One shotting has got to end
By
Acanous_Quietus,
Posted on: 2005-12-07 01:38 in Archetypes and Powers General Discussion
[ QUOTE ]
Assassin Strike. The Stalkers greeting card of sorts. This attack does massive damage when the stalker is hiding. This is broken up into two words. Assassin: N One who murders by surprise attack, especially one who carries out a plot to kill a prominent person. And Strike: V To hit sharply, as with the hand, the fist, or a weapon.
Well An assassin strike means roughly a sharp hit by someone meant to murder another person. An Assassin. I wonder why they would call it assassin strike if you couldn't in theory kill a foe in a single blow...... Wow ya know?
[/ QUOTE ]
Personally I do not approve of your method of reasoning here... I see it as being on par with the statemens "scrappers scrap", "blasters blast", or "tankers tank".
The names we see in the game for powers are not supposed to be indicative of their effect... or should all broad sword scrappers get up in arms that their "head splitter" attack does not actually split anyone head open.
Presumably getting ones head split open should constitute an instant kill every time... so based upon your logic any attak that "sounds" lethal should be equivalant to instant death.
I also suppose the katana analogues will require new graphics as that final attack certainly does not look like a "golden dragonfly"... it looks suspiciously like an attack that would cleave someone in half... so I guess we are going to have to call it "body splitter" and make that one an instant death attack too.
Just as a side note... ONLY energy stalkers have "assassins strike"... the rest have different names for their attacks... so I guess you are going to have to verbally analize all of them to fit them into this theory.
Plus... to further your analysis... if we are going to go strictly by the names of things... what about the word "stalker" implies they are able to kill anything?... I guess they should only be good at following things around.
Unfortunately that sounds like a pretty boring job if you ask me.
[ QUOTE ]
What you can say is that Stalkers probably seem a little more squishy to themselves than they actually are, because a lot of the powers that allow people to see and attack them-Tactics, Targetting Drone, Aim, and yellow skittles-also (effectively) lower their defenses by raising their attackers ability to hit them. On the other hand, Stalkers probably seem less fragile than they are in reality to people who can't see them, because having the initiative and placate combine for fantastic effective defense. Stalker Defenses on top of that is icing-though it's pretty darn tasty icing.
[/ QUOTE ]
You have struck on an amazing synergy that I had not considered... the fact that most of the powers that permit you to see a stalker also directly counteract their defensive capabilities.... so in order to even contend with a stalker... you must invariably negate their defensive sets.
I do dissagree with you that defense is inherently more difficult to consider than resistance... I find them both to be equally easy to deal with and once I have some numbers on the stalker defensive sets I'd be happy to set up some information relating to a 0 ACC enhancer situation, 1 ACC enhancer situation, 2 ACC enhancer situation etc... it really is not as formidable as some people seem to think.
The same way acc enhancement directly counteracts defenses... damage enhancement directly counter acts resistance... as when we have 50% resistance to a power at baseline... and then double the damage we suddenly are dealing with 100% of the base power damage again, as opposed to half of it.
Personally I do not understand why stalkers would advocate that the solution to the problem they set up is for everyone to team with lots of leadership... IF that actually came to pass, stalkers would be completely useless, because everyone in the pvp zones would have massive +perception and massive to-hit buffs.
[ QUOTE ]
Assassin Strike. The Stalkers greeting card of sorts. This attack does massive damage when the stalker is hiding. This is broken up into two words. Assassin: N One who murders by surprise attack, especially one who carries out a plot to kill a prominent person. And Strike: V To hit sharply, as with the hand, the fist, or a weapon.
Well An assassin strike means roughly a sharp hit by someone meant to murder another person. An Assassin. I wonder why they would call it assassin strike if you couldn't in theory kill a foe in a single blow...... Wow ya know?
[/ QUOTE ]
Very true, stalkers should be able to one shot some mobs, but you also have to remember that you're dealing with heroes with super powers. I can't say I read a lot of comics but would you ever expect wolverine to be taken out of comission in two hits? or Storm or Jean Grey in one?
