Adron

I call upon the email wisdom of the Sober virus:

[ QUOTE ]
Multi-Kulturell = Multi-Kriminell

[/ QUOTE ]

Nerf diversity and cooperation! More love to fascist clones!

Speaking of which, I hear the new Star Wars movie doesn't hurt as much as episodes 1 & 2.

Upon Googling around for interviews and hoping to scoop some non-forum-released info on CoV, I came across some photos of the Cryptic lobby. It had a bunch of life-sized models of various NCSoft game icons.

There was a big bird-lady (looked rather like the harpies in WoW, actually) hanging out with one of the Hero statues. IIRC, the article stated that they had no idea where that birdperson came from.

So, recalling that one of the new ATs will be a winged one, I put 2 and 2 together and counted my chickens before they hatched.

States and Recluse are of the yet-unseen "Incarnate" archetype, which has not been adequately described as of this writing.

My money is on an avatar-like motif, much like Marvel's Juggernaut or Thunderstrike (the old second-generation Thor).

Since CoH's mythos allows for an infinite array of pantheons to simultaneously exist, every Incarnate can probably predispose themselves to some god or another (even from different mythologies) without artistic conflict.

Besides, the two Kheldian ATs take Natural and Science enhancements. If they stick to formula, the new ATs might draw from the remaining Magic, Technology, and Mutant origins. "Incarnate" sounds pretty Magical to me, and I remember back in alpha testing when States was described as having that origin.

So the birdpeople (Avilians, I think?) and Corallax (underwater people?) will have to fight over who gets to be tech and who gets to be mutie, I suppose. The wing-arms-instead-of-hands thing implies more Mutant, but I'm deep into the realm of speculation at this point.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Statesman was clearly obfuscating there.

[/ QUOTE ]
Statesman obfusicate!? Inconceivable!!! <evil grin>

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure he'll reveal his true origin "soon."

Hah, looks like I'm not the only one who observed bad team tactics in the video.

Well done.

[ QUOTE ]
Synapse is not dead, he is still in the game and will be around to take a beating in the comic too.

[/ QUOTE ]

Manticore: I have the Defender-amped Leadership pool, and I wrote the script for this CGI so I'm in charge. Synapse, go scout the enemy base!

Synapse: My super-advanced nervous system has given me the mental acuity to realize that I'm a squishy Blaster and should NOT be scouting. This ain't Phase Shift, dude. I don't even have the Concealment pool. What if I get mezzed? Talk about lack of foresight.

Foreshadow (running up, out of breath): What? Did someone say my name? I have angst, you know.

Manticore (teleports five feet to the left for no reason): Yeah, n00b, if only you had a travel power, too.

(Positron and Statesman fly up).

Statesman: I am here to state the obvious! We must get in the place and take the thing!

Positron: I'm a Blaster!

Statesman: No, you're a Defender. We'll go in after you buff the party.

Positron: Oh, I specced out of all that when I got my new armor. I can't heal, either, so no one take any damage or need to get rezzed in the middle of combat.

Statesman: No problem there.

[ QUOTE ]
There shouldnt be any XP for that! Statesman is the boss, Poor Kublai probably cons grey.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oooh, ouch.

SUMMATION: The "Blaster Role" is feasible, but flawed due to how the AI responds to massive damage. Details follow.

~~~~~

When a blaster is solo, missions spawn very small groups. The blaster can alpha-strike and neutralize at least one mob immediately, and then clean up with minimal risk.

When a blaster teams with a defender, the defender can help with an alpha-strike and then concentrate on keeping the blaster alive during the mob-retaliation phase.

When a blaster teams with a controller, the controller can lock down/distract the mobs and let the blaster get off AoEs in relative safety.

When a blaster teams with a scrapper or tanker, the melee hero is charged with the duty of maintaining aggro while the blaster concentrates fire on the melee hero's target.

When two blasters team, they should concentrate fire so as to share aggro and expedite the neutralization of their target(s).

Blasters teaming with the ever-variable Kheldians resemble one of the above conditions and will likely have to use the same tactics.

