Kruunch

Why spend so much? I can take on the same number of bosses and I think my build so far has cost me 20mil influence.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure this has been discussed somewhere but I don't typically follow the Tanker forums and my search-fu sucks, so apologize if this has been discussed to death.

Came up with a concept for a WP/BA Tanker that I really like, so I've worked up a build. I like the build, but I suspect I have too attacks...if there is such a thing. The build uses everything from Battle Axe and everything from Will Power except Resurgence. I chose to skip the APP.

Now it boils down to Chop vs Stamina. My recovery is at 3.26 EPS (assuming accolades) with a toggle consumption of 1.05 EPS. AoEs have 32% endurance reduction. STs have 39% endurance reduction. The build would have 42.5% global recharge, no Hasten. I suspect this might have endurance issues at higher levels? Is Chop considered skippable?

[/ QUOTE ]

Without Hasten you shouldn't run into end problems .... just slot better for endRed in your attacks.

If you can't slot better for endRed, try throwing an extra slot in QR and add Performance Shifter: +end (usually a cheaper ghetto version of Numina's + Miracle).

[ QUOTE ]
It depends Dave, if you pick WP, you can acquire QR and skip getting Stam, ( I have done this and with ease).

[/ QUOTE ]

I've tried this and it doesn't work very well. It's sort of like not having ED but forcing yourself to follow those rules.

One of the big perks to WP is its go power. Why would you hamstring yourself by lowering your recovery to Stamina only level and then having to invariably slot for recovery later? Its doable ... but you miss a large part of what being a WP is (and then fun of being free of recovery concerns with regards to set bonuses too).

Also you don't need to skip half the powers in the set to pick up all or most of the powers in DB. You can skip Resurgence and Strength of Will without missing a beat. I would highly suggest not skipping HS however.

[ QUOTE ]
Ah various damage types, dm, ss, fire and em for the tanks. The Defender I think was a energy blast.

I was having less endurance issues with the defender.

Damage types didnt really matter though since they were ae mobs and I gave them two attack powers so they would have no resistance to favor any damage type over another.

The Fire Devices has now soloed too 22. You mentioned that it was something about low levels, well that particular blaster actually outperforms my SS Invuln which is level 50. He gets winded far easier than the blaster does.

Granted if I pace myself and absolutely PLOD the tank can turn up the difficulty and grind through it where the blaster cannot turn up the difficutly yet. The blaster can finish the map twice as fast though on the same difficulty. At 50 I have no doubt he would be able to handle the mobs on Invince and still not have the end issues the tank does.

[/ QUOTE ]

I played a fairly well known Fire/Dev Blaster and you will be hating life soon without a Tanker (or some other form of bait).

Having said that, your Blaster can (and should) always be able to solo faster then your Tanker. One is damage oriented (only) and the other isn't.

If your Tanker is running into end problems at L50, I would say he's poorly slotted/built. Most every Tanker I have (8 as of now) and every Tanker I've ever had (6 deleted post 20) has had their endurance issues gone by and large after their mid 20s to early 30s (depending the build). This is even before IOs.

Interesting and good to know. Thanks for the heads up

Endurance and accuracy issues will plague you until 20 (Stamina) and 22 (Single Origin enhancements) ... this is every Tanker's burden to bear.

If you can tough it out, I'd save your money for SOs at L22, being a new player.

SD/DM is a great combination btw. Mine is currently L20 and is really starting to shine.

Grats! (can you do it with Pyre thrown in up to Fireball?)

[ QUOTE ]
No he wouldn't. He's intelligent enough not to get that emotionally invested in a video game.

[/ QUOTE ]

ZING!

[ QUOTE ]
What do you want to see, Kruunch?

Personally, I want to see more tilesets and branching missions, off the top of my head. Also a form of PvP where players can enter instant missions and compete over the same or conflicting goals.

Are those the sorts of things you are referring to?

Especially, what would you like to see out of the alignment system?

