Leogunner

I never suggested I should decide whether someone should or shouldn't feel attacked, so you can stop repeating that. I didn't call anyone a liar, I described the act of lying which is intentionally misrepresenting someone. If you're assuming I'm calling you a liar, maybe you should address the points that I said you're misrepresenting me, such as insinuating I've personally insulted someone. Or do we need to define what a personal insult is? Also, I never said the word stupid. I said "sucks". Stupid has far different connotations that can allude to someone's intelligence or mental deficiencies. Saying someone's ideas suck means they are bad or not well thought out.

Again, I hope you have enough self awareness to understand that your opinion is personal. I know plenty of players that just enjoy hitting lots of things (they tend to play Dominators). I've read posts of players that just like the effects and animations. The thing is, I'm not making the suggestion on the grounds you're trying to represent it as. It's for those who already aren't laser focused on meta and may be more interested in diversity or alternative tactics. Besides, you're flip-flopping between "too much damage/Brute-like" to "it's not going to be interesting/noticable and there are better, easier solutions". For the latter side, Great! go make those suggestions. For the former, you'd have to prove it. I know this, which is why I'm baffled why you think you know if a damage buff to Tankers is on or off he table. While those can be seen as aggressive, brash or egocentric, they still aren't "personal insult", which is what you've accused me of (I've not targeted anything at anyone's person, just criticized their ideas). I don't believe being rude is as bad as lying.

"If you enjoy [having the situation Brutes have in relation to Tankers], there's no reason to pick Tanker if [you think Brutes have as much survival/support] just [do more damage]." I'm fine with you not liking my suggestion. But don't pretend like that beats it or my argument. If you're going to gatekeep changes to Tanker to your personal perspective, there's nothing stopping a Tanker purist from gatekeeping any changes you might think is necessary (and their arguments exist in this thread too). I see a blindspot in your argument. But anyways, I haven't insulted you, you just take frank disagreement as insults. It's a difference of opinion. I'll advise you again, drop your tone policing. I'm only saying so to preserve your state of mind. I don't really give a ****, tbh. It just makes you sound less dignified when you misrepresent a simple comment as an insult.

That's an alright opinion to have. Just have the self awareness to know not everyone will agree with your opinion. Others are suggesting unresistable -res in Bruising. I disagreed that it would change anything except in niche scenarios when facing mobs that resist debuffs. I also disagree it would make me want to play Tankers anymore than now. But that's just my opinion. Each AoE power has a defined range, max number of targets it affects, effects numbers with attributes that allow or disallow to be affected by enhancements or buffs, etc. These are *NUMBERS* and flags. It's different with a power that is a ST or AoE and you're reverting it into the other as they don't have the built in attributes with appropriate numbers to change. But I'm not advocating for ST attacks to be changed into AoEs, I'm suggesting the number already associated with its range to be changed for Tanker powers. Yes, it will have to be done on an individual powers basis. No, you're not going to railroad me into an argument of "Oh, the TESTING is going to be TOOO extensive! It's WAY too much work!" I never argued about playtesting. So don't care. Standard Code Rant works both ways. I don't know how much testing it will be so I'm not touching it.

I did read this and it doesn't so much have a suggestion as it does give someone else a spring board to make a suggestion related to your observations. It's kind of brainstorming but still several steps away from an actual concrete idea. Nothing wrong with that. I actually used that (and others that made similar observations) springboard in another thread suggesting to change tier 9s. While others were talking about removing the crashes or changing them to fill powerset holes, I suggested weakening the effects of the crashing tier9s (I used 33% strength as a starting point) and convert the rest into a team support/buff. This could be something to do for only armor tier 9s in the primary set (so Tankers only) but that still requires some other points to implement to be concerned with, such as altering the powers to be PBAoEs, rebalancing sets to take the new effect into consideration, power FX and UI changes to make them customizable, etc.