~~~~~

What seems to kick blasters in the teeth the hardest is the retaliation phase of combat. The blaster shoots, the surviving mobs shoot back, then the blaster is forced to stop shooting and run. As previously mentioned, if a mob responds with a ranged mez then the blaster is likely about to get gangbanged.

Most blasters know better than to initiate combat with their AoEs (unless they're pretty sure it'll one-shot the mobs), and many will try to Aim+Buildup+Snipe a straggler villain that has strayed too far from the herd... so as to decrease the amount of retaliation when the real fight starts.

Many blasters, it seems, rely on Stealth more than Hover nowadays so they can minimize accidental "adds".... and Hover is very dangerous when you start having to worry about getting mezzed. It ain't fun to fall down into the middle of a bloodthirsty batch of baddies, especially after you've been shooting them.

~~~~~

All that being said, there are some powerset-specific differences.

Fire blasters are also the squishiest aggro magnets ever. I don't know about you guys, but the "Mutually Assured Destruction" factor makes me outright scared to use my powers unless there are two controllers on the team. :P

Ice blasters, in proper converse, have a lot of great retaliation-prevention mojo.

Electrical blasters are noteworthy only if they're specced out to be blastrollers (i.e.: endurance drainers). It takes a lot of effort and slots to make that happen, and even then you're trying a darn silly thing by jumping into the middle of group of hostiles.

Energy blasters have the double-edged sword of knockback. Yay, I smacked some of the baddies away from me! Boo, they're all scattered now! Yay, I do great damage! Boo, the melee guys hate me! Their L32 nuke is also the most questionable one to use, for similiar safety reasons as the endurance-drainer electrical guys above.

Rifle blasters are all over the place in their attack vectors, which means they need to position themselves.... all over the place. I swear I feel like a yo-yo while my shots recycle: long snipe, close cone, long single-target, medium single-target.... ugh. Then there's the fact that some of the attacks have knockback, and some don't. I get more gripes from the melee folks when playing Rifle than when I was playing Energy, and I don't blame them.

~~~~~

So what am I getting at with all of this "We KNOW this stuff already" blather?

Well, I hope that I'm demonstrating to the devs that the life of a blaster is a hard one. I'm also hoping that they'll see that most of the secondary powers have very little use during actual gameplay.

Sure, sure, there are some "blappers" that will disagree. It's great that some blaster builds can support melee combat, but we all know that it's a long walk to get there without swimming in debt.

SUGGESTION: Allow damage taken to induce a degree of "shock and awe" in targets.

I mean, some guy just ran up and exploded at a bunch of thugs. Why are those thugs calmly pulling out their pistols and firing back, typically unfazed by this?

It's true that the AI will cause mobs to "chicken out" when most of their friends just fell over dead in a short space of time. That's great. It's also true that some attacks (Electrical blasts come to mind) have a chance to faze a mob for a brief moment.

Note that the mob's allies need to actually die before anyone gets scared. They seem to be perfectly okay with everyone going from full health to green-sliver the space of one heartbeat, but it takes villains hitting the floor before anyone starts to worry.

Heroes, bless it, has the same problem that tabletop games like D&D tend to have: It doesn't matter how damaged people are, they usually operate at 100% combat effectiveness until they're dead.

.... So it seems to make sense that the "special AT advantage" of blasters (other than the necessary cheaper attack costs) could be a higher chance of causing the targets to flee after soaking up a massive hit.

I mean, if some dude nearly one-shotted me, I'd be running like hell if I could.

