Other than the Quantum/Void bit, I have to admit that when I got into playing my Warshade the though came to me that they were Blasters done right. The secondary powers aren't a hodgepodge.
But I imagine it would be difficult to do wholesale changes to the secondary sets at this point. Still, they could load up secondary effects for a bit of gain (like is being done with some Defender powers in I4).
Under construction
For the record, I didn't intend to name you as an attack, I wanted to point out that "yes, people are asking for these things, and yes it can make communication harder." My own reaction to your use of 75% as a suggestion is a good example - I completely didn't notice you also said "or 80 or 85." I'm not blaming you, because my reaction didn't help.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm against tank mages, at least as far as not everyone in this game is a tank mage (maybe if everyone was I wouldn't have a problem with tank/scraps/post 32 controllers)
[/ QUOTE ]
I can sympathize with this - I used to get frustrated playing blasters through the early levels and never running into adversity after playing a relatively painful first character. I think that my troubles were a combination of my secondary's shortcomings (DA) and inexperience with the game, and my perception of my blasters having an easier time were a combination of me knowing better how to play, the game actually being easier for blasters at low levels, and the whole "City of Blasters" perception that was prevalent at the time. So, while my perception of how good blasters were at the time was inaccurate, it does give me a sense of where you're coming from.
[ QUOTE ]
As it currently stands Tankers have the best defences in the game, and the highest single target attack in the game, with the only downfall of that being that if you herd and stack too many mobs at one place you can accidentally kill yourself, it also has a set designed to protect itself through killing everything around it, which means it's fairly safe and very damaging.
[/ QUOTE ]
Quite true. I've pointed out on the tanker forum that burn is likely going to come up for another nerf. Also, I think Statesman's statement that they're evaluating scrappers and tankers will see an overall reduction in defenses across the board. I hope it doesn't come to that, and that the devs instead evaluate each set individually for what needs to be done to make it easier to balance a playing environment that includes invuln/stone tankers (who are nigh-unkillable) and blasters of any variety.
Scrappers are about the same as that.
[ QUOTE ]
Post 32 controllers are what really get me in the risk/reward senario, the worst offender, gets an invincable tank team, and summonable energy blasters, the others, except mind (and maybe gravity, I'm not sure on it's damage output with the sings.) can do about the same, and once they summon these pets, they can just Phase shift and let the pets go to town, or die, who cares, no XP debt.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, while pets are a great tool to help controllers solo, I can't see them (Illusion and Fire) not getting toned down. Especially if Geko's statement of what made regeneration overpowered is an accurate statement of what the devs want from the game.
I don't care if the entire game gets recalibrated if the ATs end up on relatively even ground in terms of capabilities. Not identical, of course, because that's silly and impossible - but, like, a good build from every AT should be able to solo Invincible missions after 25-30. I think that's a good balance goal.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
First off, my statements and opinions do not address whether the current state of the Blaster is fun to play from lvls 1-50. That is a subjective call for each person to make. My issue is that the focus on the damage cap of blasters versus scrappers is misplaced. As a kinetics defender, I would like FS to actually make a difference for blasters. The fact that they can already hit the cap without me is unfortunately. I suppose if they teamed with me regularly, they could swap their damage SO's for something the else...maybe like enhancing secondary powers or power pools. Anyway...
[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying blasters are balanced because they do more damage than the other people on their team? I think so.
[/ QUOTE ] I'm not sure what you mean by "balanced." The question is do they have a role and the tools to do it. Until I know what that role is, I can't answer the question. Up until now, I saw it as ranged damage. They are like the artillery. Everyone protects them and they add more damage on the pile. Seems they do this pretty well. AoE's can contribute significantly to the minion destruction, especially when grouped with AoE's from Tanks and Scrappers, and other Blasters...good times.
Somewhere along the line, blasters got hung up with who does the "most" damage. Reminds of playing basketball with players who are concerned with who's scoring the most points. Selfish. NBA basketball shows you how desctructive those attitudes are to team play.
[ QUOTE ]
That isn't enough to make balance, especially considering that others solo can kill more stuff than blasters
[/ QUOTE ] So here we see the mixing of issues. Is it about the role on teams or the ability to solo? Nevermind that blasters are not the solo AT. But it does seem to infuriate many of you that by lvl 32, you go from first place soloers to last place soloers. Scrappers probably move down the chain as well, perhaps Tanks and Pet controllers rank tops.
So what? I'm soloing....the performance of another AT is irrelevant...i'm soloing. I don't care if there is some fire/kin that is able to solo three groups on Invinc...why do I friggin care?
Nevertheles, there is the sense of entitlement, such the ugly American, and so prevelant on these boards. No doubt, some of it can be attributed to the early game design putting you on your throne. I remember how difficult it is to convince a lvl 10 fire blaster to even consider a team.
I would agree, the game sets up an ego train wreck with blasters. You feel like superheros early and then are brought down to mortal status as the game progresses. I agree that in most RPG's, this is counter-intuitive. You should feel your power rise as you lvl. But we a have problm, Houston. You are already Gods when you start. It's tough to increase your relative power with out completely trivializing the mobs you face.
