Statesman, issue with your position on blasters
"No it's not ridiculous that our melee attacks are the most damaging. considering the risks that we take using them. It's ridiculous that we have them at all."
Then what should their secondary be?
[ QUOTE ]
"No it's not ridiculous that our melee attacks are the most damaging. considering the risks that we take using them. It's ridiculous that we have them at all."
Then what should their secondary be?
[/ QUOTE ]
It should be support like the set is entitled. I hardly see fire sword, or fire sword circle as "support" I see them as more damage.
Support is circle of fire.... an effective immobile that gives me room to breath.
Support isn't Blazing aura.... a low level DoT that equates to more melee range damage.
Support isn't Burn... a low level dot that equates to more melee range damage. If anyone tells you it's status protection... they've never used it in heavy combat. It's duration is to short to provide any meaningful status defense.
Support insn't combustion.... A low level DoT that equates to more melee range damage, and has a painfully slow activation time. (are we beginning to see a pattern here?)
And it's not Hotfeet. Yet another DoT... with a moderate slowing effect. the slowing effect is made largely useless by it's small perimiter area.... by the time the slow/fear effect has kicked in mobs have already attacked.
The fire secondary is overloaded with worthless DoT's... It's like the devs think that a fireblast dosen't work at close range. 
Between fireblast, fireball, firebreath, and blaze I have all the close range fighting support I need.
Even worse.... our secondary is loaded with crap from the Fire tanker secondary...
here's a clue....BLASTERS AIN'T TANKERS. Shows you how much thought went into the design of the fire secondary.
[ QUOTE ]
No it's not ridiculous that our melee attacks are the most damaging. considering the risks that we take using them. It's ridiculous that we have them at all.
[/ QUOTE ]
Agree to disagree. I think it's both. More damage is redundant, and melee is not the function of the Blaster. The most potent melee should be in the melee sets in my opinion.
[ QUOTE ]
Who said we wanted a boost in AoE damage? Did I say that? Did anyone say that?
[/ QUOTE ]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but when you say, "don't nerf my damage", and you're an AOE blaster, you're talking about the proposed HP increase and how that will change your alpha-strike? Is this wrong? When I say increase damage, I mean in relation to mob HP, not right now.
[ QUOTE ]
THe problem with your argument is that this thread isn't about scrappers.
It's about blasters. The survivability of Super reflex scrappers has no bearing whatsoever on the discussion. My EXPERIENCE...tells me that blasters die more often than any other AT when teaming. And as any Tanker can tell you Hit points don't matter all that much in the scheme of things. Damage Ristance/Avoidance is where the money is.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's not an arguement. It was a question.
The difference between a SR scrapper and a blaster HP is barely there right. So my point was if both are hitting the def cap, and neither has res, why would the blasters in the team drop like flies and sr not? I'm asking in the context of the blaster/defenders doing their job debate that moridin and erratic are having. In my experience when bubbled, and enemies debuffed, Blasters don't fall apart when enemy fire is returned. This is just experience as a blaster, or as a sr scrapper playing with blasters. I'm not asking for your word of honor, I'm asking about mechanics.
[ QUOTE ]
Making mobs tougher and making our AOE weaker
[/ QUOTE ]
Never said exactly this. My hope is that making mobs tougher ALONE would bring AOE damage into line. But, I'm still researching different methods to solving this problem.
Well Erratic. The problem is that it is *you* who come off as arrogant when you come to Blaster boards and try to tell lvl 50 Blasters that they are incompetent and dont know what they are talking about when you yourself dont even have a high level Blaster. Truth be told, you dont know jack about being a Blaster but what you insinuate and assume based on your second hand data and knowledge. All of your arguments are based upon your experiences as a Defender. You have no idea of what all this sounds like from the perspective of a Blaster.
That is what you are lacking. Perspective.
Take this comment by Moridin for instance
[ QUOTE ]
I am also perfectly safe leading off with an AoE because I know that by the time they pick themselves up off the ground they will be provoked and held, and if they miss I will get the heals I need.
[/ QUOTE ]
You replied that this is a contradiction but actually you totally missed the point. The point is that as long as everything goes right, everyone is fine but if ONE thing goes wrong, its the Blaster that pays the price 99% of the time. Blaster survival has a VERY low tolerance for error whether solo or grouped but especially when grouped becuase of the higher con opponents.
