TwoHeadedBoy

lolok. I'd love to see a Tank solo the GM's my Blaster can solo. Without temporary powers, pets, or inspirations. I've seen Tanks boasting about "soloing" GM's with Lore pets. I'm sure lots of Tanks have "soloed" GM's with envenomed daggers. But that really doesn't count.

Sounds like you're just clinging to the past, man. Incarnate powers are an assumed standard for high end builds in the modern game. I routinely build around Agility on very tight, slot consuming builds with rigorous goals. I calculate my potential damage output with the right Interface before I even make a character. If I come up with something that's hurting for recovery, but I like the build, I just plan to take Ageless. Using end game powers for high end builds isn't a bad thing- It's the direction the game is advancing in. The only exception for this is Lore, but that's just a personal thing that I have a problem with. I don't like Lore at all. It just feels cheap to me.

The only speed reference that you have is my Blaster vs. whats-his-name, the guy that's ridiculously hard to kill for everyone and extremely resistant to lethal damage. Giant rock fellow on Monster Island. (Arcanaville said those would be the hardest to solo and doubted that I could do it, so that's the one I posted videos of.) Pretty sure no tank is about to stomp him without temps, pets or inspirations. My Blaster did though. I do not think any melee AT could solo him without any outside +dmg, pets or temp powers. And I can earn rewards and PL as fast as they do too. On the same build that stomps monsters they can't stomp without cheating.

And obviously my Blaster has Incarnate stuff. Are you trying to imply that having Incarnates is a bad thing? Why even mention it? Everyone should have Incarnates at this point.

Farming in and of itself means customized enemies in the AE, lol. I didn't make a specific map for my Blaster, or use a specific map for Blasters at all- I use a standard high rating s/l cave farm.
Did you just say "you can't do it" and "it doesn't matter if you can do it" at the same time? Wow, I can understand the need to cover your *** around here, but that's just silly man. And yeah, sure poor people can do the same thing on Brutes- That is, stomp large spawns efficiently. Granted. I have two unpurpled Brutes meant for recreational spawn stomping. But those poor people Brutes can't solo GM's on the same build without pets, temps or inspirations. So it makes sense to me. I can beat the game on one character, and it's a fun and engaging build with an active playstyle. This makes me happy, and it makes it worth the investment.

Sorry, I feel like you've only latched on to some impression of what you think I'm saying, disliked the vague idea you formed, and then gone on to assume that I'm uneducated, using the fact that I don't have a high end Dom as the backbone to your POV. It just doesn't seem reasonable to me, shrug.

Plant is the reason why Doms can claim to compete with Archery's AOE. Not sure why you mentioned Fire since it lags behind Archery... Plant/Psi probably beats Fire/Ment in terms of AOE output. Creepers are beastly, Dom's Psychic Shockwave does more base damage than Blaster's PS, and their immob can be made into a pretty epic attack. The only Dom counter to ROA is Seeds of Confusion and confusion damage is why they can compete with the high end Arch Blaster clearing speeds, imo- Plus there's Sleet like Reppu has mentioned. Plant/Psi could probably beat out Fire/Ment without suffering from a noticeable decrease in reward rates due to confusion, but Archery will beat out Plant in terms of enemies defeated per rewards earned every time imo.

I haven't tested this personally but I'll be able to soon- I rolled a Plant/Psi this morning and it's currently a little before lvl 30. I just need to get his leveling finished up so I can slot the build out, do trials for a couple of days and start my testing.

Do you seriously not know about s/l cave maps? It's not a build designed for farming, it's designed for everything but also happens to be good at farming. I can ticket farm and PL very efficiently on my Blaster. Keeping one small purple running isn't exactly rocket science, and I don't see why you'd find anything difficult about keeping Drain Psyche saturated on a farm map. "You only have resistance to the three most common damage types" is silly. I actually have about the same s/l/e res as my TW/FA Scrapper on my Blaster. Same defense outside Shadow Meld too. Building res to the most common damage is logical, so I'm not seeing what possible fault you're finding. My Blaster solos 54x8 Malta and Carnies and GM's too- I'm not sure how you could possibly find a build that softcaps everything with a small purple and has resistance to the 3 prevalent damage types to be in any way lacking. Especially when it has rain of arrows and the ability to regenerate over 100 hp/s.

