SCRAPPERS AND TAUNT

[Bill Z Bubba]

1 minute ago, kelika2 said:

what?

 

I'm wondering why you seem only interested in fiery aura getting a taunt aura but none of the other scrapper sets missing said taunt aura.

[Bill Z Bubba]

3 minutes ago, UltraAlt said:

Why does it make sense?

People avoid being on fire or any other kind of damage for that matter. Someone staying in a fire or in an area where they are getting injured is the part that doesn't make sense.

 

But not when it's a brute or a tank setting them on fire! Then it makes perfect sense!

[kelika2]

Just now, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

I'm wondering why you seem only interested in fiery aura getting a taunt aura but none of the other scrapper sets missing said taunt aura.

Oh thats because [Burn] makes fiery aura what it is and it makes things run away from it making it meh.

Its like a Stun but things running around at full speed still

or enemies noticing [Time Bomb] and vacating the area

[Yomo Kimyata]

I'm going with nerp on this.  Part of the game is allocation of scarce resources (in this case AT and power choices).  I'm not giving up the intellectual thrill of solving a problem so that some jamoke can kill pixels 10% faster for an imaginary currency.

[arcane]

Burn actually does so much upfront damage right now that it’s hardly “meh” anymore even if it makes everything scatter. With procs it’s a 5-target short recharge nuke - even if it had zero DoT damage after the upfront hit.

Edited November 11, 2021 by arcane

[BrandX]

On 11/9/2021 at 6:16 PM, InvaderStych said:

 

That is the trade-off between armor choices. Sets that have a taunt in Scrapper Secondaries are the ones that have an aura where the buff is dependent on the number of mobs within the radius of the aura.

 

Sets that have a damage aura (including Stone after Page 3 goes Live) get a passive damage source instead of a mob-dependent buff and a taunt.

 

SR/Ninjitsu don't need one either because that's thematically weird.  Especially for /Nin. Seriously.

 

There are plenty of ways to deal with runners between *PPs and Combat Teleport.

 

Taunt dynamics and Scrappers are just fine as they are.

 

Would much rather see Scrapper Secondaries trigger Critical Hits; suits the class better and brings them in line with Brutes/Tanks who's inherent effects are buffs to damaging powers in their secondary/primary respectively.

 

So, thank you but no, we'll have a never mind.

 

 

Yes!  Damage Auras should crit for Scrappers!  We're Scrappers!  

 

Now, I'm not for the "No more Taunt Auras going forward for scrappers" but that's also based on what the set is like.  WP and INV you want them in close for those buffs.  Damage...well, find a way to keep them pinned!

 

People never seem to want to slot those slow procs.  Or use the Immobilize Interface 😛

[Deuce Spade]

I had to look up jamoke to see that it's an insult, which does increase the sting, so well done.   Most people arguing for taunt auras don't seem to be doing so out of a need for more influence, so I'm not sure why that was even brought up.

 

Since all you folks with "build around it" answers don't accept the argument that taunt auras make the game more fun, in that they reduce the frustration of chasing after otherwise weak and relatively non-threatening mobs in most cases, could you show me how you're doing it?  I propose you build one of these scrappers that overcome the runner problems, whether through use of provoke or slow or immobilize interface, and compare how effective it is against a scrapper with taunt aura.  I'd like to see how effective your strategies are in a side-by-side comparison.  If there is no significant difference (or even, say, a 10% variance) in clear times, I'll agree that scrappers have no need of taunt auras.  If there is more, you guys agree that while the question of scrappers needing taunt auras isn't settled, that these arguments don't hold water.

 

The problem of difference between secondaries could be minimized by comparing the taunt aura of /EA with non-taunt /SR.  Still apples and oranges, but with the dps increase of each being tied to recharge, it should be about as close as we can get.  If someone has a better suggestion, I'm open to it.

 

You'd need the same primary, obviously, and the same pilot would reduce skill-based variance.  I'd be genuinely interested to see how it turned out.

