Defense_Options

Love the numbers was hoping they could be lowered or removed. I just don't like toggle dropping. I think it was unfair that it was so easy to remove the defenses of my scrapper or tank and yet things like unresistable damage and unresistable debuffs were in the game. Just seemed to much.

Ok well to keep them nerfing revive and MoG I suggest we start talking those powers up.......ok never mind I could never post anything without laughing trying to do that.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
just read the notes. not bad, guys, not bad at all. All we get is a moderate nerf to a power that the majority of us skip anyone. I can live with that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ditto. While I would like it changed. I guess it wouldn't be an issue without some kind of Regen nerf.

[/ QUOTE ]

Think we can keep them only nerfing MoG from now on? Would be nice.

From what I have read on whole defense based sets taken all in all should see this as good. In so much as they didn't floor their foes accuarcy under most circumstances anyway. Only when you could rely on flooring does it hurt. Elude and MoG can generally count on flooring even the biggest baddies. While Elude takes a hit the damage is mitigated because SR as a whole is getting a buff and they can deal with double the low amount of damage Elude lets through now. On the other hand Regen is seeing no buff and with the way MoG prevents healing for 3 minutes any extra damage can be ruinious.

If you are say a Ill/FF controller I would be happy as this helps you since most of the time you can't floor the chance to get hit so in general this is a buff. Just in rare always flooring cases is it a nerf.

Well I have a question prehaps someone can find the answer to. If you hit with an attack, say KO Blow, does that mean your taunt also hit? Or does it work that out seprately. And if it does work it out sperately does that mean I can miss with the attack but not the taunt part?

[ QUOTE ]

and is it me or has this become the OH NO ANOTHER ISSUE AND MORE DOOOOM FOR REGEN thread?


[/ QUOTE ]

No one is talking DOOM except you. So prehaps you should avoid such overblown statements if you don't like them.

[ QUOTE ]

What fascinates me is how new this discussion is to the MMP world. I’ve played lots of games over the years, and usually customization wasn’t that big of an issue. I won’t use any particular game as an example, but rather I’ll take D&D 1st edition to demonstrate a difference. Magic Users then couldn’t use swords. Just couldn’t. They couldn’t really wear armor, either. The major reason for this was balance: a sword wielding, armor wearing mage rendered any regular ole fighter pretty darn useless. There was certainly some grumbling – after all, didn’t Gandalf wield a sword? – but pretty much it’s been accepted. In fantasy games today (online and other), the same limitations continue to apply…When designing City of Heroes, I remember a lot of people telling me that it was just plain wrong to give people so many costume choices in the beginning. People wanted to earn individuality over time, not receive it. Yet, to this day, I think character creation is the single most praised element of the City.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just as an aside 3.5 edition D&D allows for that mage to wear armor and carry a sword. He spends feats and takes spell failure for it but he can do it if he wants. D&D apparently thought more choice is what the people want.

One of the failures of some MMO (since we aren't naming names) is that they lack costume customization. As a matter of fact I know one where they make seprate RP servers that has had many many posters complain that all of one race or another look alike and that all armor at the top end looks too similar. The fact that costumes in Co* are customizable is a big draw and I really enjoy that. I think it is one of the great strengths of Co* prehaps you might take a second look and see how many others thinks that as well.

I think part of the issue is how much damage people do compared to how much health they have. They could have simply given everyone a base 25% damage reduction in PvP against other players. Wouldn't have messed with PvE at all that way.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You know with SR scaling and defbuff protection think there is any chance of regen getting -regen protection? Every other defense has it's own defbuff protection now doesn't it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Except, as you know, the -regen effect were added simply to screw regen.

[/ QUOTE ]


Well of course but maybe they will relent, after all ED still bites and all.....Heck give us -regen protection and I can live with no tier 8 and 9 powers worth taking .... oh well you know what we have now.

You know I really don't mind the gobal defense nerf so much I hate IH as a click always will but still really you can learn to live with it but ED just still feels so mean. Ah anyway so anything good coming our way? New powersets or anything they might have said? I know not for I7 but maybe they hinted at something fun for a later issue. I would love an energy based primary (fire/cold even) and I would love a pure resist set that wasn't energy based.....(you know like many used to play Inv back before....)

