-
Posts
1185 -
Joined
-
In case anyone doesn't remember, here is one example from back in June where people were noticing odd aggro issues that they were having trouble figuring out:
Trouble managing aggro since i7?
I was going to bump it, but I figured that was rude.
Anyway, my point is, yeah, this has been around a long time, but we've been noticing problems for a long time too.
From the blaster thread that was linked:
[ QUOTE ]
The only Tank I have found that can hold aggro from me is an Ice tank.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm betting that Ice Tank had Taunt and the others didn't or weren't using it. -
Also, I want to point out that while there are often disagreements about the "we will never do X" statements that may or may not have been made in the past, one that definitely was made after the reduction to Smoke Grenade (when people claimed that Cryptic said they'd never "nerf") was that they would never stealth nerf.
This isn't a missed patch note. We've got two developer responses posted in the thread so far, one public, one a PM, neither of which has claimed any surprise that we didn't know about it until now. -
[ QUOTE ]
I've had a confirmation.
[ QUOTE ]
Re: Gauntlet doesn't work anymore on (some?) AVs
.
It has been this way for a loooooong time, it's nothing new. Certain levels of enemies are simply too smart to fall for the old "I hit you, so now you hate me" level of taunt.
[/ QUOTE ]
[/ QUOTE ]
That was Positron, right? Weird, because it sounds like Statesman's kind of response. Anyway, I think we know that whoever posted that is for the change.
To whoever said that: it doesn't matter that it's been that way for a long time. We weren't told about it, and we've been trying to figure out what the heck has been going on with our aggro control for a loooooong time, it's nothing new.
The only reason it took me so long to figure out is that I deleted my level 50 Tanker when I5 came out to make her a Brute in anticipation of side-switching. I only just recently started fighting AVs with my new Tanker, which I made when I found out that Brutes wouldn't be able to be heroes any time soon, if ever. Meanwhile, my SG has two active tankers in it other than myself-- one doesn't have Taunt, but just returned to the game after the GvE free weekend (the Tanker in the Neuron and Anti-Matter demos), and the other spends 95% of his time either roleplaying or playing his villain.
I think the Devs think that the fact that we didn't figure this out sooner means that it must be fine. I don't think we didn't figure it out sooner because it's fine, I think we didn't because most of us do have Taunt, and fire it off when we see we don't have aggro, and those who don't have been in situations that kept them from noticing it.
I have to ask: Why didn't the Tauntless tankers like Gideon and Panzerkatze notice this earlier? Are you folks playing other ATs? Not fighting AVs? Teaming with Tankers that do have Taunt? Teaming with groups where you are dealing the most damage? Did you just come back to the game recently?
I'm not trying to attack you guys or anything. I honestly thought this immediately after that Burkholder fight when I tried tanking him without Taunt: how did the people who were vocal supporters of not taking Taunt miss the fact that they couldn't hold aggro on AVs? -
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Indirectly, it did.
No comments on the gauntlet issue at the moment -- but I am reading the threads and taking notes.
[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks for looking into this Castle.
[/ QUOTE ]
I would also like to say thanks, Castle, for replying to the thread, and reminding everyone that someone on the Dev team cares about our concerns.
However, I want to point out to everyone else, in case anyone thought differently, that he didn't say he was "looking in to this" like he has when other issues he was unaware of came up. He knows this change was made, or he'd be surprised. He's compiling notes. If it was his decision to make, I don't think he'd be compiling notes-- he'd just read the thread and make a decision. I think he's trying to find a way to convince someone else.
This isn't a bug, you guys, or Castle would be saying "wow, that's not supposed to happen". Brutes' auras still working is the bug. This was an intentional stealth nerf, and I get the impression that in order to reverse or change it, Castle needs some good arguments and reasonable alternative solutions. That's why I think he's taking notes. So don't stop making rational arguments against the change, or reasonable alternative suggestions for making AV fights more interesting while still allowing a Tanker to serve a purpose beyond "less extra damage than a Scrapper or Blaster" without being forced into a specific power choice.
I'm not trying to say what anyone is thinking, I'm just trying to make sure that one dev post doesn't make posters with good ideas assume that change is coming, and stop giving feedback.
Anyway, I have what I consider to be a great argument against the implementation of the change: Taunt still allows us to make an AV fight just as easy as Gauntlet and Auras did, so this change does not serve its purpose. Also, it defeats the purpose of all of the changes made in the attempt to prevent Taunt the power from being mandatory.
That's my argument. Unfortunately, I have no solutions yet other than "reverse the changes" that don't either render Tankers even less useful in AV fights, or require a complete overhaul of the AT or AVs themselves. I hope someone else can come up with something acceptable to the decision maker(s), I'll continue trying myself.
Thanks again, Castle. -
His source *is* a dev.
-
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Their purpose is to not have one apparently.