I don't understand what you are so angry about. Because I think that Blasters have higher max damage potential than Dominators do? This hasn't been proven in either direction, and everyone's initial calcs are showing the same as mine- That it's close. Or are you angry with me because I believe that high end /Mental Blasters can be as survivable as Dominators for all practical purposes? Please let me know what exactly I've said or done to upset you. I feel like you're misconstruing my argument that Blasters can achieve comparable and slightly better results for me saying that Dominators are irrevocably bad or worthless. I know they're not, so I don't see why you're so mad. Even Reppu isn't mad at me anymore, I don't think. And Reppu is always mad at me.

Well the thing about if you choose a resistance shield, you can still have softcapped defense through set bonuses. If you really think than an s/l softcap and control is enough on its own though, I'll take your word for it when I'm working on this build.

Who said you could touch my coffee? I saw you do that. And get your hands away from my hat.


Aww, I'm sorry. It's ok though, I found you a friend.

Their primary is control, and I don't believe that their damage output can compete with high end damage output. They have Controller primaries, are Controllers a damage AT? They have Blaster secondaries, and Blaster secondaries are not the reason why Blasters do a lot of damage. So, shrug. They were clearly implemented in a way that gives them way more firepower than they deserve, but the concept behind them all but flat-out states "not very good at anything."
I'm still working on upgrading my crappy computer- Whenever I've tried to record anything x8 my FPS has dropped to an unplayable state, even with my particle count like halfway down, unfortunately.

I understand how they work- I didn't even want Dom's to be a part of this discussion because I didn't consider them a primarily damage dealing AT, but I was proven wrong on that. I'm not sure how complicated this game is for you, but there's really nothing beyond the scope of comprehension once you understand how things work. I'm also not sure if you know what sort of Blaster I play. I'm not drawing parallels to execution, since it's clearly going to be very different per AT, just to end results. I know that Plant can match Archery's AOE output, but that it relies on Seeds of Confusion to do so, which means lower reward rates. How much of an impact that makes is something I look forward to investigating personally. Single target wise, I think there's a chance that the Dom would win because of redraw, but my initial calcs show that they're about even. I'm aware that a control primary with high end survivability built in means that the Dom can theoretically be *more* survivable, with higher potential, but there is really a cap on survivability if you're talking about build performance in the scope of in game scenarios, not theoretical max possible sustainable damage. Basically, if both survive the same situations, it doesn't really matter which "survived better," because alive is alive. My Blaster already solos 54x8 and GM's, so I think he's at the survivability cap anyways.

What do you mean? I never claimed otherwise, I have looked at the numbers and seen high end Dominators perform though. I've never said Dominators are bad, just that they don't personally appeal to me. I'm going to give it a shot though, I had more extra inf than expected so I'm going to throw a Plant/Psi together.

One thing that I am skeptical about is going with Ice Mastery- I always prefer to take resistance APP/PPP's since I can build defense up with set bonuses, but Sleet seems to be a factor in the level of performance you've talked about. Do you feel like the control primary is enough to make up for having no resistance (aside from possibly tough?)

As for leveling up, I don't enjoy playing before 50 and I don't have the time anyways. I neglect my main projects as it is, haha. I prefer to just get PL'd on alts I'm curious about and take it from there. Performance below level 50 just isn't something I'm interested in, shrug.

I wasn't attempt to badger, just making a request. "I'm too busy" or "I don't feel like it" is a perfectly viable answer, haha. She already said she could do some math to fit a damage output metric into her survivability metric, so *shrug.* I didn't think adding Dom's to the mix would break anything any more. I would be more than willing to perform my own tests but1.) I don't have a Dominator, 2.) People trust Arcana a lot more than me, and 3.) I'm not as good at math anyways.


I do have some extra inf, I can roll up a Plant/Psiand pay for it to be PLed within the next few days, but it's going to take me about an extra week to make a build for it.