I was replying to your opinion that my suggestion makes Tankers less unique. You literally said it would make the AT less unique and I responded with my opinion. Like I mentioned before, if I enjoy cone powers and lining up mobs or using PBAoEs to spread CC, debuffs and controls (because on a Tanker, they're pretty much tickling the mobs with these anyway...even on offensive ATs, it's only doing moderately decent damage to minion types) and Tanker just so happened to be the AT that excels at that, that would be one reason to pick it over other ATs. It also comes with the added SUPPORTIVE advantage of taunting things quicker, so if that Brute flies in and uses their PBAoE and taunts 6 mobs (because their PBAoE is capped at 10 and they couldn't manage to get all the mobs within it when used), the Tanker can follow and use their PBAoE and taunt 11, hitting 5 guys the Brute didn't even taunt at all. It also has the handy mirror effect of Scrapper v Stalker. Overall, their damage is close but Scrappers is better...until ST is focused on and some Stalkers quickly and unequivocally pull ahead of a similar set Scrapper. Plug in Brute v Tanker and exchange ST for AoE and that's a hypothetical I'm trying to explore here. As for pointing out personal insults, I see it's fine if you or someone else does it, but if someone you disagree with does it, that is an arguing point against them. Look here. You are out of your bounds trying to police me. Just leave it alone, okay?

Then you're dismissing the points and presenting others out of context dishonestly. If you acknowledge that it will increase the support, then don't present the suggestion as "Brute-ifying" the AT when doing such would likely be a straight offensive buff. If your issue is with how much damage it adds, then say THAT. Anything else and you're wasting my time getting me to repeat myself. OMG. I KNOW THAT! I know it's not an individual change to some powers modifier. Regardless, it's still isolated to *only* changing the numbers of those powers. That is a lot less work than making a new mechanic or rebalancing other ATs and mobs in relation to the entire game. If you'd stop pretending I've got ulterior motives, maybe you'd know this. Like I said repeatedly, I want Tanker to be more fun and unique. I also would like to use some of the underused cones and help out the Tanker at the same time. I feel my suggestion can facilitate all of these. Your arguments are basically to pull certain points out of context, falsely represent them and then dismiss my rebuttals as toxic. If that's how it's going to be, then so be it. I'll just have to keep putting you in your place.

No, it doesn't make it the opposite. Not does it make it DPS. And it doesn't rely on certain AoE's being extremely weak. If you continue with this perspective, you're relying on arguments that take your opponent out of context and misrepresents them. Link the post, pls. It just means you're being dishonest and leave your observation wide open to criticism.

I asked you which debuffs you are talking about and you mentioned one. I didn't see any other AoE powers with debuffs that would cause a problem with my suggestion. I didn't neglect the support aspect, in fact I *acknowledged* the support aspect as a feature of my suggestion and how it can appeal to that part of Tanker. Unfortunately, you have dismissed that part and focus on the damage. I'll put it in perspective for you: my suggestion does BOTH! It increases damage And support. But apparently, if it touches damage at all, that's making it a Brute in your perspective, which is unfortunate. In a lot of ways. There are powers with differing debuff numbers, with varying damage components, with varying ranges and interactions with other powers. I've given examples. So stop pretending I am pulling statements out of thin air. The snipe parts is an example of a power that is dynamically varying on the buffs you have and what buffs the damage of it. The rest of your post is basically suggesting other stuff. That's fine, I can respond to it at some point.

That is a possibility. It's also a possibility to try something unique. To say there's no need is you just trying to dismiss the suggestion because you have no other argument. And that's a possible perspective if the target cap stayed the same. Adding buffs to powers is another possibility too (as you mentioned in Cross Punch). Go make that suggestion then, it doesn't really pertain to my suggestion though. Looking forward to reading your write-up of it. Also, where were you when the poster that post was responding to said I lack the ability to pay attention? So I can't say something but you can be a forum police and moderate only me? Get the **** outta here with that lol It is a valid response to someone saying "Everyone is telling you how your idea is wrong!" Again, you're not a GM so stop trying to police other people's posts, especially if you're going to discriminate with the people you target with your policing. I didn't have the time to respond because I was dealing with making sure deadlines were met. I'll get back with you later. Also, when you read things on a forum or online, don't take things to heart or personal. People will criticize you in one thread, and be friendly and buddy with you in another. This isn't targeted to just you, Auroxis, but to anyone discussing stuff online.

