Gilia

I agree with this, but I just wanted to note that it's not quite so strict. Many MMOs allow beta testers or people who preorder to get a jump start. Not a lot, but some. Course many MMOs are failing, too..

I also don't think you can say it's the "whole point." Exercising your creative juices as a writer or game creator is probably up there too... oh yeah, and money!

I don't follow the logic. Because Going Rogue is built on the same engine, its content is bypassable? Because you will have the same AT options, you don't have to ever see the first area of Praetoria? However, if the powers were switched around or a new engine were introduced then content could not be skipped?

I mean, I agree with the conclusion. However, in light of Going Rogue it doesn't follow that they "wouldn't justify" letting you transfer old characters. If anything, logic dictates that Paragon Studios is fine with content being skipped (hence the majority of it is now), if you should so choose.

I'd really just like to see something similar to Going Rogue over again down the road. An installation that is fit for modern hardware, but you could still play with friends on the old setup. More powersets, a new world/city to explore, etc.

And why is that you say? I think a "new" City of Heroes would suffer the same fate as the majority of MMOs coming out of late. Too few players free from another MMO with the modern hardware that new ones require are out there.

Yeah! Group Fly ftw!

Edit: ;-)

It's gotta be a mixed bag based on play style...
My favorite ATs are Blaster, Soldier, Peace Bringer, Stalker... probably in that order. Blasters and Stalkers just do so much sheer damage out of the box. Well done, they are making others feel silly for a whole 49 levels.

Peace Bringers and Soldiers I like because the sick versatility. Properly built, they can go toe to toe in melee or do above average ranged damage. They are so unique.

It's pretty subjective though. Brutes doll out a ton of damage, too, I'm just not as into them. I am not a big fan of Warshades, but that's mostly in "light" of Peace Bringers.

If I had to pick a side, I'd say hero over all. I find Corruptors to be this awkward inbetween -- not keeping pace with a Blaster and not as team oriented as a Defender. I get a similiar feel about Dominators in light of what Controllers can do. The only 1:1 correlation that I really have to give Villains is I'd rather play a Stalker or Brute than a Scrapper.

It's so subjective though.

Why /devices? Devices gives you smoke grenade and cloaking device. You can literally sneak up to almost anything, take the same amount of time to deploy a time bomb as an end-crash nuke would have you end-crashed and do end-crash nuke damage.
/Traps on the other hand? Less damage and no stealthing.
I love it in /devices. Probably wouldn't take it in /traps. Obviously it doesn't fit all playstyles. End crashing nukes don't after all, and it's a clear "secondary" form of that (pun intended).

I don't hate group fly the way most people do either, but that's cause I get nostalgic by being able to joust. Use some set bonuses to offset the -acc and do some unsuppressed flybys. Yeah I wouldn't use it on a team. I'm very *aware*.

My nomination has to be Jump Kick. I just don't like that power. Combat Jumping and Air Superiority make it look silly, it's animation looks silly, and I've never had it on any AT whose numbers for it weren't abysmal low.

Yeah, but keep in mind that this set was created entirely after the redraw penalty was compensated for. There's no lingering redraw issues (like many people say Trick Arrow still has).

If I Web Envelope from Mace Mastery with Wide Area Web Grenade queued up, the second will fire virtually instantly after the first, for example. The rifle's maybe half drawn when it launches. Some chains aren't so fluid, but don't worry about the time it takes to draw the gun. If it were drawn, the animation's time would be extended till after you fired anyway. Redraw powers suffering from lower DPA is a myth like the pre-supersidekick "double influence when exemplared" or "targeted AOE knockback is radial."

I just don't like switching weapons all the time because it LOOKS goofy...

Yup. It has a three minute down time. Which is okay, I mean it's up 40% of the time out of the box. I have it on a tanker, because I love to fire it off after Resurgance, rather than waiting on toggles. He's not IO'd very well, though. If I put the investment in, I'd probably drop both the t8 and t9.

I agree with most of what's been said. Invulnerability's draw backs are the psi-hole and endurance cost. It can be made very good with some IO investment. Because of that, I'd put it up with WP and Shield (for their regen and damage, respectively) for the best post-IO'd sets.

I don't think the psihole matters as much redside, though. I've seen well built Tankers become laughable in a lot of late game content. That doesn't seem to be the case for Brutes. At any rate, I'm not a fan of the set because once DP is on auto it's soooo boring.

Empty Clips is your standard cone. Honestly, on most blast sets I cannot resist the cone... for the same reasons as you, I dropped it from my DP/ Corruptor.

