In Beta I read all the threads saying Stalkers were overpowered in PVP. Now that I have played a Stalker in Bloody Bay extensively, I can say that Stalkers are only invincible when they bottom-feed. If I search far and wide for that lone defender plinking away at some turrets for their mission, sure I kill them with no risk. On the other hand, when I engage in team battles, I have to be very careful to even get a kill. Often times I am killed trying to escape after a kill.
I expect the good Stalkers will get relatively few kills with relatively few deaths. The bad ones will get impatient and die a lot. In short, Stalkers are balanced in PVE and PVP.
They are perhaps the best solo AT in PVP and the worst in groups.
PRTECTR4EVR
I can't think a nice and wordy way to say this so: For starting and ending saying you are open minded your questions have a heavy bais. I also don't see any relation between your questions and risk vs reward for stalkers.
I am not a dev, but I am going to give my opinions. 
1. If you consider the Stalker a 1v1 AT, then any AT without mostly AE attacks is 1v1. The idea that this is a 1v1 AT no doubt comes from that fact that this AT is the easist while solo to choose your battles in the chaos that is the PvP zones.
2. PvP zones are consensual. If anything I think you mean Duels vs Battles. The Arena's are combat with rules applied. The battlefields aren't.
3a. A few things - Assault not working once at stopping placate is a bad example. Teammates don't require a pwer choice, and do wonders for placate. Lastly I completely agree with you that more powers the assault need +res to placate. I'd love to see every power with +res taunt, have +res placate.
3b. I completely disagree about the foils being built into the ATs.
Whats the foil to the Brute? The Defender who keeps the brute forever out of melee range? The Blaster who kills from range before the brute can reach him? Or maybe the scrapper that takes him down before he has enough rage, or lands enough hits?
I feel the ATs in this game are all much more versital then most people think about them. People are getting locked into mindsets about how things should work, they need to stop self limiting themselves.
I think part of the problem is people are only concentraing on when Stalker triumph, and not enough when they fail.
I spent a few hours in Siren's Call the other night and after a while I acutally sat down and "talked" with a pair of heroes who had been hunting me.
One of them was Blaster who remarked how I had assasinated her 5 times and she was amazed how effective stalkers could be. I laughed and told her not to be soo impressed. While it was true I had succesfully defeated her 5 times I had failed another 15-20 that she just wasn't aware of.
Stalkers can only defeat heroes who get careless or are unaware. Stalker powers are all melee based, and our Assasin strikes are easily interruptable and therefore quite situational to use.
In the Arena I can't pull off a victory against ANY competant player with a travel power, simply because they know I'm coming and are prepared for it.
Centinull
Good points, Centinull. I read somewhere (sorry if I'm not giving credit where credit is due) that stalkers are CoX's 'Natural Selection process'. If you're careless or sloppy, you're defeated. If you stay on your toes and play competently, you make a difficult target, and the stalkers will likely look for easier prey.
There's one thing that sticks out for me...
The idea that Stalkers ODing on Red Inspirations and One-shotting Tankers being brought up as "Unbalanced" - when it has less to do with STALKERS, and more to do with the idea of Mainlining Inspirations.
The Stalker is not the only Archetype that can go far above and beyond what he should be doing by swallowing too many pills. A Blaster addicted to Luck is, likewise, incredibly dangerous (unstoppable all-destroying Blasters of death). In group situations, this kind of Blaster (the "immune to death" form of blaster) can really turn the tide.
Balancing Stalkers with the idea of "Overdosing on Red Inspirations" in mind is a bad idea - just like Balancing blaster Damage with the idea that they can't be hit by melee attacks is a bad idea.
Inspiration Overdose being used to do things an Archetype shouldn't be able to do is a completely different issue (and, personally, I think it's a serious issue - sure, other people CAN use inspirations too, but turning it into a game of "Who can get more inspirations more often!" isn't a good idea - but it's got nothing to do with just Stalkers).
That said - sometimes, I LIKE difficult targets.
