Let's put it this way...My level 35 Fire/Storm controller duo'd the Manticore TF with a level 34 Ice/Kinetics controller. And at the end? the Ice/Kinetics controller believed that I could've taken on the AV all by my lonesome. My blaster could never do anything like that and you can make the argument that my controller is a not a power build.
[ 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? 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 ]
From the CoH website's AT description:
[ 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.
Hit Points: Low
Damage: High
Primary Power Category - Ranged Attacks
Secondary Power Category - Melee Attacks
[/ QUOTE ]
If we do not/will not be "by far the most damaging to the enemy" especially "In comparison to the other Archtypes" and are regulared to being the "ranged damage" specialist, then please change the description. Otherwise our role should be clear. If not, then it would be an extension of the problems inherent in not making an informed decision of powers/primary powerset/secondary powerset that is of concern to the Devs.
Something I think Statesman is missing is that without a decent Defence it doesn't matter what kind of Offensive power you have if you have to tiptoe around mobs, running away and using insps.
I guarentee that they will do nothing to fix the real issues with blasters because they simply do no understand the problem. Anything they do will either be too little or too much (and then get nerfed).
The don't understand that range is not an advanage. They don't understand that the 2 different types of blaters (AOE and single target) are suffering 2 different problems. They don't understand that having zero defence is not a viable option. They don't understand that CoH works differently than other MMOs. They don't understand that everysingle mob in the game can take advantage of a blasters weakness.
And if they do, well they sure as hell havn't shown it in the last year of development.
not to mention the role of "ranged damage" with out also being the "offensive juggernaught" described is relatively pointless.
please change it to:
"The Blaster is pretty good on the offensive, but not as good as scrappers. Whether up close or afar, he can deal out some damage. In comparison to the other Archetypes the Blaster is by far, the second most damaging to the enemy. Moreso, the Blaster is quite fragile; this Archetype has relatively few hit points, and almost no defense. Blaster heroes must be on their guard before getting into combat, as well as prepared for debt; while their moderate power can overcome some foes, alone and in groups they are quite vulnerable. The Blaster should avoid conflict as much as possible, since any attention results in defeat. If a Blaster were to go all out, he'd end up consuming all of the healer's endurance. Not even a tank's taunt will keep you from meeting defeat. Good luck out there Blaster, you'll need it!"
Awesome!
----------------------------------------
"The Blaster is pretty good on the offensive, but not as good as scrappers. Whether up close or afar, he can deal out some damage. In comparison to the other Archetypes the Blaster is by far, the second most damaging to the enemy. Moreso, the Blaster is quite fragile; this Archetype has relatively few hit points. Blaster heroes must be on their guard before getting into combat, as well as prepared for debt; while their moderate power can overcome some foes, alone and in groups they are quite vulnerable. The Blaster should avoid conflict as much as possible, since any attention results in defeat. Were he to go all out, he'd end up consuming all of the healer's endurance. Not even a tank's taunt will keep you from meeting defeat. Good luck out there Blaster, you'll need it!"
[ QUOTE ]
[ 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.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I've always had this "perception" that getting into melee with anything on my Electric/Ice Blaster was essentially begging to die. I get enough Ranged attacks in my Primary that I can cycle damage forever. Why would I want to run in and try to slap someone, giving him the chance to gut me?
[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry man but you are wrong on this. I play all my blasters in melee range and am pushing 200 levels with the 5 of them combined. Statesman is right. I like playing my blaster in melee range and there are a lot of other players that do also.
I'm not saying that melee blasting is better than ranged blasting. It is just what some of us find fun.
-AZ
Well, I went Energy/Ice. It worked for me, not having a "useful" secondary (All I took was Buildup and Icepatch) Because then I was able to take pool powers in liberal amounts, but not only that, but I was able to slot up my attacks and not have to slot my defences, because, well, I didn't have any :P
With my scrapper, I've had to play this balancing act and slot up attacks and defence at the same time, granted my scrapper is now starting to become quite "tough" but is lacking the raw "boom" of a blaster, granted she will catch up eventually, but in my book it's not all about end game.
