Kahoru

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"OMG! He's nerfing EM!" -- Nope, at least not for I7.

[/ QUOTE ]
DOOOOOOOM for I8! EM is getting nerfed! Start rolling those Ice/Elecs now!

[/ QUOTE ]

ZOMG NECRO POSTER. RISE FROM YOUR GRAAAAVEE!!!!

AHHHHHH NECROPOSTING.

Perhaps, but you are now speaking of a PvP zone that has yet to be implemented.

In 3 out of the future 4, the risk v reward is still broken. There is no loss of reputation for dying. In SC, one does not lose bounty for dying. Hence, many ATs will jump into the fray to try to get even 1 kill. Dying doesn't mean anything.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
3) Datamining -- I looked at Blaster/Scrapper a few minutes ago. In terms of raw kills, Blasters are the better PvP killers, but only if they have Energy Manipulation. Without EM, they are roughly 60% of scrappers numbers. In terms of kills to death ratio, Blasters are slightly behind scrappers with EM, but competing with Defenders and Dominators for lowest value Note, that these are solo values! Things are very different in team play.

[/ QUOTE ]
First I think _Castle_ is super cool for responding, even in a thread where we were probably not being as respectful as we could.

On the K-to-D thing, again, I think looking at K-to-D is pointless. If you think about it from a tactical standpoint, it always makes sense to target the most threatening character first. My VG is heavily PVP oriented. When we are in a PVP zone, if an infamous /EM Blapper bounces into the fight, we nearly always switch targets to them to dispatch them before they can 2 shot us. So if you blow up the actual numbers, that Scrapper might have 5 kills to 3 deaths, but that Blapper might have 20 kills to 18 deaths. The Blapper's ratio appears worse in such a case, but it's pretty clear he's better at melee damage than the poor Scrapper.

Since we are picking on the uber power sets, how about datamining Spines/ Scrappers versus all of the other kinds. I imagine Broadsword might be close but I would bet the numbers for Claws, MA, DM, and Katana are pretty far behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. The lack of a penalty for death makes the K-D ratio a bad way to balance sets. I think a better judge would be the number of kill per hour.

Here's another post about Circuit_Boy's fictional underground organization of the "Stalker Defense League", led by our guildmaster, _Castle_.

Here

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
_Phantom_:

I think you must have me mistaken for someone else. You said:

[ QUOTE ]
Whats really sad is to watch you patting yourself on the back on the blaster boards for admittedly causing aggravation in this fabricated, fantasy "Melee Community" you've chosen to create to entitle yourself to even more delusional, conspiracy theory martyrdom.

[/ QUOTE ]
Where exactly have I "patting [myself] on the back on the blaster boards for admittedly causing aggravation in this fabricated, fantasy 'Melee Community'"? Can you point to a single, specific post where I've ever done that on the Blaster Boards? And, by "specific post", I mean I'd better see a link, and it'd better be one of my posts, and it had better be saying exactly what you're claiming I said.

Otherwise, you've really just proven my case for me, haven't you?

And you're the one raving on about how I'm "delusional"?

By the way, _Phantom_, personal attacks are a violation of the boards' rules. Specifically attacking an individual, calling that specific person "delusional" and "paranoid", certainly qualifies.

[/ QUOTE ]

Convieniently for you the "Nerf Blappers" thread was deleted.

I can however ask kali magdelene to verify the fact that not only did you announce that you hold this fabricated "Melee Community" responsible for nerfing the blaster AT across the board, but you made several posts specifically re-instating that this is indeed your belief.

She was apart of the conversation I was refering to, and will probably remember it quite well based on the nigh illogical and obviously antagonistic quality of your language.

But feel free to continually embarrass yourself by deflecting from topic, threatening board policy violation reprisals and cherry picking poorly crafted sentences to support your unfounded and factless rhetoric.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've done some post mining. While I couldn't find anything on the fictional melee community, I did find some on his fantasy "Stalker Defense League".

Take a look:

Stalker Defense League?

The blaster v. scrapper "Who is the damage AT and why do they get mez protection" argument will probably restart in a week...if it hasn't already.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"Mez protection" doesn't let the scrapper one-shot the dominator from parts unseen without ever even offering the dom the chance to run away, let alone fight back.

[/ QUOTE ]

The end result is the same. Almost no risk.

[/ QUOTE ]

Y'mean, like a controller vs a brute? There's balance on both sides, this is the only issue where there is no equal.

