Responses to Moridin in ( ),
(You didnt read enough of my posts Man,
I am for an increase in blaster power and suggested 2 things a pet and a damage shield. So since you didn't read all my posts you must have misunderstood and thought I was against a Blasters getting love I am not.
I am for it just not the 9 items + Concern mentions whilst thinking that the 2 I suggest are out of balance.)
[ QUOTE ]
(Pay attention to peoples responses and you wont be so off base with your counter arguments.)
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When those responses are based on the fundamental principle that blasters are fine, need no improvement and should have to trade something to have any adjustment made then there is not really any point in taking that person seriously.
[/ QUOTE ]
(Point is you thought I was against blaster's getting love this is your mistake you may start taking me seriously again not that you ever should not have.)
[ QUOTE ]
Even if it wasnt for the input of people with level 50 blasters who have also played other ATs there have been any number of analysiss performed that show blasters are less powerful then scrappers, tankers, controllers, and even some defender builds by a VERY wide margin.
[/ QUOTE ]
(I dont agree it's very wide, I agree it is noticable and needs adjustment I would perfer buffs to blasters over nerfs to others as I play all archtypes personally)
[ QUOTE ]
If you wish to debate this do so in an appropriate thread instead of coming to one where the discussion centers on what to do about the problem and try to deny it even exists.
[/ QUOTE ]
(I'm gonna let you in on a little secret I never denied it exsists you need to read back and understand what you qoute ere you still your foot in your mouth Sir, and btw I will debate here as it was here I was asked to defend my position by Concern so I make no apologies to you.)
[ QUOTE ]
It does exist and it starts to get very annoying when you try to have a discussion about what to do about it and trolls drop by and try to derail that discussion by insisting 300 pages of posts rehashing things that have already been discussed at length in order to prove to them personally that a problem actually exists.
[/ QUOTE ]
(What can I say here? Your way offbase and I can't find a care that you where annoyed by something you misread.
I am for the blaster changes perhaps its you who is troll.)
[ QUOTE ]
Just to clarify some things you certainly didnt get probably because you have not read any of the discussion on what the problems are.
[/ QUOTE ]
(You are a funy person saying I don't read posts with nothing to back up your one liners.)
[ QUOTE ]
Range: Blasters are a ranged AT that have far more melee and short range attacks then they do ranged attack. Only 1 blaster set has more then 2 non interruptible single target attacks with a range of more then 20 feet. How well do you think scrappers would do if they were limited to just 2 attacks?
[/ QUOTE ]
(Hell I am with you here thing is your not limited though.
Your just put in a risky situation that you dont want to be in and again I am trying to suggest ways to make it easier for Blasters to melee without shooting thier fists off like a Voltron arm.)
[ QUOTE ]
Damage: three of the 5 blaster sets need to do more damage as they are regularly out damages by tanks, scrappers, controllers and some defender builds.
[/ QUOTE ]
(Unless you are talking about DPS without deaths your way off base here.)
[ QUOTE ]
The question is how can this be done other then by just a blanket increase to blaster damage. Of course Concerns proposals increase damage in some cases, this is exactly what they are supposed to do.
[/ QUOTE ]
(Yeah I made suggestions for that too a Pet and a damage sheild. Also I am for some of concerns points just not all of them together and then some. Go back and try actually reading what you qoute.)
[ QUOTE ]
They do not, however, come in the form of a blanket increase to blaster damage which is exactly
the type of solution needed.
[/ QUOTE ]
(Maybye so your entitled to your opinions and wants. I certianly would be bummed to see all of concerns ideas get implemented at once cause as he suggests as that would throw balance and the archtype out the window.)
Dude.. a big colorful giant robot [ok not so giant but in the same style] would be awesome. Plenty of attack options, half of which are just style so you can either go "super-robot" [ie; Getter-robo, voltron, Gravion and the like] or more "realistic" [like Gears, exo-armors and the old variable-fighters].
gawds I'd absolutely love that as an AT. it's tech origin, and its definitely heroic! Maybe an old votoms Scope-dog...
Nova I am with you on that I just would perfer it to be its own Archtype and not force the human torch to shoot his flaming fist off..
I did say as an AT didn't I?
[ QUOTE ]
Point is you thought I was against blaster's getting love this is your mistake you may start taking me seriously again not that you ever should not have.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yet another refrain of Im not saying it, but I really am. Sorry, but I am just not buying it.
[ QUOTE ]
I dont agree it's very wide, I agree it is noticable and needs adjustment I would perfer buffs to blasters over nerfs to others as I play all archtypes personally
[/ QUOTE ]
You are mistaken. Scrappers and do as much if not more raw damage and can survive the attacks of 10+ times as many mobs. With the multiplying effect of AoEs this amounts 10 times greater survivability and much more damage the gap between them is, to put it simply, insanely large. Large to the point that it makes zero sense for them to even be on the same team fighting the same mobs.
[ QUOTE ]
Unless you are talking about DPS without deaths your way off base here.)