Concern, if you want to improve the fate of blasters, you need to address this problem instead of ignoring it. You have to recognize that the balance you are thinking of is the wrong one. There must be "balance" between the heroes and the mobs....not between the Heroes (PvP notwithstanding). None of your suggestions (haven't seen them all) seem to acknowledge this. How do we keep the average team from being TOTALLY overpowering? Upping blaster damage and giving them mez and defense is simply going to exacerbate this problem.
Another item you overlook is that improving blasters can also have the consequence of bringing back those all blaster teams I remember seeing in Perez. Don't seem many of them on Respec. I don't think the game wants to see any more all one-AT-type team being that dominate. I think the problem already exist with Cntrlrs/Def (probably unvoidable) and to some extent Tankers.
[ QUOTE ]
Then assuming that blasters are often in team, it would seem to suggest that the damage of blasters as a team would be the damage of blasters on the Punisher list.
[/ QUOTE ] Depending on the lvl ranges of the zone...this could be true.
[ QUOTE ]
If another AT did more damage than the grouped blaster (who would make up most of the highest damaging blasters, and would exist), then we could conclude that this would make blasters not truly the best at dealing damage, teamed or not.
[/ QUOTE ] No... a solo or near solo-herding Fire Tank or DM/Invul is going to probably do way more damage than any individual over the same stretch of time. The stats don't account for that. That stats show who has dealt more damage, not who can do more damage in all situations. I fail to see why this isn't obvous.
Even on teams...Fire tanking with a controller on an 8 man team is going to give you the best damage output. The point you aren't considering is how team tactics can exploit some powers more than others. If blasters with Nova could herd...I'm pretty sure they'd out damage everyone else.
Lastly, no one has presented conclusive evidence of who those stats belong to. Show me a printout of all the top damage dealers and their AT's, then this discussion approaches validity. Right now, it's based on the assumption that blasters have none of these titles.
[ QUOTE ]
It assumes that all players wish to maximize exp by defeating the most foes possible.
[/ QUOTE ] Disagree. Many players want to maximize XP with as little risk as possible. Some players are risk averse, some are not. It is not always a reflection of their true potential.
[ QUOTE ]
It assumes that players will recognize when teaming creates a mutual advantage.
[/ QUOTE ] That one is just flat wrong. All teams are not created equal. First, there is only a team advantage when you have a competent team. Not all players can recognize this. The vast majority of players I team with, have very little understanding of other players powers. This improves with lvl..and PvP will also improve this, but to recognize an advantage, you need to correctly understand:
1) How your powers work
2) How your teammates powers work
3) How the enemies powers work
4) How the enemy AI works.
5) How to achieve synergies combining 1-4.
I'd say most players in the game (not on the boards) score about 40-60% on that exam.
[ QUOTE ]
It also has the warrent of its claims that if a blaster doesn't do enough damage teamed to beat out some other AT solo than they aren't balanced.
[/ QUOTE ] Again. We have a disconnect between what the game dictates and what you want to be true. There is no warranty that blasters should be better than scrappers or tankers soloing. And as far as "beating out some other AT solo," what does that mean? Defenders solo much slower than blasters, but can do so with lower risk. Many, many blasters argue that the fastest xp is achieved with some debt. That the time it takes to avoid debt results in lower xp/hour if debt is acquired. Not only that...they are going to halve the debt in the upcoming issue. So now faster arresting will be even more advantages.
Let me sum it up. The blaster AT has to fit in with the game. You can't change it irrespective of the mobs you face and the combined efforts of teammates. So many of the changes people propose fail to consider the game wide aspect. It's all about the deficiency they see in the toon they most identify with and how to eliminate the obstacles. There is a reason why those weaknesses are there. Until you can speak accurately on why they are there and demonstrate that you truly understand the impact of tweaking them, your suggestions seem to follow LadyMage's wonderful quote. "Balance is achieved when my character is the strongest."
Nope...that's basically it. I'm most familiar with /fire obviously, so I speak from that perspective. There's very little from that set that I used regularly. The swords, build up, consume after an inferno. That's about it.
I can't remember actually using ring of fire for it's control aspect, just another attack in the chain. Didn't take combustion, didn't take blazing aura (absolutely retarded power for a blaster, IMO...frontloaded inferno, sure, I'll risk that...waiting for a DoT tic...instant pass on that.) Got great use outta burn after they fixed it...didn't use it after they "realized they didn't mean to fix it". Hot feet...such an insult. Only good use for that power I've found is standing behind a tank, slowing AV's at it's edge.