[ QUOTE ]
Ok, so I've been browsing some of the threads out there with the concern to stalkers and found/came-up with some interesting options. First off, like the devs have done it the past add facets to current powers, i.e. add +perception to thing that would make sense like possibly Super speed, Accelerate metabolism, Speed boost, or anything in the realm of adding alertness as a side-effect. It was done with certain mezz powers in I5, it can be done with perception too.
Another idea is taking current +perception powers, (diclaimer....not my original idea), adding +perception enhancements to current percption powers, Tactic in particular. If you can invest 3 +perception enhancements to a perception power and it would allow you to see thru stealth/hide, it would be more bearable to some folks. This is a raw concept, but a start to a solution.
A few more things I'd like to add. EVERY AT has been tweeked/nerfed for balance. You guys remember I5/6? So why is it such a outlandish idea to adjust a brand-new AT?
Second, many ppl aren't looking at the big picture. Ok, fine so if you wanna be viable in pvp you must take +perception and/or a AOE toggle. That's how stalker critics will tell you to "smarten up". Even when as mentioned by the devs, they dont want any person to be compelled to pick-up a specific pool power (e.g. Hasten/stamina). The temporary satisfaction of one-shotting all these so-called uber pvp builds, will fade just as that estatic feeling of breezing thru invincible solo missions at 50 or soloing AVs. I did it in another MMO, where challenge was non-existant, and I quit shortly after. Its not worth it in the long run, to ward-off solo/noob pvpers just for a short lived, cheap satisfaction. I dont want to see an environmet where all potention pvper are forced into picking up the Leadership pool, or forced to team ALL the time b/c of the allure of the stalker. I guarrantee the stalker population will rise if unchecked, just as all the other arena cookie-cutter builds have.
[/ QUOTE ]
Why are you worried about the marketing of the game and the newbies that are coming into the game? It's not your place to do that. You're a player. You're setting off a bad example to the newcomers right in this very post. You're giving them negativity. If the newcomers should feel discouraged, it wouldn't be the Stalkers gimping them, it would be the people who are reacting negatively towards the certain situation instead of giving out several solutions to help them improve their gameplay.
And besides, not every single person is gonna feel the way that you do. You shouldn't base every newcomers feelings on your own because for all you know, 90% of the newcomers probably disagrees with your personal opinions. I'm all up for having a good gameplay environment, but you're making it worse with your "I hate Stalkers" rant.
[ QUOTE ]
Very true, stalkers should be able to one shot some mobs, but you also have to remember that you're dealing with heroes with super powers.
[/ QUOTE ]
And can you tell me where it says that being able to heal other people would make YOU inmune to a bullet trough your eyes?
[ QUOTE ]
I can't say I read a lot of comics but would you ever expect wolverine to be taken out of comission in two hits?
[/ QUOTE ]
If he gets jumped by two equaly strong enemies that can strike from the shadows, sure i can.
[ QUOTE ]
or Storm or Jean Grey in one?
[/ QUOTE ]
Cant count the many times i seen these get KOD in one shot. Heck, i seen Spiderman be KOD in one shot. Few are the heroes that can actually stand more than one well delivered punch.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ok, so I've been browsing some of the threads out there with the concern to stalkers and found/came-up with some interesting options. First off, like the devs have done it the past add facets to current powers, i.e. add +perception to thing that would make sense like possibly Super speed, Accelerate metabolism, Speed boost, or anything in the realm of adding alertness as a side-effect. It was done with certain mezz powers in I5, it can be done with perception too.
Another idea is taking current +perception powers, (diclaimer....not my original idea), adding +perception enhancements to current percption powers, Tactic in particular. If you can invest 3 +perception enhancements to a perception power and it would allow you to see thru stealth/hide, it would be more bearable to some folks. This is a raw concept, but a start to a solution.
