Chyll
-
Posts
2009 -
Joined
-
Quote:You are late to the party:Originally Posted by Suisei
I could go on, but if you haven't noticed the error in your words, I don't know what to tell you.
- And I already admitted - yes the game has changed since introduction
- I meant recently - as in why now all this discussion (and Arcanaville answered that nicely)
-
Quote:Fair question. Looking back at it, right this moment...Originally Posted by Arcanaville
The question is, were your perceptions radically different before Defiance 2.0. That is the way to judge your perceptions.
I thought it was challenging and difficult to play my first blaster - also my first character. Looking back on it... I assume a lot of that was me, not knowing anything about CoH or even MMOs. In fact, Build 1 on that character is still there (a couple of odd IOs tossed in)... and it is pretty horrible, so that perception may not be off base.
After D2.0 I found blasters to be noticably improved. I recognize that supports that there had been a problem. On further thought, I have contributed more levels to blasters post-D2.0 than before, further supporting that I (perhaps unconsciously) recognized the improvement. So to answer, my perception post-D2.0 revealed to me the issue from pre-D2.0.
Somewhere in there I "discovered" corruptors though, and my defender and blaster time both have suffered accordingly. (And now I am wandering away from the topic.)
But I have never felt that defenders solo'd better (and I've spent a lot of time solo), pre- or post-D2.0... again, I cannot explain that apparent disconnect in my experience from the norm.Quote:Originally Posted by Arcanaville
If you perceived blasters to be very problematic before D2.0, and then fine afterwards, you *may* be right. If you've always perceived blasters to be fine, the numbers say that your perceptions must be skewed for some reason, because Defenders soloed better than Blasters prior to D2.0. -
Quote:The implication was that I was incapable of such fine awareness during my own game play. (Again, I may have taken too much in it. But, after extended discussion where my voice was so much one side, at first read it was easy to feel it directed towards me specifically rather than generally.)Originally Posted by Void_Huntress
What implication are you perceiving? There's no superiority, no 'slap' in the statement you quoted.
All she did was reiterate that she doesn't experience an issue playing blasters. That she isn't trying to get blasters fixed because she EXPERIENCES a problem that you do not experience, but instead because she's AWARE of a problem. -
Excellent post, well constructed, logically presented that essentially convinced me that perhaps I was looking at things too narrowly. And then...
Quote:The back handed superiority slap that makes me want to disagree again.Originally Posted by Arcanaville
And its not that I have problems playing Blasters and you don't, so I see a problem you do not. I've been playing Blasters since release, and I do fine. Statistically, probably better than 99.9% of all players given the underperformance data of I13. I see the problems in spite of my ability to play Blasters well. I play everything well. I played MA/SR at release and made it work. If making it work meant there was no problems, MA/SR would still be what it was at release - which today would be hopelessly underperforming.
(Probably unintentioned, but the implication was unpleasant, particularly given how well thought out the entire post clearly was. Maybe I'm just too sensitive today...) -
I have said before, and will again, do not go up against Arcanaville when numbers are on the line.
Quote:Originally Posted by Arcanaville
You'd be wrong, because Blaster DPS is not radically higher now than preI13 and preI13 Blasters were harder to solo for the average player, as evidenced by the fact the average player died more often playing Blasters than any other archetype by a wide margin. That is likely to be improved now with D2.0, but highly unlikely to be reversed completely..
But, maybe it is because I do not equate 'easy to solo' with frequency of death. And, yes, that seems backwards even to me.
I probably shouldn't, but I take offense to that sidewise insult.Quote:Originally Posted by Arcanaville
But then again, even before the I13 changes and especially during them lots of people were saying the same thing: that blasters were fine, that they were among the better soloers, I don't have any problems and neither does anyone else I know, etc. All of those anecdotes and judgments turned out to be 100% false, so their credibility today is entirely suspect.
It is just a shame you can not add up fun...
I legitimately am concerned that there is an unfair judgement against blasters in multiple discussions atm. I do not speak for anyone else's experiences - I speak for my own. I have frequently seen complaints of defenders being hard to solo. I have rarely seen complaints about soloing blasters - to the contrary it is usually laughter and enjoyment of 'living on the edge'. Perception matters. I am sorry I cannot quantify my experience.
Blasters are fun, challenging, enjoyable, and easy to play.