And then there's the reason that /energy is so good with it's melee powers, and why /elec and /ice are so much better than /fire (at least from the outside lookin in)...No real secondary effect. DoT tics are only useful for droppin a runner who's managed to get outta range since your last shot. In other words, useless. That runners gonna come back anyway. The DoT isn't large enough to save me an attack, doesn't keep enemies from hurting me, doesn't debuff the baddies any. C'mon,they're on FIRE! Why are they still as accurate as before, hell...why are they even still shooting at me? I learned what to do if I caught on fire in kindergarten...STOP! DROP! ROLL! (in the game it'd be cower like fear if they couldn't be bothered to put in the animation)
bleh..I've said all this before. Fix the secondaries and we're well on our way to being viable.
Furio--Lvl 50+3 Fire/Fire/Fire Blaster, Virtue
Megadeth--Lvl 50+3 Necro/DM/Soul MM, Virtue
Veriandros--Lvl 50+3 Crab Soldier, Virtue
"So come and get me! I'll be waiting for ye, with a whiff of the old brimstone. I'm a grim bloody fable, with an unhappy bloody end!" Demoman, TF2
[ QUOTE ]
I can tell you from personal experience that Blasters do 60% more damage than Scrappers in the early levels. It's simply how they are slotted.
In the 20's and into the 30's, however, Scrappers get the extra slots to put into thier attacks, and Blasters get extra slots for....utility/travel powers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Since I infer from this passage you believe the "early levels" are the pre-20 levels, slotting cannot account for a 60% difference in damage. DOs (the only enhancements available at those levels) only boost damage by 16.6%. Maybe if a blaster 6-slotted for damage and the scrapper only had the original single slot in every attack, the blaster would be doing 200%/116% = 172% -- 72% more. If the blaster had a more conventional 5+1 slotting and the scrapper put even a single extra slot in their attacks, you'd be comparing 183/133 = 138% -- 38% more damage.
If anything, early level blasters might have an extra attack over the average scrapper, but I don't think that is necessarily typical. I do know my early level scrapper kill speed and my early level blaster kill speed were comparable - not identical, but similar. Certainly not a 60% difference. At best, my blaster might have been 20% faster, and that speed difference was nullified past 22 when SOs became available. My blaster still killed faster (for a little while yet) but my scrapper had less downtime in between fights. It was basically a wash.
Also, blasters are slotting attacks well into the 30s. For me, explosive blast took up 6 slots from 27-28, nova took up 6 slots from 33-34, and total focus took up 6 slots from 42-43 (I didn't take it till 41, and EPPs didn't exist yet). Conventionally, someone is more likely to take total focus at 38, burning slots at 39-40. In other words, of the 18 slots you get from 31-40, 10 are likely to go to attacks.
In the 20s, among the powers a blaster will likely be commiting slots to are hasten and stamina, a similar situation for many ATs. A specific power energy blasters are slotting in that range is conserve power - a "utility power" many ATs would give their right robotic arm to have the privilege of slotting in the 20s.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
[ QUOTE ]
Mieux, I play Scrappers, Blasters, and "Blappers".
I can tell you from personal experience that Blasters do 60% more damage than Scrappers in the early levels. It's simply how they are slotted.
In the 20's and into the 30's, however, Scrappers get the extra slots to put into thier attacks, and Blasters get extra slots for....utility/travel powers.
By the mid-30's, Blasters have an effective 10% damage bonus compared to Scrappers...the difference between the base damages, basically. Yes, Scrapper damage is resisted more often. Yes, Scrappers might not have an entire attack chain 6-slotted yet.
Let's call that a 25% damage difference between the two in the mid game. Scrappers get Criticals on average, 5% of the time. One in every 20 attacks does double damage, so we're down to a 21% real difference.
Ok, is a ~21% damage boost + range (but less than many mobs) equivalent to the capability of Scrapper secondaries? That's the question...so far, the answer seems to be: no. Do you agree?
[/ QUOTE ]I'll answer this, then I need to jet for a time...
[ QUOTE ]
equivalent to the capability of Scrapper
[/ QUOTE ] This is my issue Scott. What do scrappers have to do with blasters? This whole AT envy situation is nonsense. The problem that blasters should complain about it that missions don't confer enough advantage for Ranged damage.
Remember all those Council bases? Remember how they have the slots pill boxes from which you can fire into and out of, but cannot use melee? Do you know how many blasters I see use those to their advantage?
The misssion should provide structures and objectives where Ranged damage can confer a huge advangate. For instanced, rooms filled with turrents on high ceilings. Enemies behind pill boxes that can't be reached from the room you are in...either blast them or run through more enemies, trip mines, to get to them.
True...in away it is a type of admission that blasters are ill equiped. But I would rather focus on changing the missions than the powers.
Constantly upping powers is a long-term lose-lose situation. Politicaly expedient, ultimately destructive.
Edit: And no offense, but I can't take your numbers as being accurate or conclusive. Not that I have any conflicting numbers..but I can't take them as truely accurate.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It assumes that players will recognize when teaming creates a mutual advantage.
[/ QUOTE ] That one is just flat wrong. All teams are not created equal. First, there is only a team advantage when you have a competent team. Not all players can recognize this. The vast majority of players I team with, have very little understanding of other players powers. This improves with lvl..and PvP will also improve this, but to recognize an advantage, you need to correctly understand:
1) How your powers work
2) How your teammates powers work
3) How the enemies powers work
4) How the enemy AI works.