A few more things I'd like to add. EVERY AT has been tweeked/nerfed for balance. You guys remember I5/6? So why is it such a outlandish idea to adjust a brand-new AT?
Second, many ppl aren't looking at the big picture. Ok, fine so if you wanna be viable in pvp you must take +perception and/or a AOE toggle. That's how stalker critics will tell you to "smarten up". Even when as mentioned by the devs, they dont want any person to be compelled to pick-up a specific pool power (e.g. Hasten/stamina). The temporary satisfaction of one-shotting all these so-called uber pvp builds, will fade just as that estatic feeling of breezing thru invincible solo missions at 50 or soloing AVs. I did it in another MMO, where challenge was non-existant, and I quit shortly after. Its not worth it in the long run, to ward-off solo/noob pvpers just for a short lived, cheap satisfaction. I dont want to see an environmet where all potention pvper are forced into picking up the Leadership pool, or forced to team ALL the time b/c of the allure of the stalker. I guarrantee the stalker population will rise if unchecked, just as all the other arena cookie-cutter builds have.
[/ QUOTE ]
Why are you worried about the marketing of the game and the newbies that are coming into the game? It's not your place to do that. You're a player. You're setting off a bad example to the newcomers right in this very post. You're giving them negativity. If the newcomers should feel discouraged, it wouldn't be the Stalkers gimping them, it would be the people who are reacting negatively towards the certain situation instead of giving out several solutions to help them improve their gameplay.
And besides, not every single person is gonna feel the way that you do. You shouldn't base every newcomers feelings on your own because for all you know, 90% of the newcomers probably disagrees with your personal opinions. I'm all up for having a good gameplay environment, but you're making it worse with your "I hate Stalkers" rant.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yo buddy, what makes you think the greater populus of players or noobs read these boards? And two, I personally dont give a damn per se about the individual new-comers, I care for the PVP environment as a whole, which in reality, isnt made up of well-oiled, pvp machines and highly organized sgs. I dont wanna see pvp zone turn into graveyards because the zone turned into CounterStrike.
And who are you to tell me what MY job is? I'll tackle any task I choose to without getting permission for ppl like you. Thank you. If my arguement is weak against stalkers, then the devs will be the final judge of that.
I believe that the Assassin strike attack (when I say that I mean Assassin Strike/claw/blade/etc to the troll who responded before) is the only attack that Stalkers can pull off with relatively little danger (there is always the chance of missing or being spotted before an attack). Sure if they placate they can pull off another in quick succession but the problem with this is with non target AOE's it is viable to still damage said stalker.
and btw, every comic hero gets beaten easily once, learns from it, then goes out there and kicks extreme hiney. Wolverine beaten by Magneto, stripped of his adamantium then developed Bone claws.....Storm had to forcibly overcome her clostrophobia, Jean was "beaten" by the spirit of Dark Phoenix, and with Rogue's help overcame it and became more powerful because of it
The correction to your chosen method of argument is hardly "trollish"... your reasoning went something like this :
Stalkers should be able to 1-shot because they have a power with the name "assassin's strike"... you are basing your entirely rationale upon a flashy word the developers chose for the power.
Here is your actual statement :
[ QUOTE ]
I wonder why they would call it assassin strike if you couldn't in theory kill a foe in a single blow
[/ QUOTE ]
As such I am confused as to why you do not have issues with the "invincibility" power not actually making a char invincible.
Or why when a blaster goes "nova" that the entire city isn't vaporized... because we know that a nova is an exploding star.
If you want to argue for keeping one-shotting please be my guest... but you are going to have to do better than the name of the power justifying the effect because just about every power in the game does not perform exactly as it's name might suggest.
That is the reason why the line of reasoning you offer is completely without merit in this case.
What you have to realize is that the effect of a given power goes well beyond what the power is called... most are much weaker than the name might indicate... so why should "assassin's strike" be exempt from this prevalant theme in the way the names of powers, and their ultimate effects are associated?