I see you noticed Castle's post about the values of SR's defense (stalker wise) I wonder if those are the same for scrappers that should really mess with Arcanaville's calculations on that comparison sheet don't you think?

You know with SR scaling and defbuff protection think there is any chance of regen getting -regen protection? Every other defense has it's own defbuff protection now doesn't it?

Well that and close up the defense wholes there is no need for. Heck make it IH that lasts 3 minutes and make IH truly completely heal you just give it a recharge equal to the crey pistol....

You can shine a turd ..... oh sorry I remember you like claws........so they will be brought up to par with the other primaries I hope? It actually would be nice to see them working maybe will even give them a try myself though honestly I really want a brawling set and martial arts just isn't it for me.

[ QUOTE ]
Just getting ready for I7.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know I returned just to post in this thread.

So besides MoG getting slightly worse come I7 is there anything else that is changing for regen come I7?

Hi all figure I'd post here just to visit.

It's been a while since I4 and that huge thread back then but I really feel truthfully that was the point were Regen became the enemy of Jack and the Devs. We gave them heck over that. They deserved it as its obvious now that Regen was certainly not unparalleled, controllers were solo'ing every AV, my Inv tests showed an I4 Inv tanks could herd and kill groups of +7s including bosses and lts(22 and I let them beat on me for a literal hour just to see if they could hurt me, I even dropped TI for fun and still nothing....I posted this all in a tanker thread back a ways and many tankers came out to see me do it or try it themselves). I lament the change of this game into something I really don't enjoy much anymore and so I am not likely to renew come Jan 20th. Till then I will post a bit lurk a bit and watch. I'm not sure there is a change that would bring me back outside of something leadershipwise but we shall see. Good luck to all and Merry Christmas.

[ QUOTE ]
Umm...so nowadays what do you call a tanker that is not inv or stone that can still take all the aggro for an 8 person rugged spawn without support?
A fluke?

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you responding to the person you hit reply to? If so he said nothing about Inv or Stone tanking and others not he said scrappers can tank just as well as tanks. I tend to agree with that.

Scrappers with a team of 8 as you say will have support in the form of their teammates. Even if all 7 are blasters. The sheer damage output of the team will be immense they should have little trouble destroying anything they find quick and easily. Actual tanking will be limited but what need there is for it the scrapper can handle Add in controllers and/or defenders and that scrapper can handle a whole lot more plus with controllers you get holds and possible pets to add to the aggro control equation. Sure a tank can tank but in our test on heroic we found no need for anyone to tank, we replaced the tank with scrappers and a defender and noticed no drop off in survivability. Strangly we also noted no drop off in XP/minute either. And by the way we did test Ice/Fire and Fire/Fire also not just Inv and Stone. Point was on heroic we simply didn't notice a real need for anyone to "tank". We are talking about testing on higher difficulty settings and seeing if that changes. That really will be the test. If we find that the tank does end up adding value to the team in the higher difficulty setting that would be something, if not then I think we may just have a problem. If there's no need to "tank" then what value does a tank have? But first we need to show that before we try and answer it.

However certainly on heroic the question really is what need is there for a tank or a defense buffing defender if there doesn't seem to be any real need for defenses?

[ QUOTE ]

defense is not important


[/ QUOTE ]

Hey........


Oh you mean the protective thing....ahh better.


Yeah on heroic the need for anyone to go aggro gathering is just not there. Any competent team can handle things anyway they like. It does make defensive sets like Force Fields less useful or even not useful at all on teams playing at heroic. Rad, Ken, and Emp all have great ways to up your damage so they will shine on that level. It also implies that on herioc since damage is king Blasters/Scrappers with a buffer or two should be the ideal. I think using /Fire did weight things a bit because as an AoE set it does do a better XP/minute deal then a less AoE built set. Still it does make things really odd. The issue is can they balance things for heroic and for Invincible levels? I tend to think they don't think so and thus they gave up on that and just went with this. Makes a mess out of ATs and defenses sets though.

Nice trolling but meaningless. Doesn't change that a tank's roll is on any team is questionable on the level they are determined to balance things on. If you seriously need a tank on heroic then you don't know what your doing.