It takes three or four apps and it's done and that's if the scrapper doesn't have a toggle like Integration.

How is that the same as "BAM one-shot you're dead"? At least the dom has the chance to run away. If you've been AS'd, you don't have the chance to even run away, you're just dead before you've even seen what's killed you.

[/ QUOTE ]

This point is not legit given that 1-shotting will be removed from the game. Thus if you get ASed from 300 feet away, you have plenty of time to pop a green or use a self heal.

[ QUOTE ]
"Mez protection" doesn't let the scrapper one-shot the dominator from parts unseen without ever even offering the dom the chance to run away, let alone fight back.

[/ QUOTE ]

The end result is the same. Almost no risk.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But, I'll be more happy with the one shot nerf.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm also looking forward to this,although, I fail to see how it's going to solve the issue.

If I need to team to be able to see a stalker and have a chance of survival, then they should have to team to defeat me and my team.

I dont' think they should allow Stealth and Hide to stack and instead give STalkers an inherent power that allows hide to grant the same -perception as hide+stealth currently does, but only when teamed with another non-stalker.

[/ QUOTE ]

...

I guess since dominator needs a team to take stand a chance against a scrapper, scrappers should only have mez protection when they are teamed with a non-scrapper.

As interesting as your idea is, it will only lead to the unlucky visible teammate to be ganked, since thats the only thing the heroes see.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have no doubt adjusting Placate would tank a solo stalker's Kill-to-Death ratio.

[/ QUOTE ]It will not affect much since the majority of Stalkers do not realize how placate works and many think it is a single target special and even then after a placate you are still unattackable right? This gives the Stalker the time to get away until stealth and hide kicks back in.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe many stalkers realize how placate works. The change merely makes it so the non-placated teammates of the placated hero have an easier time attacking the stalker.

[ QUOTE ]
I will not argue that stalkers are all kiddie minded, unless it's to inflame you. I have to argue though, that those few intelligent, calculating Stalkers will be the absolute most unstoppable force in RV with these patron powers.

I mean it: Balancing a high frontloaded damage, stealther is hell. On everyone.

[/ QUOTE ]

Skillful, calculating stalkers are already hell on everyone...for the heroes in freedom anyway. We are called Lords of the Dead. Nothing like spiking an emp with 6 impales and 2 focuses. Yummy.

If the competition is good, we field a stalker/corr team. If the competition sucks, we whip out our corrs and retake Siren's Call.

[ QUOTE ]
Hey, it's my opin, and I said should see.....
Oh, and please don't tell me that stalkers require thoughtful, intellectual, and calculating players..... I looked in the stalker boards, and saw everything I hated about WoW, and Lineage2. Sorry, I just don't care to buy into a need for an Ub3r B0y AT in this game. An extreme DPS stealthing class seems to get included in every MMO with PVP. And it ALWAYS spawns issues, real and imagined. And, of course the puberty minded will always migrate to anything that allows them to one (or 1.0001) shot you and/or perpetual gank people.

Don't nerf stalkers! Leave them alone! Just remove them from the game, is all....

[/ QUOTE ]

Heh, wasn't going to tell you that stalkers required thoughtful, intellectual, and calculation players. In fact, I've said the opposite

However, that is just one playstyle, the ones that the puberty minded go to.

I like to challenge myself and start off with an attack like focus, since it makes the fight more enjoyable for both me and my opponent. If any of you have played a stalker using that play style, I can tell you its quite challenging and requires "thoughtful, intellectual, and calculating players". Don't judge me just because I happen to play a stalker.

[ QUOTE ]
I like Vort's words. They completely sum up how everyone else should see stalkers, and their mindset. Not that he is the only example. Far from it. And he's not a bad guy, I assume, because the Jerks have a good reputation overall. It was just very easy to see his post on the stalker forum. Kinda flashing at me in neon, and all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course every stalker thinks like Vort, a "jerk" as you say. People generalize a bit too much.

Whatever, he won't stop until blasters get mez protection and can auto-decimate every other AT.

[ QUOTE ]
Now you're not only spinning _Castle_'s statements, you're spinning your own.

"...FAR outkilling..." weren't even your own words. They were Lallendos's.