[/ QUOTE ]
I guess the "purpose" is to make Taunt worth something so that tankers will take it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think having 0 endurance cost, being auto-hit, ranged, a long duration, and being AoE makes it worth taking. I hate the very concept of the power, but I took it because it's just too good for me to turn down, especially when facing dangerous, unhittable foes like MoGed Paragon Protectors.
[/ QUOTE ]
Then why are we constantly being assaulted by Tankers constantly screaming about how they don't need it?
[/ QUOTE ]
Because they didn't. Taunt should be a tool, like Power Burst. How would you feel if you thought Power Burst didn't fit your idea of a Blaster because it's got such a short range, and you had a bunch of people demanding that you take it, despite being capable of doing your job without it?
Anyway, that's pretty irrelevant now, isn't it? Taunt is now mandatory for AV fights. Tell your constantly screaming Tankers that. -
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Their purpose is to not have one apparently.
[/ QUOTE ]
I guess the "purpose" is to make Taunt worth something so that tankers will take it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think having 0 endurance cost, being auto-hit, ranged, a long duration, and being AoE makes it worth taking. I hate the very concept of the power, but I took it because it's just too good for me to turn down, especially when facing dangerous, unhittable foes like MoGed Paragon Protectors. -
[ QUOTE ]
Can you take down a GM/AV without some form of -Regen?
[/ QUOTE ]
My SG takes down AVs without -regen all the time. In the demos I posted, nobody has -regen, and we don't even have full teams, just 5-6 people. -
[ QUOTE ]
A tanker's role is to serve as a focus for buffs and heals while smacking his fist into his palm.
[/ QUOTE ]
Brilliant! Hey look, I'm going to have a signature. -
If that is true, then the Brute was probably holding aggro through sheer damage output, which wouldn't be too hard for a Brute.
-
[ QUOTE ]
We're backing to fighting AVs circa-I2, except we've got hatcheted defenses, and the AVs have boosted HP.
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't forget, we had single target taunts in our attacks too, back then. You could tank an AV without the Taunt power at release. Gauntlet was added for dealing with groups. -
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Except AVs ignore threat rating as of I7, do they not?
[/ QUOTE ]Yeah, forgot about that. Post re-edited now.
I think the Gauntlet change came in sometime after the CoV end-of-Beta event, as I remember the devs talking about how all the taunt effects basically shut down the AV/GM ability to attack.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah. Isn't that the Tanker's job? How can they "take damage" if they can't take aggro?
The other bit of insanity is that the Taunt power puts it right back in that situation. All this change has done is made all the people who said "You aren't a Tanker if you don't have Taunt" right. -
Holy crap! When and how did you find this out? You sound as if this has been common knowledge for a long time.
Edit:
[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: Tankers and Brutes still have the highest base Threat Level of any AT (4), with Scrappers second (3), Kheldians, Stalkers, and Masterminds third (2), and everyone else fourth (1). This means that if a Tanker and a Blaster apply identical hostile effects to a target, the target will go after the Tanker first.
[/ QUOTE ]
Except AVs ignore threat rating as of I7, do they not? -
People have been reporting lots of aggro problems since I7, and I think I've found one of them. They made (some? all?) AVs immune to Gauntlet. Invincibility doesn't seem to be working either. In fact, in my testing, the only reliable aggro holding tool for an Invuln Tanker vs. AVs is Taunt (I haven't tried Provoke). I've not been able to observe or play any Fire, Stone, or Ice Tankers for any reasonable length of time since this issue presented itself.
I've zipped up 4 demo files for your viewing displeasure. Before you watch them, remember that Tankers have been able to cause any mob to immediately turn and face them just by hitting them since release, the only exception being if another Tanker had the aggro. We've always had built in taunts in our attacks, the AoE aspect (now called Gauntlet), wasn't added until Issue 3.
Zipped demo files, names have been changed to protect the innocent
In these files, you will find the following fights:
Burkholder
The file labeled "aggro-Burkholder.cohdemo" was originally the entire mission, but I cut it down to just the AV fight. My doing that is probably why it doesn't seem to end after we exit.
In this demo, you will see the most blatant example of the problem. You will see my Tanker completely unable to get Burkholder's attention off of the Blasters without the use of the Taunt power. I use Taunt once at the beginning on a reflex when I see him, but don't use it again until it's been made pretty obvious that neither Gauntlet nor Invincibility are affecting him at all. Nobody else on the team has any taunt powers.
He never turns to face me once he decides to fight the blasters until I decide to start using Taunt.
Neuron and Anti-Matter
In the files labeled "aggro-neuron.cohdemo", "aggro-antimatter.cohdemo", and "aggro-anti2.cohdemo", you will see the same Inv/SS Tanker who doesn't have Taunt. Now, he was really lagged the whole time, so he does have long periods of inactivity. However, when he does hit the AVs, they do not turn like they used to to face him.
In "aggro-neuron.cohdemo", I see the line "2 2 MOV MA_TAUNT" 3 times, so it looks like the Katana Scrapper taunted him 3 times over the course of the fight. That wouldn't be enough to keep him off the Tank for the whole time.
