Thanks for the response, States. Apologies for the bombarding and all.
The issue isn't quite limited to the Scrapper vs. Blaster debate, though--some of the Defenders, through a combination of slotting and buffs/debuffs, can easily match or surpass even a cleverly-played Blaster. Radiation and Dark come immediately to mind. Any thoughts on whether that will be factored into the evaluation as well?
[ QUOTE ]
Secondly, I have no intention of removing melee attacks - it's just a "perception" by some Blasters that some of the Secondary Sets aren't as useful as Devices or Energy Manipulation. This is a rather frequent refrain in PM's (and the occasional forum post). This is something that we should also explore...we want all the Secondary sets to be fun.
[/ QUOTE ]
Whew....thanks for clearing this up, Statesman. I got a bit worried after reading the first paragraph there.
Statesman I applaud your efforts. I know you are crazy busy and I appreciate the fact that you will take a good hard look at blasters for the future.
I'd personally like a shoulder kitty with laser beam eyes. I think that would solve the blaster issue in and of its own.
The Legion of Freedom
[ QUOTE ]
Now, the issue is more specifically - what does a Blaster do that a Scrapper can't already do?
[/ QUOTE ]
So I guess there's no definite answer on that yet, huh?
Actually, to me that's AoE damage, but I think most blasters are stuck on the "omg scrappers get 500% cap and we only 400%, we are doooooomed!" 
[ QUOTE ]
Secondly, I have no intention of removing melee attacks - it's just a "perception" by some Blasters that some of the Secondary Sets aren't as useful as Devices or Energy Manipulation. This is a rather frequent refrain in PM's (and the occasional forum post). This is something that we should also explore...we want all the Secondary sets to be fun.
[/ QUOTE ]
A) I aggree that melee attacks should stay, but they also should be made more worthwhile.
B) The "perception" you talk about is by the people who play the game, so it's really the final say in what is fun/works and what isn't. Now, of course sometimes we make mistakes but when the entire Blaster player base considers a powerset subpar then it is in fact so.
[ QUOTE ]
I'd personally like a shoulder kitty with laser beam eyes. I think that would solve the blaster issue in and of its own.
[/ QUOTE ] *drool* laser shooting shoulder kitty for the win!
Cool Thanks! I love playing a Blapper. I love Meleeing stuff with my Controllers, Defenders, and Scrappers and they all function at it very well. So why should I have to stop hitting stuff when I log in my Blaster?
[ QUOTE ]
Ranged damage. Now, the issue is more specifically - what does a Blaster do that a Scrapper can't already do?
[/ QUOTE ]
Thats a damn good question. But saying: "Ranged damage" and then saying: "I have no intention of removing melee attacks" Raises even more questions from everyone else I'm sure, and they're Not going to be the good kind either. 
I personally like how Scorus addressed it here
I know people bring up the 500% damage cap for scrappers and I've heard that this is because being in melee is much more dangerous. So what if blaster melee attacks had the 500% damage cap while the ranged had the normal 400% cap? (Of course, that seems like it would be fairly difficult to code)
[ QUOTE ]
I went away from the computer to check on some CoV stuff and *wham* I received 5 or so PM's asking "what is the Blaster's role?"
Answer - Ranged damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the definition. Very much appreciated. However, if our role is ranged damage, why so much melee in the secondaries? Currently, the only Blaster secondary I will play is Devices because of the sheer amount of melee in other sets.
[ QUOTE ]
Now, the issue is more specifically - what does a Blaster do that a Scrapper can't already do?
[/ QUOTE ]
Currently nothing.
[ QUOTE ]
Or, even worse, is a Scrapper inherently "stronger" than a Blaster.
[/ QUOTE ]
In the game's current form - yes. Having Blaster damage with incredible defense makes them stronger IMO.
[ QUOTE ]
We want each Archetype to have a well defined role, and part of our Scrapper testing is aimed directly at this.
[/ QUOTE ]
I can tell you from experience that the Blaster's role of ranged damage is currently broken. There's nothing that we can do that another AT can't do safer than we can - that's just wrong.