I'm implying that if -res debuffs are a problem with regards to my suggestion, then you can address that problem by addressing those particular powers with -res. For example, if the issue is with Staff's PBAoE spreading too much -res, just make it so it doesn't increase the target cap by much and focuses mainly on the area. We'll just have to disagree on that then. Consider that it's already a consensus that Tankers don't do nearly as much damage as a Brute and they fall behind them on damage but retain a short lead on mitigation. Walling your perspective options to anything offensive is just going to have to be a difference in opinion. Consider the circumstance that current Tankers had been saddled with the same mods since the beginning as current except their melee mod was set to Defender level (0.65 I believe). If Tanker damage was just that low, would adjusting it really be "just making it like a Brute" or would it just be putting it closer in balance with everyone else? Now take that concept and add a unique gimmick to attain that damage that isn't Fury or Crits. And you'd be wrong. Powers are already inconsistent among ATs. I've given examples. Changing the numbers on powers is something already being done, dynamically even with powers like Snipes. I'm sorry you don't like being wrong but you're wrong on this one.

I'm sorry, have you ever used Shadow Maul? It's a pretty nifty animation if you're not too concerned about top d33Pz, however it's kind of a luck-shoot to hit 3 or more guys with it. Like, to line up that many consistently, it requires a kind of server-lag hop to one side of the mob or back to widen the cone enough to hit that many. that or you need to blast a bunch of mobs against a wall and use corners to bunch them together. I still do it but this is what I'd clarify as "a lot of positioning or herding". The rub is, even still, it's not *that* effective despite the work involved. I'd like to be rewarded *better* for that effort along with a lot of other cones that get left behind. The funny thing is, you're accusing me of being disingenuous with the presentation of my suggestion but I even gave you *numbers* to help you equate what I'm trying to convey but you've seemed to have gotten caught up on verbiage like "not a lot of positioning" and "engaging more" to push your argument that I'm attempting to dumb down powers. If you could manage to put 2 and 2 together, I'm attempting to make the efforts of positioning and herding *more* rewarding than it is, giving you incentive to engage in such actions. Do you feel that wouldn't be the case? As I've clarified above, I disagree. It wouldn't just be "push attack button, get more damage numbers" as cones and PBAoEs still require positioning to maximize their benefits (or do you believe you can just hit 4+ mobs with a 9ft cone? Not even Flashing Steel which is also a 130 degree cone can hit its cap without positioning the mobs first), it would just be *more* rewarding for a Tanker who is mostly just hitting things to taunt them anyway. Also, yes, it would benefit aggro. Also also, what does it matter if an ATs damage comes from ST or AoE? Tankers certainly aren't winning trophies for their ST damage...not even sure why you brought up that point. Perhaps you missed it in your circle +inf/like cycle with Auroxis, but there have been people that have agreed that my suggestion is alright or cool or interesting. There have also been people criticizing it and me responding to their criticism. Me responding to that criticism (like when someone mentioned it might not be workable because of mechanical or code reasons) isn't be being unwilling to take feedback. I'm not defensive (projection much?) either. I have been dismissive though, probably because your opinions suck and so do your ideas. Oh, almost forgot to mention, your idea to give AVs more autohit damage to invalidate players' mitigation already exists and just emphasizes needing healers more. I think its a sucky idea to push to implement more just so you can justify a survival boost for Tankers. And increasing their areafactor would be the product of their inherent. You know? Those little abilities built into an AT that violate certain rules that other ATs abide by? Yeah, those. The overall numbers I suggest could be exaggerations as I didn't plug them all into an excel to measure the precise effects, but the general premise is what I'm selling. It's nice to know, however, that you've resorted to nitpicking minutia to attempt to dismantle my suggestion. Can you state a specific balance problem pertaining to a set powerset so that I can narrow down what the numbers should actually reflect? No one has asked me to be more precise yet but I can if that is what you desire out of my suggestion presentation. That has been up for debate (the "under performing" part). It has been argued that Tankers don't under perform at what they do, it's just not a wide enough gap between them and Brute...or in some arguments, it's because the place they perform better at (aggro) isn't necessary. Well, elaborate and defend your idea then. I'm glad you went back and read the thread though but there are better things you could be doing than everything short of direct personal attacks, to try and make your perspective seem ideal. Good luck lol

