FeiWuLong

Here's a suggestion that may help two AT's in group situations.

Give tankers a "Cover" aura.

Any other character within said aura that is targeted by Ranged attacks (maybe melee and aoe as well) has an additional layer of defense check. "Misses" are actually blocks performed by the tanker, and as such takes damage it in place of the squishie.

This benefit is two-fold. Tankers have very little to do in their cryptic given role. That of playing the Colossus type guy. Some of them would rather have a more offensive bent, and I agree most of their sets need more damage, but they are built with the vision of a Steel wall. And a wall that smacks the snot out of anyone who gets close to the squishies.

The second part of the benefit is that all the aggro that a blaster pulls is somewhat mitigated by the fact that the return volley is being buffered by the highest defense AT in the game. Synergy in action. Blasters who are also willing to invest in some Tough/Weave or any other pools that provide DEF, or who have a Defender in the group as well will probably find they can blast with more impunity and that when something goes wrong it's unlikely that it will mean Instant death.

And it fits comics to boot.

[ QUOTE ]
Interesting idea. It probably gets too far into the game mechanics for it to be implemented and comes with a whole range of balancing issues, but at least it would not be as arbitrary as taunt/provoke. If it could be made to work it would be superior for that reason alone, and it could introduce a whole range or tactical options on top of that.

[/ QUOTE ]

It'd be a bit of a pain to implement I imagine, but since most factions seem to maintain a degree of roles between each other, once the major ones are set it'd all be about figuring out the flavor ones for the individual types, the general mobs could be copy and paste code. I mean, it's really about asking what are the team roles in a given mob, and what would strategically make the most sense for them to do when presented with their "mob". That of grouped heroes. Personally, anything that increases team dynamics and strategy I'm all for.

[ QUOTE ]
With the possible exception of SR, and even that is only “possible” no scrapper def set is challenged by even minions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, they all work virtually the way they're supposed pre-mid 20's. Then, between some extra slots available for defense and SO's they start to scale past the mobs, but even then, before 28, it's more because of damage SO's than the defenses. And in DA's case, with the advent of more status attacks, they're in a real hurting spot. (I got stunned at level 3 when I started my new DA toon.) Thankfully some of the low level status madness is/has been rolled back.

[ QUOTE ]
For 3 whites = 1 hero to be a reality 10 white minions have to pose a real threat to even a solo combat oriented hero. Even the weak scrapper secondary sets are up to this.

[/ QUOTE ]

It sounds like a good number for a decent built solo scrapper to me. Maybe some would argue that it's too weak, or too powerful.

[ QUOTE ]
Just because there are a couple of sets that go far beyond what the other scrapper def sets can do does not mean that all of then are not to powerful to meet the difficulty goals set out by the devs.

[/ QUOTE ]

True. INV could be toned down. SR could be made better for the slot investment (I'm not entirely sold on perma-elude, and unlike people like Superchum, I don't necessarily think that absolves the set of any valid complaints or tweaks). DA could get it's stacking armors so it's not a status fx b*tch. So on. But I see it as very unbalancing that scrappers can herd huge numbers of mobs, even tankers doing it seems broken.

[ QUOTE ]
I will certainly agree that more balancing between the def sets is still required, but it probably makes sense to have an idea of what the mob difficulty fix will consist of before attempting this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree completely.

[ QUOTE ]
This sounds good on paper, but in practice the only time it’s easy to hit large numbers of mobs is on the opening strike. After that the number hit with each attack is not nearly as high.

[/ QUOTE ]

Certainly, but with both my aoe blaster and my scrap main with his single pbaoe ( )I can hit more than 3 mobs in a single aoe post initial strike pretty easily. Until we see the rewards of fighting hardened single targets versus mass softies balanced, or single target versus aoe become more balanced, aoe will ALWAYS be prefered. It's very telling that aoe blasters aren't complaining about the damage they do, or how economical the end cost of a fireball is (except for a few who somehow think there's a damage nerf coming). If hypothetically defenses were no issue, then aoe is clearly the way to go. Personally I don't think it makes sense to say aoe is balanced due to risk in a group setting. Especially when there are AT's with aoe and potent defense.