Then of course everytime Blasters die they are told it is there fault. This is why many high level Blasters though this may not be entirely the case, and i am not innocent of this, have developed the mentality that it is their responsibility alone to keep themselves alive.
Since the work on a team is to kill the enemy and keep yourself alive, you might now begin to see how from a Blaster's perspective he is doing most of the work. From a Blaster's perspective it is HIS responsibility to kill the enemies, being the offensive specialist and it is also his responsibility to keep himself alive.
But if a Blaster has this viewpoint, then to him, he is soloing and everyone else is leaching off of him isnt he. If a Blaster cant kill the enemies or keep himself alive, then what is going through his mind? Most likely he is thinking that he should be soloing.
FeiWutLong Why do you think that SR is considered the worst scrapper secondary? I'll give you a hint. You have already said it.
[ QUOTE ]
in the mid 20's I just do missions when I feel like soloing with the new xp pump at the end missions seem like "how" to solo know.
As for street soloing I don't have many more challenges as far as damage to death on mobs but then again I don't play an AoE blaster so I always had to be on the move and my fights typically took more than 10 seconds.
[/ QUOTE ]
I do play an AoE blaster and I have no problems with the post Issue 2 game. I always did more missions than street hunting anyways but even street hunting is still just as survivalable as it was.
Yes, Warriors now shoot back - like everybody else did. Yes, Tsoo throw caltrops. So what? I can still kill just as many yellows and whites as I did before and just as quickly. Orange and red minions take a little longer but they should not be easy anyway.
Ltns? I don't notice any difference in their toughness - aside from new powers. I've put 4 lvls onto my blaster since the update and I'm nearly to 30 now so I have been playing quite a bit.
Perhaps I just don't see the problem, perhaps there is no problem?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who said we wanted a boost in AoE damage? Did I say that? Did anyone say that?
[/ QUOTE ]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but when you say, "don't nerf my damage", and you're an AOE blaster, you're talking about the proposed HP increase and how that will change your alpha-strike? Is this wrong? When I say increase damage, I mean in relation to mob HP, not right now.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wrong pal. I don't mind a hit point increase. People who said that will prevent alpha strikes don't understand the art of the alpha strike at all. My problem is with a hit poind increase AND a damage decrease. And if a significant change is coming to both I want some tools to cope with it. My gimp secondary just dosen't fit the bill. As for the melee argument
I could care less whose melees do the most damage. If I had my druthers there would be NO melee attacks in the fire secondary. Maybe you could discuss that with someone who gives a damn.
There is much bloviating in this thread.
[ QUOTE ]
Well Erratic. The problem is that it is *you* who come off as arrogant when you come to Blaster boards and try to tell lvl 50 Blasters that they are incompetent and dont know what they are talking about when you yourself dont even have a high level Blaster.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're the one making claims about what you experience that are strictly at odds with the existence of other ATs doing their jobs as I and thousands of others playing the game experience. You can have a Ph.D. in physics and the moment you start to claim that things fall to the ground because the Earth loves them and hugs them close your judgment is suspect.
[ QUOTE ]
You replied that this is a contradiction but actually you totally missed the point. The point is that as long as everything goes right, everyone is fine but if ONE thing goes wrong, its the Blaster that pays the price 99% of the time. Blaster survival has a VERY low tolerance for error whether solo or grouped but especially when grouped becuase of the higher con opponents.
[/ QUOTE ]
And you speak in contradictions yet again, supporting Moridin_'s assertion about how he is safe 99% of the time and then saying there is a low tolerance for error. Clearly 99% of the time there is no error and so trying to hold up that Blasters are at some sort of great risk is wrong. You can't have it both ways. Either he is safe most time and the entire crusade about how much danger Blasters are in is a bunch of bollocks or Moridin_ is lying about how safe he is. You choose.
[ QUOTE ]
Since the work on a team is to kill the enemy and keep yourself alive, you might now begin to see how from a Blaster's perspective he is doing most of the work.
[/ QUOTE ]
I already understood the presumption that the Blaster was doing the lion's share of the work and apparently everyone else was leeching on his hard work, incapable of doing anything on their own to advance and so they should be thankful that the Blaster, like an Olympian god, has descended from on high to take a hand in their triffling affairs (amazingly you want to label someone else arrogant), but its the reality of the matter that is at issue, not the egocentric notions of some Blasters.