5) How to achieve synergies combining 1-4.
I'd say most players in the game (not on the boards) score about 40-60% on that exam.
[/ QUOTE ]
This seems to be the best point you make and is a good reason why blasters need help. As you note, even if blasters had a role as team damage dealer, and did it great, they'd still have a hard time, just like pre-32 controllers because of the stupidity of a large amount of the player base when it comes to teaming.
I think you are right here, and I really included this one as a type of reductio to show how far from balanced, and to use your terms "fun" a blaster is.
But then you say this.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It also has the warrent of its claims that if a blaster doesn't do enough damage teamed to beat out some other AT solo than they aren't balanced.
[/ QUOTE ]
Again. We have a disconnect between what the game dictates and what you want to be true. There is no warranty that blasters should be better than scrappers or tankers soloing. And as far as "beating out some other AT solo," what does that mean? Defenders solo much slower than blasters, but can do so with lower risk. Many, many blasters argue that the fastest xp is achieved with some debt. That the time it takes to avoid debt results in lower xp/hour if debt is acquired. Not only that...they are going to halve the debt in the upcoming issue. So now faster arresting will be even more advantages
[/ QUOTE ]
The point of this was if a blaster whose role is to be a damage dealer is outdamaged (and for the most part the outdamagers are "support" ATs like tanks and controllers) when he is in "optimal conditons" aka a group, by someone who doesn't need a group, this shows that the blaster AT is too weak. Risk doesn't matter here. Assume that grouped blasters and solo tanks have equal risk (the tank actually has less risk). If the solo tank does more damage and kills more enemies than a blaster in a group, why play as a blaster?
Also, any blaster that argues that you get exp faster with some debt is a retard. That would be impossible. Now risking debt is another story, and with risks their should be rewards. But actually having debt lowers exp. If you intend to always have some debt, better to just fight mobs that give half exp, then you won't have to go to the hospital from time to time. And if you can beat guys that give a small amount more than exp then you win over the other guys.
I don't see how you can think that other ATs defeating more experience solo than grouped blasters is a good thing for the blaster AT.
[ QUOTE ]
Constantly upping powers is a long-term lose-lose situation. Politicaly expedient, ultimately destructive.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're right here, but only if you apply it to every AT, and no one here is asking for say, tankers or scrappers to be boosted.
If scrappers or tankers were too powerful (lets call this a contrafactual so that no one gets upset) then increaseing of the others to make it so they were as powerful, albeit in different areas, is what we like to call game balance. It's not easy to do, but it isn't bad in the long run or "ultimately destructive as you claim.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Has anyone done any datamining to show who does more damage on average in a team from lvls 1-50? Is it blasters or scrappers? Why do I get the feeling it's blasters?
[/ QUOTE ]
I am pretty sure that the Dev's have the numbers. The fact that Statesman did not come out and say that blasters deal more damage than scrappers kind throws your assumption in some murky waters.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, if you go back the addition of critical he said outright that these made scrappers the highest damage AT.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Has anyone done any datamining to show who does more damage on average in a team from lvls 1-50? Is it blasters or scrappers? Why do I get the feeling it's blasters?
[/ QUOTE ]
I am pretty sure that the Dev's have the numbers. The fact that Statesman did not come out and say that blasters deal more damage than scrappers kind throws your assumption in some murky waters.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, if you go back the addition of critical he said outright that these made scrappers the highest damage AT.
[/ QUOTE ]
To be fair, he said "highest single target damage, but he still did say that.
[ QUOTE ]
And let me offer you some reality Concern. From lvls 1-16..maybe even as high as 20...scrappers are pretty mediocre. Seems that blasters are far better at soloing. In fact, controllers seem to solo better than scrappers from lvls 1-10. But you dont' see scrappers pissing and moaning about it do you?
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you serious? There is no way a controller solos as well as a scrapper from level 1-10. Furthermore we were treated to 9 whole months of incessant scrapper whining, despite the fact they were already vastly superior to every other AT.
[ QUOTE ]
The fact that people can do more damage than a blasters over a given period of time can have nothing to do with who has more damaging attacks. It's about herding and regeneration i.e. health and endurance. Again, you are misapplying stats.
[/ QUOTE ]
No you are the one misapplying states. It does not matter one damn bit why a tank or scrapper is doing more damage. What doesnt matter is how much damage your attacks do if at the end of the day everyone has done more damage them you and compared to them you have nothing to offer but damage.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Has anyone done any datamining to show who does more damage on average in a team from lvls 1-50? Is it blasters or scrappers? Why do I get the feeling it's blasters?
[/ QUOTE ]
I am pretty sure that the Dev's have the numbers. The fact that Statesman did not come out and say that blasters deal more damage than scrappers kind throws your assumption in some murky waters.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, if you go back the addition of critical he said outright that these made scrappers the highest damage AT.
