Wait... no Super Strength for Scrappers?

[Erratic1]

Theme is somewhat in the eye of the beholder, and no doubt someone can find a comic created at some point in the last century where the hero is able to bench press planets but leaps into hand to hand regularly.

 

I entered here to object to the notion that because Spiderman once punched the Hulk that serves as an example of a super strength scrapper. In theory Jarvis could punch Hulk too (its not like we see the next panel after Spiderman punches Hulk, though with his agility he no doubt fares better than Jarvis). To the extent I have a preference, I like not all powers being open to every AT. Somewhat contradictory, I am also fine with a few ATs having access to all sets in a category. I would be fine with Blasters and Tankers having every ranged and Armor set, as that is their thing. Beyond them though, I like not every AT having every option that exists for its sets (well...Mastermind pets only existing for them, obviously they would get all).

[MunkiLord]

So it's not enough for you to simply skip some sets, you also want to restrict other people from having the option simply because you don't want it for yourself. That's an extremely selfish view.

[Erratic1]

So it's not enough for you to simply skip some sets, you also want to restrict other people from having the option simply because you don't want it for yourself. That's an extremely selfish view.

 

I beliieve I wrote about my preference and what I like, not about controlling other people.

 

 

[Williwaw]

Most melee-oriented supers have SOME modicum of superhuman strength.  It's kinda like the "basic package"

 

Not even all of them.  Guys like Wolverine, Silver Samurai, Elektra, Daredevil, Flash, Moon Knight, Mockingbird, and Batman don't have super strength (though one could argue Batman's a Stalker rather than a Scrapper).

[jack_nomind]

Not even all of them.  Guys like Wolverine, Silver Samurai, Elektra, Daredevil, Flash, Moon Knight, Mockingbird, and Batman don't have super strength (though one could argue Batman's a Stalker rather than a Scrapper).

 

Wolverine canonically has super-strength.  The Flash has super-everything while utilizing the Speed Force (strength, agility, durability, healing factor); while it's true he can't just lift a bus bare-handed, he can generate an equivalent amount of force.  Moon Knight, Daredevil, Elektra, and Mockingbird all "sometimes" have superhuman strength, depending on where they are in their various natural/magical/mystic serum power cycles.  Batman, similarly, stretches the definition of 'peak human' to absurdity since he canonically can lift a car.

 

In any case, here's

for Scrapper Superstrength.

[Murcielago]

The only reason why SS wasn't ported to scrappers is because it would require a rage nerf but never heard from the devs as to why it was stopping them. They could have easily just replaced rage with build up.

[Redlynne]

no doubt someone can find a comic created at some point in the last century where the hero is able to bench press planets but leaps into hand to hand regularly.

 

FOUND IT!

 

 

Reference links: 

...

...

...

...

[@Ghost]

I feel like Rage could use a conceptual makeover for every AT just for its usability's sake after the crash was "fixed," but other than that I don't see why you wouldn't port it to Scrapper. If all people cared about were the extreme ends of performance, the majority would all be playing the same sets. And I'm not even sure a straight SS port would beat out TW's absurdity to begin with.

 

Conceptually, the idea of limiting set proliferation is ridiculous. It was ridiculous when the live devs were throwing out how a melee AT with guns would be stupid because they didn't think it fit with the "theme," and it's ridiculous to say there couldn't be a super strong Scrapper. Just because one person doesn't have an idea for it doesn't mean a thousand more won't.

 

Obviously this is all volunteer work and it takes time, but arguing for it not to happen is real wild.

[BrandX]

Spider-Man is an example of a Super-Strength scrapper.

 

/em polite cough

 

Spiderman does not have Hulk or even Kryptonian levels of super strength.

Stronger than an average human?  Sure, by a good bit.

REALLY super strong?  There are plenty of comparisons that put Spiderman towards the "lower end" of the super strength scale.  You even provided one.

 

If anything, I'd argue that Spiderman would translate to City of Heroes as more of an Electric Control/Electric Assault Dominator ... with the special effects swapped out for webs instead of electricity/lightning ... for that playstyle of preferring to neutralize foes by binding them up with webbing rather than going for the fist to the face as a first answer to every confrontation or for a knockout blow display of physical power.  Besides, the Dominator TAUNTING their victims for being helpless against the Dominator really fits in with Spidey's habit of taunting/critiquing his adversaries while he makes them look like fools in combat.  That kibitzing/commentary on how the fight is going while the fight is in progress is totally a Controller/Dominator habit.

 

I'd say he has Super Strength.

 

However, let's go with another super strength Scrapper type...

 

Rogue.

 

Super Strength and more a scrapper than a tanker or brute.

[Murcielago]

There really isn't any lore reason to not port SS to scrappers. There are already too many inconsistencies with scrappers being "finesse" argument.

[Gobbledygook]

The argument that Spidey is not a Super Strength scrapper is bull. Remember when Otto took over his body, and fought Scorpion? Not holding back? He knocked the mans jaw off, in one hit.