I don't have the resources to level and build high end Dominators for such purposes, unfortunately. I did do a short experiment with a friend on his high end Plant/Psi- The clearing time matched my Arch/Ment, but that was with Seeds of Confusion, so reward rates were obviously lower. The problem with comparing builds across different players, though, is accounting for user error or player skill- Not that I feel either of these conditions had an impact on the experiment I just mentioned, but I also can't prove that they didn't, so any argument predicated upon it is inherently void. Do you see the problem I'm facing here?

I think that you are falling victim to your own preconceived notions here, to be honest. I believe you are trying to cover so many grounds with your argument that ultimately all add up to the same thing. If the primary function of both Blasters and Dominators is dealing damage, which is better? I believe that the best way to discuss that is by taking ideal sets on both counts and gauging which has superior damage output. I believe that Blasters would win. Even if we take two examples for each and compare the min/max'd optimal ST sets, and then compare the min/max'd optimal AOE sets. I believe that Blasters will come out on top in both scenarios, sans confusion.

Yes, Dominators have more inherent tools to survive, but all of those tools are at least somewhat trivialized when it comes to high end play. Clarion provides status protection, and 32.5% defense to all positions does enough to mitigate mez. And yes, sure. Dominators can run Destinies besides Clarion- But so can any Blaster with a proactive nature and a break free macro. You are dealing in such a way that your approach to the analysis is theoretical to a point that it is potentially irrelevant to actual in-game experience.

I would love it if you could find a way to adjust your reasoning and only consider a certain set of agreed upon high end scenarios. I just don't think that maximum sustainable DPS is the most relevant measure of survivability, and with Incarnates, I don't think status protection is much of an issue. I also don't think that modifiers matter as much when you consider the powers available- Yes, Rain of Arrows and Blaze are both a big deal.

No offense, Reppu- I know we've had our disagreements. I think we've had enough of conjecture and both of our own personal bias about this. I believe it would be most logical to let Arcana run max survival vs. max damage analysis and we could take our disagreements from there. I know you're proficient in napkin math but I just trust her results more, and I think it'd be best to have this conversation on more objective ground.

This is what I was asking Arcana to compare as I feel like she would be a great medium for this debate.

I personally believe that Dominators can only compete with Blasters in terms of damage output (once again, to clarify, I mean an optimally built high end Dom v. high end Blaster) when it comes to both ST and AOE damage, by relying on confusion. The followup statement to that is I believe that confusion damage's rewards will suffer from enough of a decrease that, even if the Dom can compare AOE/ST DPS, the lowered rewards will be enough of a detriment that the Blaster is still earning more.

I will give the nod to Dom's in survivability for this hypothesis, because I'd be silly not to, but I'd also argue that any gap in survivability is ultimately irrelevant at the high end- I believe that if Arcana is willing to look at 54x8 survivability with attention to killing speed, both will be able to survive, thus cancelling each other out. Damage output would be the only remaining point of contention in terms of primary function, and at that I believe the Blaster wins.

I got that part, but I was inferring your perspective about the Dom/Blaster comparison in hopes of getting some further insight out of you. You've successfully confirmed a point that I wasn't basing any solid argument off of disagreeing with.

I didn't realize they were classified as such- I didn't believe they were but you already established that was the case. It's not a matter of 'burden of proof' at this point- you seemed willing to objectively run some numbers, so I was curious as to what the results would be at the high end.
Personally when I think of high end play and Archetype balance, I feel that the best way to approach it across AT's is by taking the best combination with the best build per AT. Think of it like the playoffs in sports... The best team wins each division and goes on to compete with the others. So, it would be max potential Dom vs. max Blaster vs. max Brute, etc. Obviously the secondary question is how balanced the AT's are internally, and that's a separate issue which I've talked about a bit too.
No, but for Mental Blasters, Melee play is something that I advocate, hopefully for obvious reasons. Sorry for the confusion.
Are you arguing versatility vs. functionality? I'm talking about max potential, not versatility- Versatility seems way too subjective of a subject imo because there's really no conceivable way to quantify it. I think the ultimate comparison should be gauged by contribution- Can a Blaster or Dominator deal more damage is the first question. The second question is how much of the rewards will be earned in case of the Dom, and whether Dom's relying on confusion can be so much more efficient that they make up the reward rate gap. The third question is how well the former survives vs. the latter- Obviously, you can't kill stuff if you're dead, so that's important.