[ QUOTE ]
(Aside: Yes someone could use Tactics etc, but as has been stated many times, PvP should not infulence PvE. It should not be necessary for any player to take a power or powerest in order to participate in PvP. If Tactics become essential, this is not the case.)
[/ QUOTE ]
that is a fallous argument, fire brutes that take acrobatics cannot take on flying blasters so they either have to take flight or TPFoe in order to deal with them by your reasoning that is wrong. What about the numerous blasters and controllers that have stealth and invis I am required to take +perception to see them so that is wrong by your analysis as well. There are too many things that simply are required in order to be competent against certain stratgies that just don't work in PVE. Do you really think the sudden popularity of TPfoe in PVP is because it's so good in PVE 
[ QUOTE ]
Aside: Yes someone could use Tactics etc, but as has been stated many times, PvP should not infulence PvE. It should not be necessary for any player to take a power or powerest in order to participate in PvP. If Tactics become essential, this is not the case.
[/ QUOTE ]
PvP not influencing PvE means that the devs will attempt all they can so that any change to the game because of PvP does not affect PvE.
It does not means that you should be able to taunt and herd and burn players as you would in PvE or so on. If you wish to take active part of PvP you SHOULD be influenced drasticaly by this on your desitions. If you, however, decide to ignore PvP, you should never be forced to do something that is PvP oriented. That is all that ideal stands for, dont go around twisting it.
[ QUOTE ]
That is all that ideal stands for, dont go around twisting it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh? You mean there is a definite, absolute history of the etmology of the phrase "PvP not influencing PvE" for these boards? If there is, would you please do me the courtesy of citing it? And if not, could you please do us all the courtesy of not asserting your own ideal as the greater, better, truer meaning?
I ask only because some of us (an assumption, really; it could quite possibly [and depressingly] be only I) hold the phrase to a fairly different meaning, and I see nothing which would suggest that there was an error in my doing so. And if there was such an error, then I would greatly appreciate being made aware of it, so that I would know of the need to search for a new term upon which to pin my prefered ideal, to prevent any confusion.
Okay, I've read through 80% (literally) of this thread. The discussion has ranged from overpowered Stalkers (or not) to Grand Unified Theory of Everything (an impossibility in my mind, but I'm no scientist). The one post that made me smile ended with a call for a nice global thermonuclear war. An apt solution I sometimes think, but rather irrelevant here and now. As an aside, if Anne Coulter becomes president in 2008 I will gladly surrender my dark blue passport.
Chess
Checkers
Go
Shogi
Othello
Five games. All rely on two opposing, perfectly balanced powersets and a grid to move the pieces over. All are pure PvP games of skill, with no luck or randomization involved. All have simple rulesets and can be played anytime, anywhere. Also, if you lack the proper pieces, they can be easily substituted. All five games are thousands of years old.
A beginner can learn any of those five games in half an hour or less. A master will spend a lifetime studying them and still have things to learn.
In my never humble opinion the PvP aspect of MMORPGs is completely unworkable, and will remain so for a long time to come. It is overly complex, always depends on some element of randomization, easily exploited, and caters to bullying rather than fair play. In my experience PvP in MMORPGs is boring because it always come down to one of two things:
who has the better built toon
who gets lucky with the seed algorithm
and in the very worst cases, a combination of the two. I find discussions of "skill" amusing when they are harmless, and completely laughable when they are serious. "Skill" in a PvP-enabled MMORPG is a minor element, when it has any impact at all. It's never about skill. It's always about the numbers. I'm sorry, but any other approach is simply delusional. (Using TP Foe to drop an opponent onto Caltrops and a trio of mines, for example. How is that "skill"? 
If anything, it's an exploit because it puts complete power in the hands of /Dev or /Traps player.)
CoV has not broken the mold. If anything, it has reinforced it. Discussions like this one will never end until someone, somewhere has the guts, genius, and sheer luck, to create a PvP-enabled MMORPG that captures the same simplicity/complexity dichotomy as any of the classic games I've listed above.
