Tankers/Brutes Should Have Fear Mez Protection

[Snarky]

8 minutes ago, arcane said:

It’s a forum…

Anything goes

[TygerDarkstorm]

15 minutes ago, Ukase said:

I have zero problem interacting with others. But I don't think your opinion or mine is relevant when it comes to the suggestions or feedback of other players. Context matters. 

If the idea reeks, I'm sure our dev team doesn't need us to tell them that. Maybe they do. It's just my feedback that we shouldn't give feedback. Because that leads to what we have here. You give feedback. I give feedback on feedback in general. I don't see any positives in giving folks a thumbs down, unless they're asking for reasons why we couldn't have something. 

 

Changes do not necessarily need to be in line with the style/previous content found in-game. 
 

If you notice, the majority of us who disagree with this suggestion have given reasons for why; we did not just come in and go "lol you suck." And the actual people playing the game should have a say in these suggestions and whether we feel they would be beneficial or not since these changes would affect us. No feedback on this might lead the devs to believe we feel the armored AT's aren't strong enough  and need buffs.

 

First of all, CoH is an MMORPG; that means it is intended to be played with other players. Can you solo? Of course, but that does not mean it should be a total cakewalk. Suggestions like this one that take further agency from you as a player to make conscious decisions about how you're playing and need to approach your enemies are bad. We do not need more things handed to us on a silver platter and basically giving a simple "I win" option, and that's what this would do.

 

We do not need to standardize all the armor sets so that they all have KB protection, and fear protection, etc. etc.; it takes away the flavor and essence of the sets and turns them into the same sets with slightly different effects. Not to mention, making it brainless in how to handle things like mez. And I say this as an uber casual who is not great at making builds or whatever and frequently dies to things others probably consider dumb. The onus is on me to learn how to play better and be better prepared.

 

If fear is that much of an issue, then plan/prep/build for it. Break Frees are readily available.

 

I semi agree that changes don't necessarily need to match previous content, however, this leads to a slippery slope that is not really a good thing. Changes that drastically alter game play need to be scrutinized and viewed with a magnifying glass to make sure they bring a net positive effect.

 

TLDR: Suggestions asking for things to be dumbed down and handed an "I win" button that make it so you don't have to put conscious effort in how to handle your character are overwhelmingly bad.

[OEM61]

If negative responses impact dev decisions then I guess no responses might impact dev decisions as well.
If negative responses do not impact dev decisions (and, on the whole, I do not think that they should for what it's worth), then there is no harm in people voicing their disagreement.

So that is why people respond.

What I am reading here, mostly, seems to be summed up as "Some sets do what you want.  We do not think that the game should be made easier every time someone has a problem with a thing.  All challenge, and a whole lot of fun, would be lost.   There are also other ways to deal with fear effects."

And sometimes disagreement can lead to people "workshopping" the initial idea or just offering some suggestions of things that are in-game already, like here by pointing out certain powers and sets that will help with the fear situation.

=============

My contribution here is much the same.
No set is "perfect".  If your defense set, and any AT with a defense set will do here, has no fear defense/resist then it has other things.  The sets that do have fear defense/resist will be lacking somewhere else.  It wouldn't be a matter of "just" adding fear defense.  Every set that has fear defense would need something else to balance them out against all of the now-stronger defense sets.


But if I really had a problem with fear I would make sure to always be carrying a Break Free or similar.


EDIT:  Oh, and players can also use salvage to get themselves a fear resist buff.  A Radiation Emulator, Linear Accelerator, Supercollider, or Enchanting, Arcane, or Mystic Crucible in your base allow you to get yourself a variety of buffs, including fear resists.

So yeah.  Lots of ways to work around it, and even more when you know to prepare for it.

Edited Sunday at 03:58 PM by OEM61

[Luminara]

8 hours ago, Ukase said:

One of these days, this sub-forum will allow posts by players, with no replies from other players. At least, that's my dream. 

Then they'll create new threads in other sections of the forums to ask questions about the suggestion, present the issues they see or foresee, or express agreement or disagreement with the idea, instead of responding directly to the threads in question.  The only real change will be in how much work the GMs have to invest to maintain an orderly forum.