Which suggestion was that? I saw you made a suggestion for bypassing aggro cap using pseudo-pets... Firstly, if they are fun then what are we here for? What conundrum is there? I'm repeating myself, but if we're to figure out what the conundrum is, you just have to go back. It's apparently that Tanks are invalidated in certain content. That Brutes are chosen more. That team buffs square the two (Tankers and Brutes) off in mitigation. But if they are fun, should you really care? I'm certain a Blaster can out DPS a Stalker and be looked over for something "better"...and how often do you think players care to argue this? I'd say, it probably has to do with people enjoying Stalkers and them being fun that has something to do with it. I'd postulate, if you are having fun with your Tanker, nothing is stopping you from enjoying it, it functions fine and still have a bit of a niche with its AoE Gauntlet effect...but if you're asking *me* if it's fun, I and others have bones to pick. Secondly, no **** I'm the one saying Tankers aren't fun. I've played some and while they aren't horribly slow, they aren't engaging solo and they are obnoxiously commandeering when played "officially" compared to most other ATs (they tend to be the ones saying "alright guys, stay here...", sure it's safer, but so is pulling...and you know what is pulling is? boring. that's why it's used *strategically*, not every set of spawns lol). Thirdly, I haven't asked them to be morphed into anything. Giving them a melee hook to manage in combat isn't morphing them into Brutes or something else. It's giving them more opportunities to keep track of rather than just who is and isn't taunted. It's giving players a purpose to roll a Tanker over another melee counterpart. I don't even understand why you're imagining some warped version of Tankers when I've literally just suggested amending to what already exists. I can only assume you've adopted the ideology that, as a filthy non-vet Tanker player that is elitist meta focused, I'm trying to give Tankers equal damage to Brutes. I'll just say, you've assumed wrong. That's fine. I was just making you aware so you can partake in the irony of it. I'm just saying, I can use their argument bring your argument into question. And someone else was saying it was pushing them too close to Brute territory. But then, I guess I'm not paying attention lol But I have. You didn't bring up any other counter points, did you? It's fine, because I'm tired of talking about it. I'd much rather discuss your suggestions. You must enjoy listening to me repeat myself: If Tankers are fine, sure, leave them alone...but if Tankers are *not* fine, and there is something they need, I FEEL they need to be made more fun to play, not "better" than Brute at something...because they already are better at something. Now I'm pretty sure I've gotten under your skin. It was probably the "my idea is better than yours" comment. Well, if that's not going to get you to elaborate on your suggestion, then yeah, it's not that I don't care about other people's opinions. I just have no qualms being frank and telling people when their opinions are half-baked or garbage. I'm willing to present and defend my suggestions and take feedback. What about you? LOL, wut? I'm sure you meant to end your post on a bang, but you've lost perspective. A better Shadow Maul wouldn't push them away from what they are any more than stackable or unresistable Bruising. You've come up rather short here since discussion from the very beginning has been trying to give Tanker something more to provide to a team. It's like you've abandoned your entire reason for responding to the thread if you take that stance. Or did you get blinded by your argument with me?

There is an argument here to be made about instant gratification and its overall effects on not only the health of a game but also on the mental well being of a player. Maybe if I were in college for game design, I could make a basic project on it...

Okay. So what? Brutes have an advantage in buff saturated situations. That's how they were designed. There is nothing you can do here except nerf Brutes. You can't push the resistance cap higher, you can't push the defense cap higher, you can't push the aggro cap higher. Pointing to an old anecdote that doesn't relate to the situation doesn't change those truths. So you share the title of most survivable and best at managing aggro in certain buff situations. Is that just not tolerable? Or are you trying to make the argument that Tankers are underpowered? Because, hilariously, I'm having 2 different discussions at the same time: one person telling me I'm of the opinion that Tankers are underpowered and therefore underestimating them, and another person arguing that an imbalance has shifted Brutes into overpowered territory and Tankers into underpowered territory. Apparently, both of you missed the memo when I said I just wanted Tanker to be fun and outlined why I considered my suggestion to be that. I do believe I've handily dealt with both you and Auroxis. Not to sound egotistical, but I feel my idea is just better than yours' lol Not because I'm better or anything, just that you haven't really posted much of an idea at all. You don't have to like my idea though but I feel I have defended it overall: It's not like a Brute (the closest thing Brute gets to such a change is Savage Melee's Rending Flurry at max blood stacks) so it isn't making Tanker "brutish" unless hitting things is just too uncivilized for the pallet of the prestigious selfless Tanker. It's not complicated. It's not overpowered and would barely bridge the gap (if at all) when you completely saturate AoEs among hoards of small sized enemies. It's not infringing on Brute. If I'm to believe William Valence, in highly buffed scenarios, Brute will equal their survival and surpass their damage... Considering the circumstances with regards to buff/debuff numbers, Tanker would only pull drastically ahead with -res debuffs which is limited to a few (one) powers...but if I'm to believe the many proponents of unresistable Bruising, this shouldn't be a problem at all... It's novel. Again, very few options exist that modify AoEs (see: Boost Range for cones, Rending Flurry). Poll players of Dark Melee, Battle Axe, Elec Melee, and all your melee sets with narrow cones and ask how much time and effort do they put in lining up their narrow cones (or if they take some of the cones at all). This would be like making Stalker AS usable in an attack chain...it changes the way you use the sets. If you have anymore counter points, feel free to fire them my way. Looking forward to reading and commenting on the ideas you post as well. Good luck.