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh good lord burn the tileset mentality already. The two most popular MMOs to date (EQ and WoW) have some very defining features in common with one of the primary ones being that zones and dungeons are very distinctive. CoH started off promisingly with some of its hazard zones (the original Faultline in particular) but truly failed to capitalize on their original creativity.

Branching missions I would like to see and I believe that this is one of the attempts being made with GR. What I especially like about branching missions is that it forces the player to pay attention to the story and more importantly, actually become invested in it if implemented correctly. That would be a *very* good start to content diversification.

A lot of what I would like to see (and not just in CoH but in MMOs in general) I've outlined in my wordier post in this thread already. But to recap the main points for CoH specifically:

1) The detective system that was discussed oh so many years ago. A comic book style, non-combat system method of advancement via storylines, puzzles and problem solving. Basing this type of system on a dynamically generated pieces of key content (the actual puzzles, problems and forks) to keep the storylines fresh and the cheat sheets to a minimum.

2) Stepped content progression. Introduce tougher content meant for IO set enhanced player groups (but not going above the one group dynamic). Accordingly add in additional IO sets (stronger ones) that would be needed for future content, etc .... This is meant to broaden the end game and give you more of a reason to continue playing and developing your max level toon.

3) A robust faction system (multi-layered as opposed to the flat system WoW has) that would give access/deny access to certain IO sets and possible future abilities.

4) Add additional player power and enhancement slots as a reward for higher end content (I heard a rumor of additional enhancement slots being considered for a future issue ... anyone confirm that?).

5) Expand the hazard zones to include more influence and more and rarer drops and deny drops and influence to those above and below the level range for those zones (except when exemplared or SK'd). Include within the hazard zones public "dungeons" with rare spawn unique mobs (i.e. Giant Monsters) that yield hamio-esque and/or rare recipe drops. Populate said zones with the tougher mobs of those level ranges.

6) Revert powers in PvP to work identically to how they work in PvE and then "fix" the holes with new PvP IO sets (e.g. an IO or a set bonus that prevents teleportation of self).

7) Add unique IOs (non-sets) that give additional powers or specific effects and make them ultra rare (e.g. an IO that prevents any movement impairing effects (think Ring of Free Action from PnP DnD)).

8) Extend PvP to all co-op zones (would make cross-grouping in co-op zones both more interesting and more realistic from a comic book pov).

I could go on and on but these ideas I've presented are within the scope of the current game, with the current engine (certainly additions would have to be made but the entire engine would not have to be re-written which is paramount to feasibility here). Notice I didn't mention raising the level cap? The game just wouldn't support it as it currently stands.

Sadly I don't think you could go to much further (or even realize everything I've outlined) with the cuirrent game simply from the fact that MMOs tend not to revitalize from a business model perspective.

In other words, if NCSoft was *really* going to capitalize on the past successes of CoH, they would need to start planning on releasing a CoH 2.

[ QUOTE ]
The MA is content like the costume creator is content- whether it adds to your enjoyment or not depends on how much customization means to you.

I like it. Doing goofy things like saving the Stanley Cup from angry Leafs fans is a fun change of pace.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ahhh but this is my point exactly .... yes it's content. It's just not diverse content. Again .... more is not necessarily better.

I will say this for the MA system ... whether the devs (or you guys) are conscious of this or not, it is the push for the next-gen MMOGs (player created content). While I don't like how CoH has executed this particular version of it (and to be fair I don't DISLIKE it either) it does open up some extremely interesting avenues, both for CoH and MMOs in general.

Sadly I'm of the opinion CoH will never realize the full potential of their MA system. However I do believe it will grow from what we have today and in a positive fashion.

These of course are only my opinions.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(doesn't mean it isn't ... I just haven't heard of a whole slew of new devs working on something recently).

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, CoH: GR should prove you wrong there.


[/ QUOTE ]

Historically speaking, the odds are against you. But I hope you are correct.