[/ QUOTE ]
No I am not. Statesman has outright said scrappers are the highest damage AT. You may want to look at this thread where I compared the attacks of a spines scrapper vs a fire blaster. Even though the fire blaster is often cited as having the best damage output of any blaster it does not win even a single match up.
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showf...b=5&o=&fpart=3
From my own personal experience I have 3 level 50 characters, a tank, a controller and a blaster. The blaster has the lowest damage output by far even going full out. In fact it isnt even a close comparison. The controller does 2-3 times the sustained damage while the tank wins by an even larger margin.
[ QUOTE ]
I have a level 40 DM/regain and it is simply the easiest character I have ever played from 1-30. It isnt quite as fast leveling after that due to the emphasis single target damage but all things considered its still easier to play in these levels even if it doesnt level quite as fast as my tank or controller.
I know a BS/regain who says exactly the same thing about these early levels, and play nightly with someone who has a level 50 claws/regain and freely says that getting to 20 wasnt hard at all.
[/ QUOTE ]
My second character after my DM/DA was a Spines/Regen scrapper, and I found the first twenty levels to be pretty easy...
...because I knew the game better after having already played through those levels and knew what to expect. My defenders have had it even easier.
I mean, think about it - before 16, Regen doesn't have any defenses. It has a self-heal that's about as good as a respite, and it has dull pain, which isn't usable very often. That's it. Nothing else. In effect, they're blasters with less range, more endurance, and free green inspirations. At 16 you get healing and status resistance, but I would argue that the latter makes a much larger difference than the former in terms of ease of play. I could solo +2 to +3 bosses with my Spines/Regen scrapper at 16th level without any healing in Integration at all - not because of any healing rate (that I did not have), but because not getting held, stunned, slept, or knocked down makes a big difference.
But the reason my spines/regen had it easier is pretty simple: I knew what to expect. I knew how to approach solo boss fights before DOs, and how the different factions worked. Even my Kheldians have a pretty easy time soloing missions.
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)
[ QUOTE ]
My second character after my DM/DA was a Spines/Regen scrapper, and I found the first twenty levels to be pretty easy...
...because I knew the game better after having already played through those levels and knew what to expect. My defenders have had it even easier.
[/ QUOTE ]
But this wasnt my second character, well it was, but I took another to 50 before I gave it any real attention and one more after I drifted away from it. My comment wasnt that it was easier then my blaster but that it was the easiest of all my characters. The reason is that it is very much like a blaster with a couple self heals which is more then I had as a blaster. Not only that it effectively had infinite end at a low level, something I also never had with my blaster.
I may find something that is easier at these levels but frankly I very much doubt I will unless I roll another regain. I suspect anyone who has played a blaster would experience much the same thing, which is exactly the point I was trying to make. The poster I was responding to was making the claim blasters had sub par skills while at the same time admitting to struggling with something that any blaster would have found easy. Blasters at higher levels are in fact all the difficulties a low level regain can face take to extreme.
[ QUOTE ]
What's this I thought you said no increase in damage? hmm 30% unresistable damage to mobs = damage increase, did you not Sir in another post claim to be a lawyer in training?
Where then is your atteniton to detail with your own percivied facts?)
[/ QUOTE ]
I begin to understand your lack of understanding. Take two mobs with no resistance. Which are the majority of mobs in the game. Current blasters would do 100 pts of damage. Blasters with the PvP change would still do 100 pts of damage.
If the mob has resistance, lets say 30% the mob would still take 100 pts of damage. Wait thats not more damage is it? No its consistent damage.
[ QUOTE ]
Think about it the aoe you lob from a safe range kills all but 2 while you run around a corner. A single pet cannont kill so many so fast, it has no aoe. The pet would not be able to mitigate damage to the level that this change of yours alone would do. Mull that over and if you use reason you should see the light.)
[/ QUOTE ]
So what you are saying is that Thunderous blast is overpowered? Wait maybe you missed my change to blaster nukes at the bottom I guess I will continue reading to see if you realized this arguement was pointless.
[ QUOTE ]
I am talking about one pet with blaster hp's not perma with some range and some small aggro managment. This would be about no differant then teaming with a second blaster except it would protect you.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wow, it has ranged agro management. Extremely overpowered. If it ties up one enemy that just negated all damage (100% resistance in a way) from one target. That is pretty damn powerfull for a power. That is why Phantom Army is considered crowd controll and this is what you are asking for. You are asking for crowd controll.
[ QUOTE ]
Again you forget that you claimed that your changes make no damage increase in your most recent post to me Sir, Not only is this a damage increase for melee aoe it also has the strong possiblity for lameness effect.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually I made it clear that I was for increasing melee AoE several times. I even explained why.
[ QUOTE ]
This abiltiy above your suggest alone takes out as much risk then one Pet with blaster hit points.
[/ QUOTE ]
Explain to me how being able to summon and drop Hot Feet takes out more risk than an agro management pet. You have absolutely no concept of how overpowering your idea is.