In "aggro-antimatter.cohdemo" the demo starts just after the Katana Scrapper accidentally taunted him, so the first 20 seconds or so aren't accurate for testing purposes. She doesn't do it again.
Out of all of these three files, The AV is attacking the tank maybe 10% of the time. All he is contributing is damage.
So, is it all AVs, just these three, or some larger number? Are the other Taunt auras worthless for aggro like Invincibility seems to be? Is it just Super Strength that has been affected? What about Brutes?
I have no idea. To find more out, we need more testing, and I'm done testing for now. I'll post any more information that I find in this thread, but if anyone else wants to try to see if they can find AVs with or without these issues, or how other Tanker sets or Brutes fare, that would be appreciated.
The big test to make is: if the AV is aggroed on someone else because they've done lots of damage to it, does hitting it once, or stepping in range with your taunt aura make it face you immediately like they used to? This is especially important if you are testing with Brutes, because they can hold aggro simply through outdamaging their teammates.
I'd really appreciate dev confirmation on this if I could get some. This is a stealth nerf, and I feel comfortable using the word "nerf" here despite my feeling that it is overused, because it looks like Tankers without the Taunt power are now unable to tank in (some? all?) AV fights, and nobody said a thing about it.
Edit: changed the title in light of iakona's information. -
[ QUOTE ]
You will NOT be able to pick the specific Synthetic Hami-O
[/ QUOTE ]
I hope this is only being put off until you can implement picking the specific HO for heroes as well. It really sucks to go through all of what it takes to get these things and get something you can't use and nobody else wants (like a Lysosome). -
You've been a wonderful asset to the community, CuppaJo. I'm sorry to see you go, but I hope you enjoy your new duties as much or more.
Thanks for putting up with our crap! -
[ QUOTE ]
Teleport beacons for all CoH zones?
Yes. It's in our internal QA right now, making sure they all work right. (So it's a patch or three away from the Training Room server).
[/ QUOTE ]
Wow! I just assumed you guys decided that you didn't want us to have them, and never considered asking for it. This will make bases so much more useful in CoH. -
Full Masks that are black don't match up with plain black Tights, while Masks With Hair do. It's somewhat subtle, but it gets really annoying after a long time playing the character.
Basically, black Full Masks are actually a dark grey:
Full Mask.
Mask with hair.
Note that in this case, I am using the Mask Full 1 for Face with the Full Mask, and Face 2 for the Mask with Hair, with the "Skin" option for Hair.
This goes for the Detail 2 options such as swept as well-- they are a dark grey.
Jay is hawt. -
Hi Jay!
A bug with the Female->Gloves->Sleeves option has existed since release:
The inside of the left sleeve uses the skin color.
Jay is sexy. -
[ QUOTE ]
Hamidon: Is surrounded by new Arch-Villain type NPCs, that will take at -least- an hour of clear time to kill them for little to no reward.
Recluse SF: Oh noes, not three Elite Bosses. What ever will we do?
<snip>
If anything, make the Recluse SF harder.
[/ QUOTE ]
Done!
*waves magic wand*
Now, instead of 3 Elite Bosses, your team of 8 will face 5 level 53 Heroes (Archvillain class) followed by 8 level 54 Heroes!
I'm so good to you. -
[ QUOTE ]
Better yet, why don't you create an anti-archvillain Task Force for us the way you made an anti-hero Strike Force for the villains, so we can give up this whole silly Hamidon Raiding thing.
[/ QUOTE ]
That would rule.
I'm hoping, one day, for a Zig breakout of multiple archvillains orchestrated by Nemesis to distract the heroes from his real scheme, something multi-dimensional or galactic in scale. -
[ QUOTE ]
The value of the heal on Healing Flames is a balance issue, which has to be dealt with as a team. So, we're looking at it, but no change is currently being made.
[/ QUOTE ]
Do you need analysis sent your way? Because players have already ran very detailed numbers to show that even if Healing Flames is raised to a 25% heal, you'd need to do considerably more to bring Fire up to par with I7 Ice or Invuln.
I don't have a Fire Tanker or Brute, by the way.
Edit: and where are my manners? Thank you very much for the animation change, and for at least posting this response. -
[ QUOTE ]
EDIT : Per a PM from Castle, I believe there are further changes forthcoming. Do not deluge Castle with PM's.
[/ QUOTE ]
Castle really does a ton for my morale.
I need a ::thumbsup:: smiley. -
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The patch notes on test today say that the cast (animation) time was reduced on Healing Flames.
There was no mention of a fix for the fact that it is only healing 17.5% instead of 25%.
[/ QUOTE ]
Somethings better than nothing
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy about the animation change. I just think it also needs to be raised to 25% heal like the other 60 second recharge self heals, and was kind of hoping someone else might hop on test to see if it was stealth buffed, since I'm at work. -
The patch notes on test today say that the cast (animation) time was reduced on Healing Flames.
There was no mention of a fix for the fact that it is only healing 17.5% instead of 25%.