What would I do to the secondary line to make it "useful"?
Not sure, and even if it did have some nice powers in it, not sure if I would even take them, more important stuff in the primary.
If anything, they would have to be powers that don't need slotting, like for example build up/ice patch.
I must admit, one of my "fun" powers is bonfire, but that's in the epic, so perhaps some of the controler "stuff" that isn't too much "control" good example is the smoke grenade in dev == smoke in the fire control.
Perhaps some "utility" powers in the secondary line, like power push, it's not really "damage" but "control", well, thats how I use it: push the critter over so he can't fight back.
[ QUOTE ]
I have brought that up several times in posts. It is on the top of my lists. And I have seen it on the top of many lists concerning blaster changes that are needed.
[/ QUOTE ]
It is probably part of intentional design that range superiority is not always going to be there.
[ QUOTE ]
No doubt 25 more range isn't going to be sufficient, we need more than that. But it is salt in the wound. Even though a Defender can be outranged as we are by villians.. they have ways of dealing with that issue that we don't.
[/ QUOTE ]
And the Defender is going to continue to have that even if his snipe's range is dropped to 50. So again, the Defender's range is not an issue. Get over it.
Under construction
I have seen Blaster attack chains that generated about twice the BI per second of a heavily optimized Scrapper attack chain.
So, yes, Blasters have the potential to be massively more damaging than even their arch-enemy Scrappers.
Sadly, that Blaster attack chain includes an even mix of ranged and melee attacks, so in order for a Blaster to achieve their truly astonishing potential, they MUST be grouped.
Let me repeat: Blasters MUST group to achieve their potential, and more importantly, it must be a well-balanced group in which everyone is on the ball.
Blasters truly shine in "Pentad" situations, in which a Tanker and Controller combine to manage aggro so well the Blaster can afford to close and destroy at full power.
Add in a Defender's buffs and a Scrapper to run interference in case the Blaster gets in trouble, and in that situation, Blasters are truly formidable.
Sadly, that's a rare situation, and Blasters get clobbered a lot. They solo, and get alpha'd. They get in an unbalanced group, pull a hair too much aggro, and drop. They get in a group and someone drops the ball (Tanker mistargets a taunt, Defender misses a bubble refresh, Controller misses a lockdown, Scrapper can't pull mob off fast enough) and the Blaster goes down.
In my opinion, a simple way to give Blasters more survivability while still preserving their "flavor" would be to add a shortlived +Res buff to their melee attacks. Say, every time a Blaster makes a melee attack, they get a ten second forcefield that adds +10 Resist vs everything except Psi. If you want to really jack it up, add +10 +Defense, too.
The best Defense is a good Offense, they say. 
Have this stack with APP powers.
The way this works, as long as a Blaster is punching away, his inherent bad-[censored]-ness gives him a decent chance of pounding his way out of his troubles.
Yes this mainly helps in melee, but if a blaster goes down due to ranged attacks, HIS FORTE, then he's just trying to do too much.
Scrappers still get status protection inherently, which Blasters do not. This is just a boost to give Blasters a chance to use their full suite of deadly attacks, not make them into the greatest soloers in the game. If a Blaster wants status protection, group with controllers/defenders, or better yet, a tank.
Just my two cents.
[ QUOTE ]
Just a correction here. The immobilize on Crippling Axe Kick is practically 100% - but only stops minions. It slows LT's. Two applications will stop an LT. I used this power regularly for several levels of testing and it was extremely reliable.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's still your opinion. I was testing it as well in Talos for 2 hours when I reached that level almost exclusively against minions and it was definitely Random Immob then. It's not just a Mag-2 Immob either, it had to be a Mag-3 because when it actually did roll the Immob effect on Lt's, Mostly Juicer/Stunner Chiefs of all things which fly OUT of most status effects, it kept them stationary for a very short time.