[ QUOTE ]
6. Swap the damage caps of blasters and scrappers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Hmmm Increase Damage ? Could be!)
[/ QUOTE ]
I love this. Really. So if I take a blaster with a higher damage cap and fire an attack it will suddenly do more damage? No, it won't. It makes it so that the potential is there but the cap does not magically make blaster attacks more powerfull.
[ QUOTE ]
8. Faster activation times on powers for blasters.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Sure thing but btw this would up DPS and thus hmm well Increase Damage!)
[/ QUOTE ]
I see you have confused damage with DPS. Need to stop doing that as they are not the same thing. Did I say that it would not increase DPS? No I didn't. Increased activation times will not make blaster attacks do more damage. It does not increase damage. It does increase DPS but don't confuse that for damage. If an attack is not one shotting an LT it will not one shot an LT no matter how fast the attack is performed.
[ QUOTE ]
9. Making level 32 nukes into more useable AoE powers like Head Splitter or Full-Auto and less situational all end consuming powers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
([censored] ? As I reread this one I realize that I glossed over it without enough thought myself. It alone is insane. I gotta say this alone is better then a small resistance to one power and a blaster hp pet.
You Sir Have no concept of balance if you cannot see that.
And BTW it is the now soon to be non perm click powers that scrappers get which sucks thier endo and are becoming O' Crap powers like Blasters booms and not the other way around.)
[/ QUOTE ]
First don't compare primary and secondary sets in regards to final powers. If you want to compare the scrapper secondary powers, then compare them to blaster secondary powers. Except for Total focus those scrapper secondaries are much better.
So, what you are saying is that if we had a ranged attack that was similar to Head splitter in damage and made into a small AoE cone or somewhat it would somehow unbalance us compared to scrappers that already have headsplitter? It removes a situational power and allows blasters to once again perform their role from range. An amazing concept. It allows blasters to have another power to cycle when they want to kill bosses. An amazing concept. Somehow though this is unbalanced?
Once again you have not said why these things are unbalanced. You have just said "OH MY GOD ITS UNBALANCED MY IDEA IS BETTER"
I already explained why your idea is ungodly good and overpowering but you have so far simply repeated your assertion that the powers are overpowered or said that in a round about way that the changes would add damage to the blaster class. Which of course was the point of the changes. To improve blasters without adding damage but allowing them to put out more damage. Can you understand that concept.
The changes also reinforce the concept that blasters should stay at range until they wish to close by placing their defensive powers at range rather than makeing them get in melee to use their manipulation powers.
However rather than saying why range is a bad thing or why haveing a non-situational attack power is overpowering you have just spouted off you opinion with no supporting arguements.
As to why your idea is so overpowering that it will never happen, think about summoning your pet from around the corner to absorb the alpha strike (including mezzes and AoE damage) so that you can round the corner and perform your alpha strike with absolutely no fear of reprisal because you the mobs have attacked and their powers are recharging. The pet can die because it does not have to live that long.
In teams it is even better because it can be buffed by defenders and controllers and its ability to absorb damage for the blaster multiplies. Do you begin to see why your idea is overpowered? It can die in one hit and still be overpowered for a balster soloing.
My final thing to say on your comments. [ QUOTE ]
5. (stolen idea) Give each single target attack a -10% res that lasts 5 seconds. This not only helps boost the blasters damage a minute amount but also allows the blaster to help a team. Thus encouraging teaming.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
( I know you mentioned you would give up this idea I just want to point out again that you forgot this would in effect increase damage.)
[/ QUOTE ]
Of course its not my idea. I put it up there because I don't expect all of my changes to even be considered or done all at once. So I am throwing out the most reasonable ideas that I can see being implimented with the least amount of coding so that something has a chance of being considered. Of course I would like to see all the changes made. I would like to have a little button that lets me kill all the mobs on a map but I don't think I will get it.
[ QUOTE ]
I begin to understand your lack of understanding. Take two mobs with no resistance. Which are the majority of mobs in the game. Current blasters would do 100 pts of damage. Blasters with the PvP change would still do 100 pts of damage.
If the mob has resistance, lets say 30% the mob would still take 100 pts of damage. Wait thats not more damage is it? No its consistent damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
TECHNICAL CORRECTION, HAS NO BEARING ON CENTRAL PONTS
I concur that a blaster does not do "more damage" when he has the 30% piercing. More damage gets through, though. And that's a very balance fix, IMO.
However, if it works like in PVP then I believe it's a guaranteed 30% through DMG RES. A floor is you will. So that 100 HP attack would do the following:
DMG RES -> HP
0%->100
10%->90
20%->80
30%->70
40%->60
50%->50
60%->40
70%->30
80%->30
90%->30
I have been useing blasters in PvP and it does not do extra damage to those with no resistance. It is not a -30% resistance but simply ignores 30% resistance.
hello :P
I'm hardly machiavelli of mmorpg's so i don't know anything about damage caps and precents and numbers blah blah blah. . .