[ QUOTE ]

We have Devs devoted to keeping the current material up-to-date, and as bug-free as they can make it, along with adding new content within the current systems. Then we have a different set of Devs (maybe still reporting to the main ones, but most likely not the same ones) working on Going Rogue, which has new systems and diversity of content in it.


[/ QUOTE ]

Name the dev team for COH: GR please. I'm really curious to know if it is a totally different team or not (and for that matter ... how many are on it).

[ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry that you're not happy with the conent that we've been getting, but it is new content. Just because you don't like the format that it's taking doesn't make it not new content.


[/ QUOTE ]

Now you're just being pedantic. More of the same != new. It's just more.

[ QUOTE ]

IOs and sets added a new way to build characters that can vastly change the way that characters can play.


[/ QUOTE ]

No they didn't. They were a sorely needed reward boost in a system virtually lacking in rewards. However since all content can be completed without having a single member IO slotted means that the reward system (or more appropriately the content progression) is still vastly out of whack (and thusly proving my point).

[ QUOTE ]
The MA allows you to build your own missions within a framework. How you can look at that and say that it's not content baffles me. Sure, the missions still exist within a limited framework, but it allows for a lot of new stories, which is exactly what a lot of people were complaining about before it came out. They were tired of doing the same missions over and over again. Now, we have a whole new system devoted to making new stories, and a lot of them are quite good new stories.

[/ QUOTE ]

People were tired of doing the same *things* over and over, which the MA system hasn't addressed. New bouts of text doesn't cure the content ills (at least for me). The mechanics and style are *exactly* the same. The MA system introduced *new* content only within the scope that creating an MA now is part of the time you spend playing the game (sort of a meta game almost similar to dungeon building in NWN). Speaking of NWN if you want to see what the MA *should* have been ... just look at NWN's original world builder (as buggy as it was) from what .... 8 years ago?

[ QUOTE ]

You seem to be saying that only new mechanisms within a mission is new content, and that's just not true.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm saying that the quantity of the same ole mission (even with different text) in yet another content patch (in this case the MA) doesn't add to the content of the game in spirit.

So in essence, yes it is true.

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately that's not (proven) to be enough to hold the majority of subscriber's attention for more then a few months at a clip.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd also ask you to back this statement up, because I'm betting that you pulled it right from your rear end, to put it delicately. Neither you, nor I, know the average subscriber length here, nor what causes people to leave.

[/ QUOTE ]

And this is where our feelings get bent because heaven forbid someone disparage our favorite time waster.

I know why people don't quit games ... because they're good games.

Are you really going to argue that you don't see a rise in numbers with I14 or that prior to I14 most all of the servers (with the exception of two) were a veritable ghost town?

How many people on your friends list never log on anymore?

that's what I thought.

Well I'll disagree about the MA system but if you say that the system that drives it will produce more robust content then I'll wait and see. But I (like most customers) who have played this game are going to base their opinions on history, not promised or implied futures. Historically speaking, what you've said here doesn't jibe.

Also you first mentioned that the new system that drives the MA was setup to deliver missions faster (which I can see). How is it going to make content more robust (i.e. diversity of content, not quantity content)?

From a programmer's point of view, any time I've been associated with a project that is currently in production and needs continuous maintenance, AND is being rebuilt to add more functionality (rather than layered on top of the original application), there have always been two dev teams involved to facilitate parallel development. I don't see that happening here (doesn't mean it isn't ... I just haven't heard of a whole slew of new devs working on something recently).

Typically if the production team and the maintenance team are the same, production will be limited in scope due to resource restrictions. That I do see happening here (and it's really not fair to blame the devs (sorry devs) ... this is more management and business then what Castle, BaBs, et al. do). Your comment about adding to the robustness of the MA system by allowing the coloring (i.e. hue) of standard mobs is *exactly* the care taker type of development I'm talking about.