Nerfing Stalkers is not the answer. Balancing Perception/Stealth is not the answer, either. Greater simplification, not greater complexity, is the only route that can hope to bring success.
The one poster who proposed that any PvE build should also be PvP viable has the right idea. Only when the worst PvE build imaginable can walk into a PvP area and compete well enough that the player who built it will come away with a greater appreciation for the game itself will this or any other game come close to matching the elegance of the Classics.
If you're looking for a realistically balanced PvP model, Halo is not the answer. Look to the Classic board games and find some way to incorporate that same level of consistency, predictability, simplicity in content, and complexity in mastery. Cryptic needs to be looking for a way to make each player's PvP experience as easy to learn as Othello, as intellectually demanding as Go, and just as simple to learn as two sets of black and white stones on a fixed grid.
Each indivdual player, by the way, not each team! Attempting to force team-based or faction-based PvP onto the player is the first step down the wrong road. Factions and teams can be both important and relevant, no reason for them not to be, but it is the individual player that pays a monthly subscription fee and must come away from the game feeling content.
According to Nick Yee's Daedalus Project, 75% of the overall MMORPG playerbase currently does not enjoy PvP and 5% or less actively participate in PvP. Those are the numbers you need to change if you want the PvP portion of CoV/CoH to ever be anything more than a freaky sideshow.
In terms of suggestions... Well, for starters don't let Hide stack with Stealth, but even that is only a short-term solution. The only long-term solution is to treat the PvP game as completely separate from the PvE one. It needs a completely different ruleset and a completely different set of goals. Until we reach the point where a computer AI can match the creativity of a human mind, mixing the two will never work to anyone's satisfaction.
Greater simplicity, not greater complexity. Any other approach will only lead to an endless chain of "balancing" and huge numbers of frustrated players.
================================================== ===
AE Story Arc #536752: Torn Asunder
An army from far, far away has been driven from their homeland and landed on Earth. They desperately need a new home and they're liking the look of ours.
================================================== ===
[ QUOTE ]
Okay, I've read through 80% (literally) of this thread. The discussion has ranged from overpowered Stalkers (or not) to Grand Unified Theory of Everything (an impossibility in my mind, but I'm no scientist). The one post that made me smile ended with a call for a nice global thermonuclear war. An apt solution I sometimes think, but rather irrelevant here and now. As an aside, if Anne Coulter becomes president in 2008 I will gladly surrender my dark blue passport.
Chess
Checkers
Go
Shogi
Othello
Five games. All rely on two opposing, perfectly balanced powersets and a grid to move the pieces over. All are pure PvP games of skill, with no luck or randomization involved. All have simple rulesets and can be played anytime, anywhere. Also, if you lack the proper pieces, they can be easily substituted. All five games are thousands of years old.
A beginner can learn any of those five games in half an hour or less. A master will spend a lifetime studying them and still have things to learn.
In my never humble opinion the PvP aspect of MMORPGs is completely unworkable, and will remain so for a long time to come. It is overly complex, always depends on some element of randomization, easily exploited, and caters to bullying rather than fair play. In my experience PvP in MMORPGs is boring because it always come down to one of two things:
who has the better built toon
who gets lucky with the seed algorithm
and in the very worst cases, a combination of the two. I find discussions of "skill" amusing when they are harmless, and completely laughable when they are serious. "Skill" in a PvP-enabled MMORPG is a minor element, when it has any impact at all. It's never about skill. It's always about the numbers. I'm sorry, but any other approach is simply delusional. (Using TP Foe to drop an opponent onto Caltrops and a trio of mines, for example. How is that "skill"? If anything, it's an exploit because it puts complete power in the hands of /Dev or /Traps player.)
CoV has not broken the mold. If anything, it has reinforced it. Discussions like this one will never end until someone, somewhere has the guts, genius, and sheer luck, to create a PvP-enabled MMORPG that captures the same simplicity/complexity dichotomy as any of the classic games I've listed above.