But heck, this entire game is easy to play. I love defs, brutes, blasters, and all matter of ATs. My favorite ATs are corrs and tanks, so how I became the most vocal defender of blaster honor... I have no idea. -
Quote:Until the next round of AOs come out....Originally Posted by Quasadu
What makes it particularly annoying is the fact that even if you did want catalysts on that character, the most you will ever need is six. Once you use six on that character, any more you get will be just about useless (I guess you could unslot already improved ATO's and slot new ones from the same set to improve, but that seems silly).
-
Quote:My last, last post.Originally Posted by Void_Huntress
The devs themselves told us circa I11 that blasters were the worst performing AT as a whole, amongst all powerset combinations for the AT. That the best blaster powerset combination was outperformed by the worst powerset combination for any other AT. Including defenders.
The adjustment we got was Defiance 2.0, which undoubtedly helped. The question is if it helped more than the buffs all the other ATs have received since helped them. It seems unlikely.
There's also the question of the new content (Praetoria, First Ward, incarnate, etc), and the increased threat level those enemies present, and how that threat weighs against the various ATs and playstyles.
Barring exceptional builds like feather_of_sun and myself deploy, blasters as a whole just don't have the tools to deal with large swaths of problems with any reliability.
And as I recall there were dev comments about how Blasters were some of the highest made type of AT and the most taken from hero to villain. The latter in particular, at least, indicates some prevalence of play that would seem to balance against 'worst performing'.
In short, YMMV. And I am far from sold. -
Quote:Oh, I wasn't discounting your point. I just thought you were making an apples to kumquats comparison.Originally Posted by Auroxis
Obviously, but that's besides the point. My point is that there are a lot of ways to obtain capped defense/resistance, but very few ways to obtain capped HP. You basically have to either be a Stone tanker, an Inv tanker, an Ice tanker, a REALLY beefed up WP tanker, or have a cold with Frostwork on your team.
-
Quote:I continue to contend that worst case scenario for Defenders is worse than Blasters who always have partial mez protection. And anything other than worst case is power rather than AT specific.Originally Posted by Radio_Silence
It is worth noting, however, that the worst case scenario for Defenders on the Mez front is being in the same basic position as Blasters (lacking direct mez protection), while always carrying significantly better general mitigation.
Yep, looks like you replied before I got some edits in. I had forgotten about the Vigilance buff. I do remember a numbers based thread that analyzed the results of that vis-a-vis Corrs and Defs edged them out for DPS as a result, even with scourge. I would hardly expect edging Corrs to beat blasters for DPS - but, that is going to be situational (foes, etc) anyway.Quote:Originally Posted by Radio_Silence
Defenders are a quirky comparison here, since Vigilance grants them a 30% damage buff while solo. This puts them slightly ahead of Corruptor base DPS in solo play. Scourge helps Corruptors pull ahead, but only in a relatively small cross section of play is that by a significant margin.
Blasters have mitigation beyond just out-damaging the oppponents, and that becomes more available at high levels too (i.e., KB, holds in ice, etc.) So I wouldn't be quick to say it gets worse as a player advances.Quote:Originally Posted by Radio_Silence
Solo, at the same difficulty settings, Defenders are apt to outperform Blasters through sustainability. At lower difficulty levels the gap will be less obvious (even becoming effectively non-extent below a certain threshold) because mitigation means less when there is less to mitigate, and Blaster DPS will tend to be high enough to mitigate through murder anyway.
At higher difficulty levels, the gap will become increasingly apparent as Blasters lose the ability to survive against hostile mobs by destroying them first and start spending more time doing 0 DPS while chewing pavement or flying back from hospitals.
I will still contend far more complaints, threads, global requests for teams, etc. based on 'hard to solo this def' than any for Blasters. And I'd say that was telling. It is anecdotal vs. numbers, I admit, but I think it is pertinent to note.
*shrug* I haven't seen real "data" to that effect... and I think that any changse Blasters need are low on the priority list given that they perform fine.Quote:Originally Posted by Radio_Silence
As far as subjective experience goes, in the end it boils down to how you want to play. I would not say it is impossible to have fun playing a Blaster, but I also wouldn't say that Blasters are performing well in their own right. This is the real crux of the various conversations about Blaster performance: Should Blasters be altered in some fashion to provide better overall performance compared to other ATs?
Available data suggests that, from an objective standpoint, they should.
