Lolblaws

Recruit
  • Posts

    74
  • Joined

  1. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Call Me Awesome View Post
    Good question, I've /bugged it twice so far. Of course the (non) feedback you get from that is the form letter "Thanks for reporting ............." is pretty meaningless.

    Anyone PM'd Castle about it yet?
    I PM'd Castle about it months ago with my main account. No response.
  2. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hot_Head_Mike View Post
    Gah! Energy doing only 'mediocre' DMG?
    Yep energy blast is pretty much middle of the pack in every capacity.
  3. elec/x/mu dominator where x = earth, energy, or ice assault is very good at quickly draining 8 foes. However, it has no appreciable -recovery; it is there, but not reliable. Great -end though.

    elec/psi/mu doesn't drain as quickly, but the massive -recovery ensures that once they are bottomed out they stay there for the duration.

    I terms of supporting the team and delivering direct damage I'd nominate those combos.

    Elec/x/primal, or Elec/x/mu where x = kin, therm, or storm can also result in a pretty potent sapper.

    The controllers contribute less direct damage than the doms, but all 3 secondaries can do a good to amazing job of making the team kill faster.

    I wouldn't recommend cold domination. Heatloss is on way too long of a recharge to make an effective end drain tool and mobs with floored recharge use less endurance because they attack so infrequently, so -recovery is less potent (ie cold/elec def).
  4. pb boosts lots of 'psuedo pets'. Elec control isn't unique that it boost its ones too.

    pb does boost -end, but does NOT affect recovery. If it affected -recovery, it would affect +recovery, ie. our own.
  5. Quote:
    Originally Posted by firespray View Post
    I didn't really feel it was necessary to point out that the game is only balanced around SOs once they are available. I assumed that was obvious.
    Sure it is obvious. Is it obvious that they only enter the equation for ~10 levels of what the average player experiences in this game?
    Quote:
    I also disagree that enhancements are only needed for soloing. Teams need them too. Maybe not really good teams, but your average PuG team isn't going to get far without some sort of enhancements in their powers.
    You can disagree all you like, but it doesn't change anything. If we accept that they are needed for solo'ing then we can then use that information to conclude that they are more than we need for teaming.

    We can do this because spawns don't scale up as quickly as teams do. PC's by and large have a degree of forcemultiplication whereas very few NPC groups do. Because spawn size grows at the same rate (or less) to player additions (typically 2 or less new enemies are added to spawn size for each new player, which is equal to or less than /x1 solo size spawns) it is safe to conclude that PC teams gain power at a higher rate than NPC groups (this is intentional by the way).

    Therefore if SO's are needed to solo, then they provide more enhancement than is needed when teamed.

    Quote:
    I don't disagree with you. But why should the fact that anyone CAN create an uber level 50 mean that it should be easy to do?
    You're confused about what is being said. Take a look at the time frames being discussed as a direct result of the developer valuation put on pvp IO's... easy != obscene time investment.

    Realistically obtainable in a reasonable amount of time given the reward is not an outlandish expectation or a demand for easily acquiring things is it?

    Quote:
    It seems to me like this is probably done on purpose. Sure, everyone dogpiling the new guy that doesn't know anything about PvP or how to defend himself is an efficient way to farm PvPIO drops, but it doesn't exactly make a good first impression on the new guy does it?
    It's irrelevant. The only thing we can say for certain is that pvp rewards are not given for performing good pvp practices where we define "good" as pvp'ing with the intent of winning.

    As a painfully obvious result there will be disconnect between the rewards and player satisfaction with the process to earning them.

    Imagine if the most epic accomplishment badges in the game were earned by walking through city hall in atlas as opposed to doing things like MOSTF...well you probably can't imagine it because it is illogical and would be rejected by the player base. Welcome to the pvp reward system.