 

Oh, hey, look at that, a potential issue which you failed to consider has been raised.  Someone looked at your "dream" and thought, "Wow, there's a huge fucking problem that this person didn't notice."  Why, one would almost believe that this is why replies aren't restricted. to provide a variety of perspectives and a degree of oversight that's impossible for a small group to accomplish, and keep it confined to the ideas presented so it's easily accessed and digested.

 

Want some catsup with that foot?

[Ghost]

In Ukase World, a suggestion is made that has a very obvious reason can’t be implemented.

 

No responses to let poster know why, because it’s Ukase World.

 

Leads to a dozen more posts by OP asking why it still hadn’t been implemented - because you know, no one can respond and explain

 

Luckily this isn’t Ukase World, and it could be explained why and spare us 2 dozen repeated threads on the first two pages about a suggestion that can’t be implemented.

 

Final analysis: Ukase World bad!

[Uun]

21 hours ago, Projector said:

I could understand it from the perspective of there being a threat so big/terrifying that even the Tanker gets scared sometimes, but then why do powers like "Increase Density" break them free?

Actually, Increase Density doesn't protect against fear. Neither does Rune of Protection, Dispersion Bubble, Faraday Cage or Force Field Generator. 

 

Other than popping a Break Free, you could take Hybrid/Melee or Destiny/Clarion.

[Ukase]

2 hours ago, Luminara said:

Want some catsup with that foot?

Tabasco, please. 

I have more to say, but most of it is just opinion and may not belong here, so I hid it in a spoiler. 

Spoiler

Anyone can make a suggestion, good or bad, which is great. Even the bad ones can be fun to think about, even if on the surface it's clear some suggestions are more of a vent, than an actual desire to see the change in game. 

I freely admit I'm way too obtuse for my own good. And short-sighted in a lot of areas. Not all areas, thankfully.

Now, I read your replies to the OP. They were clear, concise and made good sense to me. But ultimately - it's just your opinion or preference on whether it should or shouldn't be adjusted in some fashion. And the idea has as much merit as most others I see in here. More than some, not as much as others. 

I don't require a clear concise plan of execution with a long term strategy for a suggestion. And I think it's kind of crazy that some folks here believe for an idea to have any merit it must be in line with the way things have been done in the past. Perhaps on the code side, that makes sense. But on the player side of things, if suddenly we have a new mechanic in play that's different from the things we already do, I don't see the harm in that at all, as long as it's optional and fun for at least some folks. 

If suddenly our OP had fear/terror protection on their tank, it wouldn't change how I play one bit. It wouldn't change how anyone else plays either. It is a non-factor. The only people that care would be the same kind of people that are always concerned about what someone else who's not on your team and not on your mission is doing. It's an easy fix, and it shouldn't make a hill of beans difference to anyone. If folks always wanted to play a tank, but never did because of that fear, I'd be super surprised. Mind you, I am obtuse. It's possible that making this change would suddenly cause all kinds of havoc that I'm too short-sighted to think about. 

But that's just me and my obtuse nature with Tabasco on my size 13. 

 

 

[Ukase]

1 hour ago, Ghost said:

Final analysis: Ukase World bad!

I agree with your final conclusion, but not for the reasons you state. 

[megaericzero]

14 hours ago, Ukase said:

If the idea reeks, I'm sure our dev team doesn't need us to tell them that.

The open beta forum says otherwise.

 

There's been some harsh criticism but also genuine improvements to ideas specifically because of feedback.

[tidge]

20 hours ago, Ukase said:

One of these days, this sub-forum will allow posts by players, with no replies from other players. At least, that's my dream.

 

As soon as we have a forum where players can post suggestions that no other players can read or otherwise be aware of the suggestion, I support this dream.

[Ukase]

15 hours ago, tidge said:

 

As soon as we have a forum where players can post suggestions that no other players can read or otherwise be aware of the suggestion, I support this dream.

So, this comment makes a lot of sense to me. And I guess it has to make me rethink my position. 
I was wrong. 

I do learn a lot from this particular part of the forum, on the "why" or "why not" something wouldn't work. Some of you are excellent at providing data which can allow me to independently reach the same conclusion. 

[Snarky]

1 hour ago, Ukase said:

So, this comment makes a lot of sense to me. And I guess it has to make me rethink my position. 
I was wrong. 

I do learn a lot from this particular part of the forum, on the "why" or "why not" something wouldn't work. Some of you are excellent at providing data which can allow me to independently reach the same conclusion. 

i only post on the forums to get people to open up their minds...