The shame of it is that the original dev team created an amazing game from a physics and graphics point of view. The animations and graphics are excellent, and the fighting can be made to be (and in the past has been) ... for lack of a better term ... heroic. BUT that's all the game offers .... and that's all it ever offered. Unfortunately that's not (proven) to be enough to hold the majority of subscriber's attention for more then a few months at a clip.

The real shame here is that these guys have had 5 YEARS (not including ALL of the pre-release work so really 7-8 years) to get a clue. Now they're about to be trumped by the new slew of Super Hero MMOs coming out (DCO, MO, CO). I'm willing to bet that out of those three appearing within the next 2 years, one of them will effectively vapor CoH/V as it stands now.

I agree with you about the looks.

I've seen a couple of DB Tankers and haven't been impressed with what I saw but having said that, I don't have any quantifyable data.

I wouldn't say they're unplayable by any stretch however.

Shhhhh

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


As we are talking about an interactive game, then no, I don't consider the MA new content in spirit. New content technically speaking? Sure .... but I can write words on a paper bag and read them back to myself while I do the missions I've done repeatedly to get the same effect.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now you're being obtuse, intentionally. You know very well it's nothing similar to reading lines off a paper bag. You know very well there are 100s of story arcs (content) you can choose to enjoy. You know very well some of these story arcs are on the same level, if not better, then some Dev created content.

MA is wonderful and a perfect match for this game. Of course, it will need some fine tuning periodically to make sure the system is up to date (I15) and new features added as they are developed.

[/ QUOTE ]

You play Tic Tac Toe competitively don't you?

If we were talking about a static form of entertainment such as comic books, I would agree with.

As we are talking about an interactive game, then no, I don't consider the MA new content in spirit. New content technically speaking? Sure .... but I can write words on a paper bag and read them back to myself while I do the missions I've done repeatedly to get the same effect.

I wouldn't call that new content either.

No real "beef" with it other than it's more of a gimmick then a real content update, being just player supplied words of things we've done a billion times in exactly the same way.

Additionally I think having a centralized system of content (geographically) takes away from your game world, and the rate with which you can earn tickets and influence, devalues the small reward system that is currently in place in CoH.

[ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
Also a question: Do you prefer the typed defense because you can get it higher then the positional? It seems to me positional is better depending on what your focus is (in this case positional melee being important to leverage the most out of RTTC). While I understand S/L is the most common type (especially from melee) of damage I was wondering what your thought processes were here.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's because Willpower is a typed defense set, so trying to add positional defense is redundant. Consider this:

Heightened Senses gives +3.3% s/l def, or 5.148% enhanced. As I explained above, positional and typed defenses don't stack, so you'd need to add over 5% worth of positional defense before it even makes a difference. Now for the extra wrinkle, all defense bonuses give 50% of their value to a corresponding pair (melee -> s/l, range -> e/ne, aoe -> f/c, and vice versa). So you'd actually need 7.722% worth of extra melee defense before it even equals the s/l, WP's lowest def.

It's much worse for the exotics. To that, HS yields 13% def, or 20.28% enhanced. That's completely wasteful to try to best with positional defense.

The main reason is this: Why bother stacking melee def just to equal the typed when you could use the same slots to make your typed defense better?


That said, it's not terrible to add positional def bonuses due to the 50% cross over rule - so long as you understand you're slotting it for the typed def and not the positional. For example, you can snag 1.56% e/ne and f/c def from the 2/3 set bonus of Blessing of the Zypher. Low slot investment, decent return.


(Note: If you have a positional def build like Shield, I'd say building for typed def is crazy. One other bonus, Kinetic Combat offers its 3.75% def bonus in only 4 slots, compared to most positional def which takes 6. This leave two slots to mix and match for better enhancement value. I personally use four 4 piece KC sets.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent explanation, thank you. I'll need to take another look at my slotting more closely (so far I've been just slotting to take a little bite out of my end useage and grabbing +Maxhealth where I can).

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One final thing ... get rid of MAs and burn your world builder tool. I think it's far past the time for a more robust tool then something as simplistic and static as what they are using.