[ QUOTE ]
This is actually something I thought they should have done with smoke grenades.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was thinking more personal and less group friendly, but that's a place to start. I picture such things as Cyclops shooting down incoming mini-missles and generally being aware of the stick and move nature of ranged superhero combat. I mean an attack like BS or Katana's parry, "supressing fire" or some such that debuffed acc significantly for a short while would be more useful than Total Focus. At least to me, shrug.

[ QUOTE ]
When people make a mistake in a group, no matter who that person is, blasters are by far the most likely to pay the price. When blasters group at all they need to be at or near the highest levels in the group in order to contribute to that group.

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems to me AI that favors certain targets over others could help greatly in this situation. A tank smasher prefering to fight a tank (scrappers being ranked #2) may treat damage from another class as being lesser because their hated foe is in the group. Other enemies could realize a vulnerability to status attacks, and mostly ignore damage dealers in the pursuit of the "real threat". The aggro system with artificial provok/taunts and degree of damage certainly makes a situation for aoe damage dealers in general, and frail blasters in particular, where they will be singled out for counter blows. Perhaps more unique AI that would require more tactics and group dynamism could help.

[ QUOTE ]
Other then alpha strikes, blasters need to use skill and/or teamwork to make their AoE’s effective. If you add strong defensive capabilities into the mix this goes out the window.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was asking the person whose hypothetical divide between Scrap/Blast damage should be aoe vs. single target damage. Unless single target attacks are boosted, or aoe made much less effective aoe/cones will always be prefered. Shadow Maul is considered one of, if not THE best attack available to scrappers. You better believe it has a lot to do with it being a cone.

[ QUOTE ]
The mix of AoE’s and overpowered defense is at least as disruptive as alpha strike AoE combinations that can wipe out whole groups of mobs every 20 seconds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. Which is why I have a problem with aoe in general as it is in the game. And also why I included spines/inv/reg scrappers and fire tankers. Defenses becoming less needed in the high level game is another issue that needs to be considered, and mob adjustments may change much of that. However, only two sets ever tank. Inv and Reg. Nerfing scrapper defense sets broadly would be a poor idea.

[ QUOTE ]
BTW my contention has always been that the problem isn’t AOE’s, it’s the front loaded nature of some of the high damage but slightly slower attack rate AoE’s

[/ QUOTE ]

Certainly it's not aoe in theory, but how it's practiced. Yet, unless mob numbers are adjusted as well, all it takes is an aoe to hit 3 mobs doing 1/3 of a single target attack to equal the damage. Most aoe's that I've witnessed do more than 1/3 of single target, and they certainly hit more than 3 mobs.

The game as it stands now the game rewards slaughtering mass amounts of enemies quickly. Single target damage dealers, though perhaps liked for tackling monsters/AV's are not really all that effective for the majority of encounters.

[ QUOTE ]
but if you can survive the counterattack that is every bit as good.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wondered when I first made my blaster why they didn't have powers that increased their def/res to ranged attacks. Clearly, it wouldn't be nearly has high as scrapper/tanker defensive numbers. But having "chaff" pod powers in all the blaster secondaries would make a lot of sense.

[ QUOTE ]
The solution to the current problems with AoE’s should be to A) remove their ability to first strike kill. Either make them do less damage with shorter animations and recharge, or increase mob hit points. AND B) remove the ability of any AT to survive the aggro of massive numbers of mobs, or even smaller numbers (in the 20 range) without support.

[/ QUOTE ]

Clearly things that are needed in the game. I would amend though that aoe vs. single target damage dealing really needs to be looked over for how economical they are versus each other, and that in altering the defense game care should be taken to not break anything. (Dark Armor for example)

[ QUOTE ]
The game as a whole would be more balanced if the blaster lines were more AOE while the scrapper lines were more single target. But hey, scrappers have BS and Spines, tankers have Fire-Fire, we should be allowed to enjoy our own AOE attacks without the fear of nerfs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why should scrappers get single target attacks when aoe is clearly so much better?

