EvilGeko

ED isn't necessary period. If you give people [X] number of slots, then you should let them put whatever they want in those slots. If you want "three max" then you don't allow powers to be enhanced beyond three slots.

I agree with that to a point, but I look again to the X-men which have created legitimate new stars in Wolverine, Deadpool, Cable, Gambit, Rogue. Only Wolverine (and perhaps Rogue) have really hit the broader public consciousness with the X-movies, but the others have had their own books and series and the most recent of them: Cable and Deadpool were created in the 90s.

So I think there's a space for new characters, but we comics buyers have to actually read the books. For example, there was this fun series called Runaways that Marvel supported for a couple of years. Decent book, all unique characters. Gone now, because we readers would rather read four version of Wolverine each month!

May I ask what's the primary/secondary of that character?

Why not just play them?

DUDE!

You forgot Warshades!

When I want to do a Task Force, no matter the AT I'm on, I'll lead and recruit, so I'm not just blowing smoke.

I take the first 7 people who want to come. For anything. I think badges are stupid, so I don't care how many times people die. I want people to be having fun, because people tend to play better that way, so I tell people to bring what they want. I've been on TFs with 2-3 Stalkers since GR moved so many red-siders to blue. So long as they're killing something, I don't care that a Scrapper or Brute could do it 10-20% faster.

I'm a min-maxer. And I know this for sure. This game is too frikken easy to be wasting time worrying about these small swings in performance when building teams. And that said, the only reason for the disparity IMO is: 1) Stalkers who try to rely on AS; 2) the general lack of AoE in the AT. The first is correctable.

It was better before Shield Charge was brought down to earth, but my FM/SD Scrapper doesn't worry too much about the few hits that get through. The bastids don't live that long!

This. The three live examples of the Turbine model of F2P have turned out well. Two of those games while dealing with aging games were not unsuccessful like the most recent champion of online F2P .

I don't know if CoH is considering going F2P or not, but it's not something that can be ruled out because the game is doing OK.

No, it doesn't. It adds more choice and flexibility than almost any change we've seen before.

MemphisBill keyed me into what I'm arguing against. It's Defender drama. I truly didn't understand what you folks were talking about before he made that comment about healers. And while I've never understood healer drama either (I spent years arguing against the myth of the kicked non-healer), I understand enough now to know that I need to get out of the way!


So I will flee the field of battle today, you guys win!

People can kick KB users now. Providing a choice doesn't really change the status quo.

As for the rest, I do think we've argued the point enough. I don't think the devs will do anything to change it, but I thought that about MoG too, so I thought I would provide the idea.

Now replace whatever power you were using in that situation with any power in Fire Blast. Would you have had to do anything other than fire it off? KB powers need to be planned around, because they INTERFERE with other powers that rely on the mobs location.

Can that be used to your benefit, sure at times. That doesn't invalidate the general case. These are all exceptions that prove the rule.

Think of it in math terms. The Kheldian story arcs are boring piles of repetitive council mashing. I.e. they are a net negative. The SoA arcs are at least in the positive territory if only just.

How do you see being able, but not forced to, turn off KB as a nerf?

Well, maybe the developers thought that underlined one was a bit more important.

I'm not anti-KB. I'm pro-choice. Similar to the more famous version of pro-choice, I think that choice gives the sets that revolve around KB more options other than "Don't do it."

And like the more famous "pro-" group, many of you folks tend to demonize the opposition and make them out to be evil. I find both "pro-" groups to be counter-productive more times than not.

Actually, it will be a choice much more than you think. What I think most likely is that teams will be fine with KB most of the time. There are some encounters where KB will be more helpful than others and some where it will be downright dangerous. With a toggle, the player can dial it down and back at will.

No, it's a fact. That KB interferes with a large number of powers is a fact. It's a verifiable statement. You knock something out of AAO aura, you have lowered the damage of the shield user in question. That's not my opinion.

What is my opinion, but it's more of an inference based on the above fact, is that situations like this, cause the general lack of popularity for KB heavy sets.

But what if I need the extra to-hit that Invincibility and Soul Drain (I can't tell you how many times, this has happened to my brute) provides. Or the damage that Against All Odds or Soul Drain provides. What if the mob could have been dead (100% mitigation) if it weren't knocked out of my Lightning Rod or Shield Charge or Quills or Ice Storm, etc.

That really would be a nerf to KB users.

As to the last underlined. This is what I'm talking about. You're stating here in no uncertain terms that the people who enjoy nuking spawns don't matter.

Yes, it would. No offense, but I question the tactical skill of anyone who prefers Kheldians to SoA.

How is a choice a nerf? Because people won't feel bad anymore for having to accommodate your playchoices?

You're hysterical. I offer a choice. You may choose to equate that with a nerf if you wish, but I shall not waste time countering an argument stated in false terms.

This has been happening for years already. It's why I've been on groups who pass by on Peacebringers and hardly ever see Energy Blasters at all. Perhaps that's all we can expect at this point.

But there is another way, that doesn't include changing anyone's playstyle. If the devs have the vision to embrace it.

Not likely. What's more likely to happen is that once people can control KB, team leaders will feel much more empowered. Right now, if KB was causing problems, I wouldn't blame the player. It's not their fault. I don't expect people to waste the time learning how to control something that's supposed to be helping them. But after this, I can now ask them to remove the effect for the good of the team.

What is likely is that some pro-KB folks will come to the boards and complain that teams won't let them use KB.

Agreed, so do you acknowledge then that KB is actually a detriment? Because taking what you said to its logical conclusion, this explains why Energy Blast, which is a perfectly fine set otherwise, doesn't have anywhere near the popularity of a set like Fire Blast.

IF a player chooses not to learn how to use KB, why is that a problem? I honestly don't understand. Are you saying that sets like Energy Blast are balanced around having to learn to use a potentially problematic secondary effect? Because if so, Energy Blast needs something to compensate it for being saddled with KB, no?