[/ QUOTE ]
To be fair, he said "highest single target damage, but he still did say that.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope, he said highest damage, no mention of single target though most people assumed he couldnt possibly be including the AoE damage the fire and AR sets can deliver.
Ok
It seemed a little angry to me but it is not always easy to tell in text vs hearing someone talk. Such is the internet. No harm no foul.
I do want to say I am all in favor of blasters getting some love both PVE and PVP but I just dont want to over do it so that a nerf comes around 3 months later.
Yes knock-back sucks for everyone who isnt using it but seeing as how they just turned in on for PVE sadly it probably isnt going away, mores the pity although I secrtely have a place in my heart for Mob Bowling with shockwave, but dont tell anyone I'll deny it.
I can appreciate that the 500% dam cap seems like a slap in the face, I just dont know if that alone compelling enough to them to change it.
I personally would gladly give you my extra 100% damage if it finally ended all the /regen hate that exists in the game (not pointing fingers just a general statement).
I think that many of the problems in the game now are due to some of the fixes in the end of beta. I dont think anyone had total immunity to status effect before they gave it to /regen because the set was at the time so weak. So it worked out that everyone had a hole of some kind in their status defense, and integration was a click like Practiced Brawler and vulnerable to sleep I think (long time ago). Then Tanks complained that they have holes in their status resist but /regen didnt, or they couldnt move and now most of them minus fire/ have complete mobile protection.
It seems to me that Blasters should have some kind of status immunities too maybe not holds or knockdown but at least sleep and maybe stun since the ranged sources of status, I believe were mostly added in Issue 2. But this is a catch 22 as Statesman doesnt want blasters to have status protection and made sure of it in removing it from the APP, the only way to make it more even would be to put a hole back in everyone elses which isnt likely to happen either. Even the statuses wouldnt be a real issue if they werent so prevalent.
[ QUOTE ]
The dev's have made it clear that when something was supporting the role of an AT that it would be improved. Punchvoke, and taunt for tankers, Katana improvements for scrappers not to mention stacking armor. Exactly what was the price for stacking armor? Oh, that right, there wasn't one other than the inherent cost in the armor themselves that was always there. The devs are very willing to change something for the better without doing a give and take.
[/ QUOTE ]
True, and I know that people like to throw out range is a defense, and people then say no it isnt. I personally believe that yes it is a defense but it isnt that great and shouldnt be your only one. It seems to me that range as a defense was engineered so that you could effectively protect yourself by using the surprise attack to gank mobs in 1 or 2 attacks leaving only a boss or maybe a lt to even get a shot off at you, but in the late game it just doesnt scale well, because instead of 3-4 mobs in a pack you eventually start doing it to 20 or so mobs and it is unbalanced. How do you fix that without capping damage from AOE or effected targets, or some other non pleasant thing?
Statesman has admitted that the game kind of goes to crap once everyone gets SOs because the trading of enhancements never really caught on like it was supposed to due to it being easier to just sell them and buy what you wanted.
I know first hand with my WS that I can use the range and damage of the cone then AOE to pretty much mop up a small to medium size group of mobs and maybe 1 will survive 2 if there is a Lt or boss. In that example range does act as a defense but it only works until they get closer. Luckily I can be moving back as I fire and coupled with the longer range of the AOE I can generally keep them at a distance in an open area, or if I have a hallway, if not
Mmm yummy carpet.
This goes back to extremes and how they really dont work well for balancing things out and a better need for layered/degrading defenses but that is a whole nother bag of snakes.
As to Dark Armor stacking and the end cost not being an added negative maybe it wasnt an additional negative per say since it was there, but since they didnt stack before and they do so the net effect is a new negative. But thats just semantics :-p
[ QUOTE ]
Hi, I have a warshade too. As a matter of fact I found the War Shade three form to be so easy I went straight for the human only form to find a challenge after playing my blaster. Warshades are a little hard to play in the early levels but after you get nova it is pretty easy compared to a blaster in the 30+ game. You would really have to play a blaster to understand.
[/ QUOTE ]
You could just as easily say a 1-29 blaster is easy to play compared to a blaster in the 30+ game and make the same statement, and it seems to me that is the crux of the problem.
Blasters seem to mature early-mid game, and most everyone else matures mid-late game. It seems to me that this is the biggest problem. By the time that everyone else is in their prime Blasters are lagging behind, and this is largely due to other sets defenses coming into maturity while blasters dont have any.
How about this option, instead of the ridiculous amount of stuns/disorients in the late game, what if they were replaced with more acc or slows which are less immediately lethal to a blaster?
[ QUOTE ]
I wasn't angry. Check out freedom fury's thread on Blasters in CoH if you want to see a furious post. As to your logical explanation it ignores the stated reason given by the devs for the damage caps being the way they are. It is similar to saying well I believe the sky is blue because venus is green.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ok. Like I said, no harm no foul, and States reason is his own and not mine which was way I didnt use it. But he is a dev so his reason trumps mine.