[ QUOTE ]
Secondly, I have no intention of removing melee attacks - it's just a "perception" by some Blasters that some of the Secondary Sets aren't as useful as Devices or Energy Manipulation. This is a rather frequent refrain in PM's (and the occasional forum post). This is something that we should also explore...we want all the Secondary sets to be fun.
[/ QUOTE ]
Personally, most of the fun is gone when I have to venture into melee range. For someone to even make good use of these melee powers, they have to take the Fighting pool. No player should have to use power pools to preform their ATs role.
What we can do that a scrapper can't already do?
Let's see... I'd say the only real advantage we have over them isn't ball AoE [they get those in point-blank form, which isn't a problem for them], but rather our extended cones. Sure, the damage is a tiny bit lower, but blaster cones can easily hit an entire group if well used. Only 2 "final" powers of scrappers can do this, but with less damage. As things are right now, our edge is in the full-auto/Flamethrower and other similar combos.
However, as torakage said, the biggest problem is that its not just blaster vs. scrapper... its blaster vs tanker, blaster vs defender, and even blaster vs fire-imps... and that's on the offensive side!
I wouldn't mind seeing some of the melees dissapear personally, but if we're revamped so that they're worth taking and using instead [the non energy melees that is], that's just as good, if not better.
Some of the more problematic ones are Blazing Aura and Combustion; both of which have slow animations or slow DoT as WELL as requiring the blaster to get himself surrounded. I don't think anyone who's wanted to eliminate melee from blasters was refering to Total Focus or Havoc punch
Most of the secondary sets are not fun.
Too much mez makes melee too risky. Getting one shotted doesn't help either. In a good team, yes, you can get away with some melee, but if the team is that good, you should have nice clumps of groups begging for AoE damage.
On the subject of "refusing to remove melee", now your speaking as a developer not as a gamer.
Ok, why should I melee? When a Kheldian can do that too. You know, blast then swap to dwarf form and melee?
If I melee all the time, why not play a scrapper, then I get mez protection, a higher damage cap and better defenses.
I have a blapper I leveled to 28. It was somewhat painful but I had some fun, but I stopped playing that character. No point when I can run a Kheldian.
Kheldians infringe too much on blasters anyways.
H: Blaster 50, Defender 50, Tank 50, Scrapper 50, Controller 50, PB 50, WS 50
V: Brute 50, Corruptor 50, MM 50, Dominator 50, Stalker 50, AW 50, AS 50
Top 4: Controller, Brute, Scrapper, Corruptor
Bottom 4: (Peacebringer) way below everything else, Mastermind, Dominator, Blaster
CoH in WQHD
[ QUOTE ]
For someone to even make good use of these melee powers, they have to take the Fighting pool.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is bull. I manage just fine without the Fighting pool, and most of the */Eng builds that I've seen do so, as well. I haven't heard anyone make this assertion before, and it certainly doesn't match my experiences.
Now, if you were to say that good use of melee powers requires Stealth/SS, I might have to agree there....but so do Inferno, Time Bomb, Blaze, Firebreath (as an opener)...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For someone to even make good use of these melee powers, they have to take the Fighting pool.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is bull. I manage just fine without the Fighting pool, and most of the */Eng builds that I've seen do so, as well. I haven't heard anyone make this assertion before, and it certainly doesn't match my experiences.
Now, if you were to say that good use of melee powers requires Stealth/SS, I might have to agree there....but so do Inferno, Time Bomb, Blaze, Firebreath (as an opener)...
[/ QUOTE ]
I've read plenty of people say otherwise. One player being able to do it is way different than the majority. Similar to the way some Blasters don't have a lot of problems post-lvl38 but the majority of others do.
Don't let your personal playstyle and build cloud your vision of what the majority of players experience.
[ QUOTE ]
the biggest problem is that its not just blaster vs. scrapper... its blaster vs tanker, blaster vs defender, and even blaster vs fire-imps... and that's on the offensive side!
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't forget Phantasms!