[ QUOTE ]
In defense of Heph, he is not asking for Godmode for Blasters or ranged Blasters, etc. He's specifically argued for a little defense, and no additional status protection. Though I don't share his view about adding defenses into the set, I don't feel it's in the best interest of anyone to bastardize what he's saying. (not directed at you aqshy)
[/ QUOTE ]
Unless he's finally started compramising from all the previous times, the bulk of his arguments have always been that Melee is instant suicide despite the fact that many other Blappers and myself have proven that to be untrue. ...Maybe against large mob groups Solo, yes it would be. But in teams, certainly not when you know the mobs you're fighting well enough to know how they'll behave. But he's not interested in Grouping, never has been. He wanted Blasters to have as much or more HP's as defenders and more ranged control powers than Defenders in place of all these Melee attacks. If you read his posts enough, you begin to realize he's an Alpha-Nuke Min/Maxxer who was only having fun back when SmokeGrenade was broken(Not saying he's ever used SmokeGrenade, just that at that time, AoE solved every Blaster's problems in Soloing), and that's what he wants Blasters to return to... Defenders(Ranged Defense) with higher Ranged Damage making them completely independant from needing to group to get their fastest rate of EXP.
Remember, that's what made this 'City of Blasters' in the first place. It wasn't because they did so well in Groups that they squeezed Scrappers ouf of groups which brought about Scrappers getting Criticals. ...no it was that the Mobs were too Easy for Blasters soloing from 1-40 throughout the beginning and 1st issue of this game making Blasters #1 b/c the right setup had them soloing faster than Scrappers. ....Now the Shoe's on the other foot, except that Scrappers were never built with a Handicap for Teaming so they're starting to push Blasters out of team games(especially in Team PvP) because there's just so many of them everywhere, they present No Burden on their Teams, and the Blasters population is starting to thin.
It's always cumulative power in everything the AT's do that helps decide the popularity. But the trick the devs need to pull off next is to make Blasters less helpless in PvP and 35+ game without making them Solo faster than they Team for all the levels before that. I personally believe that can be achieved by tweaking the Melee powers and putting StatusResist in the Damage-Field powers. And that's where Heph and me had always been at eachothers throats... I want to see Blasters have very brief and limited situations in each fight where they're almost as defensive as a Scrapper or Controller but with far more consistant High damage and superior Endurance-per-Damage. He wants them to have slightly less defense than that, but Always at range and in Perma-Mode.
And I believe only one of those options will still have Blasters needing to fall back on other Teammates most of the time.
[ 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 ]
Much like I say "You don't know what you're talking about, Log a couple hundred hours behind a blaster and tell me that Fire Manipulation/Electricity Manipulation are as powerful as Devices or Energy because you really don't know what you're talking about." is my perception.
I've played my blasters up with their secondaries, and I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that Devices and Energy are the two most powerful secondaries.
Do you have the same experience, or are you seeing something I'm not, like Havoc Punch dropping +9 mobs in 1 hit?
[ QUOTE ]
It is probably part of intentional design that range superiority is not always going to be there.
[/ QUOTE ]
While I could see some villians having more range than me, but when minions of equal level are throwing rocks farther than I can fire my sniper rifle.. there is a problem. Not to mention the fact that even if it WAS designed that way.. then blasters need to have extra defense to ranged attacks. Being two-shotted by something that you can't reach is a problem.
[ QUOTE ]
And the Defender is going to continue to have that even if his snipe's range is dropped to 50. So again, the Defender's range is not an issue. Get over it.
[/ QUOTE ]
And the Defenders is also going to continue to have ways of dealing with shorter range than villians. Blasters do not.
You, get over yourself.
Here is a link to my response that it's just my "perception" that the Fire Manipulation pool is weaker than Devices or Energy as a secondary.
Fire Manipulation vs. Statesman's defined Role of a Blaster
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is probably part of intentional design that range superiority is not always going to be there.