    Quote:
    I see this as a good thing too. Let players decide what things are worth, the devs shouldn't be doing it for us.
    You seem to be confused again about what is being discussed in specific sections. Players have put a value on the pvp sourced pvp IO's sold on the market and off. However it is the devs putting a value relative to other rewards on pvp IO's via the A-merit system. Players have absolutely no influence over how many A-merits a pvp IO costs outside of persistent whining to get it looked at.
  6. Quote:
    Originally Posted by firespray View Post
    I wonder if PvP rewards was a system doomed to fail from the beginning (at least doomed to fail at bringing in more people). Personally, I'm not a fan of PvP. I never have been, and I probably never will be, both in this game and in others. I'm not going to PvP regardless of how good the rewards are, unless the game requires it (in which case I'm probably not going to be playing that game).

    I've always kind of gotten the feeling that the people who like to PvP are going to do it regardless of the rewards, simply because they like to do it, and the people who don't like to are going to avoid it, also regardless of how good the rewards are. Sure, adding rewards to PvP is nice for the people who do it, but I'm not sure how successful it will ever be at bringing in the people who don't.
    One could say the EXACT same thing about pve rewards and come of just as clueless. Just because pvp rewards haven't been implemented well in this game isn't evidence that they lack value for the playerbase...

    But in this case you may be like talking to a wall. I don't mean that to be insulting, but you just proclaimed no interest in pvp and proclaimed that there is nothing that anyone could do to create interest in the activity. You bias is obscuring your viewpoint heavily.

    On the other hand some people are able to recognize that the game is composed of numerous small activities designed to specifically satisfy sub groups of players. Ideally they all intersect at certain points, but it isn't necessary for a healthy and productive gaming experience.
  7. Phantasm is actually way worse at surviving than imps now against tough single foes.

    With imps the fire controller is usually standing back from them and the actual pc draws the agro because they outdamage each imp. The result is that the AV may never even take notice of the imps and attack them.

    With phantasm the AV is agro'd onto your melee range PA and melee range decoy so phantasm ends up biting it nearly immediately due to aoe's.

    It's persistent bugs like this that make me wish it had been one of the other lead devs on the layoff list as opposed to BaB's.
  8. Of course post gr layoffs were expected. Bab's as part of that group? not in the least.

    You don't usually get laid off when you leave under your own volition and/or on your time schedule. It isn't unheard of, just not that common of a practice. That in no way means that the parting was not amicable. I would sincerely hope that after the great work he did that PS made him aware of the value he carried.

    On a personal level I'm sad, BaBs was by far my favorite dev, he listened well and delivered well, which is not something that I can say for many of the other team members on a consistent basis.

    Big shoes to fill and I'd be a lot more confident with pretty much any other dev being on that list and needing someone to fill the role.
  9. Lolblaws

    Hey Look! i19!

    I could easily see some of the incarnate powers having overly long and exaggerated animations to purvey their 'epicness' in pve. The result could well be them doing crazy pvp damage due to cast time being such a huge factor in determining how much a power does in pvp.
  10. Diet and excercise. It really is that simple.

    In your case the diet is by far the easiest one to alter. One big meal per day is just about the worst way to eat possible.

    Exercise is harder for you due to your ailments. The pool recommendation is ideal, but will require a large commitment and lifestyle change that may or may not be feasible for you at this time. I see the pool as something you would do down the road once you have made some life alterations and you are ready and able to devote more of your life to achieving your health and fitness goals.

    In the interim I suggest either a bowflex or a total gym. Both are low/no impact and both scale very well as your strength increases. Both work with limited range of motion and expand on it as your mobility and strength improves. You can get both for ridiculously cheap intro offers and once you try them for a month or two you'll be more than willing to shell out the full price. Comparatively a recumbent bike is not only expensive it is very single purpose which can lead to boredom and early plateauing. Additionally, you will likely find that as your strength/fitness improves you will need to invest more and more time on the bike to continue progressing. This also contributes to exercise boredom and premature peaking. The latter is something that bowflex/total gym tend to encounter a lot less due to the numerous exercises and how well they scale up with increased fitness without additional time investment.

