Leogunner

Irrelevant if there is a Tanker around who is t3H b3$t at holding aggro.

Well the reason to play a tank is to use sustain to shore-up damage received thus mitigating damage to others. The reason to play a Tanker is, should and hopefully will be for the specific unique aspects of the AT fitting the desired concept of the character you're creating. For these changes (specifically, the area/range and target cap changes), the reason to play the Tanker is to hit many foes and get lots of attention. It's actually justifying the entire concept of taunt retroactively. Why does a Tanker taunt? One might answer "because he's a tank" but I'm talking about the concept of taunt itself. It's not specifically shouting out a challenge using gestures or words, it's mostly just a game mechanic. I suppose one could say the reason Tanker attacks taunt is because they use fancy hand waving or some such while they are attacking to goad enemies into targeting them (and decreasing their effectiveness at the same time...kinda dumb justification if you ask me) but with the change, the answer why Tankers taunt is clear: their attacks are perceived as more dangerous. Why? Because it hurts lots of people, it shakes the very room, it's deafening and extremely obvious. So that would be the AT to use if you wanted to fill that concept. The reason to play a Brute is even simpler: they are just offensive tanks. They get their offensive powers sooner, they get more damage with more aggro and they have high potential when buffed. The fury mechanic can be somewhat ignored if you don't like it but want to be an offensive tank but with the changes, one can actually decide to *gasp*....build a Tanker offensively and it work like a standard or non-optimized Brute.

Just got home so started playing with my Shield/DM Tanker some more with better set-up. While it's not like he's completely OP or anything (he still can take a while to beat down a pair of bosses), I'm actually good with a melee that takes longer to kill hard targets if he himself can survive it no problem. Removing trash via AoEs is great though and can facilitate smoother gameplay if you remove bosses (that's just if you want to steamroll). For players like me, I do enjoy juggling Touch of Fear and recovering health from Siphon Life and reducing ToHit with my attacks and such. I think my only conflict would be comparing Tanker to other melee ATs. As I've said before, I probably won't ever play a Dark Melee character on anything but a Tanker from this perspective, which is fine...preferable in fact...Scrappers have their sets which benefit their higher mods, stronger damage bonuses, quicker animations, etc...while Stalkers have their niche that smooths out lack of ST DPS of a set, controlled bursts and utilizing BU which can be less or more advantageous depending on the set. We can start to see what sets would be preferable on which ATs now and I'd still want to keep them very distinct. Considering the sets Tanker/Brute have access too vs Scrappers and Stalkers, I still want to reign in Tankers ST DPS. This would broaden the difference between Tanker and Brute while keeping the likes of Scrappers and Stalkers square in their niche. Lowering their melee mod back to 0.85 (keep their ranged mod change) and keeping their AoE advantage puts them on the median to high end on the AoE spectrum with Brutes and Scrappers hot on its tail. I just feel, putting Tanker mods so close to Stalkers (even including criticals) puts their output too close for the advantages the tank ATs have. Then put stuff like Titan Weapons, Super Strength or Energy Melee's inability to crit, and that is what puts them too close. Not saying Tankers rival Stalkers, just using them as a spectrum here.

Have a Blaster that reduces the number of enemies to 5 with 2 clicks (Aim+Nuke).

Probably not necessary. You trying to tell me no one on your team has debuffs or controls? You are a team, after all...

No! I want to hit stuff with shadow maul. I'd prefer they reduce the max targets but keep the cone range then do the reverse (reduce the PbAoE range but keep the max target buff) for radius.

AoE isn't DPS. If you're going to factor damage differences of AoEs you're going to have to calculate kill speeds. Adding up the numbers is almost as arbitrary as adding up money spent to create a budget without any other data like income, necessary expenses, desired amount for savings, ect. So you're going to need the amount of HP per target, number of power activations, those powers activation times, ect. Rather than make up random pen and paper comparisons you could go do some mao clear times.

Again, you are under the false assumption that Tanker's are special. No. Tankers have armor and melee sets like every other melee AT. The only real difference for them should be their approach to hitting people in the face. That is all.

