[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
they are supposed to be kings of ranged damage 
[/ QUOTE ]
Kings (and Queens where applicable) of damage. Period. As for the whole issue of primaries and secondaries... unlike the other ATs, there is no clear demarcation of roles for the primary and secondary Blaster powersets. There are support, ranged, melee and melee-ranged attacks spread throughout the both.
[/ QUOTE ]
The Blaster is an offensive juggernaut. This hero can deal a ton of damage from a distance. But the Blaster must be careful because hes somewhat fragile compared to other heroes. The Blaster cant stand toe to toe with most opponents in Melee for long. His best defense is a great offense.
I will continue to quote this every time someone says otherwise. This is not from any manual...this is not from some post dated 3 years ago. This is the description that is on the Character Creator RIGHT NOW. I created my first character...a Blaster...because of what this said. Now I want the Devs to live up to their promise.
I consider this a form of written contract. THEY said 'ton of damage from a distance'...not me. This is what THEY decided that EVERY player would read as they were considering what type of character to make up. Considering the changes over the past few years EVERY player who made up a Blaster thinking they were going to do 'tons of ranged damage' has been lied to. Flat...out...lied...to.
I consider this a breach of contract. Our agreement was that my Blaster...not 'some Blaster sets'...not 'ok at range but more damage and thus safer in Melee'...MY Blaster would do 'tons of damage at range' and 'cant stand toe to toe with most opponents in Melee for long'. They haven't lived up to their end of the bargain IMHO.
I call shenanigans on the Devs for all of those Blaster players who have been lied to since this statement became less than true.
"Comics, you're not a Mastermind...you're an Overlord!"
[ QUOTE ]
All ATs, all combinations within each, are supposed to be able to solo. That was a stated goal of the developers several issues ago. [ QUOTE ]
and so they can. But it also has been stated that not every AAT is meant to be able to solo at the same ability or every mission. A blaster can solo the majority of the missions at heroic level.
Some blasters can solo at a higher difficulty (I run at mid level to minimize debt), whereas some sets need to solo at a lower level. This is the case for a lot of ATs though. My Earth/Storm/Ice controller solos an invincible, but my MC/FF/Primal still does heroic because I'm not set up for damage and it becomes tedius otherwise.
I'm not saying that blasters don't need some loving, because I agree that they do. I also believe that the secondaries need a lot of looking into for balance. Now, that isn't to say that all secondaries are bad in all cases, there are some good synergies with secondaries that people consider bad, just that there are some that outperform others and don't have as many synergy problems.
[ QUOTE ]
The Blaster is an offensive juggernaut. This hero can deal a ton of damage from a distance. But the Blaster must be careful because hes somewhat fragile compared to other heroes. The Blaster cant stand toe to toe with most opponents in Melee for long. His best defense is a great offense.
[/ QUOTE ]
The devs, in a word, are lazy. Otherwise they'd have updated that description when they updated it here:
[ QUOTE ]
The Blaster is an offensive juggernaut. Whether up close or afar, he can deal out tremendous amounts of damage. In comparison to the other Archetypes, the Blaster is by far the most damaging to the enemy. But the Blaster is quite fragile; this Archetype has relatively few hit points. Blaster heroes must be on their guard before getting into combat; while their immense power can overcome most foes, alone they are quite vulnerable. The Blaster can turn the tide of a conflict, but they need their friends to help them succeed.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't mind the fragility issue. Never have. It's the price Blasters paid for their offense, but they are not by far the most damaging AT in comparison to the other ATs. Especially when risk levels are taken into account. Give them what they paid for or give them their change back. As for not actually being "all about range" I don't have a problem with that either, although they really do need to change the character creation descriptions. Most new folks aren't going to read the website or study the forums, let alone "know better" like folks who've been here for a while. They're going to go by what the game's intro info tells them.
[ QUOTE ]
Sure, there are times where scrappers can outdamage me, single target I'm usually behind the scrapper...
[/ QUOTE ]
Which is exactly something that should never, ever, occur. How close do Scrappers come to outdamaging you? Do they outdamage Blasters? Do they come close? Okay, now, how close do Blasters come to outsurviving Scrappers? Do they outsurvive Scrappers? Do they even come close?
Your Tanker is noticeably safer than your Blaster and your Blaster noticeably does more damage than your Tanker. How is it that Scrappers are noticeably safer than Blasters, yet Blasters do not noticeably do more damage?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i'm not saying secondaries are ranged-only, or melee-only or even support-only but secondaries are designed to improve blaster survivability not by enhancing their damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
And where do you get that Idea? Honestly my Blasters survive just fine using a Multitude of secondaries and move just as fast as scrappers solo. Give them a team and they can do even more than that.