Alternately (or in combination), everyone could start to suffer accuracy penalities based on their current health bar. I already mentioned this earlier in the thread, so I won't go over it again here.

~~~~~

Man, that was fun typing all of this in a little five-line entry window.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Me, Lord Recluse, Ravenshadow, Poz, Another programmer (no cool handle), Capt. Mako.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please, get that poor ******* a cool handle before E3. You dont want him to be embarrassed do you?

[/ QUOTE ]

I recommend "No Cool Handle."

[ QUOTE ]
This would truly give a good defensive advantage to range that corresponds both with reality and pencil-and-paper RPGs.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I understand correctly:

[*]Ranged Hero shoots a group of villains and ducks behind cover to avoid the counterattack.[*]Most villains immediately reciprocate with a ranged attack of some sort. Others may charge, if they're close enough.[*]The outcome of all villain ranged attacks are decided before the attack animation even begins.[*]Ranged Hero is shot/mezzed/etc. from behind cover, as (s)he simply cannot duck for cover quickly enough due to the combat system.[/list]
The way attacks are exchanged in CoH, using their excellent lag-skirting anticipatory AI, prevents blasters (et alia) from accomplishing what seems realistic: shooting from cover. It's likely a necessary evil to promote good gameplay.

What would assist game realism as well as accomplish the previous poster's goals is some combat element like:

"Base Accuracy is decreased in direct proportion to the amount of damage an attacker currently has."

This would simulate the shock/pain/annoyance of injury one would expect. It would enable blasters to have a form of defense against the mass retaliation from their AoEs.

I mean, if someone threw a grenade in a room full of me and my buddies, I doubt we'd have the immediate presence of mind to whip out pistols and fire back... much LESS be very accurate while doing so. If someone shot me with a sniper rifle, I doubt I'd be able to locate the attacker successfully nor return fire as if I were unhurt. The mobs in CoH have no problem with such things, even the lowly thugs.

Some attacks include forcing the mob to reel for a moment, and that's great. It's just not really enough.

Here's the scary part: it should probably work both ways. If a hero is hurt, he/she/it should likely take an -Acc. This isn't really a big deal as we have the capacity to instantly heal ourselves (green insps) or increase our accuracy (yellow insps).

Additionally, this would give us reason to slot more than one (or sometimes two) Accuracy enhancements if we so chose.

This would apply to all ATs, not just blasters, of course. There would be other details to consider like what happens to the Accuracy of MoG scrappers.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I should of read that update after my morning coffee.

I do thank you for the information though. Although this does stink quite a bit. Running around and sniping people while super speed selcudes you is (was) this blasters primary defensive mechanism. I can understand why SS got changed, but I don't see why somthing that was working should be messed with. All of us whove been robbed of the usefullness of SS should get a free respec from the devs.

[/ QUOTE ]

*points at the free respec that came with issue 4*

[/ QUOTE ]

Read the dev tracker thread religiously. In it, you'll see that they're going to remove the -Acc and instead have SJ & SS temporarily self-suppress after you attack.

This basically saves us from pressing buttons, as we would instead have to SS over, turn it off, shoot, turn it on, and SS away. Now the transmission in the car is automatic rather than manual.

[ QUOTE ]
The List of Problems:

Tanks do too much damage.
Scrappers are too tough.
Controllers get pets.
Defenders...... need to be looked at later.
Blasters...... are ok for now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tanks fought to do 80% of the base damage of scrappers because it was (and still is) impossible to play Colossus, the Hulk, Strong Guy, and so forth. Spider-Man is more of a CoH tank: nigh-impossible to kill and does good damage while snarking off bad guys. Do not take away what the Tanker boards have begged to get since beta.

Some Scrappers are too tough. States has hinted that Invulnerability needs a little toning down. Reflexes and Dark Armor have very real problems. Regeneration has been a rollercoaster. I suspect if there were more than 4 Scrapper secondaries there would be more woes to list.

The problem is not that Controllers get pets. The problem is that Controllers get pets only late in the game, and not all Controllers at that. Ergo, Controllers can't solo for 64% of their career and then suddenly they can -- some can very well.

Defenders are, for the most part, fine. Multi-role classes typically suffer from the "jack of all trades, master of none" syndrome.

Some Blasters are okay. Some are not. If you take all of your primary and secondary powers and only a travel power, then you're probably not okay (unless you're */Ene or */Dev).