But, I agree it seems unavoidably subjective/philosphical at this point, so I will pass on by the thread now. -
Quote:True, but that discounts that when an Elec tanker wants more survivability he can pop purples/temp powers/power surge/get buffs from a sonic/thermal/pain/cold/kin...Originally Posted by Auroxis
One of the best parts about Inv is the HP cap. When an Inv tanker wants the extra resists, he can pop oranges/temp powers/unstoppable/get buffs from a sonic/thermal/pain/kin. When an Elec tanker wants Inv's level of HP(approximately 50% more), he has to get a Cold to buff him with Frostwork.
-
Quote:Granted, the AT as a whole has more survivability tools.Originally Posted by Radio_Silence
Defender primaries grant all sorts of mitigation through buffs (some of which affect the user while providing mez resistance or outright protection, see Accelerated Metabolism, Dispersion Bubble, Force Field Generator, et cetera), debuffs (effective +Def and Res through reducing the inbound DPS of hostile mobs, or effective +To Hit and Damage by reducing hostile defense) and heals.
My point was - mez protection (as highlighted in the discussion) - is largely ally targeted (with some exceptions).
Set specific high end performers are not a good basis for overall comparison. But, agreed, Rad is the shizzle.Quote:Originally Posted by Radio_Silence
Some sets, notably Radiation Emission, are perennial favorites because they bring all of it together to create an extremely effective whole that allows the user to reach performance curves far outside the expected baseline for the AT with a fairly minimal amount of investment.
Solo, same difficulty settings.... I'd argue that Blasters are easier/more pleasant to solo for the average player. And that comes down to DPS, ultimately, so I stand by my opinion/experience.Quote:Originally Posted by Radio_Silence
Even without that though, given the tools available to them, it isn't difficult to imagine a scenario where a Defender is able to outperform a Blaster through sheer survivability.
That said, I'd probably slide Corrs ahead of Blasters, for the reasons you noted.
(edit: though, to be fair, that may not be true. I seem to remember a solo DPS comparison Defender vs. Corruptors post Vigilance changes that had Defs edging out Corrs by the numbers.)
(re-edit: which is an interesting point, I doubt edging out Corrs would equal passing blasters.) -
Thanks, Arcanaville. I understand that progression and defintion. Nicely put together.
However,... this did not suddenly or recently take place relative to the total time frame of the game, did it?. We are talking... 8 years of design and progression? I'd say things really haven't been redefined in that scheme for some time. Without really looking things over... back many issues at least. Incarnates shifted things at the top end, granted, but for entire game progession (1-50) sitting here on the eve of I22, I can't remember anything I really do differently with any of my AT character progressions since... Hard to remember, really.
In fact, from the moment I joined around I7, the discussions and tribal knowledge around here has said - CoH is different it doesn't work around the trinity. In fact, I had never played another MMO before CoH and I had to learn what the 'trinity' was to understand why CoH didn't fit that mold to understand some play conversations.
This would imply this 'modern' CoH definition goes back farther... and really isn't 'modern' at all. It is 'standard' and I would argue that it isn't an issue that defines the general blaster discussion in new ways. I admit I may be looking at this incorrectly... but it is the way it feels to me, anyway.
The only 'modern' thing, in my way of thinking, would be the introduction of Incarnates. And incarnates does more to pull all ATs to a common base, rather than differentiate them... actentuating the standard in many ways.
(A whole other debate buried there, in whether Incarnates is making the abilities of all so 'common' that is removing distinction from the ATs and sets.)
Maybe, in these discussion I am just hung upon the semantics.
Quote:See, my blasters have never needed anyone. Even less so since the Defiance changes. Given the preponderance of support set mez protections being ally targeted, I still think of corrs & defs as having less mez protection than blasters. Doms too (unless perma-dommed) because they have stretches of complete vulnerability compared to blasters' able to always partially ignore mez.Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Blasters have no modern game definition. They are still operating under the old trinity based definition of not having mez protection and mitigation because they are supposed to need someone else.
That I will accept, but again, that isn't a modern CoH issue... I'd say it maybe didn't make it out of Beta? Or not beyond ED? But that goes beyond my play experience.Quote:Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Its not because they are too powerful to have it. Its because of an old principle that no longer applies to this game.
Ah... see maybe there is a gap. I have never, ever considered blasters to be a melee damage specialist. It is even a niche character design role dating back to before I joined (blappers)... it is 'standard' rather than 'modern'. Probably my play style, too, I look at that annoying preponderance of melee attacks in some secondary sets the way I look at ranged attacks on a scrapper - a necessary evil.Quote:Originally Posted by Arcanaville
And even though the devs explicitly stated that Blasters should be the damage dealing specialists in melee and range they somehow let Blaster melee damage modifiers fall to third place. Even the out of date definition they have is not followed.