Nerfing Stalkers is not the answer. Balancing Perception/Stealth is not the answer, either. Greater simplification, not greater complexity, is the only route that can hope to bring success.
The one poster who proposed that any PvE build should also be PvP viable has the right idea. Only when the worst PvE build imaginable can walk into a PvP area and compete well enough that the player who built it will come away with a greater appreciation for the game itself will this or any other game come close to matching the elegance of the Classics.
If you're looking for a realistically balanced PvP model, Halo is not the answer. Look to the Classic board games and find some way to incorporate that same level of consistency, predictability, simplicity in content, and complexity in mastery. Cryptic needs to be looking for a way to make each player's PvP experience as easy to learn as Othello, as intellectually demanding as Go, and just as simple to learn as two sets of black and white stones on a fixed grid.
Each indivdual player, by the way, not each team! Attempting to force team-based or faction-based PvP onto the player is the first step down the wrong road. Factions and teams can be both important and relevant, no reason for them not to be, but it is the individual player that pays a monthly subscription fee and must come away from the game feeling content.
According to Nick Yee's Daedalus Project, 75% of the overall MMORPG playerbase currently does not enjoy PvP and 5% or less actively participate in PvP. Those are the numbers you need to change if you want the PvP portion of CoV/CoH to ever be anything more than a freaky sideshow.
In terms of suggestions... Well, for starters don't let Hide stack with Stealth, but even that is only a short-term solution. The only long-term solution is to treat the PvP game as completely separate from the PvE one. It needs a completely different ruleset and a completely different set of goals. Until we reach the point where a computer AI can match the creativity of a human mind, mixing the two will never work to anyone's satisfaction.
Greater simplicity, not greater complexity. Any other approach will only lead to an endless chain of "balancing" and huge numbers of frustrated players.
[/ QUOTE ]Excellent post, very well written. And every thing you say is true, in my opinion.
the only way that the complaining and, "nerf this and that cause it's overpowered", talk is going to stop, is when everyone enters the PvP zone and they have the exact same powers, exact same HP.
People have used games like 'Halo' as an example..well people still complain about how this weapon or that is overpowered and needs to be balanced..same is said for every single MMO I've ever played or read about.
It will not end, and I've said it before and will say it again; once the nerf squad is done w/stalkers it will be on to the next AT/Power/Set. This community has been doing it for a year and a half..and that was just over who could lvl faster.
The Harpers
It puts the lotion on it's skin or it gets the hose again!
Don't forget to help control the Furry population; have your Furry spayed or neutered!
Kellen Wolf/Claw/SR(Scrapper)/ protector
Si'Nifay/Electric/Fire(Blaster)/ protector
Ok lets take your reasoning into account, lets remove Assassin's strike for the reason that when used on another player it has a good chance of killing the other player provided the stalker is hitting close to damage cap. And while we are at it lets make Nova a close range single target medium damage attack as well, oh yeah lets also limit the number of mines to 2 at a time, increase the recharge of caltrops, Make TP foe give the foe detention shield for 15 seconds, Oh yeah and make sniper attacks do 3 damage. Everyone here would be happy with pvp right??????
WRONGO buddy
Eliminate AS or reduce the damage by 1/2 even would make stalkers uneffective in pvp and even less effective solo in pve
Nova would also be useless
TP foe would be pointless
Mines wouldnt kill anything
Sniper shot would be a taunt and end up killin the users
Caltrops wouldnt be worth anything
So this would "Balance everything according to your POV"
I got a better idea! lets make PVP Turn based! That would give everyone time to do what they want! Each person could attack once per turn and eliminate suprise attacks entirely!
Enjoy your dream, in fact, keep it your dream. I for one have no problem with stalkers, blasters, tankers, khelds, scrappers, defenders, controllers, brutes, corruptors, masterminds. All of them have weaknesses, all of them have strengths, focus on your weakness and you will find how to remedy it.
And for the record, I think you should find a way to loosen up about gettin killed in pvp, instead of gettin all riled up about a post someone puts on the boards defending a very well balanced AT why dont you go have fun doin PVE, I am sure that the NPC mobs wont post how you are overpowered to them.