Tell me that's not super strength.

[Murcielago]

The argument that Spidey is not a Super Strength scrapper is bull. Remember when Otto took over his body, and fought Scorpion? Not holding back? He knocked the mans jaw off, in one hit.

Tell me that's not super strength.

The dude held two halves of a boat together in Homecoming.

[Hopeling]

Spidey clearly has super-strength as a power, but so does Iron Man. That doesn't mean he has Super Strength as a power set. Does he perform foot stomps or hand claps? Are his hits routinely written with THOOM sound effects? None of the powers in the Super Strength set particularly resemble the things he actually does.

[jack_nomind]

Does Superman have perma-rage?  (Does Statesman?)  I don't think using the game's particular implementation is the best guide.

 

Or flipped, in terms of visuals, the closest we have to Spidey's fighting style is Martial Arts.  But of course he isn't a trained martial artist, so how would we reconcile that?

 

I think accepting that we can model Spidey as either throwing chunks of concrete at people (which he does do) or using ninja kicks (which he kinda does) are both close approximations within the CoH setting.

[Murcielago]

Why are we comparing this game to comic book characters? Comic books have a ton of variability from series to series. There is literally no argument for why scrappers shouldn't have SS based on THIS GAME ONLY.

 

Because that is the only argument that matters. I don't care what superdouche or Spidergender did/does/can do. I only care about killing skulls with my critical rage fueled foot stomp. So please stop with the well character x can do y in comic book z because its not a valid argument.

[Erratic1]

Why are we comparing this game to comic book characters? Comic books have a ton of variability from series to series. There is literally no argument for why scrappers shouldn't have SS based on THIS GAME ONLY.

 

Based solely on the game there is no argument for why scrappers should have SS either. It is a wholly arbitrary decision. Should the melee classes all get the same powersets?--Nothing a priori favors answering that question yes or no.

[MunkiLord]

In general giving players more options is a good thing. In the context of this game the argument for it is many people will enjoy playing a Super Strength Scrapper. There has been no solid argument as to why limiting player choice in such a manner is a good thing or beneficial to the game. Some people don't want every set on every AT, cool, they can ignore the sets that don't fit into their concepts and themes. It would be a win-win.

 

I don't understand why some people prefer to limit other player's choices.

[Redlynne]

I don't understand why some people prefer to limit other player's choices.

 

Because that's what the original devs at Paragon Studios decided ... and we still honor their design decisions, even though they're no longer "in charge" of the game ...?

[retiarius]

Times change, situations evolve based on changing needs/desires and discovery. 

 

To try to inhibit change because "they did it this way back then" is to needlessly impose limits that are substantively weak.

[Erratic1]

In general giving players more options is a good thing. In the context of this game the argument for it is many people will enjoy playing a Super Strength Scrapper. There has been no solid argument as to why limiting player choice in such a manner is a good thing or beneficial to the game. Some people don't want every set on every AT, cool, they can ignore the sets that don't fit into their concepts and themes. It would be a win-win.

 

Your opening sentence uses the phrase, "In general", so it is implicit that giving players more choice is not always a good thing. As for there being no "good" argument, you should perhaps differentiate between "good" and "what I like". In particular the value of there being separate ATs (and this has been indirectly stated previously in the thread) diminishes when you have multiple which overlap significantly in capabilities, particularly in the case of melee ATs (four of them) where the end goal for a significant portion of players is the solo, melee god.

 

I don't understand why some people prefer to limit other player's choices.

 

You know everybody can see you edited your post?

 

Personally, I cannot see how your life is made incomplete and CoH loses all value because you cannot currently have a scrapper with Super Strength. By all that is holy, how can the Sun rise tomorrow when life is so empty without the Super Strength scrapper?!?!?

 

Oh...was that overdramatic? Well so was what it was in response to.

[Hopeling]

Why are we comparing this game to comic book characters?

Because we're nerds and like talking about it? :P

 

Personally, I consider the Spidey discussion to be totally separate from the "can there be SS scrappers" discussion at this point. I'm not even convinced Spidey is a scrapper - sometimes he seems a lot more like an SR/ tanker or even a Web Control dominator.

 

But, say, She-Hulk is very obviously Super-Strength, best known for her solo work, starts out at full power instead of having to build up to it, and has never been very good at filling the tank role on a team. It would be hard to come up with a more perfect fit for "SS scrapper".

Does Superman have perma-rage?  (Does Statesman?)  I don't think using the game's particular implementation is the best guide.

I'm not saying that a character has to have ALL of the powers for the set to be a good fit, but they should have SOME of them, otherwise why would you use that set in the first place? Supes doesn't really get mad outside story-relevant occasions (which are better represented by red inspirations) and rarely does foot stomps, but he definitely has hand claps and THOOM effects, so an SS tanker will at least resemble him.