The nice thing about these two powers is you can stack the ice or chemical rounds against a whole mob for some serious debuffs, if the situation allows for it.


What I like to do, however, is when the person on point's life is dropping, I will hop in with standard ammo and Hail of Bullets then Rain of Bullets. The mob is knocked down three times, then half of them are knocked back. Between the decent damage and the knocking around, it can turn around most battles.

I play DP/Sonic, however, where the -damage debuff from chem rounds is a little less noticeable. If you would take 100 damage, a shot of chem rounds make it's 90. With me on your team and close by, you'd take 65 (after my sonic buffs) and that'd only get cut down to 59. Still useful, I just think the knockdown/back is more obvious. If you were some other secondary, the damage debuff might be better.

I have done a dark/dark Corruptor with a Night Widow, but in retrospect I should have done it with a Soldier. Stacking VEAT Manuevers (significantly better than the leadership pool version) with the -tohit on dark/dark made our teams incredibly resilient.

I wouldn't do two Brutes, honestly, just because I don't like competing for Fury. Something that compliments the Brute's sets though? That'd be awesome. Sonic with a heavy PBAoE Brute would be pretty sweet, or Kinetics with something not so end friendly, etc. There's probably better / more specific synergies than that...

Honestly if the original instinct was to a scrapper, I'd say two Stalkers. If one of you has a level 50, a Stalker with a Bane or Night Widow (or even a stealthy Fort) would be fun too.

I have a level 46 pain dom mastermind, and I get tagged as useless by a lot of people. Occasionally, someone who can pay attention to themselves and their teammates realizes I'm very far from useless. I am going to have to agree with some of the speculation that followed. This guy was probably healing his own pets, and had such poor endurance management that he wanted his teammates to die. When I play my minions go down every second or third mob, because the teammates always *always* come first. Similarly, if I'm on any character who uses heals, I will not run from a losing battle. Empathy Defenders who prance away when their life drops in half... THEY are useless.

I had one person tell me just the other day that I "sucked." I know why, too. He continually ran off in another direction and got himself killed (DP Corruptor). I got sick of chasing him.

Anyway, my two cents on the "healer" requests is honestly if they just meant a support character who is not built for damage, that's fine. If they actually think someone has healing powers exclusively is going to turn things around for them, but nothing else will, they are just not observant. I pactmated two Blasters, a friend and I, all the way to 50 and ran with 8 blasters many many times. No healer, no tanker, juuuust pure damage. Worked fine.

I had to bring it up and test this out just to make sure... but that's not how Rain of Arrows works. Most powers work that way (Self Destruct being a notable and clear example, with its tremendous animation time), but Rain of Arrows does not. I assume it's because a "Psuedo pet" is summoned at the end of the animation and THAT begins attacking.

It won't be a problem against most foes, cause most of them when they catch wind of your presence will go through their own ranged attacks, holding them in place. However, if they are running at you when you begin the animation and are out of the target zone at the end of the animation, you will not hit. It will not even check to hit.

I don't know if the psuedo pet inherits Aim because it was on when you began animating, however. Like EmperorSteele said though, the 10 second duration should be just fine for a 3 second power.

I would do 3 damage, 1 accuracy, 2 recharge reductions if I went with SOs or Common IOs. Frankenslotting some set pieces with end redux and accuracy might not be a bad idea though (focusing primarily on damage and recharge).

http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Threat

Attacking first just means you have the threat first, it isn't relevant once other players are "noticed." Plus, Taunt is by far the biggest modifier (presumably, we don't technically know what debuff offers). If a Tanker is being out aggroed by a Blaster, his taunt probably just didn't hit the Blaster's targets. It's more a statement about Taunt's 5 target max than anything else.

Actually, taking the auras and not taunt is more like taking Aid Self and not your set self heal, at least if you intend to use the aura for holding aggro. It's the not-as-good option.

Why do debates like this have to shoot off in these random irrelevant directions?
Surviving is part of doing damage in this game. So yeah, it "matters what they sacrifice" because they won't be doing damage if they're face planted. Tankers who opt to do a little bit more damage in exchange for the ability to tank well? That's a "sacrifice" that matters, because what they lose is better than what they gain.