But i do play a EN/EN blaster who i think kicks butt. The only problem i have has nothing to do with my damage, my range or my secondaries. I especially like my knock back and stun secondaries they buy me time, more so with some villians than others. What i hate is my hits or lack there of. i know i have to miss on occasion to spice up life a bit. . . but really why on earth can I go through all my 6 attacks sans AoE on a minion of equal level and miss every punch, blast, and mean look.
if i just missed 20% less and never missed more that twice in a row i'd be happy and die like 60% less. I know i can't take damage or give damage like a tank thats just well duh. If i wanted to be a tank i'd play a tank not a blapper. But facing off against one or two opponets even one or two levels higher 2 or more misses in a row can be just devestating. Tanks and scrappers can absorb the damage the from the misses. Even if it's just are primaries that hit more consistantly that would be peach.
But i mean really Aim and two ACC+ insp and a snipe should hit. but i've watched all to often miss.
this is what i think could bridge the gap.
Me 
[ QUOTE ]
Arcanaville said:
[ QUOTE ]
Although, against single targets, scrappers can do unholy amounts of damage if they HO themselves to +300%, use build up, and then score a crit (which bypasses the scrapper cap, btw).
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm starting to get irritated when people talk about the top 5 levels like it's the entire game. I've been playing for NINE MONTHS and I don't have Hamidon enhancements. 460 hours- if I played 9 to 5 as a job that would be three months of work. On just that one character.
It's bad enough when people ignore the pre-32 game. . .
[/ QUOTE ]
I guess its time to start putting smileys in my posts and dotting my "i"s with hearts again.
I was half-heartedly responding to someone asking what does more damage than a nova set off in a dumpster full of held villains. I originally said "inferno." I should have said "blizzard."
In fact, the power capable of doing the highest single target damage is recall. Fly to the top of the world, and then recall a level 50 tank. That beats even head splitter at the damage cap.
This works in the under level 32 game as well, and has wicked range.
[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 ]
In fact, the power capable of doing the highest single target damage is recall. Fly to the top of the world, and then recall a level 50 tank. That beats even head splitter at the damage cap.
This works in the under level 32 game as well, and has wicked range.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hmmm. TP Foe, 6-slotted with range enhancers, with a spotter for you on the ground. Pop a handful of yellows and grab the biggest bad guy you can find. (does any mob have TP resist?)
Ahem. Sorry. Back to the bickering! 
Yeah...much like mezs(but not exactly like), they higher the rank, the more resistant they are.
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
Thinking about bringing true balance to the force, er, I mean Archetypes, I was thinking of the AT spreadout and saw:
(AT, Dmg, HP)
Blaster: High/Low
Defender: Med/Med
Controller: Low/Low
Scrapper: High/Med
Tanker: Med/High
At the opposite end of the spectrum from Tankers are Blasters, as you can see. If this was truly balanced, shouldn't Blasters have High/Med ? I think this would solve a lot of the issues with recent blaster complaints on balance. (And squishyness). Just a though before I pass out...
Thanks!
[ QUOTE ]
(AT, Dmg, HP)
Blaster: High/Low
Defender: Med/Med
Controller: Low/Low
Scrapper: High/Med
Tanker: Med/High
[/ QUOTE ]
Lovely theory, realistically, the scale is more like:
(AT, Damage, HP, Defense)
Blaster: High, Low, Abysmal
Tanker: Medium-high, High, Obscene
Scrapper: High, Medium, High
Defender: Medium, Low, Medium
Controller (discounting pets): Very Low, Low, Very High
Making it relatively easy to see which AT gets the shaft.
The only semi-reasonable explanation for the disparity is that the blaster's AoE ability should offset the drawbacks. However, Defenders, Fire tankers, and Spines scrappers all also have good AoE capability.
Adding an 'dispersion' element to the AI that prevents high density clustering would definitely improve the Blaster's relative utility.
Two thoughts.
One is that Blasters/Defenders/Controllers all have the same HP, so I think Defenders would be Med/Low not Med/Med
Two, Blaster/Defenders/Controlllers seem to be in a section apart from Scrapper/Tankers because of the discrepancy between Range and Melee. There is no third melee hero (and none that could survive with the equivalent of the Controller Low/Low for what seem to be obvious reasons).
The way you have them sorted would I think be different if you didn't consider Melee v Ranged. So if you considered Damage to be the sorting criterion first and then HP secondary:
(AT, Dmg, HP)
Scrapper: High/Med
Blaster: High/Low
Tanker: Med/High
Defender: Med/Low
Controller: Low/Low
or HP primary and Dam secondary:
(AT, Dmg, HP)
Tanker: Med/High
Scrapper: High/Med
Blaster: High/Low
Defender: Med/Low
Controller: Low/Low
Either way, the polar opposite of the Tanker of the Scrapper would be the Controller not the Blaster. Note: There is no Med/Med AT anymore in the primary 5. That in itself might very well be the problem for people who want to play ranged but don't want the label squishy.
