JustBling

...
What? Seriously, what makes you say that? In the case of a scrapper, even resist sets have to be content with 75% mitigation via resists if they can hit the cap at all. With a tank or brute, they are likely to approach 90% mitigation only on fire (for a fire armor toon). A shield toon (at some investment, true) approaches that mitigation regardless of AT via the defense softcap. I do not understand, therefore, how you can make the assertion that resistance sets, under any circumstances, really, somehow offer better mitigation. At the very best, fire offers similar survivability in niche circumstances such as a fire farm.

And I'd argue that /shield is still better for mitigation, therefore /fire being better at offense isn't a problem.

Regarding this and your other post:

I'd never ask for another AT to be nerfed. It's not my fault Stalkers haven't been taken into account in the last batch of nerfs and buffs. I just want Stalkers to be where they should, in light of the devs' attentions to other AT's.

^This^

Actually, as I've expressed before, it's the exact metric the Dev's used to balance Brutes, Tankers, and Scrappers. Why Stalkers were left out of that particular rotation of balance changes is anyone's guess. If the Devs' own metric is off for Stalkers, I don't see it as unreasonable that members of the player community call them on the discrepancy.

No you're not, you're here to tell people to lrn2play. Everything comes down to skill to you, even things that are not dependent upon skill.

Actually, the discrepancy starts at 10% without any hp bonuses and then exceeds 30% if capped. So, if a capped Stalker and Scrapper were to receive the same incoming damage after mitigation, the Scrapper would still have a third of their bar when the Stalker faceplants. Of course, I would have placated and taken a moment to recover as the Stalker, but in terms of raw survivability, I'm not sure I could count that as a win or even a draw.

No, it comes from differences in hit points. You will get more mileage from resists, though. Defense functions on both AT's, but the lower health of the Stalker means that (assuming equal damage intake and equal resists), hits take off more of the character's health bar. Equal resists may equate to equal mitigation in terms of numbers, but a Stalker will feel the hits more.

Assassin Strike is very dramatic early on because you can bust up bosses and the like very easily with the burst damage. At some point in the later game, say 38 or so, AS takes a chunk out of the same boss, but usually only serves to make the boss angry.

I'm vocal about the real difficulties faced by Stalkers in common situations, but if this was an AV, it's not in the type of content that is meant to be soloable. In the case of an AV, it is still a pretty high bar to set to take it out with two people. Of course people can do it, but usually one of them is a debuffer. Heck, people can solo AV's, but that's not what I would consider a standard test of an AT.

Of course, you do say that you're venting, so I hope you feel better.
(seriously)

Even after saying this, you join the camp that clearly believe that everything is fine and anyone that has a problem with it needs to lrn2play.

Ah, the self-refuting argument, the inverse of which is just as true: Don't pretend that everything is just fine because YOU don't have the same difficulties. See?

I don't think the AT is broken, I was merely supporting what I conceived to be novel suggestions regarding the current state of stalkers. I backed off on that position after considering the issue further.
We have lived in the shadow of the other melee DPS classes. One is more survivable, the other does more damage. Should our lower survivability* not be compensated by higher damage? Yes, this question is rhetorical, but it's also relevant.
My hope is that the recent dev attention to the differences between brutes and scrappers heralds new attention to stalkers. I think there are quite a few possible solutions to stalker issues, but after some consideration, I'd like to keep the AT as straightforward as possible.
We already have to potential for finesse with Placate, Hide and AS, but finesse is largely situational, and is not as amenable to analysis as straight up damage. Again, before anyone brings the specter of player skill up--I'm very cautious about recommending AT balance based upon player skill. It would be silly to recommend that Scrappers be balanced around the fact that they can solo AV's if build right. I think the notion that player skill, beyond what may be considered "average", may be used to balance an AT is silly.

*The exact terms of which are the same as the previous disparity: hit points.

The -KB IO's aren't that rare. Check their prices on the market, and put in a low bid. If you don't have the patience for that, or if you don't have close to what the market is asking, you could always run a few AE missions. KB IO's are in the lowest level Bronze roll bracket, lvl 10-15, and a roll only costs 60 tickets, keep rolling until you get what you need. If you get anything else that's decent, sell it to bankroll.

qft

Hmm, what armor sets would be the best for this? Would it have to be a defense set like Nin or would a more balanced set, like Willpower, suffice? Would I have to cap out the relevant defense, or would a power like Shadow Meld be good enough? OR would it be better to get the End powers out of Body Mastery?

But Musashi says the fighting with two weapons is superior to fighting with one.

So you're okay with a fully loaded Stalker being roughly equivalent to a base Scrapper? That's lunacy right there. Remember, this is the situation you will face as a Stalker in every combat where you can't leverage Hide. If the Stalker does his or her job and delivers an AS, this is unavoidable. If the Stalker is knocked out of Hide, not only does he or she enter the fight without contributing much more in the way of damage than said Scrapper, the Stalker also won't last as long under most circumstances.

Blasters have the damage and can stay at range. The AT's are different and have different roles. If I am to accept that Stalkers are melee damage dealers, then I think we should be balanced against other AT's that have the same role, so we can specialize in some things while other AT's handle other roles.

But the devs can only balance around a theoretically defined average. That's what we're discussing here, right? Balancing around the player having more or less than that skill level is silly.