My Phantasms were doing 100 Dmg Energy Torrents right before I Respec'd out of them. ...Get 3 of them puppies going and you're back to the Old Days of the original Smoke-Nader Tank Mage
Well Energy manip. has the advantage of actually stunning the enemy. This is a huge advantage. A lot harder to do with fire's horribly slow animations.
Many of the melee powers as they are currently are an excercise in utter frustration, often giving a group of villains plenty of time to stack those incoming-attack-icons between your clicking the button and them actually dying. Even when jousting, there's still plenty of risk, since their attacks will kick in when you get close just the same.
If blaster-melee is made more blaster-friendly, then it could become a very interesting option. Otherwise its just a defenseless scrapper with somewhat kindof higher damage [unless crits kick in] that can't shrug off a minion's mez.
[ QUOTE ]
I went away from the computer to check on some CoV stuff and *wham* I received 5 or so PM's asking "what is the Blaster's role?" Answer - Ranged damage.
Now, the issue is more specifically - what does a Blaster do that a Scrapper can't already do?
[/ QUOTE ]
I can't think of anything that a scrapper can't do better than a blaster.
Ranged attacks? Laser eye beams and dark blasts with criticals.
AoEs? - spine burst and dragon's tail. Yeah, they're not ranged AoEs, but unlike blasters, scrappers can herd villains together into one nice clump, so range is really moot.
[ QUOTE ]
Or, even worse, is a Scrapper inherently "stronger" than a Blaster. We want each Archetype to have a well defined role, and part of our Scrapper testing is aimed directly at this.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sure seems this way, but I'd like the blasters brought up to the level of scrappers not scrappers nerfed to the level of blasters. Why make everyone unhappy?
[ QUOTE ]
Secondly, I have no intention of removing melee attacks - it's just a "perception" by some Blasters that some of the Secondary Sets aren't as useful as Devices or Energy Manipulation. This is a rather frequent refrain in PM's (and the occasional forum post). This is something that we should also explore...we want all the Secondary sets to be fun.
[/ QUOTE ]
So, our role is ranged damage yet we have all these melee attacks? Huh? Stateman: no offense, but I think you need to seriously re-look at this.
In any case, thank you for answering our PMs. Even though you can't do anything right away, it is sure nice to get immediate feedback and to know you are listening / reading.
[ QUOTE ]
Too much mez makes melee too risky.
[/ QUOTE ]
What enemies have mezzes that only work in melee? Malta tasers are the only ones I can think of. Too much mez makes EVERYTHING risky.
[ QUOTE ]
Getting one shotted doesn't help either. In a good team, yes, you can get away with some melee, but if the team is that good, you should have nice clumps of groups begging for AoE damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hit and move, don't stick around in melee range. It works, and it's fun as heck.
And AOEing that huge group of mobs in a team is going to get you killed much faster than blapping will, unless you have an incredible tank spamming taunt for you. (Not saying I don't do it, mind you--my normal strategy in that situation is to AOE until it's down to bosses and Lts, then use good single target attacks--including melee--to take them down.)
[ QUOTE ]
If I melee all the time, why not play a scrapper, then I get mez protection, a higher damage cap and better defenses.
[/ QUOTE ]
Who says you have to melee ALL the time? Personally, I like having both ranged attacks and melee attacks. Scrappers don't get that. (Kheldians do, but Kheldians have worthless base damage unless you want to put up with clunky form-shifting animations every few seconds.) Switching between range and melee is great fun.
I'm probably one of the first melee blasters (started doing it shortly after I1). And I've always found blaster Tough to be completely useless. Even six slotted it only gives 22% to only 2 types. That is just sad. It can't really be counted on to save you. I used holds and end drain to do melee, not resists. I do have a well slotted Health though, which humorously got buffed in I4.
[ QUOTE ]
Well Energy manip. has the advantage of actually stunning the enemy. This is a huge advantage. A lot harder to do with fire's horribly slow animations.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not defending all attacks based solely on the fact that they're melee. If the Fire melee attacks suck, then they need to either get fixed or replaced (or both). I'm saying that I don't want to see the GOOD melee attacks (Bonesmasher, Total Focus) replaced with crappy defenses or nerfed so they can be given range.