There are exceptions to all of the above. To paraphrase Statesman: "It's not that all X's are broken. It's that some X powersets are broken."

[ QUOTE ]
Ahhhh there's the rub.

I barely play my scrapper teamed. I use him for solo purposes and helping sgmates deal with archvillans. He's the "I don't want to be bothered with a team toon" The other 3 characters that I actively play are geared towards teaming. but they're not scrappers. 2 defenders and a fire/ss tank.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm just now rejoining this lack of communication in progress, and I imagine that there are other posts that already addressed this.

If you play your scrapper solo, then of COURSE you don't have to reposition often. All of the mobs are either charging you, or standing nice and still while shooting you at range. Additionally, the light-population spawn of a solo hero's instance mission implies that you really don't have many targets to chase after.

Your personal truths are incorrectly bleeding over into situations where they do not apply. Kali and Rooftop not only are correct in their assertions, too, but they're going about expressing them in an appropriate manner.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
blasters don't have to reposition themselves?

you're smoking the good [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]

He's not arguing that as an absolute. Rather, he's saying that Blasters don't have to meticulously position himself because of a small range (PBAoE compared to the larger AoE of a Blaster target AoE attack, 5ft cone range compared to 40ft cone range)

He is also saying Blasters don't have to move around as much to acquire, and fire on, new targets. Read again this part:

[ QUOTE ]
When fighting a large group, the blaster can continuously pump out ranged attacks without spending much time positioning himself. This (plus their noteable disposition towards AoEs) suggests that blasters are better suited at doing damage to multiple minions. Overall the blaster is throwing more raw damage downrange than the scrapper, usually multiplied over groups of targets.

When fighting a single target, a scrapper excels over a blaster as the scrapper must spend an initial period closing with the target, then may hope to remain there. Switching targets and repositioning for melee reach slows the scrapper's attacks down, decreasing DPS

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you, Rooftop. While my [censored] is indeed good, that's exactly what I'm saying.

It's my theory that scrapper damage is capped higher than blaster damage to: A) Create a roughly equivalent DPS between the two in multiple-mob situations and B) Further enhance the scrapper's "boss killer" role.

Inductive reasoning as follows:

When fighting a large group, the blaster can continuously pump out ranged attacks without spending much time positioning himself. This (plus their noteable disposition towards AoEs) suggests that blasters are better suited at doing damage to multiple minions. Overall the blaster is throwing more raw damage downrange than the scrapper, usually multiplied over groups of targets.

When fighting a single target, a scrapper excels over a blaster as the scrapper must spend an initial period closing with the target, then may hope to remain there. Switching targets and repositioning for melee reach slows the scrapper's attacks down, decreasing DPS (the noteable exception is the Spines scrapper, who is known to have excellent lethality for this reason). So, a planted scrapper works best against a single target... particularly high-ranking ones, what with the criticals... rather than multiple targets.

If my theory over design intent is accurate, then the next step I see is that blasters need an inherent method of staving off multi-mob ranged retribution if their AoEs aren't one-shotting people.

That is to say: "If my role as a blaster is to blow up rooms full of villains, then I need SOME built-in defenses when tankers and controllers aren't around." I'm sure fire blasters will agree, especially with their DoTs keeping foes mightly hostile towards them even after the initial whammies.

So, we players have been forced to adapt to what we've been given. Realizing that melee attacks invite teleports to the hospital, we have typically chosen to ignore many melee attacks and instead pick up defensive pool powers for the slots traditionally reserved for our secondary sets. Devices and Energy are exceptions, as they have some excellent support abilities that do not rely upon dangerous melee use.

Anyway, I think the damage caps between scrappers and blasters aren't really the issue. I think it's that blasters have been told that they're the gunboats when they're really more like cannons mounted on tricycles.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is nice but what about a badge for all of us who lived and died during that year not just showed up for the party. A badge for your biggest supporters that have been here through the beta, paid and played all year, even upgraded to the DVD Edition. Or will we have to wait to buy City of Villians also before that ever happens?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not handing out Torches and Pitchforks here, but when I first saw the badge I thought it was for veterans too. What's wrong with a veteran badge?