By the way, don't think I did not notice that you edited out the two other times you said Stalkers did not outkill other ATs in Warburg after I called you on that point.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't remember editing out anything. Perhaps you should do as I, and quote things for truth. You can just claim I ghost edited even if I didn't because there is no record of my original post. It would help your arguments and keep your enemy from ghost editing.

As for my spin on my own comments? Umm...I think you are confusing yourself. I had "fixed" Lallendos's generic:
"_Castle_ Has stated that Stalkers are FAR out killing in PVP, versus any other AT. Is it really required for anyone to even argue some of the points after that? "

My fix can be considered my own words can it not? You say "stalkers are always overpowered". I say "stalkers are not always overpowered". So I am using your words just because my statement only added a word?

[ QUOTE ]
Kahoru:

Actually, you're the one who's "spinning" _Castle_'s statements here.

_Castle_ did NOT state "that Stalkers are FAR out killing in PVP in Bloody Bay and Siren's Call, but not in higher zones (emphasis mine)". He did not say anything about what their Kill Count vs. Death Count in Warburg actually is.

Instead, he said "players have plenty of options of dealing with Stalkers, which *should* force Stalkers to Team more. " This is a teleological statement, not an ontological statement. In other words, he's talking about what "*should*" happen, not what actually *does* happen.

You cannot assume to know that the Stalker "Kill Count vs Death Count" is not higher in Warburg as well. _Castle_ simply did not say anything directly about that.

It's possible that Stalkers' "Kill Count vs Death Count" is higher in Warburg than it is for any other Archetype, as well, just not so much "that it isn't even funny".

[/ QUOTE ]

Reread what I wrote and what you said.

Me: "that Stalkers are FAR out killing in PVP in Bloody Bay and Siren's Call, but not in higher zones (emphasis mine)"

You: "It's possible that Stalkers' "Kill Count vs Death Count" is higher in Warburg than it is for any other Archetype, as well, just not so much "that it isn't even funny"."

We're saying the exact same thing. And of course your current argument that I slant Castle's words do nothing about your slanting of his words.

I don't need to link you to the post of "Why argue that Stalker's are overpowered when Castle said they are?". An argument can be made against that as Castle did not say they are overpowered all the time. Only at low levels.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
_Castle_ Has stated that Stalkers are FAR out killing in PVP in Bloody Bay and Siren's Call, but not in higher zones, versus any other AT. Is it really required for anyone to even argue some of the points after that?

[/ QUOTE ]

downplayed the major point for you.

[/ QUOTE ]

There fixed that for you

[/ QUOTE ]

Heh, sadly you didn't change anything. Whats your major point? I believe you were trying to say Castle had said that Stalkers are overpowered. However, Castle only said stalkers were overpowered in the first 2 pvp zones. In fact, he said that in WB, there were many options to deal with stalkers.

Whats your point again?

[ QUOTE ]
When _Castle_ himself had already admitted that "[. . .]Stalkers are so far above any other AT in Kill Count vs Death Count that it isn't even funny", I don't think anything I say about them can be construed as "going a bit overboard on how much of a threat stalkers are."

The question is no longer whether Stalkers are unbalanced in PvP. Any reasonable person can see that they are.

The question is what makes them unbalanced in PvP and how to fix those PvP imbalances.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ahhh way to take a quote of context to prove your point. Allow me to provide the Full Quote:


_Castle_:
[ QUOTE ]

Additionally, this change was mostly aimed at the Bloody Bay and Siren's Call levels where Stalkers are so far above any other AT in Kill Count vs Death Count that it isn't even funny. In higher level PvP zones, players have plenty of options of dealing with Stalkers, which *should* force Stalkers to Team more.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't give the masses half information. Give them the whole story. You say "The question is no longer whether Stalkers are unbalanced in PvP. Any reasonable person can see that they are." The fact is that they are only unbalanced in the 2 lowest pvp zones. And _Castle_ has said that changes are being made to get stalkers to team more. Why don't you stop spinning _Castle_'s comments?

[ QUOTE ]
_Castle_ Has stated that Stalkers are FAR out killing in PVP in Bloody Bay and Siren's Call, but not in higher zones, versus any other AT. Is it really required for anyone to even argue some of the points after that?

[/ QUOTE ]

Fixed that for you.

[ QUOTE ]
Incorrect. Coming up 4 here. Can that Stormie defeat your stalker solo? no. If they nerf hurricane, or if you use a ranged hold, can you defeat said stormie? Absolutely.