If the guy on the jetpack is faster, and we're gauging max potential flying speed, I say the human wins.

I've just never seen or heard of a Dominator competing with a Blaster in terms of damage output outside of leveraging confusion- I've always viewed them as the worst half of a Blaster and the worst half of a Controller paired into one Archetype, but that's clearly just a case of personal bias. Have you run numbers comparing Dominator damage output and survivability to the melee-centric AT's I presumed to be the core (Scrappers, Brutes, Stalkers?) I'd be particularly interested in Dominators' max AOE damage potential, as the only example I've seen of a Dominator competing with Arch/Ment numbers is Plant/Psi and that was leveraging mass confusion, which nerfs reward rates- I don't remember who it was, but a prolific fellow who was posting on the Kheld boards had extensively tested his high end Plant/Psi and pointed out that, at the high end, the Dominator can leverage confusion in order to keep up with high end AOE sets but the reward rates were noticeably lower.

The question in my mind if we're going to add Dominators into the equation is first and foremost, how does a high end Dom's survivability (going to be tricky as you'll need to find a means of calculating the natural predisposal to mitigation) compare to other damage dealing AT's- Remember, Melee-centric isn't the qualifier here- Damage dealer is; Playing a Blaster in melee should not be mandatory for the majority of sets, I agree, but see my earlier risk v. rewards and higher dividends for higher performance standards statements. I digress though- Do Dom's do comparable damage with reference to the conventional melee AT's, and if so, how much of that damage output is reliant upon confusion, and if enough of it is, how do they compare in term of reward rates?

Once we establish Dominators' position relatively, we can go back to talking about Blasters. Personally, I do not feel that Dominators can do enough ST or AOE damage to compete with the high end melee dealers and the maximized /Mental Blasters without relying on confusion, but if you can prove me wrong, go for it.

See I agree with you semantically, but when we consider the primary role of an AT we need to compare Blasters overall to other damage dealers- Doms are not considered a damage centric AT IIRC. In order to properly gauge Blaster performance we need to compare both damage output and survivability to Stalkers, Scrappers and Brutes, otherwise our analysis becomes convoluted.

Ok, I just had to turn you into Sheldon really quick. I hope you understand.

I would be interested in seeing those hand calculations if you can find the time to do them. I definitely don't want to make your City of Higgs Collider explode.

Interesting, thanks. I'm wondering how the survivability numbers would compare to similarly budgeted melee characters, and how much of a pain it would be to factor in outgoing damage output when considering the survivability totals. You mention stationary non-offensive Tanking as the assumed scenario which isn't an accurate reflection of how the game is played in practice- Is that because of limitations or an excessive amount of extra work on the part of your analysis?

Edit: Also, just for fun, I know you've mentioned performance deficiencies between Blasters and other primarily damage AT's. I'd be interested in knowing if you still see that gap comparing a Blaster like this to the mentioned AT's with similar budget, etc. I would personally find it hard to believe that there was still a performance gap- That, to me, at least suggests that for end game purposes (admittedly the only purposes that interest me) the Dev's would do well to leave /Mental alone- Based on what I've seen in your numbers so far it isn't unfairly survivable- And normalize the other secondaries around it.

Of course during the level up process and on lower end builds there would probably be a much greater disparity between Blasters and other damage dealers, but that's where we already discussed our fundamental difference in opinion. To reiterate for a second, your position is that accessibility should be even across the board as Blasters are not considered an advanced AT. My position is that there's nothing wrong with 'earning' good performance through investment, namely time and inf. Would a good compromise between our two POV's be that the other secondaries, when normalized around Mental's level of performance at the high end, have less potential survivability but more steady and user friendly activation methods? This seems like the route the Dev's are going, and given that, I don't think it's unreasonable for an AT that admittedly isn't considered advanced to have one more challenging secondary to choose from that pays higher dividends after increased investment.