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely nothing is wrong with any sort of Veteran reward.

[/ QUOTE ]

We preorder people still have the prestige sprint powers to glorify our loyalty.

[ QUOTE ]
Blasters already have a swiss army-knife set. Two, actually. Defenders don't.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. Every defender primary is a "Swiss army knife" set.

That's one of the reasons why so many blasters like the defender-y Devices track; it's not a bunch of tempting melee stuff that will get you killed... it's a support set.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Due to the upcoming Power Sets Manticore is actually a Trick Arrow, Archery Defender.

[/ QUOTE ]

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that's just weird. So we're going to be seeing Trick Arrow/Energy defenders running around? Trick Arrow/Psi?

But no Archery/Devices?

Cohesive hero concepts seem to be non-critical design objectives. Can we have Turkey/Gameshow controllers next?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think "zero defense" was not the best decision.

[/ QUOTE ]

That might be the best summation of "The Blaster Problem."

For me, it's an ironically fortunate thing that many blaster secondary sets are melee-centric. This way I can ignore most of my secondary powers and use the slots instead for defensively-oriented pool powers.

That trend speaks poorly of the secondary sets, and further explains why Devices is so popular since it breaks formula by being useful.

[/ QUOTE ]

I quote this, because of all other complaints I have ever read about blasters, this is the one I remember seeing the most. The secondaries are too much of a grab-bag to really support themselves or the blaster primaries, is the impression I get - naturally, there are exceptions (energy and devices are both seen as fairly good).

The secondaries seem to need stronger internal consistency, as well as more tools to enable blasters to deliver their damage without faceplanting. Please, someone tell me if I'm just being dumb?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I don't think you're being dumb. Mostly because you're agreeing with me.

Many of the powers in */Devices and */Energy supplement the primary sets rather than diverge from them. Caltrops keeps an enemy at range longer; Fire Sword is useful only if you're in melee. Targeting Drone helps your ranged attacks hit more often; Shocking Grasp is for melee. Build-Up, present in many secondaries, supports the concept of ranged damage and is therefore often used.

A typical blaster in melee is a fish out of water. They're scrappers without any defensive secondary powers (and less hit points).

About 3 years ago when Cryptic went from a freeform "classless" system to an archetype system, they classified blasters according to the old MMORPG "mage" paradigm: You do damage, but you can't take damage. This unto itself is not revolutionary.

However, then they went and told the squishy mages that it was okay to get into melee because their swords would do tons of damage. Never mind that you still don't get to wear armor or cast any inherent defensive buffs. Sic 'em!

When the wife first read the CoH comic and saw War Witch using her fire sword in every fight, my little woman scrunched up her eyebrows and asked me "What, is she trying for the debt badge?"

[ QUOTE ]
I think "zero defense" was not the best decision.

[/ QUOTE ]

That might be the best summation of "The Blaster Problem."

For me, it's an ironically fortunate thing that many blaster secondary sets are melee-centric. This way I can ignore most of my secondary powers and use the slots instead for defensively-oriented pool powers.

That trend speaks poorly of the secondary sets, and further explains why Devices is so popular since it breaks formula by being useful.

[ QUOTE ]
Never said they couldnt.. All i said was they worry more about falling to the mobs (especially if they are sleep hold stun or mez mobs, or if even one of em is.. or if they are extremely long range mobs such as crey snipers). A tanker or scrapper is not going to feel that dmg (remember ranged dmg is less than melee dmg and scrappers and tankers have a higher resist to all dmg types) so they are going to be able to close on those mobs. Also with protection from sleep and all that, they are going to close on those mobs. The blaster need worry about falling to 3 white con mobs because they cant take the dmg cant get the range and cant do the dmg.

[/ QUOTE ]

As a blaster, my best defense is supposed to be my offense.

That's not really accurate.

My best defense is tactics, and I'm not talking about the pool power. I'm talking about aggro management. I'm talking about sniping mobs who have moved away from their buddies so as not to alert them. I'm talking about pulling around corners. I'm talking about concentrating fire rather than stacking AoEs. I'm talking about coordinating with your teammates before attacking.