[ QUOTE ]
Even doing only lethal damage you are putting out damage comparable to blasters. Or you will be once you slot your powers.
[/ QUOTE ]
If I could put another 6 slots in my claws beyond the 6 I get I still wouldnt be doing comparable damage to Blasters. :-p
But I see what you are getting at, and respectfully disagree I dont have real numbers but I would be curious what a non-crit BS headsplitters numbers (BI 7.22) vs the comparable AR single target in the range of a Ignite (BI 6.66 lower but uses less resisted fire damage), or a Blazing Bolt (BI 8.91) from fire. The brawl index alone would seem to tell that tale, and the difference in Scrapper and Blaster versions of build-up (assuming it isnt a /devices but they give up buildup for an acc boost) would only make that more favorable for the Blaster.
Again I am all in favor of helping blasters in the late game I just dont want to do it in a way that is going to open them up to a nerf. Im all nerfed out for a while.
[ QUOTE ]
Remember all those Council bases? Remember how they have the slots pill boxes from which you can fire into and out of, but cannot use melee? Do you know how many blasters I see use those to their advantage?
[/ QUOTE ]
You mean those things that provide limited view and an even more limited damage arc, that have a door that if anything wanted to melee you it would casually stroll though, putting it out of line of sight until it actually got into melee range, at which point you're trapped in the room with it also.
Yeah big advantage...
I think blasters are very comic booky (Yea its not a word I know). I mean don't you remember when Cyclops shot a sentinel, then ran around with his arms flailing screaming "HEAL HEAL! Ahhh Wolverine get it off me!" 
In all seriousness though to the people saying "So blasters don't do the most damage. What's your point?"
The point is we are supposed to be the DAMAGE KINGS. Not damage queens, not princes, not jesters. WE HAVE NO DEFENSE. So if we have 150% of the damage of scrappers we're overpowered? (That would be 50% more than they have for all you math majors) What if we had 180%? Considering we have 0% of their DEFENSE I don't see the problem here. Just my opinion, take it as you will. 
You get some things right, but you're way off on others.
[ QUOTE ]
You say the base line is 3 white mobs. I have yet to see a blaster at 30+ take 3 white mobs and not be wondering if they are going to fall and get debt (hence the nickname debt magnets).... Lets also look at the slider. Blasters for the most part have to keep their slider at soft shelled taco.. Tankers and scrappers however, keep theirs at Titanium gonna take on Galactus and the gods of Mount Olympus.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you can't take on 3 white mobs at ANY level, with ANY archetype, you need to have someone teach you how to play. True, at the lower levels, I might have to rest between battles if I wanted to survive the next one. You need to realize that having 20 attack powers is fairly useless. Stick with 2 good ones for damage slotting and 2 for status slotting. Pour the rest of your slots into support powers. A very poor build or poor strategy is the only reason why you would consistantly get seriously injured by 3 white mobs.
[ QUOTE ]
I have seen 46th level controllers, tanks, scrappers, and defenders, take on entire groups of mobs and walk away as if nothing happened... i have seen each of these archtypes set their mission sliders to the highest point available and not blink an eye. I have seen blasters fall to mobs 3 levels lower than them in single combat because a blaster has not the dmg accuracy or defenses to do much against the onslaught. You will be hard pressed to find a blaster that does not have a hard time after 30th level doing anything on their own.
[/ QUOTE ]
While I agree that other ATs seem to have a much easier time solo, Blasters aren't in quite the picture you paint them. My blaster has been soloing on Rugged for some time now (since sometime in the 30s). Before that he was able to do so just fine except during the Time of Extremely Hard Bosses at the End of Every Mission. Pre-HOs, I was able to Full Auto to death most white mob groups and some yellow mob groups. With HOs, I can do the same to most yellow groups and some orange groups. I'm even fine 1v1 vs most reds and purples. It's only when I'm up against multiple red/purple lieuts, bosses, or minions w/a mez attack that I have problems.
As for a blaster falling to mobs 3 levels lower, this could conceivably happen, but only in unusual circumstances, the details of which your short description does not provide. It would be rare, but possible.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
they're full of breakfrees because the damned things last 30 seconds. something you said you didn't mind. In fact I said you wouldn't have room for other inspirations because of them and you pshawed me. said you had gifts left over from christmas.
Which is it man?
[/ QUOTE ]
My point was that just giving us back disciplines is thinking too small. We don't need to fill our trays with even one row of insps just to survive, we need mez protection in our powersets, because we are a damage AT that generates hate, and the level 35+ game is nothing but mezzing attacks.
I'm not disagreeing the proposed change to mezzing insps is bad, i'm disagreeing that it's a big deal. It's not. What IS a big deal is that we absolutely need them to survive.
[/ QUOTE ]
dude the problem with that is the developers don't know WHAT the hell we're supposed to be. of COURSE where a combat AT. but the developers treat us like support. When the only thing we offer to a team for the most part is mobs getting dead faster. If anything it's WE who need support.