Ah, IOs... YES, that is when things changed for game play and leveling... so at a macro level what are our eras?Quote:Originally Posted by Arcanaville
And even the devs have acknowledged that things are different now. Specifically in the context of defense and debuffs they have stated that while things were different in the past, they believe the defense metagame has become much stronger due to the proliferation of debuffing and invention accessible defense. The devs know the myth is no myth, because they act like the game is different now.
Condition :: Name
Beta :: Beta
?? :: pre-ED
Classic :: ??
?? :: IOs
Modern :: Incarnate
(Maybe this is a question for another thread...)
Accepted, and tl;dr.Quote:Originally Posted by Arcanaville
If they design differently, its not a myth by definition because the game is different if the devs are making it so. QED.
I just don't feel that blasters are 'broken' from anything new or different, and hence my conceptual breakdown with the entire discussion. -
In a space targeting a discussion of Blasters having the top DPS, agreed, they do not have it. Whether they should or not, I have little opinion on. Are they fun and feel great as is? That I will answer with a confident yes, and I feel there are far more important things for the Devs to consider and work on.
And the building to raise defense discussion is relavent from earlier. I can't speak to successful softcapping, but getting as high as possible - particularly against ranged - is valuable, no doubt. But that is equally true for corrs, defs, doms, etc....
Quote:Completely agree, if determining position in the grand DPS picture is the goal. For myself, I know where the kings of total DPS are already and the top ranged only DPS there doesn't seem much need for further study.Originally Posted by Miladys_Knight
If you want a true picture of comparative DPS you HAVE to have accurate comparisons. In this case you need to set up a scenario, have 2 players of equal skill and then calculate using all the time it takes to complete the scenario as a total.
However, you seem to be guilty of the same.Quote:Originally Posted by Miladys_Knight
Then you need to increase your sample size to make sure that you aren't comparing outliers. The devs do this by data mining. What you are doing is attempting to present 2 non-equivalent cases as evidence.
Doesn't the average defender have less mitigation against Mez (their powers, by and large, are not self targeting while the blaster gets freedom to use some abilities), and access to the same general blast set mitigation so little real appreciable difference there. I cannot see, or agree, that blasters are at the bottom of the mez and, consquently, (following your logic) DPS food chain.Quote:Originally Posted by Miladys_Knight
If you want to put it in a "whole game" perspective I would almost be willing to bet that due to lack of mitigation AND lack of mez protection the aggregate Blaster has a lower DPS than the aggregate Defender. -
Quote:Agreed, hence my use of the word current. Hard to say what to expect once we get past the Praetorian mess.Originally Posted by Spiritchaser
It would probably be worth noting that there's no way to predict what future mob comp might be like
A swarm of arachnoids or, if you could imagine such a thing, praetorian elder snakes (hey, who knows right?) might turn the tables against elec pretty quickly. -
Quote:But you can with hoods, with counters with it's own :-)Originally Posted by Grouchybeast
Also, you can't use the masks with the Jester ruff, either, which makes me :-(
(but agreed, more versatility would be preferred) -
Quote:No problem.Originally Posted by KnightofKhonsu
Sweet, thank you Chyll. Much appreciated.
Heads up before you rush off and catalyze a full set.
Some are suggesting the option of doing so for only 3 enhancements and doubling down on the health and damage bonuses.
Another option I saw was catalyzing the set, but splitting it into two powers to double-double down on those bonuses.
I slotted the full set for the rech and resists. -
I've run trials with both.
While neither fared poorly and both were fun, if I were going to choose for some serious trial running - to pile up e-merits for instance - Invulnerability would be my second choice.
That base energy and psi resistance in ElecA/ is just that nice against the current trial mix of foes. -
Quote:Originally Posted by kangaroo120y
Is the Might of the tanker set really useful? How well does that +resistance proc work?
It is quite useful, depending in part on your tank's set. First, it is attuned, so it levels with you at all times. Second, the enhancer and set bonuses aren't bad, but if you happened to be able to catalyze it to the superior version they are purple level.
The proc works by having a chance to fire whenever you use the power it is slotted in, as it says about 5 times a minute will be normal (particularly if you can put it in a power that charges at about that rate) and gives you plus resistance to all. It will stack.