[/ QUOTE ]
While I could see some villians having more range than me, but when minions of equal level are throwing rocks farther than I can fire my sniper rifle.. there is a problem. Not to mention the fact that even if it WAS designed that way.. then blasters need to have extra defense to ranged attacks. Being two-shotted by something that you can't reach is a problem.
[/ QUOTE ]
Very few things of remotely appropriate level can two shot you, let alone do so with a ranged attack. And rocks certainly aren't exactly a major threat.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And the Defender is going to continue to have that even if his snipe's range is dropped to 50. So again, the Defender's range is not an issue. Get over it.
[/ QUOTE ]
And the Defenders is also going to continue to have ways of dealing with shorter range than villians. Blasters do not.
You, get over yourself.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're the one here failing to make a coherent point. You whine that a Defender has more range. I note that the Defender is still outranged by mobs just like the Blaster. You then hold up that the Defender has other tools to help with that, ignoring that your intial complaint was the Defender's range which has just been shown NOT to be an advantage in the situation at hand--when the Blaster is being outranged.
You're being argumentative for the sake of it and making no sense.
Under construction
[ 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? 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 ]
Statesman, thanks for the response. That said, I think you are wrong here. A blaster is not just ranged damage. Scrappers and defenders do that almost as well (or better sometimes). Also, if blasters are about ranged damage then why so many short ranged and pbaoe attacks in the primary sets? Why so many melee attacks in the secondary sets?
It seems like you are trying to redefine blasters and it is too late in the game for that. Blasters are about damage and lots of it. They are not about defenses or range or whatever. Blasters are about damage, plain and simple.
Exhibit A: Blaster AT description (official)
[ 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 see nothing here about the blaster primarily being a ranged attacker. It says "up close or afar". It also says "In comparison to the other Archetypes, the Blaster is by far the most damaging to the enemy". This is not really true. We are slightly more damaging than most but there are definitly powerset combinations in other ATs that exceed the damage output of a blaster (often with more safety).
Exhibit B: Short range primary attacks (<= 40 feet)
Buckshot, Flamethrower, Ignite
Fire Breath, Blaze, Inferno
Energy Torrent, Power Burst, Nova
Short Circuit
Frost Breath
Exhibit C: Short range secondary attacks (<= 40 feet)
Caltrops, Taser
Power Thrust, Energy Punch, Bone Smasher, Stun, Total Focus
Charged Brawl, Lightning Field, Havok Punch, Lightning Clap, Thunder Strike, Shocking Grasp
Fire Sword, Combustion, Fire Sword Circle, Blazing Aura, Consume, Burn, Hot Feet
Frozen Fists, Ice Sword, Freezing Touch, Frozen Aura
Honestly, I just don't understand your answer (Answer - Ranged damage). I really do not see this as the primary function of my blasters and I never have. When I am in the team I feel that my goal is to do damage, plain and simple. When I play another AT and I want damage I invite a blaster or a scrapper. I am getting the blaster for raw damage, not for ranged damage.
I think the 500% cap for scrappers is a load of junk. They are not in more danger than a character with no (or very little) defenses, range or no range.
Please consider keeping or making the role of blasters "offensive juggernaut".
Thank you
-AZ
Wow, I can't believe I read the whole thing. Gets kinda nasty near the middle.
My main at time of release was a Fire/Fire Blaster. I played her to 41 before Altitis took a strangle hold on me. Since then I have leveled a 33 Mind/Emp Controller, a 38 FF/Psy Defender, A 39 Inv/em Tank, a 41 Fire/Rad Controller, a 30 AR/Dev Blaster, and a 26 MA/Regen Scrapper. While playing my Fire/Fire, I mostly Duoed with a tank. We would cut a wide swath through anything in our path. I died, often, usually when my AoE's missed or MoBs survived inferno in a large number. My tank friend laughed, I laughed. C'est la Guerre. My blaster taught me that debt means nothing, 50 is the end, not the goal.