Considering we are only talking about beta test server, I don't see a problem going all in and then dialing things back. Your way and their way are both viable approaches. I think they chose their method to rip off the bandaid that people perceive Tanker as a non-contender with regard to melee (too many people think they did crap damage) so when they dial them back, they will be seen as equal but different from Brutes rather than an entity unique from all other melee.

Gw2 does the same thing. I feel, for a game like that, it's fine but it's gameable (using movement to escape combat to refill HP changes how people play drastically). I also think it devalues other aspects of the game. Rest is already drastically faster to recharge so, as long as you aren't being attacked and can sit for a few seconds, you can rest. This actually puts value into powers like Invisibility and sleeps. I just don't think it would be worthwhile to shift the games pace for some extra QoL most don't even need.

I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but I feel the endurance boost is too gracious. It was to make up for their slower defeat speed but coupled with the other changes to boost their damage mods and their effective target cap, do they really kill so much slower than, say, a Defender or equivalent solo Brute that necessitates such a bonus? As much as I dislike running out of END or getting drained by debuffs, that's kind of one aspect of the game that affects tactics, power choices and build slotting. I was also against inherent Fitness as I saw the pool as an character aspect one can choose to differentiate builds but I got over it. I just don't want to remove the need to manage endurance for two ATs (they already did for Blasters, but I can live with that being an aspect of Blasters...they just have UNLIMITED POWAH!!). Not gonna lie, I'm a bit scared. Primarily because min/maxers gonna min/max. My Shield/DM is very fun. I want all the dark powers + spring attack and have him bull-rush mobs like he was imagined to do while fisting a mob of 5 guys with his Shadow Maul...but that's hardly game breaking. But pairing AoE sets with AoE sets and it's bound to get ridiculous. I was actually hoping for a more insular set approach to the changes, i.e. sets without much AoE or slower AoEs would have different adjustments made vs a set with many and fast AoEs with potent effects. But I'm certain people are having lots of fun with the mass of AoEs and I don't want it to leave. If anything has to be reverted, I'd vote for putting Tanker back at 0.8 melee (keep the damage buff cap tho) and put Bruising back in (for those that like it and so the tier1-now-2 power can be a little more attractive). NOTE: this is only coming from my short time playing a lvl 28 Shield/DM as I'm at a hotel playing with a basic mouse and this wretched feather-feedback built in keyboard. I want to gauge the effective feel of it vs some of my Stalkers, basically the polar opposite to new-Tanker.

If the AoE change makes it to live, I will never make a non-Tanker Dark Melee character again and I will covet Shadow Maul for all eternity 😝

Ah! You found me out! I sometimes intentionally prod people with a shaper than average remark to spark discussion. I still stand by my response that it's not as bad as people say. The worst arcs, IMO, are the ones I struggle to stay awake reading or log out early because of a spontaneous desire to take a nap.

I never tried to excuse bad writing. I just don't think it's a bad as people are making it out to. You say "the choice". You aren't considering you'll only get "a choice", one that won't suit you or at least a subset of people out there.

As opposed to what? Re-writing the arc? Move it gold-side? Complain about it online and argue with people who critique your opinion?

Like I said before, my character intentionally fell into the trap. Mental time bomb? Oh, ok...I (my character, Zane) will just use my powers and it will be a mere black stripe on my fur and he'll move along. No big deal. But ultimately, these are mental considerations you'd think of as you're contemplating the written words. You don't ignore it, just think of how your character would react. I dunno, maybe you might actually be duped into the whole mental bomb thing. Have you heard of the other crazy **** that goes on in the city!? I've run into this myself, usually with an arc where my character is empathetic in some way but my character isn't. Even when given the option, a lot of times I (the player) just don't want to have to make that bad decision so I'll just avoid the arc lol. But sometimes it is interesting to do a bit of RP mental gymnastics to work with the story. That's basically what it is, choosing to work with the story or just opt out, I suppose.