Here's how I see it:
RANGED
(AT, Dmg, HP)
Blaster: High/Low
Defender: Med/Low
Controller: Low/Low
MELEE
(AT, Dmg, HP)
Scrapper: High/Med
Tanker: Med/High
In a sick sorta way, those two meta-types, Ranged and Melee, are kinda balanced (although for symmetry Defs would be Med/Med and Controllers Low/High).
[ QUOTE ]
Yet another refrain of Im not saying it, but I really am. Sorry, but I am just not buying it.
[/ QUOTE ]
(Bully for you man since you were way off the mark anyhow it doesn't mind me a bit what you do or do not buy I am not here to convince you only to respond to your cluess post atm and to state what my opinions for fixing blasters are.)
[ QUOTE ]
You are mistaken. Scrappers and do as much if not more raw damage and can survive the attacks of 10+ times as many mobs. With the multiplying effect of AoEs this amounts 10 times greater survivability and much more damage the gap between them is, to put it simply, insanely large. Large to the point that it makes zero sense for them to even be on the same team fighting the same mobs.
[/ QUOTE ]
(Zero sence to you perhaps, one example of sence to the sane is that scrappers cant possibly do as much damage from range. Another is plain out variance of archtypes or balanced teams. I dont personally have trouble finding good teams with any archtype. Also I never argued that other archtypes where not more survivable at all only said that survivabitly is the issue here not damage and my ideas lend strength to survivability, which by your way of thinking increases DPS somehow.)
[ QUOTE ]
Unless you are talking about DPS without deaths your way off base here.)
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No I am not. Statesman has outright said scrappers are the highest damage AT. You may want to look at this thread where I compared the attacks of a spines scrapper vs a fire blaster. Even though the fire blaster is often cited as having the best damage output of any blaster it does not win even a single match up.
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showf...b=5&o=&fpart=3
From my own personal experience I have 3 level 50 characters, a tank, a controller and a blaster. The blaster has the lowest damage output by far even going full out. In fact it isnt even a close comparison. The controller does 2-3 times the sustained damage while the tank wins by an even larger margin.
[/ QUOTE ]
(Don't know what to tell you the Energy blaster I team with does the most damage of us all and yes Spiners are bad [censored] AOE as bad or better the fire perhaps but again it doesn't bother or hamper the blasters I play that a scrapper can do this. Personally I am for buff the blaster reasonably. )
[ QUOTE ]
What i hate is my hits or lack there of. i know i have to miss on occasion to spice up life a bit. . . but really why on earth can I go through all my 6 attacks sans AoE on a minion of equal level and miss every punch, blast, and mean look.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have a lvl 41 eng/eng blaster, and I notice the same problem. I find that there was a noticable decrease in accuracy when I reach the low 20s and a large decrease in accuracy when I hit the low 30s. Even with Aim + BU, my snipe misses almost 50% of the time and it's not uncommon for me to miss 4-5 times in a row, and it doesn't matter if I took a yellow insp or not. I remember another eng/* blaster complaint about the same thing. First I thought it might be just very bad luck, or perception (I might have just remembered the misses more often than I remembered the hits), but now makes me wonder if it's something more.
[ QUOTE ]
1. Impliment PvP damage resist bypass in PvE.
2. Increase the range of all primary powers to be greater than the Diameter of Foot Stomp. Greater.
3. Take all PbAoE status effects and toggles in Blaster Secondaries and make them summonable drops or target toggles. Other than cloaking device of course.
4. Make all current melee attacks have a range of 20 feet, either by changing the animations or just letting them have the range. Increase the damage on Melee AoE attack powers again.
5. (stolen idea) Give each single target attack a -10% res that lasts 5 seconds. This not only helps boost the blasters damage a minute amount but also allows the blaster to help a team. Thus encouraging teaming.
6. Swap the damage caps of blasters and scrappers.
7. Remove the rooting effect from blaster attacks.
8. Faster activation times on powers for blasters.
9. Making level 32 nukes into more useable AoE powers like Head Splitter or Full-Auto and less situational all end consuming powers.
[/ QUOTE ]
This list is insane. If all of these were implemented, Scrappers would go back to being less useful than Blasters in 100% of situations.
Since Statesman has posted a statistical analysis of Scrapper secondaries (proving that Dark Armor was actually weaker and all others were balanced) it also presented the fact that All scrapper secondaries allowed (through the use of Spines primary) could take on some pretty obscene numbers that make me as a blaster feel feeble. My question is this: Since Scrappers with their extra 100% damage over blasters not really needed, can blasters have it instead since a) our defense is our offense, b) ranged attacks do less damage (as Statesman said in the beginning of this thread) c) The original design of a blaster was to be the offensive juggernaut with Scrappers outputting damage BELOW them.
So again I ask, "Can the damage caps be switched where Scrappers are capped at 400% and blasters at 500%?
actually even better would be to cap our damage at the same level (450%) and increase our base attack damage to be more.
just my $0.02
Summer Heat
[ QUOTE ]
What's this I thought you said no increase in damage? hmm 30% unresistable damage to mobs = damage increase, did you not Sir in another post claim to be a lawyer in training?