[arcane]

15 minutes ago, Deuce Spade said:

in that they reduce the frustration of chasing after otherwise weak and relatively non-threatening mobs in most cases

I suggest relaxing a little. Typical game modes are pitifully easy and none of these frustrations are significant enough to worry about. Ignite some electric lettuce while you’re playing or something, damn. 🙂 

 

You can see how easy this game has gotten when primary player complaints are things like “I had to touch my movement keys in combat”. Humans tend to invent their own problems when they don’t have any real ones.

Edited November 11, 2021 by arcane

[Bill Z Bubba]

1 minute ago, arcane said:

I suggest relaxing a little. Typical game modes are pitifully easy and none of these frustrations are significant enough to worry about. Ignite some electric lettuce while you’re playing or something, damn. 🙂

 

Goes both ways. If it's truly insignificant, then it wouldn't matter if they were added in and standardized so that with future powersets no decision need be made regarding taunt auras. Going down the condescending path due a complete lack of any kind of cogent argument won't get ya very far.

[arcane]

Just now, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

Goes both ways. If it's truly insignificant, then it wouldn't matter if they were added in and standardized so that with future powersets no decision need be made regarding taunt auras. Going down the condescending path due a complete lack of any kind of cogent argument won't get ya very far.

I’m not in the cogent argument mood sometimes. When posts elicit major eyerolls, I say so, yes.

[Deuce Spade]

9 minutes ago, arcane said:

I’m not in the cogent argument mood sometimes. 

Clearly.

[General Idiot]

Alternately, what they could do is add a taunt aura toggle to probably the presence pool. That way people who want to add that to their non-tank characters can do so and everyone else can go on their way.

 

If nothing else it'd be interesting to see what that did to the farming meta since half of why brutes are popular over scrappers is their inherent taunt keeping things in burn patches.

[Bill Z Bubba]

7 minutes ago, General Idiot said:

Alternately, what they could do is add a taunt aura toggle to probably the presence pool. That way people who want to add that to their non-tank characters can do so and everyone else can go on their way.

 

If nothing else it'd be interesting to see what that did to the farming meta since half of why brutes are popular over scrappers is their inherent taunt keeping things in burn patches.

 

Problem 1: This still forces 8 of 14 scrapper secondaries to take a pool power in order to function properly like the other 6 do without it.

 

Problem 2: Doesn't help in farm land. Brute /fire runs the show there because brutes cap fire resists at 90% while scrappers cap at 75%. The brute's much higher damage cap in conjunction with combining insps to reds to stay near said cap means that the extra damage that might occur from scrapper fiery aura suddenly having a taunt added to it still won't help enough to matter.

[TheZag]

I like that some scrapper secondaries have a taunt aura and that some dont.  It gives me a little more variance in gameplay.  But i started the topic about if you prefer power sets to be the same or different and this would make them the same so im probably biased on this topic.

[Deuce Spade]

2 minutes ago, TheZag said:

I like that some scrapper secondaries have a taunt aura and that some dont.  It gives me a little more variance in gameplay.  But i started the topic about if you prefer power sets to be the same or different and this would make them the same so im probably biased on this topic.

That's a reasonable argument as far as I'm concerned.  Personal preference not painted as anything else is perfectly valid.

[arcane]

45 minutes ago, Deuce Spade said:

Clearly.

I take full responsibility for earning this reply

 

14 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

Problem 2: Doesn't help in farm land. Brute /fire runs the show there because brutes cap fire resists at 90% while scrappers cap at 75%. The brute's much higher damage cap in conjunction with combining insps to reds to stay near said cap means that the extra damage that might occur from scrapper fiery aura suddenly having a taunt added to it still won't help enough to matter.

If you have 45% fire defense AND healing flames, you’ll be completely safe actively (not afk) farming on a /fire scrapper. The 90% fire resistance allows all my fire farmers to skip healing flames, but if you don’t skip it, you should be covered at 75%. My Fire/Kin troller, Fire/Fire blaster, and Plant/Psy dom all do fine in the middle of the bloody rainbow map with 45% fire defense and 65-75% fire resistance, though the blaster might need a couple of small greens per run.
 

Not sure how the damage would play out though. I get in the zone while farming and can forget to click insps for long periods of time, so there’s that wrinkle 🙂

Edited November 11, 2021 by arcane

[General Idiot]

7 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

Problem 1: This still forces 8 of 14 scrapper secondaries to take a pool power in order to function properly like the other 6 do without it.