[ QUOTE ]
According to Nick Yee's Daedalus Project, 75% of the overall MMORPG playerbase currently does not enjoy PvP and 5% or less actively participate in PvP. Those are the numbers you need to change if you want the PvP portion of CoV/CoH to ever be anything more than a freaky sideshow.
[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe I'm not seeing the big picture here or something, but I don't see the problem with PvP being the freaky sideshow. I'm rather happy living within the fringes of the fringe of society. *shrug*
[ QUOTE ]
Oh? You mean there is a definite, absolute history of the etmology of the phrase "PvP not influencing PvE" for these boards? If there is, would you please do me the courtesy of citing it? And if not, could you please do us all the courtesy of not asserting your own ideal as the greater, better, truer meaning?
[/ QUOTE ]
These are phrase from the devs themselves that were first brought up when players were worried that PVP changes would ruin PVE. You can look at statesman and positron past quotes but I can paraphrase.
"PVP should not affect PVE however they are some case where PVP issues will play a part in PVE."
Whether or not they have held that to be true is debatable as I think many changes were purely PVP driven. I cringe everytime the dev make changes and say PVP was involved because simple reason being PVP is a sidedish. It's something to do when you are bored and want to kill time or goof around. I know there are hard core PVPers but they are the minority the kind of animosity (ganking, childish behavior, cursing) and nerf herding (see stalkers and the pvp threads) PVP brings makes it very unatractive to most. I know there are a few that don't participate in this kind of behavior but I can count with one hand how many i have met.
How about if you go into a PVP zone and you have a toggle that allows you to become un-targetable if you choose NOT to engage in PVP in a PVP zone. BUT the hand off is that your costume turns bright yellow and when you go to "chat" it broadcasts "Cluck cluck, Becawk, Bawk, Bawk, Bawk".
"I'm not scared of anyone or anything Angie. Isn't that the way life should be?"
Jack Hawksmoor, The Authority.
[ QUOTE ]
Eliminate AS or reduce the damage by 1/2 even would make stalkers uneffective in pvp and even less effective solo in pve
[/ QUOTE ]
PVP changes don't have to effect PVE.
If the entire AT is "gimped" if a single power is nerfed/not taken, then the AT is broken.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Eliminate AS or reduce the damage by 1/2 even would make stalkers uneffective in pvp and even less effective solo in pve
[/ QUOTE ]
PVP changes don't have to effect PVE.
If the entire AT is "gimped" if a single power is nerfed/not taken, then the AT is broken.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with that statesment I have read some of your suggestion and think they would go a long way to make stalkers more balanced. But as it currently stands for most of the stalkers carreer AS is all that he really brings to the team or solo play. If that were to be taken away stalkers would basically be a watered down scrappers with a controllled critical.
almost exactly what I am trying to say, Stalkers without AS is as effective as a blaster trying to tank. The AT is balanced and a nerf would in fact Break the AT
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Eliminate AS or reduce the damage by 1/2 even would make stalkers uneffective in pvp and even less effective solo in pve
[/ QUOTE ]
PVP changes don't have to effect PVE.
If the entire AT is "gimped" if a single power is nerfed/not taken, then the AT is broken.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with that statesment I have read some of your suggestion and think they would go a long way to make stalkers more balanced. But as it currently stands for most of the stalkers carreer AS is all that he really brings to the team or solo play. If that were to be taken away stalkers would basically be a watered down scrappers with a controllled critical.
[/ QUOTE ]
I do feel that IF it is true that a Stalker really only has AS to bring to the table (mine is still in under 20 and that's not my experience so far, but there's a lot of game left to play), then something else needs to be put there to keep the AT viable.
I'm just saying that the argument of Kill AS = Kill Stalkers ergo no fixing AS/one-shotting is faulty. If it's true, we still need to fix AS/one-shotting and also fix Stalkers so they aren't so dependent on a single power.