[/ QUOTE ]

Note: the MA is not the tool the devs have been using to create content all this time. The MA is an offshoot of an internal project to make a better (in terms of more streamlined) editing tool for mission design. In effect the players are getting a "lite" version of that newer tool. I believe its ultimately Hero-1's baby.

Their actual tools allow for far more customization than the MA (as evidenced by the fact that lots of PvE mission exceed its abilities in many areas) but my understanding is that those tools are the MMO equivalent of the days when we used to make web pages with vi and notepad.

I believe that at least part of the intent of the MA system long-term is to give their own mission designers tools that allow them to design missions much faster, allowing them to spend less time on mission mechanics and more time on either expanding mission depth or making more missions overall.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is true (and you would probably know better then I) then this is even more depressing considering how limited the MA tool is (and yes I understand that the dev's version of the tool would offer more options).

The problem is not with the speed at which they can crank out "content". That's never really been a huge problem for CoH considering how limited the content is. In fact, in the past they've always been hamgstrung more by art and animation then by physical coding if memory serves, and again that's because they were never really challenged to change the *style* of their content (which is the focal point to me).

As a programmer, I understand there are finite resources and a point of diminishing returns. However from my perspective, the point of diminishing returns is far lower then it should be for an MMO that's (supposedly) been running in the black for 5 years.

CoH has been in caretaker mode literally since release, with new additions to the game only being layered over the existing structure. At some point (earlier) the decision (at higher then the dev level) should have been made to put the resources into truly expanding the game. This decision was not made, and thus you have what a very finite set of instructions can produce.

P.S. - the proper analogy would have been to say that the MA is more like using Front Page to make a web page. You can get it done fast and cheap, but it's not going to be very indepth.

Even with your recovery bonuses and Energy Absorbtion I think you will be sucking wind a lot. If you're determined to run all those toggles I'd suggest shooting for both Miracle: +Rec and Numinas: +Regen/Rec (yes both are super rare I know).

Just offsetting the Rage and Hasten crashes is going to be telling.

A cheaper way to go would be to add a slot to Stamina and put in Performance Shifter: Chance for Endurance.

Sarrate: I have Fault on my second build. It's nice, especially for a more "tank" build for the mitigation but I'd hardly call it defining (certainly more useful then it's SS cousin Handclap). My current build doesn't seem to need the extra mitigation even on alpha intensive encounters. I did an ITF recently with this build and he held up almost as well as my Invuln (however I didn't stick around to try soloing afterwards which I will probably do next time to see how he performs).

Also a question: Do you prefer the typed defense because you can get it higher then the positional? It seems to me positional is better depending on what your focus is (in this case positional melee being important to leverage the most out of RTTC). While I understand S/L is the most common type (especially from melee) of damage I was wondering what your thought processes were here.

I can't speak for DB but WM is pretty decent now.

Given CoH's mechanics, I'm tending to shy away from the power set that is based on chaining attacks.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Inv/DM or WP/DM isn't a bad choice these days if you're going Tanker.

[/ QUOTE ]

How do you reconcile the lack of on-demand toHit buff in Dark Mellee? This is espacially important given the general potency of defense sets in PvP and corresponding gimpiness of resist sets. You WILL face high defense in the majority of Zone and pick-up arena PvP.

I have played DM in PvP and it's pretty awful given the favor of defense toons, elusivity, and having your toHit buff attached to a 10' PBAoE.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I'm serious about PvP I would think my attacks would be well slotted with IOs and I'd have a ton of global accuracy with IO set bonuses (in addition to the smaller benefits of Invincibility).

Having said that, you might be totally right ... but that would apply to any set except SS (i.e. Rage) no?

/agree 100%

Hmmm I dunno if I agree with that statement about the language of the game. Mathematically speaking the game is far too simplistic for most MMOs (flat line damage, non-scaling resists, funky dev-noted inconsistant threat meter without agro list, etc ...).

That and Stoners would still look like poo if that were the case