Any others?

Again, I've not said their damage is under value, merely stating the fact it is lower which is a statement made in response to your observation that increasing their target cap and /or area of effect skills will also increase the Tankers damage. To put both of our points into perspective: Increasing target caps or areas of AoEs will indirectly increase the Tanker's damage. Tanker melee damage is lower than Brute. Therefore there is room for change. The Brute concept does not invalidate offensive improvements to Tanker. From what I can tell, the only debuffs that is better is -res and -res is a heavily regulated debuffs. How many -res debuffs are in AoEs?

Well we are certainly talking about the tools, but I've been broadening the discussion to what the AT's goals and actions are so as to present more possibilities with regards to tools suggested. And yeah, giving more area and higher target caps does do more for their damage...which is lower than Brute. Brute doesn't have a monopoly on territory with regards to damage. The only way you encroach on Brutes is if they perform the same task in the same way. So long as you don't give Tankers Fury, crits, containment, scourge, etc or something similar AND you don't make ATs obsolete, no encroachment will occur...and you tell me who else gets inherently better coverage AoEs compared to its counterparts. Also, just checked: Brute.KineticMelee_Burst (-12.75% damage debuff) Tanker.KineticMelee_Burst (-14% damage debuff) Brute.DarkMelee_ShadowMaul (-5.625% ToHit debuff) Tanker.DarkMelee_ShadowMaul (-5.25% ToHit debuff) Can we get a clarification on the better debuff numbers? I'm not sure if its just the City of Data site was always wrong or if the mods for buffs and debuffs are independent (with drawing numbers from a non-centralized "buff/debuff" modifier).

Those are what the AT has, not what it's trying to accomplish. It's not accomplishing Bruising or Gauntlet, it's trying to grab attention and hit the mob in the face. How is applying the effects of your secondary (for example, - dmg from Kinetic melee Burst or - ToHit from Shadow Maul) or applying taunt via these skills not support? And how is hitting your AoEs reliably being "more like a Brute"?

Get mob attention and hit them in the face. "keeping a team alive" is broad and outside of the purview of your skill repertoire. At best, you indirectly keep attention away from the teammates that keep the team alive. Same could be said for my stalkers who take down annoying targets that could hinder the efforts of the tank or support. Or a blaster who thins down opposition so that there is less for the tank to have to deal with. I think there is a misunderstanding in what you accomplish as a Tanker. It's no more "keeping the team alive" than a Brute... They just do it differently. And if I'm over exaggerating the damage disparity (I never implied Tanker damage was under par, just not as fun because there is nothing to their melee... They just press the buttons... At least with brute, there's a bar to maintain and manage) you're exaggerating your tank role. Lol as if my dominator doesn't practically invalidate aggro the majority of the time. If we were going with my idea, Brutes would just hit harder and likely faster while Tankers might focus on using their AoEs and cones (that Brutes/Scrappers wouldn't use or might only bother using as ST attacks) to spread as much damage as possible, making up for their weaker damage with improved efficiency. Perhaps you need to admit to yourself that those ATs (Tankers and Brutes) do the same thing: get mob attention and hit them in the face. I'm trying to generalize this so that the vets who don't take in others perspectives, that they are aggrandizing their role in an attempt to make the AT unique... They are putting the role before the concept and thus dooming it to its fate of obsolescence. I said I'm not a Vet Tanker. I didn't say I don't play them. I'd consider a Vet Tanker to be one that played a lot of tankers, live and current, and maybe have a preference toward Tanker. And if Tanker is not for me, then is it for you? If it is, then the AT doesn't need anything. Do you want more people to enjoy or create concepts for Tanker when they'd otherwise would make Brutes? Then stop trying to gatekeep who Tanker should and shouldn't be for.

