One shotting has got to end

Hello, I'm a stalker. I enjoy PvP but I spend more time in PvE.

It seems that one shotting from stalkers in PvP is the issue here because you're much less likely to see the well built stalker than the stealthed blaster. Truth be told, there aren't any huge threads about any other AT with "one shot" capability.

I have faith in Cryptic, I made a post in the stalker forums about this, but looking at the I6-current patch notes I count roughly twice as many AT based buffs as nerf, whether result of a bug fix or planned change.

So it seems then that the problem, with stalkers at least, is less the one shotting and more the inability of the *average* player such as myself without a character that's built for PvP.

The extremes of PvP builds and their arguments look like Tactics and the stalkers taking stealth. While both serve a function in a PvE build, they're generally less useful there than in PvP.

So here's my suggestion:

Add +perception and +stealth enhancements. Allow these to be slotted to any power with that respective capability. This allows soloists on either side to effectively use these powers to best effect, at a tradeoff of defense. This means that while the advantages of tactics will still be viable, multiple stacked instances of tactics won't be nearly required, nor will stacking stealth and hide.

Make hide non-stackable. An AT built on stealth, taking the "lower grade" stealth power in order to remain on top of the game just seems silly conceptually, and is a large cause of grief. Also, other than a cursory defense buff that can be better obtained from other pool powers or secondary powers it serves little to no function in PvE. I haven't taken this power for these reasons.

Make placate require a hit check in PvP. I'm not saying that it shouldn't be fairly easy for a stalker to placate a player opponent, but it shouldn't be automatic. High accuracy, yes, automatic, no. The power doesn't currently accept accuracy enhancements, and this should remain so. This allows players with a +defense component to be equipped to deal with one of the stalker's best toys. Higher HP targets are well equipped versus the initial strike, but these targets would be less equipped to deal with the placate. This suggestion somewhat levels out the resistance to stalker toys, as currently the +defense powersets have few options at retaliation, even though they are better equipped to unintentionally avoid the initial strike.

It's not my job to design the game, but I think that the suggestions outlined here may be a step toward balancing the key issues players seem to have with stalkers in PvP without completely changing the essence of the AT.

[ QUOTE ]
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 ]

This post from Castle should be of interest to you then.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I asked for clarification on this when it was mentioned on the beta boards. The code will be for PLAYERS ONLY, meaning that a player will not be one-shotted by players OR by mobs. Players will still be able to one-shot mobs.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's the basic idea, yes. It would be pretty annoying for a level 50 scrapper to hit a level 1 Hellion and not take him down instantly.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ 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 ]

Yes, Statesman and company have stated many times that what they mean with their offten missquoted line is mainly they will not take desicions that affect PvE due to PvP. Mainly it really means: no nerfs will come to PvE due to PvP.

As for finding you a quote, i'll do a search but these forums get inactive threads deleted every week so i may not find any currently. You can always PM states himself if that is what he means, he takes his time, but often if the PMs are serious he may reply.

Now, PvP is an entire diferent playstyle, and as such, if you want to be optimal you do need to build for it instead of PvE. Heck, there are builds that are done specificaly to deal with one type of enemy and farm them to death even if they fail against other types of enemies, it is imposible to expect there to be a build that can work optimaly on every single situation.

Thanks for the link Pilcrow. I must have overlooked that one since I was looking through their posts for just that. My greatest concern is at rest now.

[ QUOTE ]
[ 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 ]

Yes, Statesman and company have stated many times that what they mean with their offten missquoted line is mainly they will not take desicions that affect PvE due to PvP. Mainly it really means: no nerfs will come to PvE due to PvP.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it's as clear cut as you make out. States and crew have said they will not make any PVE changes SOLELY for PVP reasons. That doesn't mean they will not change PVE for reasons that are primarily for PVP.

In reality, many things they say are issues in PVE were somehow magically discovered and/or raised in priority for a fix because they were causing significant problems in PVP. Had PVP not come along, they might have remained unchanged due to the devs either not noticing.