Where then is your atteniton to detail with your own percivied facts?)
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I begin to understand your lack of understanding. Take two mobs with no resistance. Which are the majority of mobs in the game. Current blasters would do 100 pts of damage. Blasters with the PvP change would still do 100 pts of damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
(Like I mentioned I am not here to convince you rather then to state your errors, you miss the point that this adds damage to those with resistance which is added damage period.)
If the mob has resistance, lets say 30% the mob would still take 100 pts of damage. Wait thats not more damage is it? No its consistent damage.
(Wrong its more that 30% would not come off without your change consistant yes more damage yes I did not claim it would be more than a mob without resistance would take just that is it is more damage. The fact that you need to stretch really hard to come up with responses is plain.)
[ QUOTE ]
Think about it the aoe you lob from a safe range kills all but 2 while you run around a corner. A single pet cannont kill so many so fast, it has no aoe. The pet would not be able to mitigate damage to the level that this change of yours alone would do. Mull that over and if you use reason you should see the light.)
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So what you are saying is that Thunderous blast is overpowered? Wait maybe you missed my change to blaster nukes at the bottom I guess I will continue reading to see if you realized this arguement was pointless.
[/ QUOTE ]
(Nah I am fine with thunder Blast man if you wnat that play electric, its one of the things that adds flavor for electric blasters.)
[ QUOTE ]
I am talking about one pet with blaster hp's not perma with some range and some small aggro managment. This would be about no differant then teaming with a second blaster except it would protect you.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wow, it has ranged agro management. Extremely overpowered. If it ties up one enemy that just negated all damage (100% resistance in a way) from one target. That is pretty damn powerfull for a power. That is why Phantom Army is considered crowd controll and this is what you are asking for. You are asking for crowd controll.
[/ QUOTE ]
(No You are just not getting it and its not supriseing to me as you simpley don't wish to. one pet with blaster hp's and some not 100% some small aggro effect that need not even overpower your own would be fine by me acutally overpowered? Not hardly For a look at overpwoered changes see you own Ideas and most importantly the fact that you want them all for starters.)
[ QUOTE ]
Again you forget that you claimed that your changes make no damage increase in your most recent post to me Sir, Not only is this a damage increase for melee aoe it also has the strong possiblity for lameness effect.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually I made it clear that I was for increasing melee AoE several times. I even explained why.
[/ QUOTE ]
(You also claimed your changes added no damage! Erm?? there you go Sir thats what I was saying is that you forgot what you said.)
[ QUOTE ]
This abiltiy above your suggest alone takes out as much risk then one Pet with blaster hit points.
[/ QUOTE ]
Explain to me how being able to summon and drop Hot Feet takes out more risk than an agro management pet. You have absolutely no concept of how overpowering your idea is.
(Feeling is mutual other than pointing out that your post didnt mention only hot feet but many more powers in this change I need not further clarify myself to you as you will miss or igore it most likely anyhow.)
[ QUOTE ]
6. Swap the damage caps of blasters and scrappers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Hmmm Increase Damage ? Could be!)
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I love this. Really. So if I take a blaster with a higher damage cap and fire an attack it will suddenly do more damage? No, it won't. It makes it so that the potential is there but the cap does not magically make blaster attacks more powerfull.
[/ QUOTE ]
(Again your just being silly here the potential for more damage exisists if/when you slotted and or you where buffed.)
[ QUOTE ]
8. Faster activation times on powers for blasters.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Sure thing but btw this would up DPS and thus hmm well Increase Damage!)
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I see you have confused damage with DPS. Need to stop doing that as they are not the same thing. Did I say that it would not increase DPS? No I didn't. Increased activation times will not make blaster attacks do more damage. It does not increase damage. It does increase DPS but don't confuse that for damage. If an attack is not one shotting an LT it will not one shot an LT no matter how fast the attack is performed.
[/ QUOTE ]
(I aggree mostly with what you point out here bottom line is you are deadler and if not increasing damage out right you are still in effect increasing DPS, in truth though this is an ok Idea.)
[ QUOTE ]
9. Making level 32 nukes into more useable AoE powers like Head Splitter or Full-Auto and less situational all end consuming powers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[/ QUOTE ]
([censored] ? As I reread this one I realize that I glossed over it without enough thought myself. It alone is insane. I gotta say this alone is better then a small resistance to one power and a blaster hp pet.
You Sir Have no concept of balance if you cannot see that.
And BTW it is the now soon to be non perm click powers that scrappers get which sucks thier endo and are becoming O' Crap powers like Blasters booms and not the other way around.)
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
First don't compare primary and secondary sets in regards to final powers. If you want to compare the scrapper secondary powers, then compare them to blaster secondary powers. Except for Total focus those scrapper secondaries are much better.
[/ QUOTE ]
(I most certinaly will compare them as they are the price or oh crap powers of each archtype it matters not that for Scrappers they are on the defensive side for blasters they are on the offensive side they have the determental effects you referanced blaster side thus I brought them up.)