There is no need to nerf hurricane. It AT BEST gives the storm person survival. Nothing more. Enter the team dynamic, and a domintaor drops the hurricane, and done.

[/ QUOTE ]

It AT BEST completely destroys melee ATs with the massive acc debuff. It at best does a pseudo immobolize by pinning people to walls. Enter the team dynamic: A stormy has mez protection. The Dom's hold don't work. Don't have mez protection? Eat a BF.

[ QUOTE ]

I realize you PVP addict that think stalkers aren't overpowered, think that Stalker's should be able to solo any other AT. Well, you are wrong. While you may not be able to use the same old worn out chain of attacks to defeat a storm def/controller, it's still a very easy kill. You just MIGHT have to team.

And, remember, kiddies:
In order to defeat a stalker not asleep at the keyboard, that same stormie MUST get a team.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, someone needs to work on reading comprehension.

The decision as to whether hurricane needed a nerf is not based on whether stalkers are overpowered. Its on how they affect EVERY melee AT.

And another thing, stormies don't always need a team to kill enemies. I've been pinned to a wall, and held through integration. I chewed a Break free, turned integration back on, and started throwing focus. No dice, they missed. I was pinned to the wall. And slowly, I got held again, and died.

And stalkers don't mind teaming. Guess what, I'm part of a SG. My stalker shines in team play. Don't try to categorize me. K, thnx, bye.

Pick up grant invis and get your friends to do it too. Brings us to the stealth cap.

[ QUOTE ]
Meh, all this means is that we will have to cooperate to gank all the Stalkers...then they'll whine until we're nerfed, then we gank them again...

It's a vicious cycle... with the Stalkers winning because they have a dev on their side.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hold on while I add you to the list of people who think Castle does everything he can to buff stalkers and nerf other ATs.

Stalkers have Castle on their side? Can you explain your reasoning?

[ QUOTE ]
Be fair, Castle was concerned about Hurricane and made that known. The Patchnotes did say that if a stalker had repel resistance that he would not be interrupted. You put two and two together and most people get four.

It has been tested and it has been found that the patch notes are wrong. However, since another patch is comeing before I7 it could mean that the changes simply hasn't hit yet. No confirmation there on what was intended.

[/ QUOTE ]

Was castle's mention caused by his love for stalkers? Or perhaps was it because he's the only red name that posts ANYTHING on balance?

Here's the link to his post:
Castle's post on hurricane

Reading the post over it goes like this:

"For instance, hurricane. We knew it was problematic in PvP. Our tests showed how it could be abused, but we deemed it an acceptable issue. I'm sure all the PvP folks are either quite happy or really annoyed by that decision. I do recall "inventing" the game of PC Bowling during one of the CoV Beta PVP tests. "

He uses "we" as in the internal testing team. "We knew it was problematic in PvP". Nor does he mention stalkers in this post ANYWHERE.

What other Red Name has posted recently on balance issues? Hmm...it's unfortunate that his simple posting of an observation the internal testing team made on hurricane makes HIM the scape goat for the hurricane nerf. Why don't you guys stop beating on him?

You guys aren't putting 2 and 2 to make 4. You guys are putting 2 and 2 to get 5. People like circuit_boy added in that extra 1 to help bridge the "Castle loves stalkers, Nerfs Hurricane" connection.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is pretty silly. I personally know that as a Stalker, I get slaughtered plenty in Siren's Call. I also know that the only thing that prevents me from getting repeatedly ganked is Placate.

Aren't there more important things to nerf? Storms? PFF? Regen for Scrappers? EM for Stalkers?

[/ QUOTE ]

Storm got nerfed today too. And theyre just as unhappy as you are. Does that make you feel any better?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, they sure are busy crucifying him over that.

And I never knew he was biased towards us. Gasp.

Of course, it's most the same rhetoric from the same people. Way to take quotes out of context.

[/ QUOTE ]

The same guys who "will cancel accounts" since I2 LOL

[/ QUOTE ]

Circuit_Boy thinks Castle actively tries to nerf other ATs in the name of stalkers. He completely disregards the effects Hurricane has on scrappers, brutes and tanks. Any melee AT is crippled by the repel and acc debuff. Also, hurricane can be used like TK in that it pins people so they can't get out.

Ahhhh well, what can you do. They are both blasters, the AT that whines and moans the most.

Oh yea, they just assumed the Castle went and nerfed hurricane. Are they even sure that he was the one who actually change the code?