    Aside from that weight loss is actually very simple science. At the end of the day if what you put in is less than what you put out you will lose weight. Spacing meals properly so that your body does not go into survival mode and retain maximum fat aids and accelerates what is essentially a simple equation.

    Other than that you have to want it for yourself enough to make the sacrifices and alter your lifestyle in meaningful ways. It doesn't have to happen overnight (and is less likely to succeed if you do jump in with both feet and drastically alter your life all in one shot), but over time it does need to happen.

    Lastly, the best advice I can give for dieting is to have a cheat day (usually recommend 2 when you first start) per week. You need to reward yourself for your commitment the other 5-6 days of the week and this is tremendously powerful in preventing diet stagnation, or worse yet abandonment. Trust me when I say that eating better 5-6 days of the week and then going nuts on the 7th is still leagues better than eating crappy all the time and you'll actually have a hope in hell of succeeding with it.

    That last little bit I learned from working with bodybuilders who frequently gain 50-100lbs in the offseason and are among the most disciplined dieters in the world. Numerous of them have confided in me that rewarding your commitment with a cheat day is as important as the healthy diet itself.

    edit: a nice easy first step to changing your eating habits is to pick up a tub of protein. For you I'd suggest a meal replacement one because you suck at eating and this is a really easy way to get in to the habit of intaking food more frequently. DON'T do the protein bars though, most of them are just chocolate bars in disguise. The actual process of preparing a shake (which only takes a min or so) will start to get you into the habit of taking the time to prepare quick and easy meals. Soon enough stretching that to 10 mins (which is all it takes to prepare a healthy snack/light meal) will seem like nothing. Once you've graduated past this phase you can start using just a pure protein powder (ie not a meal replacement) because you'll already be eating better and they can be very helpful at keeping your metabolism up as well as keeping you satiated so you feel less need to glutton when you do eat. For reference the meal replacements are generally 250-400 calories per serving and have a nice combination of carbs/fats/and protein, whereas the pure protein powder usually has ~100 calories, next to no carbs and next to no fat.

    So basically use the meal replacement to get your body into the habit of intaking food more regularily. Once you learn to do that and learn how easy it is to quickly prepare healthy snacks/light meals you can switch to a pure protein as that will help take you to the next stage of further cutting total calories per day.

    Essentially, do it in small, manageable and realistic steps. And be sure to manage your expectations.

    Most grocery stores and even walmart carry protein powder/protein meal replacements, as a result they really aren't that expensive and you don't need to go to a specialty store like GNC (which can be intimidating) to acquire them. I consider them an absolute must in altering your intake and eating habits. Some of them even taste pretty darn good to the point you might soon thinking of them as a treat. Some of the designer whey's (bit more expensive) you'd have a hard time telling the difference between them and a glass of chocolate milk in terms of taste, aside from the slight whey aftertaste.
  11. Quote:
    Originally Posted by firespray View Post
    It's not ridiculous at all. The difficulty level of the game is designed around players having SOs. The devs have stated this multiple times. SOs are very easily available.

    Sure, they've added purples and PVPIOs to the game, which has given us the ability to make uber-leet level 50s, but why does everyone seem to assume that just because something exists in the game, it should be readily available to anyone? Maybe they have 'validated' the mentality of uber 50s, but they've apparently also decided that you can't have one easily.
    If the game is balanced around SO's and the devs have also informed us that the average player doesn't exceed lvl 30 and so's aren't available (for the most part) until lvl 22 what does that tell you about 2/3rds of the average players' experience and the balance of it against the statement you just made?

    What you more accurately meant to say is that the upper level SOLO game is balanced around SO's (and poorly at that). Teams have absolutely no need for them.

    Anyway, they HAVE made the ability to create an uber lvl 50 available to pretty much everyone. In fact A merits only serve to make it more readily available to everyone. All you have to do to earn the best pve drops in this game is play any and all pve content.

    However the pvp drops have a much different drop system that actually disincentivizes players from actually pvp'ing in the most efficient manner (ie continually attacking the weakest link) and instead forces players to rotate through targets like it is a 5 yr old T-ball game where everyone gets a chance to bat and bats until they hit it.