[ QUOTE ]

It's possible it does draw something today.


[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't know about today. I haven't played Defense Options for the most part since I3. His guild went poof with I4 and by then I already had my scrapper as my main anyway his guild was far more active.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

From what I've heard all the balancing is for heroic level situations. So it's fair to ask what does a tank do on heroic when there is no need for anyone to "tank".

And healing does generate aggro I believe. Not like a taunt but I thought it did.

[/ QUOTE ]

The number of times my FF defender drew aggro while doing nothing but running disp bubble and putting bubbles on team mates convinces me there is aggro here.

I can't say so much with others, because I've never played empathy, and everyone else has debuffs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well it just that I recall drawing aggro with good old Defense Options when all he did was fire off a heal (Rad/Ene) not a debuff because when I first started playing I didn't use them, hey I tried them but was unsure they did anything other then get everything mad at me.....

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's the problem that I see. On heroic in a 5 man team during our testing I really didn't see the need for anyone to "tank" for the team.

[/ QUOTE ]


On Heroic, even with 5 people, there's barely a need for anyone other than the mission-owner and a buddy. I think higher difficulty settings for your missions really do make the game more fun.

Anyway, how about this:

Heals generating aggro.
Is that crazy?

I'm just wondering if the problem could be that the people who should need a tank most just.. well, don't need one?

[/ QUOTE ]

From what I've heard all the balancing is for heroic level situations. So it's fair to ask what does a tank do on heroic when there is no need for anyone to "tank".

And healing does generate aggro I believe. Not like a taunt but I thought it did.

If defenders and controllers didn't have debuffs the fact tanks can reach higher numbers might matter more. But they do and so even with tankers reaching higher resist numbers it matters much less because defenders/controllers can defbuff the same for both a team with a tank or without.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
His one posted test involved using the broken version of Invincibility. He also completely glosses over the fact that when buffed, any AT can Tank, so what then is so special about Tanks?


[/ QUOTE ]

The goal of the game is to make sure there isn't an ideal team composition. So, yes, a Scrapper, with buffs, can tank, but not as well as a Tanker. Why? Because 1) a Tanker starts with higher resistances/defenses and 2) he has Punchvoke and thus can manage the aggro better.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's the problem that I see. On heroic in a 5 man team during our testing I really didn't see the need for anyone to "tank" for the team. Each of us was more then capable of handling whatever aggro came our way and or supporting each other if a need arose. So if there is no need for anyone to "tank" on that difficulty what job does the tank have on a team playing on heroic?

I am personally beginning to think that at higher difficulty levels a tank might find a place were he needs to "tank" for the team because of the increased danger but while he has punchvoke to grab aggro does not a scrapper's high damage output also grab aggro and since that scrapper does have the highest brawl number doesn't he do enough to ensure he has that aggro over other members of the team. And while sure the tank has higher caps the only caps that really matter are resist ones and not every defender/controller can even buff these.

In your ask stateman section you just about say the reason tanks got nerfed in I5 was so sonic defenders had a place, but with ED coming were they not going to have a place anyway so was I5 really needed to do that?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have to ask. Was this done on a test server or a live one?

[/ QUOTE ]

From reading what he did as a test, leaving a guy on auto attack, attacking something, for 4 DAYS, without killing it... you can't DO that on live, so it HAD to be an internal test server. Am i right? You can't do crap like that on a live, or even OUR test server.

[/ QUOTE ]

I tend to agree which is why I would also say it proves nothing. Have we not seen how reliable those test servers are already?

I have to ask. Was this done on a test server or a live one?

1) Yes, I remain of the belief that it hits test almost exactly as it will hit live. (It's the regenner part of me.)

2) Sure. It seems like a good buff for all, better for some than others and that in itself is note worthy. If we agree that all tanks should be balanced with each other and agree that the current ranking might be:

Stone > Fire - Inv > Ice then this change could certainly push it to Stone > Inv - Ice > Fire. We also don't know what the change to EA and Invinc fully are, they could be another buff or actually in the end be a nerf.

3) I would say yes. The reduced rate it checks is likely an attempt to prevent stacking. If it works it makes Inv game again.