Allow me to make my position clear. I think aoe in this game is borked. Not aoe blasters. I think fire tankers, spines, and all of it need to be toned down in some way. Maybe not damage, but something. Besides my Fire blaster being a leveling machine (and he's more concept than power build) I recently rolled up another scrapper, with a pbaoe dot in his defense, several cones (one is a late attack that I don't have yet) and another pbaoe, he takes on things I wouldn't have even tackled with my single target scrapper. The +1 mission bug? Hasn't made a bit of difference, the most annoying part is outleveling contacts before I can finish arcs with all the extra exp. It doesn't take a whiz to figure out that even with just a cones coverage that hitting 3 mobs for 50 a pop versus one for 75 is good use of endurance. That's a low end look at it. Never mind the herding of 100+ mobs and small teams getting a pip every 25 minutes. I hear a lot of players blow off such tactics as not impacting other peoples play, and if it were true that'd be one thing. But aoe has a clear advantage from the top of the min/maxer activities to the average joe who teams and solos and never reads the boards. It is literally infinitely better.

Clearly any changes made to aoe need to have other balances and adjustments put into place for the AT's and the individual sets that use them, so they remain viable and fun.

Apologies, Panzer.

[ QUOTE ]
You don't even play a blaster so who cares what you'd welcome?

[/ QUOTE ]

Zip it chuckle head. I do play a blaster, an aoe one at that. Scrappers also have aoe and cones, I don't doubt the devs are looking into... Say spines... Maybe burn tankers. But please, keep being cantankerous. You haven't had anything solid to argue or say in 30 pages except Blasters need utility/defense powers in the 2nds not damage, which pretty much everyone agrees on.

[ QUOTE ]
What If I said I'd welcome an adjustment to Scrapper defense that didn't let them reach the same defense cap that Tankers hit. Then you'd be screaming bloody murder.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, you twit, I'd agree to res caps, I'd agree to an Invicibility nerf, and would point out that when stacking armors for ice and stone come about you wouldn't need to worry about def caps in the case of sr. But, even that I would accept with the qualifier that sr get some form of res, or heal, or utility.

[ QUOTE ]
-------> Scrapper board. Buhbye

[/ QUOTE ]

-----> Smack-tard board with you. Buhbye.

I honestly don't understand why aoe damage is flat. Why not make it scale off as distance from the "target" increases?

[ QUOTE ]
This will make it worse for pretty much everyone in my opinion. I think the developers need to brainstorm for a different solution that willl not affect all of the classes negatively.

[/ QUOTE ]

It may make it more like the lower level game. Before SO's scale damage way over the mobs. At anyrate, I'd welcome any other suggestion if it'd seem viable. A cap on the number of mobs than can be hit by a single aoe or cone might work.

[ QUOTE ]
Mob increase of hp is exactly how they are proposing to fix AoE. It's a terrible idea and will negatively affect every AT across the board.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm willing to try it. With other additions it may make damage beside AOE more viable, and other AT's have more to do in combat. As it stands now, 10-15 seconds, next mob, is too quick for most people to ever really do anything in a group.

When I say I don't want AOE damage to scale with the HP of mobs, that doesn't mean I think Blasters should then just be left alone. My Fire/Fire would certainly fall by the wayside if there was no response to the dramatic change mob HP increases would have on his playability.

Honestly, nobody that has posted so far has indicated that they think that mob hp increase + no changes to blasters = ok.

I think changes to mobs will have big impact on all AT's. Blasters are just one of many.

[ QUOTE ]
we have more choices in the primary pool?

[/ QUOTE ]

Power pools.

[ QUOTE ]
For my utility I have damage.... which you wouldn't mind seeing nerfed.

[/ QUOTE ]

What dank recess of your bowels did you pull this out of? Find me nerf damage quote. Please.

[ QUOTE ]
this conversation is over.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks!

Geko said mobs get the streak breaker as well. It just happens so rarely that it's a non-issue.

He's addressing it to you because in the context of your post, that sentence is "We [blasters] shouldn't have to..." He's pointing out that in the scheme of things, Blasters have more flexibility in the PP choices compared to other AT's.

Perhaps you meant general player population, but it's not what you said, and as such not clear.