When I figured out an attack chain that let me take out a level 50 Blaster (with a melee-range "slowing" aura that made ASing him out of the blue impossible) without using any inspirations, I was pretty proud. When I can Axe-kick a flyer who thinks he's safe out of the sky, and break him before he can get away, I feel happy. Frankly - I generally don't LIKE one-shotting people - my favorite Inspirations are Yellow (since I hate missing) - not Red. If something is done to remove Stalker one-shotting abilities - even so far as a "damage cap" on AS when it comes to PvP combat (no more than 80% max HP, or so) as long as they improve their all-around combat abilities, hit-and-run tactics, defense, and overall utility, I'll be very happy. I have more moves than just AS - and I enjoy using all of them (as well as using AS to the best of my abilities - I'm not ABOVE popping a few reds and one-shotting or two-shotting someone - I just don't like it).
Also - Assault does have an effect on Placate. I've had Placate do "No Effect" before in PvP combat. It's not 100% resistance, but it DOES give you a chance to be unaffected.
At it again I see.
1)Again Rock/paper/scissors Anyone with tactic's + an insight can see a stalker...aim, Targeting drone, tactics, clearmind, focused senses ect.. all have perception in them..you can buy IR goggles in SC..all these allow you to see even a hide+stealth stalker. So anyone that wants to invest can see a stalker coming all day long and gets to attempt to be the rock vs scissors doesn't mean that it'll work but the stalker has lost the advantage by not being invisible. Once unhidden a stalker is a very weak opponate..lower defenses and offense aside from AS then scrappers, with controller level hps.
2) The problem wasn't only blasters you've been misinformed. PS allowed anyone ...I'll repeat anyone to get there one kill then PS for the entire match..it also allowed Controllers to kick out pets then PS while the pets did all the work. It also allowed for controllers to solo AV's that you normally couldn't solo without it...yes I've got plenty of video using it to solo AV's.
3) How does repel sound? TK, Hurricane, Force bubble. There are only 3 sets that can counter repel. Very few powers counter fear...and it can be laid on heavy enough that even a full try a breakfrees isn't enough. And you want to talk about placate...the above 2 exemples will root you in place allowing them to keep on attacking you. Placate you can still move..so do it.
(Btw assault offers resistance not protection, there's a difference.)
4)Any /Dev blaster with TD+tactics or IR goggles.
Any /SR scrapper with FS+tactics or IR goggles.
[ QUOTE ]
Also - Assault does have an effect on Placate. I've had Placate do "No Effect" before in PvP combat. It's not 100% resistance, but it DOES give you a chance to be unaffected.
[/ QUOTE ] I'll have to test for that...thanks.
dont breakfree's also have some effect on placate/taunt ?
then theres the Cones, PBAoE and LAoEs which can hit your placater. nullifying the effect.
Mieux - Kinda bad form to say that Stalkers are unbalanced because of OD'ing on inspirations.
Civilians could be considered to be unbalanced if they could take 30 inspirations.
Its also a bit out of wack as saying they only lost because they did not run away. Could that not be said of Every AT in CoX ?
In alot of ways i see any character that can trump a stalkers stealth as the Rock to the Stalkers Scissors.
That perception is most readily available to Scrappers, who also have the staying power and damage to easily destroy the low HP Stalker who cannot run away.
Stalkers have two strengths. Stealth and Surprise.
Nullify the Stealth and you can easily avoid the surprise. Any character can do this to a degree through powers or inspirations, or more likely a combination of both, and i am not sure it would be all that much fun to play a AT whose main 'ability' is that they have good perception.
In all i would suggest that Stalkers are in and of themselves the counter to stalkers, much like submarines are in Naval battles.
Quit trying to show the Stalkers as overpowered. It's fairly blatant, when you decide to factor in something [ Inspirations ] that completely invalidate your argument, because anyone could just as well pop as many blues or oranges or a combination of them to get obscene levels of Def/Res and go around like a god for sixty seconds. Would you call their AT overpowered because of their inspiration choices?