 

Problem 2: Doesn't help in farm land. Brute /fire runs the show there because brutes cap fire resists at 90% while scrappers cap at 75%. The brute's much higher damage cap in conjunction with combining insps to reds to stay near said cap means that the extra damage that might occur from scrapper fiery aura suddenly having a taunt added to it still won't help enough to matter.

You're probably right there though I think my definition of what constitutes functioning properly may differ slightly from yours. I don't see mobs occasionally running for their lives to be a problem worthy of changing multiple powersets to correct it. Nor do I think adding an option to correct it for those it does bother makes said option mandatory, any more than taking Hasten or the fighting pool is mandatory. No one's forced to take those either no matter how many people do.

[Bill Z Bubba]

5 minutes ago, TheZag said:

I like that some scrapper secondaries have a taunt aura and that some dont.  It gives me a little more variance in gameplay.  But i started the topic about if you prefer power sets to be the same or different and this would make them the same so im probably biased on this topic.

 

2 minutes ago, Deuce Spade said:

That's a reasonable argument as far as I'm concerned.  Personal preference not painted as anything else is perfectly valid.

 

Agreed. But it forces me to ask why brutes aren't given the same option. I don't need a taunt aura in evasion to build fury on my SR brute. If I want more aggro I can use taunt.

[General Idiot]

1 minute ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

Agreed. But it forces me to ask why brutes aren't given the same option. I don't need a taunt aura in evasion to build fury on my SR brute. If I want more aggro I can use taunt.

Brutes are explicitly designed to be able to tank. Scrappers are not. That's why.

[TheZag]

1 minute ago, Deuce Spade said:

That's a reasonable argument as far as I'm concerned.  Personal preference not painted as anything else is perfectly valid.

 

More specifically, i can run a scrapper with no taunt aura at 'full power' and not be taunting enemies.  Ill sometimes turn the bio armor taunt aura off for certain teams.

 

3 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

 

Agreed. But it forces me to ask why brutes aren't given the same option. I don't need a taunt aura in evasion to build fury on my SR brute. If I want more aggro I can use taunt.

 

My best guess would be that they became the default red side tanks before everything got blendered with going rogue so they are still being given the tank treatment.

[Bill Z Bubba]

3 minutes ago, General Idiot said:

Brutes are explicitly designed to be able to tank. Scrappers are not. That's why.

 

Then no scrapper needs a taunt aura. They aren't tanks.

[arcane]

Just now, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

Then no scrapper needs a taunt aura. They aren't tanks.

If you must have a cogent argument, I’ll stick with this one here.

[Bill Z Bubba]

7 minutes ago, arcane said:

If you must have a cogent argument, I’ll stick with this one here.

 

Already stated the three options earlier. Removing all taunt auras from scrappers is number two. But there's also a 4th option. Remove brute taunt auras where they don't exist for scrappers. I suspect that would be the least well received.

[Deuce Spade]

The thing that arguments in favor of provoke (or taunt) miss is that it's limited to 5 targets.  The thing "brutes and not scrappers are designed to tank" misses is the presence of taunt auras on some current scrappers.  It also assumes a need for tanks, and that scrappers will be stepping on tank toes.

[arcane]

10 minutes ago, Deuce Spade said:

The thing that arguments in favor of provoke (or taunt) miss is that it's limited to 5 targets.  The thing "brutes and not scrappers are designed to tank" misses is the presence of taunt auras on some current scrappers.  It also assumes a need for tanks, and that scrappers will be stepping on tank toes.

Fair point RE: Provoke. Tbh I only take it on Masterminds.

 

RE: current scrapper taunt auras.. well frankly based on a number of dev comments and the illogical inconsistency of it all, my impression is that some scrappers currently have taunt auras *by mistake*. Aka not by intentional design consistent with any design vision we’ve heard from the top.

 

RE: I know tanks aren’t technically needed in the current meta because of disastrous power creep, but if we are to really assume the game’s design does not intend to encourage the practice of tanking, why have taunt effects or powers *at all*?

Edited November 11, 2021 by arcane