1. Read what I wrote. Especially in you infer slurs about not reading.

2. What brash responses?

3. What nerf to your damage?

[ QUOTE ]
I'm still waiting for you tell me where I said they should scale up.

[/ QUOTE ]

One would imagine that since the only "nerf" to blaster damage (in reality damage dealers of all sorts) looming is the increase in minion HP. That there might be an inference in your statements about how your only defense is your offense isn't outside the bounds of reason. It's only after more than 15 pages do you speak about increasing defensive/utility potential through seconds.

Now to be fair, you have not outright said it, but my statement doesn't require you, or anyone to say it. I can present that opinion independent of anyone. So again, if you don't disagree, why are you giving me a hard time about it?

Since the only talk of aoe changes is the dominance of it in the game, no specifics have been declared about reducing the actual base damage levels or anything.

Your stance is that if they nerf your "damage" you're quitting as it would remove your ability to solo.

I'm still waiting for you to show me where the nerfs are. You say proposed changes, but proposed by who? The worried blasters?

[ QUOTE ]
I'm talking about proposed changes. I'd rather air my concerns before any changes hit. Instead of trying to fet the devs to rescind changes after they're already implemented.

[/ QUOTE ]

So why are you giving me a hard time for saying, if the devs increase mob HP, I don't want Blaster AOE's to scale with them.

It doesn't even stand in opposition to your interests.

You're doing better than most scrappers at that level.

[ QUOTE ]
Umm what was your point there? Just to keep you up to date the discussion was about whether a defender can keep you alive by just increasing your def. When things can 1 hit you streak breakers mean you die once for every 20 times they attack you no matter how high your def is.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only that few things live long enough to deliver 20 attacks for that code to matter. Especially in a group setting. Other AT's live and die by def, you don't often see the streak breaker become the deciding factor. Perhaps you mean the %5 def cap?

So bud. What nerf to your damage are you talking about then?

[ QUOTE ]
THe problem with your argument is that this thread isn't about scrappers.

It's about blasters. The survivability of Super reflex scrappers has no bearing whatsoever on the discussion. My EXPERIENCE...tells me that blasters die more often than any other AT when teaming. And as any Tanker can tell you Hit points don't matter all that much in the scheme of things. Damage Ristance/Avoidance is where the money is.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not an arguement. It was a question.

The difference between a SR scrapper and a blaster HP is barely there right. So my point was if both are hitting the def cap, and neither has res, why would the blasters in the team drop like flies and sr not? I'm asking in the context of the blaster/defenders doing their job debate that moridin and erratic are having. In my experience when bubbled, and enemies debuffed, Blasters don't fall apart when enemy fire is returned. This is just experience as a blaster, or as a sr scrapper playing with blasters. I'm not asking for your word of honor, I'm asking about mechanics.

[ QUOTE ]
Who said we wanted a boost in AoE damage? Did I say that? Did anyone say that?

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but when you say, "don't nerf my damage", and you're an AOE blaster, you're talking about the proposed HP increase and how that will change your alpha-strike? Is this wrong? When I say increase damage, I mean in relation to mob HP, not right now.

[ QUOTE ]
No it's not ridiculous that our melee attacks are the most damaging. considering the risks that we take using them. It's ridiculous that we have them at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree to disagree. I think it's both. More damage is redundant, and melee is not the function of the Blaster. The most potent melee should be in the melee sets in my opinion.

I realize this is a major p1ssing match between Moridin and Erratic, but I wanted to mention something, or rather ask about something that doesn't make sense to me.

If a SR scrapper is on a team with 2 defenders and they hit the def cap (probably quite quickly) why is it they would live so much longer than a blaster on the team, who probably is hitting the same cap? The HP difference isn't that vast, and SR has no res. Melee hits harder, and they can be hit by range while being hit by melee. I just ask because I've been on a team with a spines/sr and a Fire/Dev, with 2 defs and a controller, and I didn't ever see the Blaster fall to a volley one shot madness, nor did either of us SR. For the *most* part the team was pretty much blazing through mobs.

Is there some mechanic I'm overlooking? It would seem that on teams SR scrappers would be almost as frail as blasters, but if this were the case, nobody would play with them as they need to be in melee.