[ QUOTE ]
So, what you are saying is that if we had a ranged attack that was similar to Head splitter in damage and made into a small AoE cone or somewhat it would somehow unbalance us compared to scrappers that already have headsplitter?
[/ QUOTE ]
(No I am saying that if all 32 nukes where ranged aoe's that would be far more unbalancing to the set then my Ideas.)
[ QUOTE ]
It removes a situational power and allows blasters to once again perform their role from range.
[/ QUOTE ]
(Actually though it does do what you sy it also takes away too much risk and cheapens the elcetric blaster already commonly percived as one of the weakest choices. Againa I am about more variety not less.)
[ QUOTE ]
An amazing concept. It allows blasters to have another power to cycle when they want to kill bosses. An amazing concept. Somehow though this is unbalanced?
[/ QUOTE ]
(Yep though you are blind to it .)
[/ QUOTE ]
Once again you have not said why these things are unbalanced. You have just said "OH MY GOD ITS UNBALANCED MY IDEA IS BETTER"
(Same as yourself only I stay on topic and actually defend and elaborate on points you inquire on rather then choosing misdirection and ignoring other ideas entirely. Remember we are talking about opnions here and we are both speaking from our own experiances in game you have not given hard #'s or facts yourself Concern just your ideas and opinions. This is acase of the pot calling the kettle black.)
[ QUOTE ]
I already explained why your idea is ungodly good and overpowering but you have so far simply repeated your assertion that the powers are overpowered or said that in a round about way that the changes would add damage to the blaster class.
[/ QUOTE ]
(This is merely your perception I have backed my case up and stand by it I repeat myself only to assure you I have my own reasons for what I choose as the ways to fix the blasters as you do and I am fine that neither of us are wont to agree.)
[ QUOTE ]
Which of course was the point of the changes. To improve blasters without adding damage but allowing them to put out more damage. Can you understand that concept.
[/ QUOTE ]
(Well I think I understand where you are coming from as best as I am like to and I disagree with it.)
[ QUOTE ]
The changes also reinforce the concept that blasters should stay at range until they wish to close by placing their defensive powers at range rather than makeing them get in melee to use their manipulation powers.
However rather than saying why range is a bad thing or why haveing a non-situational attack power is overpowering you have just spouted off you opinion with no supporting arguements.
[/ QUOTE ]
(The agruments are all there for you in black and white this is amtter of opinion on both sides and we are not like to agree on it is all.)
As to why your idea is so overpowering that it will never happen, think about summoning your pet from around the corner to absorb the alpha strike (including mezzes and AoE damage) so that you can round the corner and perform your alpha strike with absolutely no fear of reprisal because you the mobs have attacked and their powers are recharging. The pet can die because it does not have to live that long.
(Hmm Then tell me how it is that Controller Pets actually get folks killed by aggroing the next group over there would be risk as much or greater risk infact thenyour susgestions.)
[/ QUOTE ]In teams it is even better because it can be buffed by defenders and controllers and its ability to absorb damage for the blaster multiplies. Do you begin to see why your idea is overpowered? It can die in one hit and still be overpowered for a blaster soloing
[/ QUOTE ]
(I can see where you are coming from better then you can for me I think none the less this doesn't overpower the blaster anymore then the combined ideas you had with team buffs would infact it does less.)
[ QUOTE ]
My final thing to say on your comments. [ QUOTE ]
5. (stolen idea) Give each single target attack a -10% res that lasts 5 seconds. This not only helps boost the blasters damage a minute amount but also allows the blaster to help a team. Thus encouraging teaming.
[/ QUOTE ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
( I know you mentioned you would give up this idea I just want to point out again that you forgot this would in effect increase damage.)
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Of course its not my idea. I put it up there because I don't expect all of my changes to even be considered or done all at once.
[/ QUOTE ]
(Fair enough but that was not your tune a few posts back where you wanted them all as a start for fixing blasters, if that as changed then I'd say good for you.)
[ QUOTE ]
So I am throwing out the most reasonable ideas that I can see being implimented with the least amount of coding so that something has a chance of being considered.
[/ QUOTE ]
(This makes good sence and yeah I agree with you there this is how you feel.)
[ QUOTE ]
Of course I would like to see all the changes made. I would like to have a little button that lets me kill all the mobs on a map but I don't think I will get it.
[/ QUOTE ]
(Right well at least you admit here you want an easy mode. I don't I too want help for blasters just not that all you do. We are both entitled to our opinions )
It's my theory that scrapper damage is capped higher than blaster damage to: A) Create a roughly equivalent DPS between the two in multiple-mob situations and B) Further enhance the scrapper's "boss killer" role.
Inductive reasoning as follows:
When fighting a large group, the blaster can continuously pump out ranged attacks without spending much time positioning himself. This (plus their noteable disposition towards AoEs) suggests that blasters are better suited at doing damage to multiple minions. Overall the blaster is throwing more raw damage downrange than the scrapper, usually multiplied over groups of targets.