Your questions are rather stupid. I'm tired of hearing people whine about Stalkers already, and it's not even been a month. Give it a rest, and either roll a Stalker yourself or get smart. You're placated? Move!
You're AS'd? hunt the stalker!
It all balances out.
It just doesn't balance out easily enough for you.
What if you had a power pool consisting of:
1 tier: Null Placate [ Auto ]
2 tier: True Sight [ Auto, sees through Hide + Stealth ]
3 tier: No-hide zone [ Toggle, makes all people hidden within 50' of you unable to hide ]
4 tier: Impenetrable [ Auto, can't be AS'd / Crit'd ]
Would that be good enough? Or would you like every AT to get those as powers automatically, in addition to their power choices at levels 14/16/18/20?
1. clearly you think stalkers are not balanced for 1v1. this seems quite in line with their previous intent to not worry so much about 1v1 battles.
2. phase shift was not removed to prevent ganking. it was removed to prevent people from entering a state of complete and perpetual safety in a pvp environment. Since no stalker is ever in that state, there is nothing wrong with their ability to hide-especially give all the counters for it.
3b. which leads into this point. numerous sets can counter the stealth of hide, even certain stalkers. That seems balanced to me. Even though a few people should have a counter for the stalker, that does not mean that everyone should. assault is also said to resist placate, meaing it has a shorter duration, not that there is no effect. Stalkers with the concealment pool are what people complain about. If they have to go to the pools for that, i don't see why others shouldn't have to go for perception.
there are plenty of stories of stalkers feeling like they aren't that great just as there are stories of their godhood. I don't see anything really wrong with that.
Level 50 is a journey, not a destination.
▲Scrapper Issues List - Going Rogue Edition▲
Risk versus reward, is a funny concept to begin with, what risks do stalkers take currently well they do have low hp and low defence (higher in comparison than most squishies but low just the same). Yes, they do have that. What rewards do they get? Controlled critical strikes, crippiling damage at their fingertips. But... in the end does that mean the are justified in being able to kill someone (in pvp) in one hit from full health? Nope, it really dosn't. Does it mean it is a balanced concept? Not in the least.
The main problem with stalkers is that the situation where someone can be killed from full health in one hit exists. That situation is a big no no in a game that will not allow perma-holding. It is a hypocritical scenario in terms of risk versus reward. All team help aside, if someone could be held indefinately there would be no risk in defeating them. Why? There is no chance for retaliation, and no chance for any interaction between players, it is ultimately a breading ground for frustration and rightly so. Likewise, the exact same situation is created when you allow someone to sneak in and kill from full health in one hit. There is no chance for retaliation, there is no chance for escape, you died and why? Because the developers have allowed the situation to exist where it could happen. Ultimately kills in one hit from full health should be removed completely from the game, not only for it's blatant abusive nature, but because in terms of risk versus reward in PvP it is simply not balanced, nor does it provide any actual FUN (aka a real battle).
Ok there are a few stalkers out there who are saying to themselves, wait a minute I think it's fun. But there were also controllers who thought holding people before suppression and breakfrees was fun too. In anycase, the scenario is before the developers where players can die from full health, without a chance to participate in the battle which killed them.
There are ways to tweak stalker PvP though, which wouldn't be so bad. Make their assassin strike cap at a percentage of their target's maximum hp OR their normal damage, whichever is smaller. In games I've seen in the past, 75% of someone's health was generally considered tops for rogue/assassin hit. But any percentage could be implemented. Besides in the case of a tanker the damage you would be hitting currently with your stalker would be lower than 75% of their health so your tanker AS hits wouldn't change at all. It would be the hits you do on defenders, controllers, and all other squishy characters. (Even damage done amongst yourselves.)
What else can be done? Suppression: as shown with holds suppression is a very successfull tool. After a hold is worn out, a period of immunity to that particular hold is granted. Well how could you deal with AS? After a successfull AS, grant a period of immunity to other [censored] (sorry the plural of AS, it's getting censored lol) and potentially placate too.