I was considering some of the more vulnerable sets (FF, Sonic, Cold, etc) and their buffs and some thoughts that came to mind: Feels kind of dated and unnecessary to have their shields divided into 2 powers. I can sort of understand but at the same time, it's doing the set no favors. So why not just combine the 2 shield system into 1 ally-only shield? The power to replace the 2nd shield could be a PBAoE buff that also helps the user, maybe with different numbers from the team mates. I guess there's still the aspect of power creep so maybe not straight up defense/resistance but more on the utility side, perhaps? I'd have to spend more time rolling ideas in my head, it's too early for me right now 😞

😁😁😁😁 🤣🤣🤣🤣 If that's what's going on there, I hope you increase those powers' END cost and recharge too.

And MMORPGs are notoriously bad at actual RP. So basically, formulaic "old-skool" read-em-ups. I have no qualms with them. I don't see them as superior, just different. Can you pinpoint the particular qualities of each that support your claims? As for joining the killing game in Dr. Graves' arc, I have a few villains that simply are bored. One might say "why not take over the city!" and they'd reply "that's fekking stupid. Do you even know what goes into running something like that? I'd sooner sink it to the bottom of the ocean." But I guess anyone who decides to make a more grounded villain who falls into traps for gits and shiggles is just uncreative...that's actually exactly what I saw Graves' arc as. I'd argue the opposite, actually. It's for a villain that's self-aware to know they don't match up to the big leagues and looking for a foot stool to muddy with their boots either out of spite for their current situation or to get some blood favors that people will have to pay you back for (because some of those characters reappear later). Okay. Well I guess my highschooler teen prodigy is stupid. Sure didn't feel that way to me. Again, I think you're exaggerating...

But it's not RP writing. The RP comes in when you interact with the story and that tends to only be within the limitations of the medium (ie, if you are doing table top, you've got practically full freedom. If you're reading a book, you can only fill the character's shoes in your head). As I mentioned before, put some examples of an opposite example to the presented problem arcs and we can compare.

Oh, then you're issue is that the arc has tutorial missions. Just be glad you can skip the tutorial.

They don't characterize the player at all. It's basically a silent protagonist. Meh, I think you're overexaggerating. I'd say, post examples of arcs that do the opposite of the offenders here and we can compare. As for the Dr. Graves arcs, I'd say look at the story from the perspective of a character that actually fits and rate it vs trying to make your characters as square-iest of square peg villains and trying to fit them through the most roundest slot plots. And in the realm of CoX, you're not even forced to do it so if it doesn't fit your character, then don't do the arc. My approach is to figure out why the story doesn't fit my character. Then I ask why that is and why it completely shatters immersion or undermines the character's theme, backstory or personality. Because I usually don't make it past the 2nd why. Why is it demeaning for my character to basically be the shining star of the Shining Stars that basically everyone ends up relying on? In fact, for my teenage hero-in-training natural scrapper, it was actually rather off putting that these more experienced powered heroes would turn to a teen who is still in school to get his license to do hero work without getting into legal problems...but I consider it more of an "over time" scenario that takes place over the course of a semester and consider the training and tests he's been through so far, maybe it actually fits my character like a glove? I've got a Reverend Tanker, older gentleman, who judges people with a golden hammer of justice who is a prominent spiritual leader in the community and helping these misfits who are from various corners of existence also fills the role of the Shining Stars story (if only a few mental changes to my character's interaction dialog). Personally, I just think a lot of you guys are inflexible. You don't want to compromise your principals, which is fine, but then complain that things don't conform to said principals, which is impossible. You can either ignore/not play said arcs, treat them as episodic stories that feature the same character but are unlinked with all other regards, or just be flexible.

I'll agree that the Twins shot arc is rough around the edges but I do like Grym and Dillo. The others are annoying. Someone boxed in the Dr Graves arc which boggles my mind. Overall, the arcs are less "Coh-fied" and just a departure from the standard "read this text in the missions or clues tab" fare of the majority of the game. It requires getting into a character role somewhat thrust on you which seems to be asking too much of some. Probably not something you do well every alt, but I think it's worth doing every now and then. It's not the Frostfire arc...

Sorry, would have linked it earlier but was on a flight. My hope is it isn't focused on end game min/max content. It'll be a change that will be valued at a larger lvl range

Apparently Tanker changes are on the table but won't hit the test servers for a bit (maybe a couple months?). Was mentioned in the proc-monster tanker thread. Got any predictions, guys?