    On top of that the A merit to pvp IO ratio as highlighted earlier in this thread is so completely disconnected from the strength of the IO's that they clearly aren't tying "power" to "time investment" in the case of pvp rewards. That would be fine, but they also don't tie them to proper pvp activity either.
  12. Quote:
    Originally Posted by firespray View Post
    Yes, the game is focused around alts, not having uber-leet level 50s. There is no content that comes close to requiring builds like that. They're something you want, not something you need. If you needed them, I could perhaps agree with you that there was an issue, but you don't.
    This is a pretty ridiculous statement. You don't NEED anything in this game...period.

    The fact that the devs added IO's and in particular purple IO's (and hami's) is a direct indicator that they have validated the player mentality of 'uber 50's'.

    It may not be the most popular playstyle, but it is validated. Using your argument of "need" they could remove the ease of acquiring virtually everything in this game from SO's all the way down to TO's, but because you don't "need" them that would be ok.

    Like I said, pretty ridiculous stance.
  13. Lolblaws

    Why A Blaster?

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Airhammer View Post
    I dont have ONE blaster IO'd for defense.. not ONE and I survive...
    Neat. I have a job and I pay my bills. My statement carries as much meaning as yours. Which essentially, boils down to none.
  14. Lolblaws

    Why A Blaster?

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Biospark View Post

    Not saying your viewpoint is wrong, just that throwing IOs out of any AT discussion seems wrong to me.
    Which of course I didn't do. My exact words were that IO's are not central to this discussion, which they aren't. Blasters are central to this discussion. Their receptiveness to being IO'd is worthy of some discussion of course, but considering from what I've read this thread has ranged from solo, to teamed, to recharge+damage capped I feel that any special focus on IO's, or more heavily weighting them is probably unwarranted.

    FWIW blasters don't gain nearly as much from IO's as some other AT's though. I'd say trollers and dom's gain the most. Trollers because they gain the ability to enhance both damage and control without sacrifice resulting in them being pretty potent at both. Dom's because no other AT gains more from recharge.

    Taking a blaster up to 30% is awesome (my own is at 34% ranged), but it isn't as powerful as taking an sr or shield up from 30% to softcap def. Because blasters have so many attacks they often gain less from +rech compared to many other AT's. And because they have no base defense they have to focus harder on mitigativie IO's to reach high levels of survivability, which other AT's (all of them) have to focus less IO's on defense, which still leaves them with the ability to add additional offensive IO'ing.

    That said, sure IO'd blasters are awesome, but what IO'd AT isn't? Many of which go from being strong already to absolutely absurd power levels like cakewalking RWZ challenges, blazing through x8 content, or even running solo MOx TF's. Blasters aren't necessarily excluded from such crazy activities while pumped up on IO's, but no one is. IO's are just that good.

    You can add a supercharger to a blaster (IO'ing), but their top speed is still lower due to their gearing. Whereas supercharging the other AT's allows them to retain their top speed, but they can also accelerate much faster than they could before.

    IO'ing allows other AT's to close the damage gap, but IO'ing doesn't allow blasters to close the survivability gap. In fact the latter gets more cavernous. However, most encounters in the game don't allow for the additional survivability to come into play, but it is there. Like an invuln scrapper tanking 9 or so AV's at once without support. That is ultimately hundreds of times more survivable than they started out. A blaster can't gain that kind of increase in survivability through IO's, though they can indeed become survivable enough for a lot of content.
  15. Lolblaws

    Why A Blaster?

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by StratoNexus View Post
    The range factor is not insignificant. I don't really feel it makes up for the extra survivability of armored toons, but it is a point in blasters favor. Blasters are not totally eclipsed just because everyone can deal damage.