Why would you do that? It would prevent the stalker from being able to run without some time of vulnerability FROM THE PERSON THEY HIT. (They could placate others successfully, just not the one they AS'd) It would also prevent the one-two AS attack tactic which would be ultimately used to get around not being able to kill a squishy in one hit. It would force the stalker to actually fight a little outside of their assassin strikes, or have some other AT at their side to help finish the job.
Would this make stalkers unbalanced? I really doubt it, as it is now they are painfully hard to detect, they generally have enough defences and travel powers to scamper away if things go rough, and only really die when more than one opponent gets their hands on them, and even then they often are able to find shelter. But you know, most single opponents don't fair so well when more than one person is attacking them, and everyone dies in group scenarios, and honestly yeah in groups sometimes another AT on the other side ruins what your primary function is. A controller trying to hold a group that has a defender clear minding everyone is going to feel impotent, so will a stalker trying to fight a group with two storm defenders. They are unrelated issues, and are often used as proof of stalker's vulnerability. The only thing it prooves is there are generally a few AT's who make your particular ATs life harder. Every class experiences that, and it dosn't show that stalkers have it rough. The real issue that needs dealing with, the only issue that needs dealing with, is how Assassin strike can kill people from full health in one hit. Deal with AUTO-KILLS, and you will have a set that is much closer to balance than its current situation.
No, the idea is a stupid one
Have you seen what a blaster's alpha can do to a regen scrapper , ice tanker, or any other squishy class after they have popped 6-8 reds?
I have, it's not fun, and it's AOE
do you know what a brute can do to even an invuln tanker with a maxxed rage bar and a few reds? they can kill them even quicker than the 3 seconds it takes for a stalker to get off their AS.
perma-holds. what do you call a controller with fears that pops a few yellows? scary as hell, that's what you call them, and perma-hold is the least of what they can do. try a mind controller with the fear pool powers in pvp with a tray full of yellows against virtually ANYTHING.
You want balance?
Drop purples to a base 12.5% defense that will balance things a bit so at least one purple doesn't give you TWICE the defense a stalker with unenhanced defense gets.
This angers me... if you are wandering A PVP zone alone in blissful ignorance that there are stalkers about you deserve to get ganked. if the stalker doesn't do it, the brute that has been pounding spiders will. the controller hovering above you will take you out so fast your head spins, the spine scrapper will trash you in a heartbeat.
NO! if a stalker can one shot you (and despite your assurances I have yet to see a stalker take out an invuln tanker with their defenses up) then you had better make it your business to see them coming, instead of once again joining the ranks of complainers that are griping because one AT can do something that THEY haven't optimised their build to do or defend themselves against.
there are SO many things that can nullify a one-shot AS that you really are showing an incredible ignorance as to the set you are complaining about. Even if you have played a stalker to 40 (which I strongly doubt) you clearly don't have the PVP experience to back up what you are complaining about
I play a controller, and one of the things that I COUNT on is stalkers thinking they are catching me by surprise. it's rock/paper/scissors, and if you are going to keep on playing the same paper again and again, count on getting cut a few times.
You are right, stalkers are NOT balanced, they have distinct disadvantages in PVP. maybe you should be asking to lower the damage output for reds so that each one only gives a 10% damage boost, that way every other AT will be gimped as well, and we can all stand around beating on each other with never a single person losing. is a chess game with nothing but two pawns your idea of fun?
Risk versus reward, stalkers have absolutely pathetic defenses, no resists whatsoever, and no holds/soft controls or anything except for a single placate that takes a very long time to recharge. any group can take them out easily and most 1on1's can take them out easily if they are prepared. as far as I am concerned, seems like PVP stalkers have a lot more risk than reward
Have you ever played a stalker in pvp?
No matter how many reds I eat, there's still a very real chance that I'm not going to kill in one hit, and will get my butt handed to me. I've lost to many AT's in one on one type fights, in truth, I'm absolutely positive I've lost more than I've won.
