tankers were designed with the needed AoE/single target attacks in mind to keep aggro of wide-spread mob and single target with relative ease." The original Tanker Secondaries haven't had their ST/AoE ratio touched since launch. Follow-up powers have largely followed that trend, save when they were imported from Scrappers (Hi Spines!). It isn't a problem because they were designed to be tanks. People seem to forget villains didn't have access to the tank AT for a very long time, nerfing them now just because they do would raise the same problem but against scrapper/stalkers/brutes. Also the damage was more of a side comment ;) Paragraphs help indicate changes in subject. You incorporated both damage and survivability in to the same paragraph, so the same thought and subject. Speaking of which. Brutes were designed to be tanks, but not Tankers. How they go about doing it should be different than how Tankers do it. And after all, weren't you the one who just said, "Irrelevant, we're discussing current build," which is a game where Brutes and Tankers have been fighting side by side for years. I don't have much issue/thoughts about the damage they do or the radius to be honest. Also, my comment about "changing sets" was made in error as they clearly can. WoW and City of Heroes are night and day, comparing them or considering anything WoW does as a standard is silly. Way to miss several points, including what was being quoted. You quoted a reply in adding damage on an aoe level, but now you have much issue and thoughts about it? WoW and City of Heroes have many differences, but they also have many similarities. One of those similarities is the role of the Tank. Now, each tanking class does each one a little bit differently, both in mitigation and keeping the aggro, but I could feel the difference when I couldn't employ AoEs to help maintain that control. It would be easier if WoW Tanks did have Gauntlet to help them out and have pulsing Taunt auras, but instead they employ AoE abilities which are punch-vokes in the code. I went from running Stone/Energy to Shield/Stone, and their techniques are going to be very different, especially when Stone Melee is primarily a ST build, in timers of damage, till later in the development.

Again with the Big Corporation fears. As has been laid out, C&D is the first step, that's how they work, I happen to work for a Big Corporation, that's what we just did not long ago. If and only if an entity _chooses_ to fight that will there be costs. This idea that Disney will uses it's evil lawyers to shut down these servers over Hulks is just silly. As has been shown in this thread there are other places already where they could and do not. Down with the FUD, play the game. There are two reasons this server group will be shut down: Internal politics which cause the group to go their separate ways, OR Legal actions put forward by a Big Corporation (BC). This thread is about costume design. This is not something that usually leads to internal politics breaking up a group, but it is something that can lead to legal actions being put forward by a Big Corporation. C&D can also cause a shut down as much as a lawsuit, depending on what the BC will negotiate to avoid a lawsuit. Therefore, it is not FUD to point out and discuss how such interactions may develop and occur. So, quit trying to bully people in shutting up about it.

This isn't the problem at all. Brutes being a tank alternative isn't the problem and never has been. The problem is with tanks not having true tanking utility over brutes. They don't need any help getting aggro and they don't need to do more damage either. They aren't bruisers and weren't design to be. This is why i believe the best course of action is to increase their aggro limit and give them more -range. Like i said in the OP, the ability to aggro more than anyone else and position mobs without needing to LoS would set them far above anyone else in tanking ability. It isn't a problem to you, and survivability is one of the aspects of tanking. And I don't see how making Brutes have a Defender, or at least a Corruptor, handy to reach a Tanker's survivability has anything to do with Tanker'a damage. Control is the job of support characters. There are two aspects to control. One is the obvious one provided by Controllers and Dominators for the most part, and Blasters to a much lesser degree. This type of "Control" is about taking mobs out of the fight, one way or the other. The other type of "Control" is directing mobs attention and position. This is the one handled by Tankers, primarily, and Brutes and Scrappers to a lesser degree. Reworking sets is likely out of the question ATM, they also don't need to be brought up in damage as the Tanker is not a brute. And yet, the AoEs is also about creating a level of control. More mobs hit, means that Gauntlet gets to do more work. And allowing damage to affect in an area is a way to add Damage without increasing the base level. And let's face it, outside of Fire, Tanker Secondaries don't have a lot of AoE in them to begin with. Honestly, it doesn't have to be much, either, say a 50% splash damage for the non-Cone/PBAOEs, at a 2 yd radius, to make it interesting. I play tanks in World of Warcraft, and my favorites are the ones that can do a consistent level of AoE attacks. Admittedly, the taunt mechanics are a bit different in that game, yet the standard is there, the more I actually hit, the less Gauntlet actually has to do independently. The only mez taunt needs to give is what it already does...taunted. It directly forces enemies to change target away from whatever they were attacking, this is incredibly strong as a pseudo mez effect. This is also where my idea to improve this effect specifically for tankers comes from and it would give them a stronger "Tanker" identity. Also you can add damage with a proc ;) "Mez" can mean many things, but if I understand what you're saying, I can agree with it. "Mez" (short for mesmerize) usually means taking a mob out of the fight after a powerful spell/power by the same long name, but in purely basic terminology, forcing the AI to focus on you is a form of mesmorization. You're hypnotizing them to focus on you! :P Tankers were designed with the needed AoE/single target attacks in mind to keep aggro of wide-spread mob and single target with relative ease. Removing single target attacks in favor of additional Aoe would just increase their damage overall to wide-spread mobs which already get obliterated in team-play. You could make the case for indivdual sets needed their Aoes improved like Ice Melee or Energy manipulation but thats not whats being discussed here specifically and also doesn't apply to every set. If they were, then Gauntlet wouldn't have been added to them.