Right now where not ranged combatants... were practice dummies.
Sometimes I think the developers are waitng for us to get the hint so that they can just let the class die out.
[ QUOTE ]
Statesman said that soloing should be a choice.. Blasters dont have that choice later on in the game, not without taking MASSIVE debt. reason: Blasters cant stand up to an attack... and they cant deal the dmg another archtype can do. Without dmg or defenses a blaster just comes along for the ride so to speak.
[/ QUOTE ]
Obviously we have different builds and/or play styles. I'm a lvl 48 ar/dev/mun blaster and I've been soloing most of my non-AV missions since sometime in the 30s, usually on Rugged. While I do have massive debt, it's all from the times I've died on teams, since I rarely die solo. And I rarely die on good teams -- ie, if I have a dedicated healer, good aggro-controlling tank, good mezzing controller, etc. -- unless I'm being foolish.
I'm not saying that tanks, scrappers, etc. aren't overpowered compared to blasters, just that I'm not as weak as you say I am.
[ QUOTE ]
I would ask that blasters remember that while one of us doesn't create envy in scrappers, two or three of us can. Having three blasters in a group is like having three fire tanks or spines scrappers. There's not a lot lft for anyone to do.
[/ QUOTE ]
I had the rare opportunity to team with another AoE blaster the other day. Between my LRM+Full Auto combo and his Full Auto, all but a couple of the red/purple mobs lived less than 6 seconds after the attacks began. The team was, for the most part, able to distract the surviving mobs. AoE Blasters en masse? Sweetness.
[ QUOTE ]
Are you serious? There is no way a controller solos as well as a scrapper from level 1-10. Furthermore we were treated to 9 whole months of incessant scrapper whining, despite the fact they were already vastly superior to every other AT.
[/ QUOTE ] Yes. Being able to hold or immobilize a mob and then blast him makes for safe easy killing. Go a play a controller. Low lvls are extremely easy for all builds that can avoid melee. But obviously it slopes off. Depending on builds, it may get harder sooner rather than later.
[ QUOTE ]
It does not matter one damn bit why a tank or scrapper is doing more damage.
[/ QUOTE ] Okay...this statement right here shows that you are clueless. If I can herd 1000 mobs in 10 minutes and do 1 point of damage per second (translation, 1000 hps/sec)...I'm going to out damage anyone who can only do 10 points per second to single targets. Hands. Down.
If I have three attacks that do 1000 hps of damage, and the mob only has 10 hps. Those stats are going to only give me 10hps of damage. So I can have FAR GREATER DAMAGE POTENTIAL and have it go unrealized because the majority of it is wasted.
You have to be an idiot not to see that....or maybe just delusional.
Either way, you fail to demonstrate you have the foggiest notion of how this game works.
Something to consider, if we aren't the Kings of damage (the whole reason I wanted to be a blaster, to output insane amounts of damage that dwarf the other ATs, period. If I find out now that another AT does more damage then I do that means not only did I make an uninformed choice, but I was lied to by every description the devs put out on the blaster AT until now) then what is our role on a team?
We barely contribute other effects, yeah, "fear my single target holds! oh, the controller has that... SG, debu... Defender... Dam... Scrappers... Well maybe I can tank? I draw alot of aggro! ::a stern lecture from the defender later:: Sigh... I'm just going to sit back here guys, need any inspirations?"
Being able to "select targets better" is bull when everything is grouped around the tank, which means the scrapper and tank have about the same ease of selecting a target, and Defenders and Controllers don't seem to have that problem either.
We have no defence other then the /dev line (and that's barely anything), as compaired to 95% Resists, massive Regeneration, insane defence, Debuffing mobs to mewling kittens and AoE status effects and pets seem damn safe to me, safer then "range," which, oh yeah, ALL MOBS IN THE GAME HAVE SOME FORM OF.
As soon as the devs yank their heads out of their behinds and realize that the people in this game are looking for the most damage, and don't care if it's ranged or not. In almost every team I've been in, if the blaster goes down it's a minor inconvience, the tank, defender and controller go down and it's pull out time, hell they don't even bother rezzing until the battle is done in most cases (I've seen it from both sides, as the blaster and as the other ATs.)
[ QUOTE ]
and I really included this one as a type of reductio to show how far from balanced, and to use your terms "fun" a blaster is.
[/ QUOTE ] Balance and fun...as described by many players have nothing to do with on another. Your fun problems have nothing to do with balance against scrappers. They have a lot to do with balance against the mobs and situations you face. Hence, "balance" is the wrong term. "Calibrated" is a much more accurate term.
As far as fun. I wonder if some of the fun for blasters arises from being the dominate killer at early lvls. Arcana does an excellent job of underscoring what the discrepency is about. My lvl 19 blasters has three attacks five slotted. My lvl 20 Scrapper has one. Blasters get to heavily slot attacks there whole career. So you enjoy this perceived damage superiority. When scrappers finally get caught up...along with blasters. That gap narrows and you notice that you aren't killing 80% of the mobs like you use to. You feel like your damage hasn't scaled, but it's really the fact that everyone else has finally started doing damage. Tankers, defenders, and controllers are finally coming into their own damage-wise and blasters can't stand to share the stage.