Under construction
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps I just don't see the problem, perhaps there is no problem?
[/ QUOTE ]
No doubt they'll claim you aren't really a Blaster.
Under construction
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Clearly you are not familiar with the concept of streak breakers
[/ QUOTE ]
Streak breakers have essentially been disproven to make more than several points of a percentage diff in ACC. It's even lower the better your DEF. Because the streak breaker increase the number of misses before it activates. So at really high DEF, it might take 30 misses before something gets the streak breaker, most things don't live that long.
Sorry to butt in on your debate, but just wanted to throw that info out there.
[/ QUOTE ]
Umm what was your point there? Just to keep you up to date the discussion was about whether a defender can keep you alive by just increasing your def. When things can 1 hit you streak breakers mean you die once for every 20 times they attack you no matter how high your def is.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Clearly you are not familiar with the concept of streak breakers…
[/ QUOTE ]
Streak breakers have essentially been disproven to make more than several points of a percentage diff in ACC. It's even lower the better your DEF. Because the streak breaker increase the number of misses before it activates. So at really high DEF, it might take 30 misses before something gets the streak breaker, most things don't live that long.
Sorry to butt in on your debate, but just wanted to throw that info out there.
[/ QUOTE ]
Umm what was your point there? Just to keep you up to date the discussion was about whether a defender can keep you alive by just increasing your def. When things can 1 hit you streak breakers mean you die once for every 20 times they attack you no matter how high your def is.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're massively overplaying what can one-shot you in the game. Most things can't that any group is going to fight. Two shot you? Yep. But few things do one-shots (like say the Kraken in the Sewer Trial) and the number decreases when the Defender is not only making you harder to hit but also DEBUFFING THE DAMAGE the mobs can deal.
In 40 levels as a Defender, one who runs into the middle of spawns and stands there to AE, and having the EXACT SAME HPS AS A BLASTER MY LEVEL I can count the number of times I've been one-shot on the fingers of one hand (the aforementioned Kraken and right after Update 2 release when Rikti were doing double damage). It generally requires fighting things that are deeply purple to get to such damage, and as you and Punisher2020 have been claiming, you're always at the top level in your group so you can be useful. . .perhaps you shouldn't be fighting deep purples, especially when the other leeching members of your group see them as so ultraviolet as to be black.
Under construction
[ QUOTE ]
So I think it's one of the lamest arguements going that the low DEF class gets the most powerful ranged and melee simply because in melee they're vulnerable. They already DO impressive damage, give them something more unique.
[/ QUOTE ]
Risk vs reward. If you are taking greater risk, and a low def AT is taking a greater risk by entering into melee range, you need a correspondingly higher reward. This means if you are going to give a low def, offensive AT melee attacks they had bloody well better be the best attacks around. I will agree that it would be better all round to have useful skill that are not melee attacks in a blaster secondary.
So bud. What nerf to your damage are you talking about then?
[ QUOTE ]
They are if you have to worry about dying to the extent that you're portraying. So which is it, are they incompetent or are you exaggerating?
[/ QUOTE ]
This is whats known as a false dilemma. Neither of these things have to be the case, and in fact the real answer is that you are simply wrong in your assertion.
[ QUOTE ]
Which is it going to be Moridin_, that it is utterly unsafe and you're risking death as the Blaster or that you are perfectly safe? Allow me to remind you of your own words:
[/ QUOTE ]
Its safe because everyone does their job properly, but the instant one person screws up, even me, I die. No one else, just me get it? No mater what tactics you use, this is how grouping works for blasters unless they are lazy leaches sitting back and making little or no contribution tom the team.
When do blasters become all-powerful? I started my first blaster (Penny Pretty on Infinity) and I'm up to level 10. Have to say I'm not so impressed so far. I can AOE a group of 8-10 even con minions and bring them all down to about 1/4 of their health but that just leaves a group of wounded minions running after me. My usual MO is:
Build up
Fireball
Pick off stragglers as I run backwards down the street and hope I don't get held.
I have energy as a secondary, so if there is one boss I can usually keep him on his butt using kb long enough to kill him. If there are 2 bosses I'm dead. if I get held and the pack of minions catch me I'm dead. If I run backwards into another group and aggro them I'm dead. When exactly do I get to be overpowered?
you can debuff all you want pal...