[ QUOTE ]
And yet, nothing resists Placate.
[/ QUOTE ]
So untrue. There's skills that resist placate, just like ones that resist hold, fear, etc. There's also skills that make it literally impossible for us to get anywhere near a target.
Someone mentioned we have no holds. We have caltrops... but we're looking for trouble if we use it. It lets the enemy stop running and beat us to a pulp instead... because any well played AT that survives our AS can stand ground and take us out.
Silly thread.
[ QUOTE ]
In games I've seen in the past, 75% of someone's health was generally considered tops for rogue/assassin hit.
[/ QUOTE ]
If that was done, a stalker would NEVER win a fight against anyone...
Z
[ QUOTE ]
Have you ever played a stalker in pvp?
No matter how many reds I eat, there's still a very real chance that I'm not going to kill in one hit, and will get my butt handed to me. I've lost to many AT's in one on one type fights, in truth, I'm absolutely positive I've lost more than I've won.
[ QUOTE ]
And yet, nothing resists Placate.
[/ QUOTE ]
So untrue. There's skills that resist placate, just like ones that resist hold, fear, etc. There's also skills that make it literally impossible for us to get anywhere near a target.
Someone mentioned we have no holds. We have caltrops... but we're looking for trouble if we use it. It lets the enemy stop running and beat us to a pulp instead... because any well played AT that survives our AS can stand ground and take us out.
Silly thread.
[ QUOTE ]
In games I've seen in the past, 75% of someone's health was generally considered tops for rogue/assassin hit.
[/ QUOTE ]
If that was done, a stalker would NEVER win a fight against anyone...
Z
[/ QUOTE ]
Please... are you saying that a stalker never kills anyone but a squishy? I have seen good stalkers in action. The difference of HP of a lvl 50 controller who has experienced 750 damage in one hit is 250 hp. You can do that much damage, trust me. What risk is there in killing someone in one hit? And as to popping yellows, it dosn't take 2 breakfrees to get out of a hold, it takes 1. How many yellows does it take to see someone who has stealth and hide on? And even though you see them, it dosn't mean you'll interupt their AS in time to save yourself. They do have defence sets after all, and with a base of 50% to-hit even minor defences can push the ball in their favor.
But your complaints are as expected, the boards were full of people who complained when they suggested tweaking holds and adding break frees and suppression. Dear lord holds are a controllers only defence didn't you know. Dear lord all a stalker can do is their AS!
Points of note:
*1 - 75% is a number used for an example, that percentage could be anything deamed reasonable by the developers. Though on a squishy 75% would be more than enough.
*2 - I suggested a 75% cap or your regular damage whichever is lower. This means that on a tanker, where 75% of their hp is well over the damage you already do, you wouldn't see any difference in damage at all. Noteably if you see someone who is already hurt, 75% of their total health in damage may kill them anyway, that isn't a crazy concept either. In that situation the person has at least engaged an enemy before death.
*3 - There is nothing you can say to justify a situation where someone can be killed from FULL HEALTH, in one attack.
*4 - This has nothing to do with how I PvP, or how I handle myself in PvP. I DO keep +perception powers on all the time(even with those you still don't see stalkers more than not), I do move constantly, I do watch for signs like ripples in the water, and all that... and guess what it's not part of this discussion, nor should your skill at PvP be
*5 - I don't expect the developers to nerf you into oblivion, if for some wild reason your AS is nerfed somewhat (I sort of expect it), I wouldn't be adverse to you getting a slight increase in other areas, defence or whatnot. HOWEVER, you do get much more defence, than sets that don't have defence at all.
*6 - Finally, and this is the stretch. Please try to think about the bigger picture before you let loose your opinions. The analogy between perma-holding and full-killing in one hit has nothing to do with comparisons between holds and the damage of AS, except in so far as the futility it presents to the victim. THE futility, the unacceptable part about stalkers, isn't the raw upfront damage, it is the outright killing from full health with ONE attack (stressing the ONE). This is where you need to think a little about fairness in the game, how is this fair to your victim, you have to stand back and think about that. How is it fair to you if your hit down in one hit? Where is the interaction that makes this a game? I don't sit down to a game of monopoly and let someone win on the first roll, nor would I be gratified if I did win on the first roll of a game of monopoly. Why should you be happy with a one hit kill (again the point being made -- from full health). I think your being cheated out of a challenge. And I KNOW the people being killed in one hit, are being cheated out of a game.