I think the actual issue was giving Brutes the same Res cap as Tanks. It made some sense when there were no Tanks red-side (and MMs proved to be a poor Tank substitute), but the result is that Brutes are OP in content where their Res is capped. The cap is fine, it is how the Brute gets to it, that needs to be addressed. A Brute should not match a Tanker's survivability without a matching Defensive powerset from a Corruptor, Mastermind, or Controller, minimum, present. I would even consider that it would take a Defender or two of the others in order to match it. That being said, I do like a lot of jack's list, especially adding a (very small) aoe component to all the Secondaries, and reducing the aoe radii of attacks on them... Tankers should be all about spreading their love and reducing the hate against others. (Gad, I just had an image of Puri Puri Prisoner activating Angel Mode pop in my head. GAH!)

Lawsuits are expensive - even to initiate - so that is why most companies will start with a C&D as their first (and sometimes only) salvo. The point is that fighting even a C&D costs money to counter, short of capitulation (unless you have a good cheap lawyer already on the team), and while WB may not be able the buy the Vatican out from under the Pope, the Mouse could, and both have teams of lawyers already on payroll specifically to address C&D and IP violations. Zolgar MAY have a point about the Mouse just requesting better policing on IP violations, and we can all hope that is as far as it goes. It goes better with that because it can easily be settled out of court. However, big corporations rarely ever settle for hand slaps if they see something becoming too big in a volume, especially if they can take all the money you do have away from and remove you as any potential threat.

I agree that the likelihood is small. So is the likelihood of a sleeping bear to chase you through the forest, so long as you don't poke it. I've said this before, and it bears repeating, legal actions between corporations are often started by the big guys specifically to drain the funds, especially if they don't have a leg to stand on. Right now, there isn't much, if any, in the way of precedent regarding this situation. Do you think that the Homecoming group has the funds to to fight long enough in court to get a precedent in their favor ruled? Do note I did not say, "sue". I said, "legal actions", such as a Cease & Desist (which were the orders Blizzard put to them, though, I think that is a lawsuit, but I'm not a lawyer). And part of the issue, and one that Homecoming is trying to be very open about avoiding, is about breaching that "non-profit" cap. There has been legal actions put against groups that are non-profit because their donations reached a point that the plaintiff put forward the argument that they were actually operating at a profit. I don't think it went very far, but those legal expenses definitely didn't help the non-profit maintain their organization. Wisdom is learning from other people's mistakes. Let's try to not be blind to corporate reality just because we think a corporation won't do something.

"Can you hear me now?" "WHAT?!?!"

Honestly, we don't know what they are going to do until they put out a statement themselves. Blizzard has put legal actions on those same types of private servers which were not run by for-profit corporations. My only point has been, it is best not to poke a bear you don't want the attention of. This has nothing to do with FUD, but with just plain wisdom.