Prior to Inferno, Aim+Build Up+Fireball+FSC was my meat and potatoes. I saw all the melee attacks in the fire secondary and thought "Wow that will get me killed." I used them mostly for self defense.
Jump from 41 fire/fire, past all those alts and back to her. My understanding of the game is much improved. I recently pulled her out of mothballs and got her to 42. Died like a sheep, often. If it didn't die when I attacked there was a pretty fair chance it would kill me. After reading this thread, and with my experience, I think the best ideas to fix the blaster are:
1) More Hit Points. Not a Huge amount but possibly enough to keep them from being one-shotted with regularity.
2) A Range Only defense toggle. Want blasters to be "Ranged fighters"? They need the tools.
Anything more would be quite possibly a step toward City of Blasters again.
[ QUOTE ]
Very few things of remotely appropriate level can two shot you, let alone do so with a ranged attack. And rocks certainly aren't exactly a major threat.
[/ QUOTE ]
The rock example was merely to point out how ridiculous it is to be outranged by something throwing a rock.
And I beg to differ, I have been 2-shotted quite a few times at range. Not to mention the range mezzing. I can be put to sleep at range, with no mez protection, this can happen quite a bit. Then no matter how far my range is, it doesn't matter because I am sleeping while the villians are closing in to melee range.. and.. yep you guessed it.. dead.
[ QUOTE ]
You're the one here failing to make a coherent point. You whine that a Defender has more range. I note that the Defender is still outranged by mobs just like the Blaster. You then hold up that the Defender has other tools to help with that, ignoring that your intial complaint was the Defender's range which has just been shown NOT to be an advantage in the situation at hand--when the Blaster is being outranged.
You're being argumentative for the sake of it and making no sense.
[/ QUOTE ]
Perhaps you misunderstood my point then. My initial post to you simply stated that the Defender having more range is salt in the wound. The real issue is the fact that most villians post 30 (perhaps post 25?) can outrange blasters. I said that we need far more than the 25 the Defender has greater than our range. You then said that perhaps I should bring it up, I responded that I have in several posts and so have other blasters.
The point is if Blasters are supposed to be the kings of Ranged Damage (note not just damage anymore, but now ranged damage) then when should be. We shouldn't be outranged by almost all villians post 25-30. And the fact that Defenders have more range in some attacks than the kings of range damage, is just ridiculous.
[ QUOTE ]
After reading this thread, and with my experience, I think the best ideas to fix the blaster are:
1) More Hit Points. Not a Huge amount but possibly enough to keep them from being one-shotted with regularity.
2) A Range Only defense toggle. Want blasters to be "Ranged fighters"? They need the tools.
[/ QUOTE ]
Exactly my point on #2!!!
[ QUOTE ]
Well if a Blaster's role is ranged attacks, why can defenders snipe from a longer range then Blasters? Why do Blasters do less damage then Scrappers? Why do Blasters have less defense then support folks like Controllers or Defenders?
[/ QUOTE ]
On the less damage than Scrappers portion, let's review the history of how we got here.
#1) Melee was supposed to be, and is, more dangerous than range because the MOBs have more attacks to choose from in melee and the melee only attacks are generally 1/3 more damaging, with faster recharges, more secondary effects and lower end.
#2) Melee was supposed to be tactically disadvantageous because you could not switch targets as easily as at range, nor could you retreat as easily, and runners would be time-consuming to chase
#3) Melee-ers are supposed to be aggro-ing more MOBs therefore increasing the amount of DPS incoming in quantity.
#4) Blasters were supposed to be more damaging than Scrappers despite having the same damage base because:
#4a) Scrappers typically do Lethal and Smashing damage, and Blasters do the more rarely resisted fire, ice, elec, etc. damage types
#4b) Blasters have more AEs than scrappers to let them decimate large numbers of minions rapidly for more rapid XP gain, while still having nice single-target shots to take on the big guys
#4c) Blasters have more high/severe/extreme damage attacks than scrappers, so they output more "brawls" even though the base brawl is the same as a scrapper (Surprised me, too, but look here!)