When fighting a single target, a scrapper excels over a blaster as the scrapper must spend an initial period closing with the target, then may hope to remain there. Switching targets and repositioning for melee reach slows the scrapper's attacks down, decreasing DPS (the noteable exception is the Spines scrapper, who is known to have excellent lethality for this reason). So, a planted scrapper works best against a single target... particularly high-ranking ones, what with the criticals... rather than multiple targets.
If my theory over design intent is accurate, then the next step I see is that blasters need an inherent method of staving off multi-mob ranged retribution if their AoEs aren't one-shotting people.
That is to say: "If my role as a blaster is to blow up rooms full of villains, then I need SOME built-in defenses when tankers and controllers aren't around." I'm sure fire blasters will agree, especially with their DoTs keeping foes mightly hostile towards them even after the initial whammies.
So, we players have been forced to adapt to what we've been given. Realizing that melee attacks invite teleports to the hospital, we have typically chosen to ignore many melee attacks and instead pick up defensive pool powers for the slots traditionally reserved for our secondary sets. Devices and Energy are exceptions, as they have some excellent support abilities that do not rely upon dangerous melee use.
Anyway, I think the damage caps between scrappers and blasters aren't really the issue. I think it's that blasters have been told that they're the gunboats when they're really more like cannons mounted on tricycles.
Tranth you still have not supported your position. You have repeated your opinions again but have not supported your statement that the ideas are overpowered yet unless it is your contention that a blaster being able to deliver damage from range quickly is unbalanced.
Let me clarify that when I say I would not mind a little button to kill all the mobs, I would not mind it on any AT because frankly I enjoy seeing mobs die. This is a vice and it is one of the reasons why I enjoy playing max payne 2 with god mod on just so I can stand still and slowly shoot people in the head and enjoy every slowed second of it. A little sick? Maybe but it has no relevance because when I suggest an idea of mine is balanced you had better believe that I am suggesting it to balance the game and not to give a single AT a god mode.
Honestly if I was looking to make the game easier you wouldn't see me supporting a nerf to enhancements trying to make the game harder.
Okay enough defending my credibility.
You want to agree to disagree on alot of points without actually debating on them fine.
Lets see if we can take issues one at a time and find out what is so unbalancing about each one.
[ QUOTE ]
No I am saying that if all 32 nukes where ranged aoe's that would be far more unbalancing to the set then my Ideas.)
[/ QUOTE ]
Okay so you are against all ranged 32 nukes. However you don't say why it is unbalanced. You simply say that it is. Do you understand why I am saying that you are not making a case? You said previously: [ QUOTE ]
Nah I am fine with thunder Blast man if you wnat that play electric, its one of the things that adds flavor for electric blasters.
[/ QUOTE ]
Why is this ranged 32 nuke okay but the rest are not? What makes this nuke balanced? Is there some compromise you are looking for? Is there a compromise that comes along with this nuke? Does it do less damage? Does it have a smaller AoE? Please explain why you think that ranged nukes are unbalanced.
Okay, One thing that really peeved me is in regards to your comment about having ranged manipulation powers.
[ QUOTE ]
Explain to me how being able to summon and drop Hot Feet takes out more risk than an agro management pet. You have absolutely no concept of how overpowering your idea is.
[/ QUOTE ]
That is what I said.
[ QUOTE ]
(Feeling is mutual other than pointing out that your post didnt mention only hot feet but many more powers in this change I need not further clarify myself to you as you will miss or igore it most likely anyhow.)
[/ QUOTE ]
Here is your response. You notice that you have not given any reason why any of the manipulation powers being ranged will be unbalanced. What you have said is that they are unbalanced in your opinion with no supporting arguements. Yes I am totally aware that I included more than just Hot Feet. I was merely giving you an example as to what I was talking about considering that you may have misinterpreted it.
So I give you a power to work with and instead of showing how it is unbalanced you come back and say "Ha! Your only useing one power as an example and your idea includes more than that and that is why it is unbalanced." Try again.
[ QUOTE ]
(The agruments are all there for you in black and white this is amtter of opinion on both sides and we are not like to agree on it is all.)
[/ QUOTE ]
The arguements are like the ones above, opinions and not arguements. If you want to say in your opinion something is not balanced that is fine. If you make a flat declaritive statement then please back it up with some nice supporting arguements.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're thinking too small. If you have TF, why do you need bonesmasher?
[/ QUOTE ]
Me personally? I don't. Other blasters might want both, and I don't begrudge them that. For those that want bonesmasher, are you willing to take away bonesmasher and give them total focus at level 10, and call it even? Cause the people that took bonesmasher, I don't think they are going to be happy with "we took away bonesmasher, but don't worry, in 28 levels you can still have total focus."
I think you are thinking too "50"
[/ QUOTE ]
Talk about overpowered and unfair to other blaster secondaries.
Total Focus is what a level 38 power should be. I say give the other sets somethign similar at least have magnitude to neutralize a boss in one application.