Dispari

I do, just because it allows me to rush right up to the point where I buy IOs for them. Low level content is boring... don't know how many times I beat up Bloody Vicious and Pitbull. I tend to head right over and buy a jetpack, then work with friends and stuff to get leveled to 22+ as quick as possible.

I am looking forward to playing through the GR content though.

I agree we need more sitting poses for girls. I don't see why the "male" poses are unacceptable. And I too don't like the fact that so many are just the same thing. Also, no matter what my body scales, my hands clip through the ground when I do any ledge sit emote.

Though I believe those are more BABs' territory.

That's chump change. I give all my lowbies 5m.

That sounds pretty absurd in the other direction. Near-immunity to a damage type, and they drop so often that everyone should pretty much always have one?

And my answer is that A) any support character you make should do well so there's no need to make a fuss over it in a game that's very lenient on team makeup, and B) you'll have a lot more fun playing things you enjoy than playing things you think you have to play.

If the OP still insists on min/maxing and making things that other people think he should play, just do Kin and get it over with. Kins are always welcome in any content.

It's basically like asking "What's the best AT?" and expecting a definitive answer. There isn't one.

That's how unneeded that step is.

Funniest comment so far.

If you're looking for some kind of secret answer or a build that's totally necessary and designed just for the ITF, you won't find one. There's nothing in this game that's required in anything. Play what you like, rather than what you think the game, or other people, want you to play.

In fact, the ITF has been done by just Blasters and just Stalkers, so I think it's safe to say the only thing that you actually need to take on an ITF is A) players, and B) some damage.

What comic elements are missing? I mean besides FREEM!

It's too early to claim it's overpowered.

We know nothing about it. Even so, it's only 30% damage and secondary effects. Maybe it has a high endurance cost. But even then, what situations are there where changing ammo mid-fight would lead to an overpowering advantage?

I don't doubt that GR will increase our playerbase, even if only by a small amount. Not only are we getting new stuff and content, but the graphical update should appease people who think that CoH sucks because it's old or CO has better graphics.

What I don't think will happen is we'll have a "massive" increase in players. Minor, modest, moderate, probably. But not "massive."

What kind of time frame are you talking about? An increase over time isn't unexpected. But did it triple its subscribers in the space of one month from one update?

We also don't know how he was slotted, what kind of bullets he was using, or the resistance of those Clockwork. Even if he was using another element, 70% of his damage would've been lethal, and against robots, his damage would be predictably low.

Retention of current players by giving them something to do. A reasonable increase in playerbase as new people and friends of existing players try stuff out.

I don't think there's anything an MMO could do that would result in a "massive" increase in players. People either like the stuff the game has, or don't. Expansions add more stuff for people to like.

I'm inclined to agree.

Underwater mall zone.

...on the moon!

Which raises a good question... how will we be able to tell if someone's a rogue or vigilante and thus available for teaming? I suppose if there's a Brute standing in Talos it's obvious, but will the search results be able to search the Rogue Isles for available people? Will it only return rogues and vigilantes and not pure villains? Will I be able to see in my friends list if they're a rogue?

I don't think side-switching will make certain ATs useless. I think the general trend of each AT will continue. Tanks, Defenders, and Stalkers will still be few and far between because other ATs do what they do and more. I think side-switching will just make that more apparent.

Actually, me and the people I know would. I'm not saying I cross my arms and go "NO TANKS!! " but I'm not going to actively seek one if I have a Brute. Once support is taken care of, I stop looking for support. Once I have a Brute, I'm not going to look for a Tank.

And why would I? Think about it. If a Brute can tank, what do I need a Tank for? What's he going to do? Not die even better? Invent new levels of staying alive? He's sure not going to contribute damage the way a Brute would.

It's worth saying that I have at least 6 Brutes that can handle +2/x6. Three of which can do +2/x8. The WP one can do that WITHOUT IOs. And that's solo. On a team, when we're talking about having at least a Corruptor or Controller or somebody to heal/buff/debuff? Unless your Brute and/or support are just tragically bad (in which case the Tank would be just as bad off), that Brute's not going to die.

Imagine you're on a team with 4 Controllers. And there's a Defender standing over there. Now I'm not saying "Oh maybe he's a kin and we could use that," I'm talking all your bases are covered with those Controllers. You have buffs, debuffs, RES, DEF, and heals out the wazoo. Now are you going to stand up and go "Oh boy, we sure need a Defender!" I doubt it.