    Big AoEs and strong single target attacks from range matter. This can be especially true when you do have an aggro soaker. We have all seen scrappers die because they were in melee and the AoEs and maybe a stray aggro takes them out, even though a tanker was doing a good job. We have all seen blasters live through the same situation because they are way over there shooting off attacks. Once again, I am not saying it is balanced in favor of the blaster here (after all, the scrapper usually survives that scenario, and a blaster who may try to get into melee at the wrong time often does not), I am just saying that the ability to have that gobs of damage from range is not negligible and cannot just be brushed off. It counts for something.

    I say that despite the fact that my personal preference is to be in the center of the spawn with most of my blasters (I like /Fire Manip... a lot). Even I get significant benefit from the range factor.
    Range can certainly be an advantage. Sometimes small, sometimes large, sometimes not at all. But blasters aren't the only AT capable of delivering damage from range. It is a distinguishing feature for them against scrappers at which point it largely comes down to whether range > armor. For most encounters that doesn't hold true, but for some it does.

    Are blasters the most damaging AT from range? While the obvious answer is yes based solely upon their much higher damage modifier, the more accurate answer is sometimes and it depends. For burst ranged damage they are certainly tops. For ranged dps the long duration debuffs/buffs found on corrs and MM's can certainly surpass the short duration buffs that blasters posses. For actually surviving long enough to unload damage...well yes/no/maybe so.

    I don't think the Dragon's Den would be impressed with the valuation this game attributes to ranged damage. It is an asset, but the tendency of mobs to collapse in upon themselves across almost every faction can quickly erase much of that advantage.
  16. Lolblaws

    Why A Blaster?

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Biospark View Post
    Obviously, at level 50 your builds will be matured and, hopefully, your character will do everything that you want and more. But the main argument of Scrappers stepping on the toes of the Blaster AT seems highly exaggerated to me. You play scrappers if you want an all-around Damage Dealer with decent Defense, or many other ATs (long list) if you want an all-around Defensive character with decent Damage. You play a Blaster when you want The Best Damage dealing in the Largest Area possible and dont care about defense, because speed is your defense.

    Let's just call it for what it is. Blasters are hard to play well and may not appeal to everyone.
    The shift tends to take place well before level 50. The toons that are capable of providing damage that can approach blaster levels tend to offensively mature in their early 30's. More pile on the bus in their 40's of course.

    The shift is not only in damage, but also other half of the battle which is surviving well enough to do damage. Most AT's have a fairly linear progression of both their damage and their survivability as they gain new abilities even though mobs get tougher both in their own skills, the hp scale relative to pc damage, and our tendency to increase +cons as we reach certain progressive milestones. Basically, even though the game gets tougher, most AT's accumulate power at a great rate.

    Blasters however, spike up rapidly in early levels due to gaining so many offensive powers so quickly. As a result they are one of the more potent early game AT's. Sadly though, they tend to peak very early as well. And as the game shifts and mobs get more and more difficult (for the reasons above) blaster mitigation falls off rapidly relative to them. The early spike is actually followed not by a linear increase in power, but by a decline as their damage gets weaker relative to mobs and their survivability plummets both to what they are used to experiencing against lesser difficulty mobs and relative to the other AT's.

    IO's can certainly do a lot for the AT, but that isn't really central to this particular discussion.

    It's not so much that blasters are a more difficult AT to play well because for many levels they aren't. It's that they peak very early and tend to actually get worse as the game goes on whereas everyone else gets stronger and stronger*

    *for clarity blasters DO get stronger as well, but the rate of their power increase is lower than the game gains power, whereas most other AT's gain power faster than the game.

    They are more difficult than other AT's in late game, that is fairly certain, which unfortunately is compounded by the fact that their role as 'offensive juggernaut' is very viable through much of the earlier game and they clearly ARE the offensive kings in pretty much every capacity during that period.

    Analogy time: blasters are like a short geared car. They accelerate quicker as a result, but hit their top speed much earlier. Everyone else has taller gearing. This causes blasters to blow them away during the beginning of the race (ie earlier levels), but by the mid point of the race the other cars start catching up (30-40's), and toward the end of the race their higher top speed leaves the blaster car in the dust.