So what happened:
#1) Melee attacks remain more dangerous, but MOBs got enough ranged attacks in the late game to make that moot. Melee-ers can absorb the increased DPS they suffer twice as long as squishies can absorb the lower DPS they are subject, to, EVEN IF THE SQUISHIES MANAGE TO REMAIN AT RANGE.*
#2) Travel powers negated most of the tactical disadvantages of melee, and the "runner code" simply exacerbated the lack of this supposed tactical disadvantage.
#3) The increase in MOB ranged attacks and the damage trump-card over proximity in aggro production made Blasters not subject to significantly fewer "playmates" than a similar melee-er. Regardless, melee-ers can still last 30% longer with even 2x as many MOBs aggroed on them.
#4a) Resistance to these "rare" damage types is not at all rare in MOBs. So the "piercing" quality of these damage types does not exist.
#4b) See #3. 'Nuff said.
#4c) One of the few that may be working. While the faster recharge time of Blasters negates this somewhat, builds that slot for recharge can fill their attack chain with higher powered attacks in the same period for better DPS. It would put the well built Blaster clearly ahead on DPS if it weren't for CRITICALS, which close that gap and do so without adding any time to the attack chain.
So how do you fix it?
#1) Keeping us dependent on leveraging range to be safe is a smart decision in my opinion, but please, make range more leverage able as a defense tactic. There has to be more leverage to range than the current simplicity of, "we both can shoot", "one of us can shoot", "neither of us can shoot", ESPECIALLY on indoor maps.
#2) Let us fortify our positions so the decision to close to melee range becomes as tactical for our opponents as it is for us.
#3) Fix aggro so that in some cases proximity trumps damage dealt. Combat is confusing, and ranged attacks should be able to take advantage of that.
#4a) Give blasters a wider variety of attacks so they are more likely to find one that can penetrate the resistance of their opponent's defenses. Making them the king of damage because more of their damage GETS THROUGH
#4b) See #3)
#4c) Let us leverage this opportunity better by decreasing animation times for blasters and raising recharge times to break even. That way a well-built blaster can build up to a better attack chain than his Scrapper cohort at exactly the place in the game where Blasters are currently hurting.
* - Scrapper at 75% DMG RES, 115 HP, absorbing 60 HP attacks every 8.5 seconds, from 3 minions with 10% DEF vs. Blaster 0% DMG RES, 100 HP, absorbing 40 HP attacks every 9.6 seconds from 3 minions with 10% DEF. (Both with 0 regen). Scrapper lives 42.5 seconds, Blaster 19.2 seconds). Comparison of Tanker to FF Defender/Controller produces similar ratio.
[ QUOTE ]
It strikes me that a way of (1) making the blaster melee sets more interesting and (2) rewarding the extra risk taken by a blaster in melee is by adding something like the Katana Divine Avalanche parry into each blaster melee pool at relatively low level (with the possible exception of Devices, since it gets other goodies).
For those not familiar with it, its a fairly low damage (~2.2x Brawl IIRC?) but decent and reasonably quick attack that generates about 10 seconds of +20% melee only defense. If you are willing to use it for every other attack and use Hasten, you have somewhat lower dps but can stack it.
This allows you to build a much more survivable "blapper" if you like that, but doesn't give exceptional advantage to a blaster staying at range.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is basically what I've been recommending for the last 7 months. No I don't think Blasters should have to use Melee just to keeping their Attack-Chain rolling. But I do think they should resort to Melee for some Real Defense because that melee is Brought to them anyway and that's when they're most squishy. ...Especially in PvP where going into Melee range against a Blaster is actually considered safer and a faster soultion to stopping their damage than getting out of Line-of-sight from them.