**As a final note, and I do appreciate this honest analysist of a stalker given by Quason, I will point you to this post here click here
Please make note how powerfull they are, that they can basically get away from anyone, that they can basically kill most things even if those things can see them. Don't tell me that a 75% percentile cap would do them under, I know that to be untrue.
[ QUOTE ]
HOWEVER, you do get much more defence, than sets that don't have defence at all.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is among the stupidest statements i have read on these boards.
In other news ... water is wet !
Hey, I say it like I see it. But here is a more poignant question, why did you even bother to open your figurative mouth? Or does your -valueless- post indicate acceptance with everything aforementioned, excepting of course that most trivial sentence? But You know what? Why am I even bothering to respond. Maybe I should delete this, and save you even seeing it...
but i'm too lazy I suppose and it's easier to press post, and heck you obviously don't care.
[ QUOTE ]
Or does your -valueless- post indicate acceptance with everything aforementioned, excepting of course that most trivial sentence?
[/ QUOTE ]
Not really, i just didnt think it was worth commenting on because Castle has already stated that they are changing the coding in game so that any PvP attack that would kill a player in one hit will instead leave them with 1hp. With that in mind almost the entirety of your post was better off ignored.
I would hope that one yellow isn't enough to break through two powers worth of stealth (Hide + Stealth). Two seems fair. As far as I can tell, any single perception power sees through a single layer of stealth. I know I was seeing Stalkers with the IR Goggles, and Tactics will see them to, I understand. Stacking the two will very likely see through both.
On the subject one one shotting (from full health), do you know what pains must be gone to to accomplish this? The Assassin's Strike alone certainly won't manage it. With a Build-Up you might manage against some squishes if you're well slotted. Generally this one shot behavior comes into play with the Assassin's Strike, Build-Up, and at least a few reds. And of course you need to hit. Build-Up does include a tohit buff, so this isn't too large of a concern, but Assassin's Strike isn't autohit, for sure. Though, if I were trying this, I'd probably take a few yellows in conjunction, and maybe a preemptive break free, just in case. Of course, this all supposes you've got a target that's standing still. These are easily found in ongoing battles, where your target probably isn't at full health anyway. And these ongoing battles are generally rife with AoE unpleasantries, and stacked tactics all around. Players who aren't actively engaged are usually travelling.
My Broadsword/Invulnerability Scrapper had a friendly rivalry going in Siren's Call with a Stalker. Before I even thought to try IR Goggles (and I don't have Tactics), we engaged on a couple occassions. It was always a close fight. His Assassin's Strike would take me down to 20%-25%, and I would immediately Dull Pain back to about 60%. I'd probably get hit with a Placate and a Critical at this point, and be around 50%. Somewhere in this I managed to Build-Up and Headsplitter. We never managed to get much further than this, because some heroes would rush in and break my Stalker friend in half.
When I did start using IR goggles, I saw him coming, and we only tried that scenario once before he moved on, I think.
I dont understand what you problem is this AT needs a buff if anything. We are 1 trick ponies, people seem to forget that alot. Placate should be unresistable in pvp. The problem people have with stalkers is that they are too dumb to keep moving or they do something really really stupid like use rest out in the open. To me doing that is like having a huge neon kick me sign attached to your back. Its not like we are going to be killing all ATs without alot of extra buffage it is just not possible to do this all the time. As I see it now stalkers should be able to 1 shot everyone but tankers unless they are buffed up, be we know this is not the case. Almost everytime I have killed someone in pvp it with my stalker it has been because they did something real stupid or thought they were safe in the air. It has never been on a scrapping 1 on 1 kind of thing because I know I will lose if I scrap. There are a ton of anti stalker powers out there as it is. Let me ask this question if a blaster can use build up and aim and a few enrages and can snipe someone to death from a distance how is it that no one has a problem with that but they have a problem with someone having to creep into melee range and wait for the right opening to kill? Either way it is the same end result so why do we get all the attention? This question is not about nerfing blaster but about the devs being fair to us.