Please tell me how you solve that problem with out making blaster damage ridiculous? They still do more damage than other AT's.
[ QUOTE ]
The point of this was if a blaster whose role is to be a damage dealer is outdamaged
[/ QUOTE ] First off, you haven't even proven that blasters are out damaged by teammates. Sure, some independent lvl 50 def with HO's and Fulcrum shift might equal blaster damage...but in the real world, a blaster is still doing the most damage on their team provided he or she has a team that can protect him or her and he or she knows how to survive with a team. That last statement is going to get bolded...one sec...there.
Please...show me on average how blasters are getting outdamaged by teammates.
[ QUOTE ]
Also, any blaster that argues that you get exp faster with some debt is a retard. That would be impossible. Now risking debt is another story, and with risks their should be rewards. But actually having debt lowers exp. If you intend to always have some debt, better to just fight mobs that give half exp, then you won't have to go to the hospital from time to time. And if you can beat guys that give a small amount more than exp then you win over the other guys.
[/ QUOTE ] You completely missed the point here. Let me restate it. The The time you spend avoiding debt results in lower xp/hour than if you accept some debt for greater reward. How does this play out? Hunting whites instead of greens. The occasional defeat you suffer only reduces your incoming xp by half for the duration you have debt. If I get 100 xp for killing Reds...and only 10 xp for killing greens. I can be in debt indefinitely and make more xp fighting reds. I think it's a very simple concept. Put another way, I can make more net xp on an Invinc misison with one or two deaths than I can on a Heroic mission with none.
[ QUOTE ]
I don't see how you can think that other ATs defeating more experience solo than grouped blasters is a good thing for the blaster AT.
[/ QUOTE ] Because I don't see how the two are even remotely related BE????? This is the crux of why these posts look like the ulimate whine. One has nothign to do with the other except if there some sort of petty ego/jealousy/superiority complex at work.
I don't give a flying *** if some Fire tanker is earning 10x the xp I'm earning off in some solo mission across the street. WHO FRIGGIN CARES??? How does that make my /SR any less susceptible to Quartz crystals or AoE at lvl 27?
I seriously don't understand why you and others continually point the finger at some other AT and say it's not fair. Either blasters are fun to play or they are not.
I do think it is an issue if my blaster's damage output is unnecessary because the mobs are too weak. The solution is to make the mobs tougher....but people didn't like that.
As a scrapper, my life is not really at risk. The solution is to up the damage by mobs so that scrappers need to kill them a lot more quickly than before....but people didn't like that.
As a scrapper, I might get around to killing the boss...I might just work on these minions first. The bosses aren't really that dangerous higher lvls. The solution is to make bosses deadly as all hell so scrappers focused on them immediately, welcomed the help from any blasters, and left the minions and the Lt's to the blasters....but people didn't like that.
[ QUOTE ]
Yes. Being able to hold or immobilize a mob and then blast him makes for safe easy killing. Go a play a controller. Low lvls are extremely easy for all builds that can avoid melee. But obviously it slopes off. Depending on builds, it may get harder sooner rather than later.
[/ QUOTE ]
I happen to have a controller and a level 50 one at that. With the right power selection and slotting you can solo at a modest pace from 1 10, with the wrong power selection you can barely kill a single mob before running out of end. Under no circumstances can you compare to a scrapper at those levels.
[ QUOTE ]
Okay...this statement right here shows that you are clueless. If I can herd 1000 mobs in 10 minutes and do 1 point of damage per second (translation, 1000 hps/sec)...I'm going to out damage anyone who can only do 10 points per second to single targets. Hands. Down.
[/ QUOTE ]
Im clueless, Im sorry but you are spouting irrelevant garbage and you have the nerve to call me clueless? Read what I said again and perhaps get yourself a clue. It does not matter why a tank is out damaging a blaster. If it ever happens its broken plain and simple. We know what tanks out damage blasters that does not make it right.
(BTW, level 50 tank here as well)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think "zero defense" was not the best decision.
[/ QUOTE ]
That might be the best summation of "The Blaster Problem."
For me, it's an ironically fortunate thing that many blaster secondary sets are melee-centric. This way I can ignore most of my secondary powers and use the slots instead for defensively-oriented pool powers.
That trend speaks poorly of the secondary sets, and further explains why Devices is so popular since it breaks formula by being useful.
[/ QUOTE ]
I quote this, because of all other complaints I have ever read about blasters, this is the one I remember seeing the most. The secondaries are too much of a grab-bag to really support themselves or the blaster primaries, is the impression I get - naturally, there are exceptions (energy and devices are both seen as fairly good).
The secondaries seem to need stronger internal consistency, as well as more tools to enable blasters to deliver their damage without faceplanting. Please, someone tell me if I'm just being dumb?
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)