[/ QUOTE ]
you said it "give them a team and they can do even more than that" exactly my point
[/ QUOTE ]
Well yea, thats how this game works. Solo you can do fine, Teaming you can do things you never could Solo. I dont get Spawns of 16 solo, but Im not Supposed to challenge them anyways Solo. Teaming really brings out the potential of Blasters just like it brings out the Potential of anything else. If youre too blind to understand that then you already are a lost cause.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if you want to try inferno or blizzard, i'm okay that's really great but not like it was before ED or back when we could kill 50 foes in one nuke. I mean, i still use inferno sometimes cause it's fun and everything but it's definitly reducing my DPS if you consider the end crash. AR Tier 9 is different ^^
[/ QUOTE ]
If you want to compare Pre-ED to post ED then Blasters were pointless back then too since you could have a Fire Tank Burn Everything to death. Making that kind of comparison now is a skewed viewpoint and not one conducive to actually making a real improvement.
Wah wah, Im weak cause of ED. Get over it.
[/ QUOTE ]
fire tankers are not supposed to do that, they deserved a nerf. the nerf was too big really but that's devs choice ^^
I'm not saying, ED was a bad thing, it just broke blasters because it reduced damage by half ^^
Defiance was the response to that theorically 
[/ QUOTE ]
No, Defiance among other Inherents, was the Devs incoming answer to Villain Inherents. I believe it was actually a Dev who said they felt blasters and defenders were the most balanced that they got inherents that werent the core of their sets.
And it Didnt Break Blasters, Damage wasnt Reduced by Half. Any idiot who 6 slotted damage wasnt doing nearly as much as someone who 4 slotted damage and 2 slotted Accuracy. PLUS now we have IOs, and Blasters are doing more damage faster more accurately and with less endurance costs than they ever were. NOT TO MENTION! Theyve been Buffed Twice since then as well.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also the fact that Blaster Nukes can Entirely Eliminate a Group of Enemies before there is even a reaction fire is very nice, Who needs DPS when you one shot almost everything with a Single Power?
[/ QUOTE ]
and then you're out of the fight for the next group
[/ QUOTE ]
After I just decimated a Group in a few seconds that may have taken a minute or two. And youre not outta the fight for the next group, Chew a blue or wait what is it, 15 seconds? And your endurance recovery kicks back in. Most blaster secondaries also have an early answer to endurance issues so even if you do blow your bar you can recover or work off of that small amount you have anyways.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i just want to give blasters a damage boost because some scrappers and controllers are outdamaging us and that's just wrong
blasters are supposed to be THE king of ranged massive damage ... that's the only thing they are designed to do ^^
[/ QUOTE ]
They are the King of Ranged Damage. No Scrapper, No Controller can match what a Blaster can do at a range or in burst damage in General. Certain Sets are underperforming, certain sets in other ATs are overpowered, but to make that as your basis for arguing that blasters need a buff is a weak place to start.
1, just ONE Controller Set can match blaster damage, and it takes 39 levels to get close to what a blaster can do from 12 to 50.
And scrappers are the king of DPS but Blasters can outrange their damage, and add in their melee attacks their Burst can overwhelm anything a scrapper can do. DPS doesnt matter when everything dies in the first 3 attacks, which quite a few blasters can manage.
Blasters main role on a team is large AoE and Single Target Burst to quickly remove threats, most of the Blaster sets can accomplish this.
[/ QUOTE ]
that's right, i'm talking "in general" maybe ice and fire are just fine like that. but spines need a nerf, some controllers too and/or blaster primaries need a boost (except fire and ice)
[/ QUOTE ]
Spines Needs a Nerf? Hah. Some controllers too? Which Ones? About the *only* one that can come close is a Fire/Kin and it takes nearly 42 levels to achieve that power. Yes, Blaster Primaries need to be Tweaked, Specifically Energy, AR, Electric, with a Minor Damage Boost to Archery. Other than that Blasters are fine.
Quite a few bits here. First off, Defiance (first known as Desperation) was added to address issues with the AT. Not because of villains and/or their inherents. Defenders were that one AT that's fairly balanced. Inter- but not so much intra-AT speaking. They're also one of the few ATs held to "the deal".
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, Blaster Primaries need to be Tweaked, Specifically Energy, AR, Electric, with a Minor Damage Boost to Archery. Other than that Blasters are fine.
[/ QUOTE ]
Uhm... yeah... not so much.
[ QUOTE ]
Defiance is being looked at for pretty much one reason -- Blasters are the only AT who in all combinations perform below expectations in PvE.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well damn, lets make one of the best ATs better. Im not gonna Argue, Please buff blasters more.
says who?
I never saw any statement saying that blasters aren't "supposed" to solo.
Also never saw any "Kings of ranged damage" label either. Just some bs about being "Juggernauts"....
Last time I checked Juggernauts are unstoppable forces to be reckoned with. Blasters on the other hand are decidedly stoppable. If you're smart you just toss out the descriptions and look and what the POWERS actually do.
[ QUOTE ]
Well damn, lets make one of the best ATs better. Im not gonna Argue, Please buff blasters more.
[/ QUOTE ]
Excellent. We are all in total agreement.
Just one thing... When the hell did they buff blasters in the first place? I must have missed that one.
.....damned necromancers....
@Deadedge and @Dead Edge
Peace through power! Freedom is slavery!
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a yo-yo
anyone else other then me think that Statesmen has forgotten this thread by now?
I feel like im wasting my time just by looking at it.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
then they would out-damage the Scrapper even more if they use their Secondary.