[ QUOTE ]
As for finding you a quote, i'll do a search but these forums get inactive threads deleted every week so i may not find any currently. You can always PM states himself if that is what he means, he takes his time, but often if the PMs are serious he may reply.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless a MOD deletes them, redname posts stay on the boards forever - they are immune to the auto purges. That's why I can find posts like

Statesman clarifies his PVP/PVE statment:

[ QUOTE ]
Agreed.

We should try NEVER to change a power because of PvP alone (BTW, this is what I've always promised). The changes now aren't solely because of PvP - there's signifcant PvE issues, too.

[/ QUOTE ]

And This

[ QUOTE ]
We endeavor NOT to change powers solely because of PvP. The powers we are changing are usually because of PvE or PvE AND PvP.


[/ QUOTE ]

And This

[ QUOTE ]
“PvE will never be changed solely because of PvP.” I don’t want any PvP problem to be solved with a PvE change – unless there’s also a problem in PvE.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, it helps to search under CuppaJo's name because she posts in his stead somtimes:

[ QUOTE ]
Why are you seemingly designing this game around PvP when only a very small percentage of people even partake in it?

There are very, very few things that we’ve done with PvP in mind. Travel Suppression is often given as an example – but that isn’t true. During Beta, we noticed that players would Fly and Snipe away from mobs beyond their range – and essentially gain XP for no risk. We instituted an Accuracy penalty to discourage this gameplay. We noticed early in Live that the same thing was happening with Super Jump and Super Speed; a player could zoom in with either power, attack and escape with impunity. It’s not that we minded escaping, because travel powers should help with that, but the issue was that the travel powers were being used to get XP for no risk. We initially added an Accuracy component, but players didn’t like it as much, because it seemed to remove completely the option of attacking while traveling. I agreed and we went back to the drawing board – and came up with Suppression.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Now, PvP is an entire diferent playstyle, and as such, if you want to be optimal you do need to build for it instead of PvE. Heck, there are builds that are done specificaly to deal with one type of enemy and farm them to death even if they fail against other types of enemies, it is imposible to expect there to be a build that can work optimaly on every single situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Optimal != Functional

A build that performs well in PVE ought to be able to perform decently in PVP. That's why these answers of "get tactics" are a bit funky. You shouldn't have to get a specific power or to be decent in PVP.

There was a similar issue with Status protections . People used to say "get acrobatics", but you shouldn't have to get a specific power or pool to be decent at PVP. And, lo and behold, status protections are now sprinkled throughout the shared pools.

I'd suggest they do the same thing with +perception, but +perception stacks much better than status defense do.

[ QUOTE ]
A build that performs well in PVE ought to be able to perform decently in PVP. That's why these answers of "get tactics" are a bit funky. You shouldn't have to get a specific power or to be decent in PVP.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, a performs well in PvE does not has to be decent in PvP, it simply should not be entirely useless in other words, it should function in some situations. The topic at hand is oneshot, not every enemy can oneshoot, and stalkers are just one of 5 posible enemy ATs you can find if you play a hero on PvP. The fact that if you dont build for it you are vulnerabel to 20% of the ATs does not make you by any chance useless, not even close to just decent.

[ QUOTE ]
There was a similar issue with Status protections . People used to say "get acrobatics", but you shouldn't have to get a specific power or pool to be decent at PVP. And, lo and behold, status protections are now sprinkled throughout the shared pools.

[/ QUOTE ]

Status protection is the realm of melee, and few powers actually provide any status protection.


[ QUOTE ]
I'd suggest they do the same thing with +perception, but +perception stacks much better than status defense do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Add too many options and suddenly everyone will auto negate Hide and stealth without even trying, that is definitively overpowered.

We'll just agree to disagree on how much of the utility of a build should cross over from PVE to PVP.

But the pretention that one should have to buy a specific power to counter each AT strikes me as odd. That means 9 powers we'd have to buy to have a counter to each AT. Not an "I WIN" button, just a "They don't necessarily win" button. That's seems a bit over the top.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'd suggest they do the same thing with +perception, but +perception stacks much better than status defense do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Add too many options and suddenly everyone will auto negate Hide and stealth without even trying, that is definitively overpowered.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's the central issue with the Stalker AT. Either you are at their mercy or they are at yours. Since the key to your defense (perception) is also the key to being their bane, you can't protect yourself from them without becoming "overpowered".