 

My issue is that Spidey doesn't do ANY of the things that SS does. It seems to me like a purely superficial association based on the name of the set rather than what the set actually does, like saying that Superman should have the Empathy power set because he's good at talking people down from ledges. Of the existing melee sets, MA or StJ are much better fits for how Spidey fights.

[MunkiLord]

I don't understand why some people prefer to limit other player's choices.

 

Because that's what the original devs at Paragon Studios decided ... and we still honor their design decisions, even though they're no longer "in charge" of the game ...?

 

Why would we do that? They aren't in charge and no longer run it.

 

 

 

In general giving players more options is a good thing. In the context of this game the argument for it is many people will enjoy playing a Super Strength Scrapper. There has been no solid argument as to why limiting player choice in such a manner is a good thing or beneficial to the game. Some people don't want every set on every AT, cool, they can ignore the sets that don't fit into their concepts and themes. It would be a win-win.

 

Your opening sentence uses the phrase, "In general", so it is implicit that giving players more choice is not always a good thing. As for there being no "good" argument, you should perhaps differentiate between "good" and "what I like". In particular the value of there being separate ATs (and this has been indirectly stated previously in the thread) diminishes when you have multiple which overlap significantly in capabilities, particularly in the case of melee ATs (four of them) where the end goal for a significant portion of players is the solo, melee god.

 

But how exactly is that a bad thing for players that want that? And how is it bad for the players that don't since they can just ignore the options they don't like?

 

 

 

I don't understand why some people prefer to limit other player's choices.

 

You know everybody can see you edited your post?

 

Of course I know people can see I edited my post, that is what I added when I made the edit. You think you caught me in some sort of attempt at a stealth edit?

 

Personally, I cannot see how your life is made incomplete and CoH loses all value because you cannot currently have a scrapper with Super Strength. By all that is holy, how can the Sun rise tomorrow when life is so empty without the Super Strength scrapper?!?!?

 

Oh...was that overdramatic? Well so was what it was in response to.

 

I actually don't care either way about Super Strength and have little to no desire to play the set at all. That's not what I'm arguing for. I don't understand why the fact that some people don't want to play an SS Scrapper means they are for not letting other people play it either. Why can't those of you that don't want to play Super Strength just ignore such an option and be fine with people that do want it, to use it?

 

Edit: edit

[Erratic1]

In general giving players more options is a good thing. In the context of this game the argument for it is many people will enjoy playing a Super Strength Scrapper. There has been no solid argument as to why limiting player choice in such a manner is a good thing or beneficial to the game. Some people don't want every set on every AT, cool, they can ignore the sets that don't fit into their concepts and themes. It would be a win-win.

 

Your opening sentence uses the phrase, "In general", so it is implicit that giving players more choice is not always a good thing. As for there being no "good" argument, you should perhaps differentiate between "good" and "what I like". In particular the value of there being separate ATs (and this has been indirectly stated previously in the thread) diminishes when you have multiple which overlap significantly in capabilities, particularly in the case of melee ATs (four of them) where the end goal for a significant portion of players is the solo, melee god.

 

But how exactly is that a bad thing for players that want that? And how is it bad for the players that don't since they can just ignore the options they don't like?

 

Genericizing ATs too much removes any reason to play other ATs, leading to burnout happening sooner and giving no incentive to play other ATs which a player may find they enjoy. I have come to play and enjoy ATs I otherwise would not have because of powerset restrictions and the desire to play the powerset I could not get elsewhere. And as a result the character building opportunities have mushroomed far beyond what I would have had staying with the ATs I knew I enjoyed.

 

 

I actually don't care either way about Super Strength and have little to no desire to play the set at all. That's not what I'm arguing for. I don't understand why the fact that some people don't want to play an SS Scrapper means they are for not letting other people play it either. Why can't those of you that don't want to play Super Strength just ignore such an option and be fine with people that do want it, to use it?

 

I am not sure how you conclude I do not want to play a SS scrapper. More accurately I do not see a horrible loss in there not being a SS option for scrappers. Want to deal out big damage with SS? Well, Brute exists and has SS as an option. What are you losing with Brute as opposed to Scrapper? Critical hits and lower resistance caps? How horrible!

[Murcielago]

Should the melee classes all get the same powersets?--Nothing a priori favors answering that question yes or no.

Yes because history has shown the Live developers were in the process of porting all applicable powersets to other ATs until they ran into an issue and was usually fixed and then ported.

[Murcielago]

In general giving players more options is a good thing. In the context of this game the argument for it is many people will enjoy playing a Super Strength Scrapper. There has been no solid argument as to why limiting player choice in such a manner is a good thing or beneficial to the game. Some people don't want every set on every AT, cool, they can ignore the sets that don't fit into their concepts and themes. It would be a win-win.

 

I don't understand why some people prefer to limit other player's choices.

Exactly, it makes absolutely no sense at all lol.