I've already dropped the Hide and AoE issue. I still find it tacky that a major damage advantage can be taken away by a single lucky hit, but I've already admitted that the fix would be problematic.

Don't make this conversation about me. I have used a Stalker in its intended role, as well as that of an off-tank, EVAC teleporter, and the person who keeps the spawn busy while the Pain is rezzing people/people use Wakeys and rest for a min. With the exception of my frustration at being two-shotted by BaBs, which I described earlier, my own survivability is fairly solid. However, at the beginning of this conversation, I merely stated that Jeraud had a convincing argument, and that I agreed with him for the most part. More than one person here has taken issue with my statement, and I have been assured several times that it must be a lack in my playstyle, or something else that is not inherent in the Archetype.

As far as elitism and condescending behavior go, you are doing it, but that's okay, since I feel as if you're doing it wrong. Here's how it works:

I will certainly read responses (from anyone that's not on ignore) to this thread and consider them. I have decided that this conversation will bear no further merit and will not post again in this thread. You may, however, now have the final word, rest assured it will be given the utmost consideration.

I have to say that it is you, and perhaps the fact that we cannot judge your tone because of the internet, that makes you seem elitist. You describe a number of ideas as "dumb" or "unnecessary" then you move on without suggesting an alternative. I've asked you more than once to state your concerns for the AT, you ignored the statement and moved on. You suggest that people "move on" when they disagree with you, as if you are somehow in charge of the conversation.

Or one of the myriad of "other" options is true. Perhaps you haven't understood the argument, I think you have, but there you go. Perhaps your tone and greater than average self-assurance suggest that you have skills you do not possess. Perhaps you don't even play the game and are only posting on your father's forum account to make waves. I don't know, but your either/or doesn't explore all the options.
I note that even the terms of your either/or statement are couched in terms that could be considered elitist. Your first option is self-aggrandizing and your second option approaches condescending toward your opponents. (I am still unsure of your actual intent, so it may be unintentional. I also have to assume that some of it was tongue-in-cheek.)

Wait, why would we need both?

A slippery slope is also a form of argument as well. It's the sort of thing you just did, suggesting that making a stalker unable to be knocked out of Hide would suggest, for some reason, that the interrupt from AS be removed.

I am, however, going to back off this particular topic, I have decided that the AoE defense is as close as the devs will let us get to the condition that we are discussing. I've also decided that damage really is the point of a Stalker, so I'd like more of that, however it may be rolled into the AT as it stands.

Thank you for illuminating Leo's position, as he has yet to do it himself.

Outside of Hide, I run the risk of being two-shotted. I can understand if this were a rare occurrence, but it is not. Hard-hitting bosses and AV's punch my ticket as fast as a squishy. I would like better compensation for having low health. High opening burst damage doesn't cut it, and it isn't even guaranteed to work. AS misses, I can deal with it, I can even deal with the occasional AoE that randomly knocks me out of Hide, but it would be nice if a single RNG roll didn't remove one of my advantages to damage.

No, his argument is how the Hide mechanic interacts with uncertainty. The fact that "some things just happen" isn't being disputed, it's the fact that the "big alpha strike"--upon which the AT depends--may be neutralized by a single lucky hit. This may not be fatal, though it may very well be, but simply serves to highlight the weak points of the AT while negating one of its strengths.

You may as well call everyone who disagrees with you a noob. Player skill is not a game mechanic, and shouldn't be used to balance an AT.

You disagreed with the notion that a fix to Hide was necessary. You cited the existing AoE Defense as the reason it wasn't needed. As far as moving on, I'll do so when I've exhausted all chances of meaningful communication. Of course, this is the internet, so I'm probably damned there already.

Is a semantic argument the best you can do? I still don't understand your position beyond "poo poo I don't agree".

I too, would appreciate a damage buff. As the Scrapper/Brute rebalance was based upon the exchange of survivability for damage, I would like the damage that we seem to be missing. I do differ with you, in that I think AS numbers (in PvE) should be 'nuts'.

Actually, it is a crutch because it can be kicked out from underneath you. I don't find it dumb to use the tools that I have been given, but I won't pretend that the tools work perfectly when they don't.

Perhaps some people just don't appreciate how contingent Stalkers are upon Hidden status. It's a crutch that was programmed into the archetype to differentiate us from Brutes and Scrappers. My concern is that our role outside of Hide can be easily filled by a Scrapper with the same sets.

I'm not sure I agree with you, but okay, can you point me to a thread with your suggestions regarding the archetype, or do you think we're just fine?

I agree with most of this, Leo, but I don't think it has any place in a discussion regarding how the archetype is to be balanced against others. What you're talking about with "spatial awareness" is really something that no dev can give you. It's an issue of player skill. I have to be against this suggestion because player skill--above and beyond what may be tentatively termed "the average"--should not be considered in balancing AT's against one another. If player skill were to be considered, then the outliers who perform well against particular enemies and cherry-picked situations could provide the wrong ideal skill level. For instance, I'm not sure I would like my scrapper to be balanced based upon extreme builds and players that regularly solo Archvillains.

Again, I do agree with your statement regarding spatial awareness, but I'm not sure it belongs in a conversation regarding balance issues--on the dev side--among the various AT's.

That is true, and perhaps I could have agreed in a more tentative manner. What are the "odds" of the devs listening to player input on this sort of issue? (Yes, purely opinion, but I'm interested.)