This irrelevancy is compounded by the fact that you are citing a lot of power pools. Power pools are available to everyone. You can't make the argument that Scrapper's leadership numbers are as important to fulfilling their role as a Tanker's ability to hold aggro... if you did, you would be claiming all character should have Leadership (either Manuevers for survivability or tactics/assault for damage). Moreover, the restrictions of power pools (limited to 4) and number of power picks it can take (like it takes 2 power picks if you want Aid Self) AND their relatively lower numbers to primary/secondary sets makes them less preferable, and more importantly, totally irrelevant to the Taunt debate. You might as well ask if the SoA should take TT:Manuevers or Leadership:Manuevers, it's almost that silly of a question.

Strawman much? I was intentionally vague in saying I expect them to help and make the team better. It has nothing to do with tanker-healer-DPS and it has nothing to do with playing the way I do. Again, I can't believe we have to be so explicit about such common sense material.

My "preferred team layout" is actually delineated by which ATs I will /search for in what order. I have ended up with teams of 8 blasters a number of times and never had a problem. You don't run into a lot of Blasters who have decided they don't really need to do damage though. Most of them build for what you'd expect, and the way they help is apparent.

This is an incredibly specific set of circumstances. They have just enough influence for one build, they IO'd out early enough to make such a substantial difference that they are gimped when they change, and they somehow couldn't fit taunt into the first concept/build. This poor player... I'm glad he or she is in the minority!

That wasn't the point anyway, clearly.

Someone in the top 10% took the time to IO out a character then intentionally gimped it? Wow. That's saying something about us as a whole. I'm exaggerating of course, I can imagine circumstances where this would be all right.

The game being balanced to SOs isn't terribly relevant to most people playing with IOs. I mean, do you ever play at +0 x1? Like after level 10 perhaps? I balance the game to my build and/or team.

My point about Stalkers w/o Assassin Strike was that there is no other keystone powers debated like Taunt is. The reason, I believe, is Taunt only helps the team (for Tankers)... those other powers help the player.

That's not the question at all. Everyone's goal should be upon entering a team to somehow better that team. The capabilities of the team should increase. Therefore, the best of the players' skills, resources, and brains should be used every. single. time. I don't care if someone plays totally differently than I do. What I do care about is if they intend to team with me, that they intend to actually help me. Along the same lines as the aforementioned two builds, as I believe you suggested, the IO build should come out, even if the power choices are less appropriate. Probably, anyway. Why? Because that's what best serves the team.

If I had a build that was clearly not team appropriate, yes you can ask that question, and no I probably would not team. If I had a build that was clearly not for soloing, I probably would not solo. I can't believe this sort of thing needs to be explicit.

Anyone who intentionally gimps their build then intends to team with it is essentially leeching.

As I said, I always give Tankers a chance to prove they are capable before assuming they are not for a lack of taunt. The problem is (on Champion, mind you, Tanker Tuesdays and all) this is extremely (yes extremely) rare. Like I would put it at about 1 in 10. It is so low that on PUG teams that I'm not leading, I see Tankers getting kicked for lacking taunt regularly.

Now, if a Scranker or conceptually built Tanker can act in such a way that the team is better for having him or her, then that's fantastic. The problem with all this broad stroke in theory talk that happens in these debates, from my perspective, is the inability to differentiate subjective for objective impressions. The people playing that way think they are helping no matter what. After all, they are still Tankers, they are probably still standing after everyone else has died. What they don't realize is the Tanker who left for real life last mission never let anyone die. That guy didn't have any IOs and was 10 levels lower too. Boy, it's a shame that I'm not describing rare circumstances. Soooo many teammates we'd be better without because of what was it... concept builds? Hmmm...

I agree with this sentiment completely.

In regard to the OP, with the availability of dual builds, there's really no good "why not" for taunt.

People go back and forth on this all the time, like they are here, but my MO is more practical than theoretical. If I invite a Tanker to a PUG team and they don't have taunt, I give them a mission or two to prove they can hold aggro without or do some serious damage. If they fail, I find another tanker. That doesn't usually mean kicking the first, but I will be very vocal with the second about how it is his/her job to hold aggro, not the first one's.

As far as my running crew, none of us will build a tanker or brute without taunt. At worst, it gets pushed back a bit. There's simply no good reason to drop it outside of concept. You don't see any Stalkers dropping Assassin Strike or Placate for "concept" though.

More power to Tankers who don't take taunt, but at that point the question for me is "why team?" More importantly, "why would I want you on my team?"

Yes, yes,yes!

It does auto-hit. At least, when you use it, the hit rolls channel doesn't display any rolls, but the combat channel says the effect went off.

Combined with Maneuvers and Mind Link, it's a worthwhile debuff.

I'm not positive that it's unresistable, but I don't have anything off hand to test that on. Is there any mobs that are renowned for resisting tohit debuffs?