I've been one shotted by
Tsoo bosses
Tsoo ancient spirits
Paragon Protectors (all flavors)
Tank swipers
Tank smashers
Greater devoured
Lesser devoured
Fake Nems
Rikti Chief soldiers
Rikti Chief Mentalist
RIkti Chief mesmerist
Knives of Artemis bosses...
This list goes on. And by the way If a salvo from four nemesis Lt's drops you to 0 life at once how is that any different from a one shot kill? IF the salvo does 1200 pts of damage and my life point total is 900 I'm dead.
The rest is semantics.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Making mobs tougher and making our AOE weaker
[/ QUOTE ]
Never said exactly this. My hope is that making mobs tougher ALONE would bring AOE damage into line. But, I'm still researching different methods to solving this problem.
[/ QUOTE ]
Statesman, why do you think so many blaster builds are centered on alpha strikes? Once you answer this question, you can begin to see a problem with blasters at higher levels. Do you think it's a "haha I'm uber" situation? Or is it possibly a "whew, I get to live" situation?
[ QUOTE ]
Umm what was your point there? Just to keep you up to date the discussion was about whether a defender can keep you alive by just increasing your def. When things can 1 hit you streak breakers mean you die once for every 20 times they attack you no matter how high your def is.
[/ QUOTE ]
Only that few things live long enough to deliver 20 attacks for that code to matter. Especially in a group setting. Other AT's live and die by def, you don't often see the streak breaker become the deciding factor. Perhaps you mean the %5 def cap?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Making mobs tougher and making our AOE weaker
[/ QUOTE ]
Never said exactly this. My hope is that making mobs tougher ALONE would bring AOE damage into line. But, I'm still researching different methods to solving this problem.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think u should make mobs tougher just cause blasters are over powered. Mobs are fine the way they are with a mission slider it will be perfect. IMO aoe damage is the issue.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They are if you have to worry about dying to the extent that you're portraying. So which is it, are they incompetent or are you exaggerating?
[/ QUOTE ]
This is what’s known as a false dilemma. Neither of these things have to be the case, and in fact the real answer is that you are simply wrong in your assertion.
[/ QUOTE ]
Such a construct is often advanced in a form that fits false dichotomy but you were the ones laying out the possibilities. If it is a false dichotomy then it is one of your making.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Which is it going to be Moridin_, that it is utterly unsafe and you're risking death as the Blaster or that you are perfectly safe? Allow me to remind you of your own words:
[/ QUOTE ]
It’s safe because everyone does their job properly, but the instant one person screws up, even me, I die. No one else, just me get it?
[/ QUOTE ]
If by screwing up you mean things like failing to buff before hand, then you may have a point, but that gets back to the competency of the group.
Under construction
[ QUOTE ]
I've been reading most of this thread, and I think you guys all have valid oppinions, and should DISCUSS (not argue) your points.
My opinion is that though I do not know much about Blasters, I do know that other AT's have short comings also! I think to expect to tackle large groups (more than 3 or 4) of mobs is unreasonable for any AT!
I also think that each AT (especially Blasters, Defenders, and Controllers) MUST use some tact, and strategy in dealing with ANY group that is above their level or contains a boss or multiple lts.
For Blasters (and any AT) to depend on their 2ndary powers was not intended. My interpretation was that the Blaster 2ndaries were ment to be used "defensively" when their primary powers were unable to prevent mobs from getting into melee range. To use a blasters 2ndary as a first strike was not intended.
That's like me trying to use my Defender's 2ndary powers to be a blaster! That was my original intent, but it doesn't work, adn it shouldn't! If it did then why choose a Blaster when you can have a psuedo-blaster with good defense? As such Defenders cannot use their secondaries to becoms Blasters, and Blasters should not be able to use thier secondary powers to be Scrapper. And the same should go for Scrappers using their secondary powers to be Tankers, and Controllers using their secondary powers to be Defenders.
The bottom line is that ALL the AT's have some weakness, and that weakness MUST be dealt with by the players inginuity rather than the devs. Superman could beg for his weakness to kryptonite be removed or toned down! He had to deal with it by being smart! The only devs have already provided the BEST way to deal with each classes short-comings, and that is to TEAM-UP!
[/ QUOTE ]
My secondaries don't provide ANY defense..with the exception of one immobile. They provide more damage. Which fits my argument.... my defense is my offense.