    Perhaps if there were more corners in the race the shorter gearing would be more beneficial, but in terms of CoX the raceway is pretty much as straight as an airplane runway.
  17. 45% will lower a mobs chance to hit to the floor up to and including +5. Additional defense is useful in the face of debuffs, or against mobs that have tohit buffs of their own.

    Very few toons have any kind of (or at least significant) defense debuff resistance, which means given the obscene amount of defense debuffs that enemies throw around it is often a good idea to have excess protection.

    At the same time, few teams rely soley upon defense as mitigation. In your case as an emp you have regen aura and direct heals, so pushing beyond softcap may be unnecessary for the majority of your playtime. ymmv.
  18. Lolblaws

    Best Dom pet?

    Is singly currently plagued by the pet bug that makes him prefer melee range despite having no melee attacks (see phantasm)?

    Ideally this bug will eventually be sorted out...hopefully. In the mean time it plays a factor in my pet centric preferences.
  19. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Moonlighter View Post
    If you are going to be a flying ranged blaster, Hover + Ranged cap is the way to go. Don't get me wrong, I love my S/L capped blasters if I feel like mixing ranged and melee. If you want a reliable strong strategy, however, there is no reason a Fire/ blaster *needs* to be in melee so capped Range + flight has better across the board performance than S/L.
    Agreed if you are going to be ranged then ranged def is best, but the 10.5% leg up that the def shields give directly translates into considerably more build room for recharge.

    Additionally, if you are focusing on range damage then /em has lots of attacks that can be minimally slotted while still boosting s/l def by a large amount. Which again leaves more options open for additional recharge, recovery, or w/e you want.

    Lastly, if the spider pets are alive (and it isn't that difficult against a single target as you pull the aggro) they actually do quite a bit of damage. Also the -res proc in them will drastically improve your own damage output and is pretty tough to ignore if your specific goal is to kill meaty single targets.

    Oops, actually lastly heh, being able to negate an AV's movement by stacking powerboosted webenvelope and/or simply eliminating their ability to fly up and punch your face in (looking at you Honoree) is an ability that can expand the number of AV's you'll be able to face off against and still have a chance of winning.

    Ideally, you'd have softcap range and s/l and near perma hasten and the ability to negate their movement and some pets munching on them, but we can't all be MM's and trollers
  20. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Seldom View Post
    Illusion would work well for dominators, in my opinion, not because they have domination but because they have attacks. An illusion controller can put out a great deal of damage, but if they lack an offense-friendly secondary much of that damage goes away. A dominator? high damage makes this less of a problem. With their damage, spectral wounds would be obscenely damaging.
    Conversely, the only way to improve the damage of PA (which is generally much more significant than spec wounds while they are out) is through -res debuffs. Trollers have them in spades and usually available at early levels. Dom's have two of them; one being a st debuff and of course the dom version of sleet, which is pretty obscene, but is obscene for all doms.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Blood_Beret View Post
    Last The devs mentioned was if Illusion was ported it would probably be modified for MMs.
    This is not accurate. The last mention was said if and when it is ported it would go to doms and that an eventual port is likely.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tidbit Jr. View Post
    I think Illusion Control can and should be ported over to Dominators.

    I also believe that minor tweaks to the set are in order.




    Now that I got that out of the way:
    One power that I think they could certainly drop would be Group Invisibility. Dominators aren't really team-buffers, so it could make room for another control-power which would benefit from Domination.

    Also, while Illusions may also be viable as a base for a Mastermind set, I do not think that means Dominators should never receive it as well.
    It's not entirely out of line for doms to have a group buff. Plant was originally created specifically FOR doms and has a group buff.
  21. Lolblaws

    Why A Blaster?

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by StratoNexus View Post
    Here is a thing I think about. Blasters seem like a popular AT (for now; I have concerns about what dominators may do in the long run). People invite blasters/scrappers/dominators seemingly equally (although doms likely get less attention right now, but as people see more of them and see how well they do, I think it will increase the desire for doms). I rarely see people purposely choosing scrappers over blasters and I rarely see people choosing blasters over scrappers.
    The issue with taking the stance of 'popularity' is that blasters have never suffered in numbers. Even when the entire AT was under-performing and got the once over with defiance 2.0 they never once lacked in numbers.