Scrappers aren't Brutes. The HP difference is more significant than it seems. And one thing many of my Brutes have in common is that they go over 75% RES at times. That aside, the major difference is that Brutes taunt, while Scrappers don't. Some Scrapper sets have a taunt aura, but I'm talking... every Foot Stomp, every Whirling Axe, every Thunderstrike is taunting foes and making sure they don't attack allies. Not dying is only part of the tanking equation; the other part is taunting and holding aggro. The only reason Scrappers aren't taking up Tank jobs right now is that they can't hold aggro like a Brute or Tank can.

If this is how it goes, then there's really no point to this argument at all. But in my experience this is the exception and not the rule. People might just throw a Tank on a team even if they have 4 Brutes. But if they're as random and carefree as you suggest, there's also nothing stopping them from just filling up a team with Blasters and Stalkers and having them all die because they're uncoordinated and incapable (not that good players couldn't make it work).

In my experience, even PUGs put some thought into their team makeup. Those that don't don't tend to last very long after they form a totally incapable team and then run off and wipe several times in the first mission. People learn what works and what doesn't. And most people who are giving it any thought wouldn't intentionally go recruit a bunch of tanks (Brute or Tank), because there's no point in having more than one, maybe two tanks.

The teams I prefer to build are:

1-2 Brutes / Tanks
2-4 Corrs or VEATs (MMs) / Controllers (Defenders)
1-4 Dominators (Stalkers) / Scrappers, Blasters (HEATs)

Things in parenthesis are ATs I'll take, but not my first choice. Once things roll around, it'll look more like:

1-2 Brutes (Tanks)
2-4 Corrs, Controllers, VEATs (Defenders, MMs)
1-4 Dominators, Blasters, Scrappers (Stalkers, HEATs)

I vary and work around it when necessary. It's not a definite rule. It's just a nice formula I live by, because it's pretty foolproof

Like I said, I'm not going to refuse Tanks on my team. But if I have to pick between Brute and Tank, I'll probably take Brute. And if I already have a Brute, I'm definitely not going to look for a Tank. The ATs I named as my primary choice are more of a "general assistance, help the team out" style, while the others are more of an "I can only do one thing" style. True, Blasters only do one thing, but it's not like damage is ever wasteful. There's no point in adding a Tank if you already have a Brute who can tank.

Not to mention it wouldn't make sense. What good would incendiary and cryo rounds do? Only four powers in AR actually shoot bullets. Then you have a grenade, a beanbag, two flamethrowers, and shells. Would it be shooting cryo fire? Incendiary beanbags? As amusing as that might be.

It definitely wins on some sort of notes/comments ratio.

What about... Terra Volta?!

The devs have also clarified that even though vigilantes are heroes and rogues are villains, you CAN switch over and become a FULL hero or FULL villain, complete with market and such.

So what will happen with Ouroboros? Is our origin story retconned, or do we get to break out of jail blueside now? vv

In a business, things are going to continue rolling up until the very last second. The people drawing characters for the game aren't going to be the same ones counting money and passing out paychecks. They don't necessarily know that the game is about to tank, except for maybe office rumors. They're still paid to do their jobs, in the same way that if a fast food place goes out of business, they aren't going to stand around not making food for a couple months in advance.

What ends up happening is that one person is busy working on the stuff they're paid to do (like flipping burgers), while someone else, somewhere else, looks at the books and says "This isn't working," and shuts down the operation. I'd say NC Soft did a good job of giving each of those games a fair shake and not just abandoning them at the first sign of trouble. But you have to draw the line somewhere and cut the cord if it's just not working out.

If anything, it'd be suspicious if they just stopped working on the game and did nothing for 3 months, but kept raking in dough from subscribers until they shut down. That would imply they knew stuff was going to crash and burn, but wanted to milk it. The fact that they were working right up until server shutdown shows that they were at least giving it an honest try to see if they could turn things around.

The problem with this belief is that it aims more toward the concept that NC Soft is willing to drop a game the moment it twitches an eye, but that's not the case. If the other games, or the rollercoaster that is CoH's lifespan is any indication, NC Soft cares a lot about keeping a game open if it can.

In the event of the other games, they just weren't turning a profit. It wasn't the slight disappointment of something not doing QUITE as well as you wanted it to so you canned it, it was more that it was just utterly failing. CoH isn't utterly failing, and doesn't need to be dragged out of a grave and revitalized.

Dropping CoH because its sales aren't quite as high as you hoped, despite the fact that it's still turning a profit, would be a terrible idea from just about any vantage point you could possibly look at it from.

If NC Soft really did want to kick CoH to the curb, they could've done it ages ago when we dropped to the FREEM! 15, or before it became Paragon Studios, or before they started hiring lots of new people. There was plenty of opportunity back in the day when the game was at the bottom of the slope.

Now that the game is on the upward trek of this roller coaster ride, and has an expansion just around the corner, it would be utterly insane to snub the game. Not to mention the dumbest business model imaginable.