Bump and Grind Bane/SoA
Kenja No Ishi Earth/Empathy Controller
Legendary Sannin Ninja/Pain Mastermind
Entoxicated Ninja/PSN Mastermind
Ninja Ryukenden Kat/WP Scrapper
Hellish Thoughts Fire/PSI Dominator
Thank You Devs for Merits!!!!
[ QUOTE ]
I expect the good Stalkers will get relatively few kills with relatively few deaths. The bad ones will get impatient and die a lot. In short, Stalkers are balanced in PVE and PVP.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's been my experience. I'm "mediocre" right now -- I own the unwary clueless hero, but these heroes that have moved to Stage 2 strategy (i.e., increased perception, AoE effects, etc.) are much more difficult to defeat if I get impatient. I can't play haphazardly at all anymore.
Last night, when I played "pretty cautiously" but not "paranoia cautiously," I died three times and had no kills to show for it.
The Stalker-busting by some of the threads on the PvP boards is getting tiresome when it feels like I'm already working harder than most heroes just to hold even, now that they've gotten over the initial week where Stalkers were mowing through clueless players left and right, like a chainsaw through jello.
Tangent: Personally, I feel like it's a cheap shot to chunk a bunch of reds and one-shot someone -- it's different from using a limited power like Build Up, and feels like an "exploit" -- but that's just me. I suppose a tank can chunk a bunch of purples to counter it, so it goes both ways, but it still feels cheap.
Stalking isn't just hide, placate, and AS. It's the tactics you use to choose, follow, and engage your target - tactics that can be thrown right back at stalkers by ANY hero(or a team of heroes) that knows what good stalkers are doing, and has the powers to shut them down. If you anticipate what a stalker will do, they lose surprise.
Once you play a stalker, you get a good knowledge of their weaknesses. Stalkers are unbalanced in PvP. If they ever were "balanced" their playstyle would be completely changed.
When more heroes start stalking stalkers, we'll see a balance in PvP. Right now, heroes aren't or just haven't learned how.
[ QUOTE ]
*3 - There is nothing you can say to justify a situation where someone can be killed from FULL HEALTH, in one attack.
[/ QUOTE ]
So how are you planning on dealing with those pesky inspiration popping blasters? Or those pesky inspiration popping Scrappers? Or those pesky inspiration popping Brutes?
It's all well and good to make dramatic proclamations, but as long as you have inspirations you are going to have the possiblity of a one shot kill from any of those AT's and possibly controllers as well. And that one shot kill could easily happen from Stealth, and even from long range.
As far as I'm concerned they can make any changes they want to Stalkers in PvP, as long as it doesn't effect the AT in PvE.
We've all seen a lot of back and forth in the PvP boards about Stalkers. We've seen complaints in the Stalker threads about needing improvement...I've noticed you seem very receptive to the idea that Stalkers might not be good enough. There's no point in debating about overpowered vs underpowered because it is largely a subjective discussion and offers little clarity.
One thing I think that has to be put on the table is that it would seem improbable for the devs to 100% nail the "balance" of the Stalker AT in PvP right out the gate nor would I expect them too. I realize there was internal testing and beta testing, but I do not believe the devs would contend that the data was conclusive or complete under those circumstances.
However, I am intereted in the devs providing the player base with a statement about how they perceive the risk vs reward for stalkers in PvP.
1) When the Arena first came out, Positron said he wasn't overly concerned with the 1v1 battles because it was too much of a rock/papers/scissors affair. How do we reconcile the dev philosophy that 1v1 can't be balanced and yet make sense of a toon that is designed for 1v1 combat? How does one side-step 1v1 balance on one hand and then appropriately balance an entire AT for it on another?