    Fun and popularity are separate qualities from balanced. They can certainly intersect, but none of those qualities are necessarily causal of any of the others.
    Quote:
    Just like with the tanker/brute/scrapper, I think the nebulous nature may be a good thing. If the extra mitigation tankers bring was clearly needed, that forces the game into the trinity role. If blasters were the clear winners in damage as you suggest, it could lead to people clearly wanting blasters for their higher damage and therefore clearly needing buff/debuff and aggro control to keep them standing. It is the fact that things are so close that may be what makes the game more interesting when it comes to team makeup, since so many options work.
    Tanks/scraps/brutes are much better balanced against each other. There are still some issues here and there, but by and large they follow a pretty logical ordering of survivability and damage output.

    I really don't see the issue of blasters being the clear damage kings. They are blasters after all. The only AT that should be approaching blaster damage is maybe stalkers in terms of single target take down because that is sort of their gimmick. Of course stalkers being crushed by brutes and scrappers in single target damage is a different discussion for another time.

    Lets back up and look at this from another angle. MM's are the best pet class. If controllers/doms could perform better than them at being a pet wrangler in a variety of scenarios then there would be a legitamate problem. Doms and controllers are the best crowd control AT's; if corrs or blasters could outcontrol them in various scenarios they'd have a legitimate complaint. Tanks are the toughest and aggro spongiest AT; if some other AT was more at home in that role they'd have a legitimate complaint (the legitamacy of this particular complaint was certainly put on the table in the GR beta when the brute max resistances were dropped down a notch in testing, additionally we saw a max hp increase go through for tankers helping clearly establish their dominance in this area).

    Yet here we are saying it is ok that other AT's are capable of infringing well into blaster damage territory. It isn't just scrappers either, they just happen to do it with a lot of their combos. Doms, trollers, corrs, mm's, brutes and who knows who else all have combos that can get uncomfortably close to the damage a blaster can produce. In some cases they may well be able to surpass them. In all cases they bring far more than just 'damage', which blasters are largely restricted to doing.
  22. Lolblaws

    Why A Blaster?

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ClawsandEffect View Post
    There's one problem with all your math and calculations. This goes for both Another Fan and Arbegla.

    Not all scrappers are Electric/Shield, and not all blasters are Fire/Fire.

    You can't look at the damage of one aberrent blaster combo and say it is proof that the entire AT is better. Fire/Fire is by far the best blaster for AoE burst damage, you can't use it as an example and say the results are typical of the entire AT.

    I bet the numbers look a whole lot different when you compare an spines/fire scrapper to an Psi/dev blaster. Or an Elec/Ice. There are a lot of Blaster combos that are blown away by the average scrapper's damage output, and you're completely discarding the fact that they even exist in your comparison.

    So, on that note, all your calculations are completely useless when comparing the 2 ATs as a whole. All they do is prove that an Electric/Shield can do comparable damage to a Fire/Fire blaster while being leagues more survivable. It does NOT prove that any random blaster is going to outdamage any random scrapper, far from it.
    Edited for the same statement, but leaning it toward the other side of the argument. It isn't difficult to make one sided arguments and ignore facts is it?
  23. Lolblaws

    Why A Blaster?

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Oliin View Post
    I'm not completely sure if you're being sarcastic or not here, but either way that statement just bothers me. Does the ability of a controller to lock down enemies negate the survivability advantage a tank has over a scrapper and therefore indicate the two ATs should have more similar damage? I mean, if the ability to negate the survivability advantage scrappers have over blasters makes it ok for scrappers to equal (or just about that) blaster damage then shouldn't it be ok for tankers to equal scrapper damage too?