[/ QUOTE ]
blasters secondary is NOT based on melee !!! it's support !!!
[/ QUOTE ]
As a matter of fact, when the blaster archetype was originally created, it was explicitly created with a "Ranged Damage" primary and a "Melee Damage" secondary. They were explicitly called that. The names were changed from "Melee" to "Manipulation" after the fact, but the melee damage heritage is blatantly obvious in the design of the manipulation powersets.
But the original concept for the blaster - a concept that was never retracted right up to release - was for the archetype to do "Damage, and More Damage." The problem is that fundamentally, blasters do not really get the full effect of the "More Damage" part of their archetype definition unless they are in melee range.
Its the fundamental flaw in the archetype's design, going all the way back to the invention of the archetype system itself, that has never been fully or directly addressed by the devs to this day.
[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 ]
anyone else other then me think that Statesmen has forgotten this thread by now?
I feel like im wasting my time just by looking at it.
[/ QUOTE ]
considering he's not part of NCSoft, I would imagine so.
LOL did even he give up on the game?
Well now I feel better. At least now I feel as though the AT...or the description...or the powersets...or SOMETHING is wrong besides my method of thinking.
"Comics, you're not a Mastermind...you're an Overlord!"
It's nice in theory to say buff X power set but not Y when Y's only advantage of X is the buff you want to give X. You cannot take away the advantage Y has without giving something in return.
Example: You cannot give another set the damage of Fire bringing it up to par with Fire, without reimbursing Fire for the lost ground it is going to have. The under performing sets have side effects to their powers which are supposed to be the trade off for the lack of damage (slows, end drain, etc).
You cannot buff one without buffing them all. You can call out for a damage buff to them yes, but you have to buff them all the keep the secondary effects not more of an advantage.
I only took fire because it was pure damage when the game came out, I only play it now because it is pure damage. You cannot take away it's bonus damage over other sets without some sort of reimbursement, like reduction of all of its power recharges to compensate, making it a faster set than others.
Wassabi Grav/Kin 50 (before badges/accolades were in game) Pinnacle
Miss Command Bots/Traps 50 Justice
*others left off due to space issues
[ QUOTE ]
LOL did even he give up on the game?
[/ QUOTE ]
No.
He's just not a part of NCsoft.
Jack Emmert (Statesman) is part of Cryptic.
NCsoft bought out Cryptic's stake in CoX. Thus, Jack no longer has any say over what goes on here.
Head of TRICK, the all Trick Arrow and Traps SG
Part of the Repeat Offenders
Still waiting for his Official BackAlleyBrawler No-Prize
[ QUOTE ]
Well damn, lets make one of the best ATs better. Im not gonna Argue, Please buff blasters more.
[/ QUOTE ]
One of the best? What the hell are you even talking about? Or is this perspective PvP-based?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well damn, lets make one of the best ATs better. Im not gonna Argue, Please buff blasters more.
[/ QUOTE ]
One of the best? What the hell are you even talking about? Or is this perspective PvP-based?
[/ QUOTE ]
And PvE-based. Soloing on Invincible ain't a problem for my Blaster.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well damn, lets make one of the best ATs better. Im not gonna Argue, Please buff blasters more.
[/ QUOTE ]
One of the best? What the hell are you even talking about? Or is this perspective PvP-based?
[/ QUOTE ]
And PvE-based. Soloing on Invincible ain't a problem for my Blaster.
[/ QUOTE ]
That doesn't mean it's one the best ATs. And try it on Unyielding. Spawns are bigger.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well damn, lets make one of the best ATs better. Im not gonna Argue, Please buff blasters more.
[/ QUOTE ]
One of the best? What the hell are you even talking about? Or is this perspective PvP-based?
[/ QUOTE ]
And PvE-based. Soloing on Invincible ain't a problem for my Blaster.
[/ QUOTE ]
That doesn't mean it's one the best ATs. And try it on Unyielding. Spawns are bigger.
[/ QUOTE ]
That I will. Sounds like fun.
A Blaster's last words....
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well damn, lets make one of the best ATs better. Im not gonna Argue, Please buff blasters more.
[/ QUOTE ]
One of the best? What the hell are you even talking about? Or is this perspective PvP-based?
[/ QUOTE ]
And PvE-based. Soloing on Invincible ain't a problem for my Blaster.
[/ QUOTE ]
That doesn't mean it's one the best ATs. And try it on Unyielding. Spawns are bigger.
[/ QUOTE ]
That I will. Sounds like fun.
[/ QUOTE ]
better for PL'ing with
All ATs, all combinations within each, are supposed to be able to solo. That was a stated goal of the developers several issues ago. Some ATs, and some combos within ATs, solo better than others. But ALL ATs and combos do better on a team. Stating that blasters are supposed to be a teaming AT simply because they perform better on a team is a misnomer. Even spines scrappers and fire tanks get better (XP|Inf)/min on a team, even if its only because of increased spawn size.
Within blasters, different primaries and secondaries create different synergies. If I carry enough greens insps, my blaster has a better (XP/Inf)/min rate than any of my other characters, including my BS/Regen. It also has the highest rate of debt collection and pay off.