[ QUOTE ]
If I melee all the time, why not play a scrapper, then I get mez protection, a higher damage cap and better defenses.
[/ QUOTE ]
Because, and this where I have to disagree with States, the Blaster AT does damage, from anywhere, yet cannot take it, from anywhere.
If you want to play an AT with defensive capacity that does pretty darn good damage, roll a Scrapper. If you want to play an AT that can't take much damage but can dish out a truly sick amount of damage, roll a Blaster.
At least that's the distinction as I see it. Rather, the distinction as I feel it should be.
[ QUOTE ]
I have a blapper I leveled to 28. It was somewhat painful but I had some fun, but I stopped playing that character. No point when I can run a Kheldian.
[/ QUOTE ]
Kheldians are a different kettle of fish... er... okay, bad choice of saying there. Khelds are a reward AT for getting a regular AT to lvl 50. They infringe a bit on everyone.
[ QUOTE ]
I've read plenty of people say otherwise. One player being able to do it is way different than the majority. Similar to the way some Blasters don't have a lot of problems post-lvl38 but the majority of others do.
[/ QUOTE ]
Where? Every post I've seen by someone with Total Focus has been a rave review of the power, and none of them have mentioned having to take the Fighting pool to use it.
Again, I'm not saying every blaster melee power is great and must be preserved. What I'm opposed to is the idea that some good powers need to be removed, just because they're melee.
[ QUOTE ]
I can't think of anything that a scrapper can't do better than a blaster.
Ranged attacks? Laser eye beams and dark blasts with criticals.
[/ QUOTE ] Of course, before level 46, that's not an option. I'd like to agree with you in general, but be careful bringing up points like that one.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I can't think of anything that a scrapper can't do better than a blaster.
Ranged attacks? Laser eye beams and dark blasts with criticals.
[/ QUOTE ] Of course, before level 46, that's not an option. I'd like to agree with you in general, but be careful bringing up points like that one.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well we can bring up Focus and Impale then? Cause those are available at 18 and 8 respectively.
[ QUOTE ]
Well we can bring up Focus and Impale then? Cause those are available at 18 and 8 respectively.
[/ QUOTE ] Much better. 
Quoted from Statesman's original post-
[ QUOTE ]
I went away from the computer to check on some CoV stuff and *wham* I received 5 or so PM's asking "what is the Blaster's role?"
Answer - Ranged damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
Then about 4 sentences later...
[ QUOTE ]
Secondly, I have no intention of removing melee attacks
[/ QUOTE ]
Then immediately after that gem...
[ QUOTE ]
it's just a "perception" by some Blasters that some of the Secondary Sets aren't as useful as Devices or Energy Manipulation.
[/ QUOTE ]
Take a good close look at that progression states. First, blasters role is ranged damage, your own words. Second, you have no intenion of removing melee attacks... you know, the things that don't define the blaster's role. I'm not saying Blasters shouldn't have any melee attacks, but some sets just have a silly number of them.
Third, you're telling all the blasters that their 'perception' of certain sets is wrong? Kinda like you proved your uber regen build roxxored on your internal test environment, right?
Could it be, I dunno, that the guys who have played their blasters from 1 to 50 'might' have some knowledge on what is an inferior powerset and what isn't? Saying Ice Manipulation is as useful as Devices is like saying Ice Armor is as good as Invulnerability for tankers. It's just not true.
I went away from the computer to check on some CoV stuff and *wham* I received 5 or so PM's asking "what is the Blaster's role?"
Answer - Ranged damage. Now, the issue is more specifically - what does a Blaster do that a Scrapper can't already do? Or, even worse, is a Scrapper inherently "stronger" than a Blaster. We want each Archetype to have a well defined role, and part of our Scrapper testing is aimed directly at this.
Secondly, I have no intention of removing melee attacks - it's just a "perception" by some Blasters that some of the Secondary Sets aren't as useful as Devices or Energy Manipulation. This is a rather frequent refrain in PM's (and the occasional forum post). This is something that we should also explore...we want all the Secondary sets to be fun.