I still die, but my kill ratio is outstanding. Debt is a rarity.

I also hang out with controllers whenever I can, because we need each other.

So, no, I wholly disagree with your "The blaster need worry about falling to 3 white con mobs because they cant take the dmg cant get the range and cant do the dmg" assertion.

If you honestly can't take down 3 white cons on your own, then I agree that you do have a problem. You are misinformed, misrepresenting, and/or unskilled.

[ QUOTE ]
You will be hard pressed to find a blaster that does not have a hard time after 30th level doing anything on their own.

[/ QUOTE ]

To be fair, my primary blaster is an Ele/Ele and does well on Invincible while solo. He's 43 at the time of this writing.

Electricity has been given the dishonor of being called the "weakest" blaster set, and from a raw damage standpoint I can nod my head in comfortable agreement on that.

However, with all of my attacks 6-slotted for 2 Acc & 4 Dam, I blow up orange cons easily enough. I typically run with Voltaic Sentinel out for the little bit of extra damage. When Thunderous Blast recycles, it's like payday.

If things get into melee range, I can either one-two neuter them with 6-slotted Short Circuit and Power Sink, and/or I can Lightning Clap, and/or I can Phase Shift. I didn't keep Tesla Cage as it would help against only one non-boss target at a time, and that's not what I needed.

The Concealment track keeps me safer when I feel like an endurance drain alpha against a bunch of minions and lieutenants. Sometimes I'll sneak up and Short Circuit + Thunderous Blast + CaB + Power Sink + Ball Lightning + Lightning Clap. That sequence, in that specific order, neutralizes pretty much everything except purples. Sometimes I don't even need to progress past the TB part.

My pool powers are Hover+Fly, Swift+Health+Stamina, Stealth+Invisibility+Phase Shift, and Body Armor. I used to have Hasten, and will probably pick it up again at 44 to increase my DPS by 40% and my defense by 5%.

My inspiration tray holds nothing but my strict diet of greens and blues, with one Break Free and one Awaken available just in case. If a yellow or red drops in, I almost always immediately use it before the next attack.

That's my build, and that's my level of effectiveness. I don't put out as much raw damage as a Fire blaster (who does?), but I can put it out consistently and in relative safety.

That being said, prior to level 22 I should have bought stock in the Awaken company. It may have just been a skill issue on my part, but daaaaang did I die a lot.

[ QUOTE ]
The idea of zapping things appeals to me generally more than the idea of punching things. So I'm inclined to play ranged damage types. For some that inclination is absolute and so they are going to play Blasters and not Scrappers given a reasonable choice. And if the choice isn't reasonable they are going to take their dollars and go elsewhere.

My earlier statement is that wanting to play a Blaster is sufficient reason for some to choose to play a Blaster.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm completely with you in playstyle preference and playstyle philosophy. Shooting things from cover is more entertaining to me than chasing after them. This is why I typically play mages or archers in fantasy games; I prefer to spend my time pulling triggers than struggling to get someone in range of my fist.

That being said, 12% of my current characters are blasters.

I dare say that I've gotten pretty good at managing aggro, as it's the first skill a blaster's player needs to develop. Pick your target(s), use your terrain, and don't hesitate to retreat if it gets too hot.

Don't think that every one of your powers is there just to help you do damage; most are really just a form of active defense. Pool power choices are critical for blasters because of this.

Also, ironically, it's GOOD that most of a blaster's secondary track is extraneous because you NEED those slots for pool powers. My primary is a level 43 Ele/Ele with 4 pools (well, 5 including Body Armor) and I've used less than half of my secondary powers. I do not want to be in melee, and my power selections reflect that.

So, I'm sorry that I'm not standing up in defense of my favored AT, but for the most part I think that the defensive potential of blasters is just fine. Except for Fire blasters.... the price of their power is too high.

My only real critique is that since a blaster's primary defense is his ability to alpha strike, that makes the Concealment pool far too valuable to them. Any AT should not be "forced" to rely so heavily on a pool power (such as Stamina or Hover, for that matter) to work.

[ QUOTE ]
At the moment, Scrappers, and to a lesser degree, Tankers, are being analyzed. Once we establish a baseline, then we'll be in a better position to look at Blasters.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't forget to turn on the level-to-level adjustment subroutines in your test environment.

Heh. My apologies to those faint-of-heart and/or suspicious-of-dev.