    I'm aware that's somewhat of a weak argument, but my point is that ATs should be balanced against each other not balanced by the inclusion of another because in the case where that 'other' either isn't there or isn't doing its job effectively then problems will tend to arise. Sadly I don't think blasters are currently very balanced against other damage ATs as far as damage versus survivability goes, and even more sad than that is I don't really think the game would hold up well to a blaster damage increase that would bring their balance 'in line'.

    That said, I like my blasters. I think they're fun and I doubt I'll stop playing or making them anytime soon, but I also think they're poorly balanced.
    You just summed up my exact feelings.

    I'd like to add that it isn't until you start stacking multiple buffers that blasters start to look good. What I mean is a single cold (def/corr) will usually put the def based toons on the team within sneezing distance of softcap, but it will only put the blasters around ~20% def.

    Of course that is far better than nothing, but due to how def and resistance work where they become stronger and stronger the closer you get to the working caps it usually means that a single thermal does more for an elec armor toons survivability than it does for a blaster.

    Once you start stacking enough buff/debuff that a toons own protective measures no longer matter then sure blasters start to shine pretty darn well in terms of killing tons of stuff without risking being instantly vaporized as a result.

    But on that note, that only really happens because the game has a pretty low ceiling on encounter difficulty. Most toons have no use for 70% def because it is functionally the same (most of the time) as 45%. But if/when the game is made to have more difficult encounters you may well see toons with higher innate survivability + buffers continuing to have use for their ability to survive way better than the blasters+buffers. Who knows.
  24. Quote:
    Originally Posted by BenRGamer View Post
    You know, I suggested a 'Kinetic Mastery' since I didn't think Kin would make it as an MM secondary... people didn't even like that idea.
    The problem is that people hear the word "kinetics" and automatically kneejerk into thinking that it would be ungodly on a MM (I mean MM's are like supercharged fire controllers right????). They of course are oblivious to the fact that few MM's operate at close melee range and the ones that do are either squishy and/or don't do much aoe damage.

    It wouldn't be a bad set per se, but it wouldn't be nearly as powerful as dark, traps, or storm. Nor would it be as good as rad or cold if those two ever get ported over.

    Personally, cold is the set I'd like to see get ported.
  25. Quote:
    Originally Posted by JuliusSeizure View Post
    Here's my reasoning. For every single ability that a hero/villain has access to, I could name some mechanic that counteracts it or at least mollifies its effectiveness. Whether that's PToD protecting AVs against mez, or abilities that grant foes +acc and +ToHit to break through high defense, or simply creating an enemy group with higher protection to certain mez types-- Nemesis and confuse come to mind-- there are tools that the developers can employ to counter hero abilities and make the game challenging.

    What counteracts 3 untouchable pets that happen to do damage with a 27 second mag 4 taunt attached? I can't think of anything, and that's my reasoning.

    Have you watched an Illusion/** solo some of the most difficult GMs and AVs this game has? Illusion Control isn't doing this because of the breadth of abilities available to the set, Illusion Control is doing it because Phantom Army puts up an indestructible wall. Plenty of sets have access to enough damage and -regeneration to take down similar foes, but only one set has the access to invincible set pieces. From a design stand point, I would never want players to have access to indestructible pets, let alone ones that do damage and possess long duration / high magnitude agro generating abilities.

    And no, soloing AVs and GMs is not reason enough to label a skill as broken, as plenty of ATs can do the same and every character gets increasingly powerful through global recharge bonuses. But doing so without any risk whatsoever? Only PA grants this.

    Illusion is a legacy set, and Phantom Army kind of floats under the radar because of this. As soon as Illusion is ported, however, Phantom Army would probably be looked at.
    My guess is that they did look at PA and decided it was only a problem in one encounter and as such gave hami the ability to destroy PA.

    For normal mobs 3 single target unfocused and uncontrollable pets doesn't seem to present much of a concern against ~16 mobs.

    If they considered them to be a problem during other tough single foe encounters which is where the power really shines, they likely would have given those foes the ability to destroy PA as well. They could have easily given Recluse such an ability for instance.

    Anyway, you are of course entitled to your opinion. I don't personally feel it is justified, but that's ok.