The superior proc on my SR/ tank can get from 2.52% psi resist at base (from set bonus) up to 32%-ish psi resist in one fight. -
Superior Might of the Tanker
The doubles provide 33.1% benefit each (i.e., Accuracy/Damage, Damage/Recharge)
The triples provide 26.1% each
The Quad provides 23.2% each
The Rech/Proc provides 23.2% rech, and the proc is timed to approximately 6 times per minute (instead of 5 for the un-catalyzed)
Set bonuses are:
2: Damage +4%
3: health +3%
4: recharge +10%
5: Toxic/Psi resistance +2.52%
6: Smash/Lethal resistance +2.52% -
I think I'll go get in line now.....
-
Quote:*shrug* I disagree, and I don't see how to meet in the middle.Originally Posted by Miladys_Knight
I never said blasters were helpless. They aren't even close to balanced though.
Just your examples for trollers, corrs, def assume that all powersets in those ATs affect self when many of them are team mate only abilities. I rank many/most of those under Blasters. You clearly didn't.
Dominators can only break free if domination is up... I'd say that's on par with Blasters that can always partially ignore every mez.
I will not bother to go down the full list, but I'd guess Blasters are pretty middle of the pack.
(let alone the fact that the design changes and you hadn out wonderful mez breaking ability - then all the suport sets that have power choices for just that are now unbalanced.....)
Let alone how easy it is now to make a break free if you don't happen to have one.
I continue to believe Blasters are not unbalanced in this space. -
Quote:They aren't on CoHTitan either...Originally Posted by KnightofKhonsu
Okay, I've searched for information on exactly what Enhancement Catalysts will do to MoT. I know what they are supposed to do; however, I don't know the numbers. I thought I read them on the boards somewhere but I am unable to relocate them.
I have a full set of them and want to use them on my MoT. Can someone who knows the numbers, post them for me? I just want to confirm what they will do for me. Thanks.
Off the top of my head (far from my game computer - I do have a full set of these on one of my tanks), the proc checks 6 times a minute instead of 5. The individual enh benefits raise to something on par with purples, and set bonuses all up a notch - also on par with purples. Psi resist gets to 2.52% or something like that, for instance. I want to say the rech bonus steps up to 10%, but can't remember for certain.
I will check when I get home, if you still haven't gotten an answer. -
Quote:It will work anywhere. It just do not expect it to fire every time you use Dragon's Tail. Spam it, and you should get by.Originally Posted by Northman
So, for my Shield/MA Tank, I am thinking putting the proc in Storm Kick. Less than 12s recharge though. Will it work there? I had initially planned to put it in Dragon's Tail.
-
Quote:Maybe there is the difference. I compare it to what all ATs get, not just the "damage" ATs... and while it isn't tank, brute, etc. mez def/resistance, it is considerably more than trollers, defs, corrs, etc. get. And when you consider Blasters used to get nothing, I like the current state pretty well.Originally Posted by Oliin
I know I don't really need any change with regards to mez on my blasters, but then I also don't really play my leveling blasters at the high difficulties that I can on any of my melee characters. So I generally can defeat what mezed me before it takes me out using my T1 and T2 attacks.
I don't really feel comfortable saying blasters need no changes with regard to mez because of that though and I'm really not sure what advantage they have because of defiance.
All the other damage ATs either have mez protection which keeps them from being mezed in the first place (in most cases) or have powers that work like break frees. Blasters can use their three lowest tier powers. In one case one of those powers is melee range(though I think it possibly functions the best for keeping me alive while mezed) and in another case it actually does no damage at all.
I'm not trying to say defiance's attacking through mez sucks, but I don't see it as an advantage over what the other damage ATs have either. It's just kind of there, and for me it works fairly well to be honest. -
Quote:Ultimately, those specific examples involve letting others make fools of themselves. So, yeah, a little different. But there are lines even there.Originally Posted by mousedroid
In my opinion it depends upon how it's done. SBC was at his best IMO on the Ali G show where he would interview politicians or public officials and expose their fundamental ignorance of the issues or of what people really cared about; or better yet when he purposely made racists and homophobes uncomfortable or angry. Was it nice? No, but neither were the people who were his victims. Was it funny? Hell yes.
Yep, 'Slapstick' succeeds when it involves everyone cooperating together, not taking advantage of someone.Quote:Originally Posted by mousedroid
But things like the slapstick bit at the Oscars? I'll pass on that. It's cheap and unfunny IMO.
edit: to refence Aggelakis' excellent post above - that qualifies as 'silliness'.