Just to caveat off that, my suggestion isn't technically more damage but rather reliable damage. The Brute can still do more damage, he just might have to spend more endurance to hit those outside his range or spend more effort lining up mobs to knock down (or likely, just not bother lining them up and use ST attacks or AoEs as ST attacks). I think you need to get out of the mentality of "We shouldn't compete with Brutes!" Wrong. Yes, you need to compete with Brutes because they are your DIRECT COMPETITION! You never hear Stalkers or Blasters say "Aw, guys. We don't need to compete with Dominators or Scrappers. We just have to do our own thing" NO! It's just natural to pit these ATs against each other when they are trying to accomplish the same thing lol. Now they don't have to do the exact same thing to compete but don't just quit the game because you feel it's not your place when it very much is.

Also, def debuffs can be very common and high in caliber. You might get hit with a radiation attack that drops your defense by 15%...that's more than a small purple on its own.

So then the change would be unnecessary. At best, it would be an appeal to the perception that Brutes are superior tanks compared to Tankers and it'd just be throwing those particular players a pity bone but it wouldn't change that people see Brute as superior because damage is king. There are a lot more concerns of balance beyond Brute. Are you telling me that Brute is just OP? Then we should nerf them, right? Or that Tankers are UP? Well do they die too easily? From my perspective, I don't see a balance concern between the two. They are different playstyles (mainly talking about Brute), it just so happens that said playstyle falls in line with the meta and farming. Well now you are getting into complicated implementations. I've seen such suggested before but why not post a full write up?

Def debuff resistance isn't tied to defense, tho. Anything can provide it. But there is no resistance debuff resistance except for resistance itself. I wouldn't be opposed to putting all debuff resistance into the sturdys. For most ATs, the extra resistance doesn't do much on its own. But having the option to pop a yellow for +perception or an orange for res to - perception would be keen.

Even if we're saying Spiderman is a Tanker, I feel the way his attacks would draw attention isn't because of his quips but because of his irritating ability to control you with webbing. Similar to how the RP example I mention where his Energy Melee attacks were literally physically beacons of brightness guiding attention to himself. What I'm aiming at is mechanical. Not the flavor of mechanic because flavor can change. I suppose one could say it takes a certain kind of personality to choose to be a Tanker but I'm not about that jazz. If you want more people to flavor the mechanic to their liking, then give the mechanic a better prop to flavor for more players. That's my perspective because I'm not aiming to make Tankers better tanks, I'm aiming to make Tankers more fun. That was a prospecting suggestion. If the mechanic of variable target caps isn't feasible, then just a base improvement. Someone already mentioned how changing target caps depending on team size is complicated or impossible. So the solution is put the attacks somewhere in the middle. I already made my statement on that but I'll state it again, and feel free to counter it: Aiming to do something you already do the best better will only matter if its noticable. If Tankers are already unkillable and you want to make them 5% more unkillable, who will notice or care? As for aggro management, if it's not hard control, you're stuck at 16. And what does it matter if the Brute or Scrap steals aggro from you, if they don't die, that merely means they don't need a tank. From what I can tell, you've got Vet Tanker players that are salty about "they terk ker jurbs" and are desperately pushing to get that job back...but nobody NEEDS that job. Sure, it's nice to have but not necessary...but this whole issue is predicated on these players wanting to MAKE that role necessary. I'm merely popping in as a novice Tanker and avid Stalker player trying to throw out some ideas for you to make your AT fun because THAT is what's necessary lol. But if the AT is fun to you then please, leave Tanker as is. I'm merely propositioning on some aspect of the game that I'd definitely dig into and have no idea why anyone would be opposed to such a prospect but would rather a much more bland idea like "longer taunt duration" or "more HP". *shrugs*