2) The Arena is a situation where neither toon can leave the battle. Players, blasters in particular, were using Phase Shift to effectively gank and escape and the devs put a stop to it. Clearly ganking was not to be tolerated. What is interesting is that the Stalker AT is predicated on ganking. Its speciality is the 1v1 battle with the escape. Why take that ability away from blasters in consensual battles but promote and endorse it in another AT in non-consensual battles?
3) I am unaware of any AT power that doesn't have some counter in another AT without resorting to power pools. Defender buffs are unresistable, but yet people can buff themseves beyond those debuffs a la Fort, Build-Up, etc. Blasters have some unresistable damage, but the majority of it is resistable. Every status power has some opposing power that resists it. Fear, Holds, Sleep, even Slows, have their counters within the players very powers themselves. Even Taunt in PvP is not 100%. And yet, nothing resists Placate. Yes, I understand you can knock someone out of it...provding you somehow manage to trigger an attack that launched before Placate takes affect and hits after (you can't honestly say this is an expected skill). Or, you can launch a PBAoE and hope to hit, provided you have one. But this isn't resistance to the statusing power like every other status power has. Are there plans to offer the other sets resistance to Placate e.g. Give Clear Mind, Integration, Practiced Brawler, Ind Will, etc?
(Btw, Assault offers no usable protection against Placate. Don't know if it is a bug, but I stood there and let one placate me...and I was not able to target them at all...and certainly not within the time for them to launch an AS after running around for a few seconds...and no...Assault wasn't detoggled).
3) It seems that the AT's in CoH have their foils in CoV. And vice versa. Who is the foil for a Stalker? Who can consistently solo defeat Stalkers who do not want to be defeated to the same extent that they can defeat any solo AT that doesn't want to be defeated? ...I'm reading that Stalkers can one-shot tanks in BB and Siren's with enough Rages. No solo AT can achieve the invisilibty of Stalkers, so should Stalkers be the only set that doesn't have to constantly be looking over its shoulder for fear of some hero?
Again, my question is not about is this too much or not enough, but how you and the devs perceive the balance and most importantly, how the off-setting weaknesses are actually substantive. What do I mean by that? Geko stated that one of the reasons that they turned IH back into a click is that they could not balance it as a toggle. They had meant for it to have a great healing benefit, and thought the huge endurance drain would compensate. But players proved they could avoid this penalty by six slotting QR and Stamina. So the penalty, though substantial...was not substantive. The same thing was said about Perma-Unstoppable. People were compensating for the crash, so there was not substantive penalty. It existed on paper, but was easily compensated for in-game. People talk about toons with damaging auras are proof against Hide...but I recall you explicity saying you were able to crit a Fire Brute...through BA and defeat him.
I think it would help a lot of the players if you explain how the devs perceive the AT is balanced in PvP and how that actually plays out in PvP...not how it plays out theoritically.
For all the Pro-Stalkers posters out there. I like Stalkers. I like the element that the AT brings to CoH. The joy in defeating them is almost as enjoyable as beating blasters. I also have defeated Stalkers with my Scrappers 1v1, so I'm not even protending that Stalkers are invincible. My lvl 33 has defeated a lvl 40 Stalker in Warburg...several times. But each and every defeat of a stalker was only a result:
1) they simply chose not to use enough Rages to one shot me.
2) They stuck around for the fight.
and usually,
3) I was playing a /regen
In absolutely none of those situations could I have defeated the Stalker if they had decided to check out early. And ...I was defeated far more times by Stalkers that stuck around than I defeated. So it wasn't like I sailed to victory. I'm not asking for any changes. I'm asking for an understanding from the devs for how this AT fits within the context of PvP from a substantive Risk vs Reward model.
I don't believe for a second that it is an easy task to balance this type of AT for PvP, so I'm certainly not recusing the devs even one bit, I am trying to understand it from their perspective.