I only have one thing to say about this issue, so I'll just say it without further ado:
Whatever happens in PvP...I couldn't care less, as I don't bother with it. Those who are interested in it can hash out the AS there. However, if AS is made a NON one-shot kill in PvE, I will be VERY pissed off. That would make every fear I (and many others) had about PvP intruding into PvE come true, and would be the beginning of the end. I *LIKE* the way my PvE Stalker plays, and changing that for PvP reasons would break the game for me.
Now, if AS changes ONLY effect PvP? No skin off me. Like I said, I'll let those affected by such things argue about that.
[ QUOTE ]
Ok lets take your reasoning into account, lets remove Assassin's strike for the reason that when used on another player it has a good chance of killing the other player provided the stalker is hitting close to damage cap.
[/ QUOTE ]
Who said this was my reasoning?
I never once advocated for AS to be removed from the game, and the fact that you are stating that I have only goes to show that you are not so much interested in having an honest debate as you are at furthering your own position at all costs (even if that cost is understanding the positions of others).
What you have done here is created your own argument to argue against... I have stated NONE of the things you have said... and then you claim I am wrong.
I might very well make up your argument too... however I actually addressed the content of your post, so you can be rest assured that my arguments were against your actual position.
[ QUOTE ]
Eliminate AS or reduce the damage by 1/2 even would make stalkers uneffective in pvp and even less effective solo in pve
[/ QUOTE ]
No one is saying to eliminate AS or to just cut the damage by 50% (or at least I am not)... so why don't you see my position for what it is instead of this craziness that you are purporting it to be for your own convenience.
Next you will say I am advocating for stalkers to be taken out of the game completely... well let me cut you off at the pass and tell you that is also not something I desire.
[ QUOTE ]
Enjoy your dream, in fact, keep it your dream.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry... everything you stated is your own delusional fantasy... not mine.
All I have been trying to tell you from the beginning is that the name of a power does not impact the actual game mechanics... NONE of the powers function entirely because of what they are called... as such any argument predicated upon the name is ultimately flawed.
[ QUOTE ]
And for the record, I think you should find a way to loosen up about gettin killed in pvp
[/ QUOTE ]
I also never stated any occurance that would lead one to believe I was getting killed in pvp... another made up argument you have presented here.
Feel free to argue for 1-shotting... but I would ask that you refrain from telling me what my opinion is when you do so. If that is all the ammo you have in your logical arsenal then you are shooting blanks.
Now if you desire to present your own game experience... and your own opinions, I would love to read them... but the second you start telling me what my own position is without backing it up with evidence (i.e. a quote) is the second you lose credibility so far as I am concerned.
[ QUOTE ]
almost exactly what I am trying to say, Stalkers without AS is as effective as a blaster trying to tank. The AT is balanced and a nerf would in fact Break the AT
[/ QUOTE ]
Very bad analogy. A Stalker without AS would be like a blaster without a snipe. Since day one of this game many people have pigeonholed a number of AT's i.e. "A tank without taunt is not a tank", "Defenders are Healers" we all know this is not true and to say a Stalker without AS is "broken" is not true either.
Back to the point of this thread, I have said it before and I will saw it again, not one Stalker power needs to be touched to balance them out in pvp. The only thing that needs to change is the Hide+Stealth combo.
Turn it off and suddenly everything changes.
[ QUOTE ]
Ok,the relavance of a stalkers hp is bs. My controller's hps is at the bottom of the rack.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just in the interest of keeping this discussion factual, in warburg stalkers and controllers BOTH have 885 HP. So if your controllers hps are at the bottom of the rack... guess what your opinion about stalker HP must be?
As such I think it is important that we stop advocating that one AT has "terrible" defensive capacity while another has "great" defensive capacity until we run a few numbers to confirm or deny such a position.
From the way things seem to be turning out, the survivability of stalkers is pretty close to midway between scrappers and blasters.
With more accurate base power numbers I could work out the specifics.