...No, a Blaster should have real defenses, real short defenses, but real defenses none the less when they do have to resort to Melee since it is a last-resort. Having a DA, I have extensive experience with this because at Range and having no self-Heal that doesn't require several mobs at melee range, I'm just as squishy as weaker Defenders or Blasters. ...And with the Endurance Costs for DA, I'm also unfortunately familiar with Medium-Defenses for Melee that fizzle fast and cannot be maintained. It IS balanced and it encourages you to Team more than solo.
With this kind of Setup that can't be sustained, I think it would be perfectly balanced to even give most Blasters' Secondaires some light Status resists early in the game(sleeps and disorients), and Medium ones at EndGame (Knockdown, Immboilzers, Holds, Mag-4 Disorients, EndDrains).
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To be honest, I'm also kinda disappointed that it was only five that got sent...
[/ QUOTE ]
was napping before they got sent, and woke up with over 10 pages of the stuff already on... you people write a LOT
[/ QUOTE ]
It wasn't a condemnation - at the time that the PMs were sent out, lots of people were already serial-posting. I'd just like to think that the entire blaster AT could muster more PMs than the entire dark armor population.
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 ]
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 ]
No. Please do not speak for all blasters. SOME players who play blasters who post in this forum feel that certain powersets are subpar. Just because SOME perceive that certain power sets are subpar does not mean they are.
Again, don't speak for all blasters. I like certain blaster secondaries and dislike others. Some of my friends agree and disagree with me. Does that mean the ones I dislike suck? No. My opinion is not the be all and end all.
Only an ego-uber-dork would assume the "entire blaster base" is united on what is broken and what isn't, as if this "base" was the be all and end all with determining what worked and what didn't in CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's how you can tell blasters are generally useless. Try to think of a single team, a single situation, a single time in game where a team trying to decided between two potential teammates would say "No, lets not take the scrapper, let's take the blaster!"
[/ QUOTE ]
As a controller, my answer is: every time I form a team.
[/ QUOTE ]
I prefer to have blasters over scrappers on my team when I'm playing my tanker. With my scrapper, it literally doesn't matter to me - have one or the other, and we'll do fine.
But saying this (as true as it is) doesn't help, because people are convinced that no one wants blasters on their teams. It may very well be that there are [censored] idiots out there who are so mercenary in their team-building that they kick blasters for not having as much defense as scrappers.
This is not dissimilar to the tankers' claims that they had no place on teams before issue 3.
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 ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's how you can tell blasters are generally useless. Try to think of a single team, a single situation, a single time in game where a team trying to decided between two potential teammates would say "No, lets not take the scrapper, let's take the blaster!"
[/ QUOTE ]
As a controller, my answer is: every time I form a team.
[/ QUOTE ]
I prefer to have blasters over scrappers on my team when I'm playing my tanker. With my scrapper, it literally doesn't matter to me - have one or the other, and we'll do fine.
But saying this (as true as it is) doesn't help, because people are convinced that no one wants blasters on their teams. It may very well be that there are [censored] idiots out there who are so mercenary in their team-building that they kick blasters for not having as much defense as scrappers.
This is not dissimilar to the tankers' claims that they had no place on teams before issue 3.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wasn't meant as a counter to the "lack of teaming opportunity for blasters" point. Just a reminder that it's not AS bleak as painted in his initial post.
Statesman: RANGE IS NOT AN ADVANTAGE IN COH.
every enemy has a ranged attack. EVERY SINGLE ONE. it may be weaker than their melee attacks (in most instances) but it is often still enough to kill the fragile blaster. how is this our role-defining advantage?
how does this make it okay to do less damage and have less defense than a scrapper?
please explain this to me.
the worst part of this post is that it sounds like states is hinting that we're not supposed to outdamage scrappers. our role is not to be the damage king. our role is to do nearly as much damage, but from farther away. It makes no sense to me why anyone would play a blaster, if this is their defined role.
scrapper: more damage, more defense, almost no range.
blaster: less damage, less defense, more range.
does that balance out? DOES THAT BALANCE OUT, STATESMAN?