I can make myself a hard target for scrappers/brutes/tankers by having fast movement. But this fast movement doesn't help me to penetrate their shields any better.

I can make myself a hard target for most controllers/dominators by having status protection and DEF. But status protection and DEF don't help me to actually cause them harm.

I can make myself a hard target for blasters/corruptors/defenders by getting and slotting up defenses. But those defenses don't help me to defeat those opponents.

For Stalkers, the prescription is +perception. But offering that as a defense is like offering control as a defense. It not only protects you, it makes them vulnerable.

Fortunately for us, there is no class for which control is the only counter. But for stalkers, we're not so lucky.

One alternative to +perception that people have discussed is PBAEs. These can disrupt an AS, and deliver little enough offensive punch that they can be viewed as primarly defensive in any short battle. But there are three key problems with that solution:

<ul type="square">[*]PBAEs are not in the shared pools, so not everyone can get them[*]3/4 Stalker secondaries are focused on DEF, which makes the PBAEs significantly less effective as a preventative[*]Stalkers get a massive protection vs. AE when hidden[/list]
So, if we're going to say that the availability +perception will make everyone else "definitively overpowered" in PVP in relation to Stalkers, then we have to figure out some other way by which people can protect themselves from stalkers. Some method that protects them without opening the Stalker to becoming the prey.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

This is the one thing I currently dislike about the PvP zones at present, that you must constantly use your travel power to avoid the possibility of a Stalker creeping up behind you. It would be nice to be able to stand in one place and either take in the zone or fight without having to leap away after every few attacks.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sounds like you simply don't like to be caught off guard, if you haven't noticed that's the entire point of the AT. To catch you when you least expect it and take you down as fast as they can. I have a feeling that until stalkers are completly gimped unable to sneak on people or take them down no one will ever be really "happy" with them because of the nature of the AT.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's no need for them to be "completely gimped" over this issue. For the most part people don't have an issue with being sneak attacked - they have an issue with the very short period of time between initiation of sneak attack and death, which denies them the oppotunity to actually combat.

If Stalkers are such weak combatants that they cannot complete a kill after a successful sneak attack that eliminates, say, 50% of a recipients HP - then that needs to be fixed in tandem with any one-shot fix. And can be. It's not a binary either/or of "Stalkers get to one-shot or they will be gimped".

[/ QUOTE ]

This post should be closed after you wrote this above statement. Perfectly said and Thank you.

You have really touched on a great many issues here that while not a "one-shotting" issue... are things that really need to be thought about.

At present the mez scenario has been solved to a certain extent by "sprinkling" the power pools with various defensive measures.

I can take health if I want to be less susceptible to sleep.

I can take heal self if I want to be less susceptible to disorients.

I can take acrobatics if I want to be less susceptible to knockdowns.

There are MANY types of mez effects and the like which interrupt ones ability to use their powers... so it is not an "all or nothing" situation.

Perception as it stands now is "all or nothing" and that is where the problem resides... if everyone takes tactics, not only will stalkers be unable to hide from anyone... but tactics gives overlapping to-hit buffs which will negate their defensive sets entirely.

If tactics is the solution then stalkers are in BIG trouble if the gaming population decides to listen to that advice because if everyone takes tactics just to contend with stalkers... suddenly stalkers become completely useless.

The solution to the perception problem is probably to make it less two sided... it needs to have more depth to it for it to function well.

Perhaps a system where all chars have an inherently boosted perception directly in front of them... that way a stalker needs to sneek up behind their target... but if for some reason their target spins around there is a chance they will be seen and attacked.

This way everyone has a "chance" to see a stalker when he is nearby... not a situation where you are guaranteed to see them, or you cannot see them period.

[ 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 ]

Break the AT? Wow, are we being a little over dramatic here? So your saying if AS+ BU only left ppl in PVP with a sliver of hps which required you to follow up with a second fast attack to finish your oppenent off, this would break the AT? Come on give me a break.

There's a few lvl 40 stalkers in my sg that pvp consistantly. You know what they do when they cant AS? They sneak up on someone, hit BU, TF, ET, and BS. Guess what most ppl are dead after that chain of attacks anyhow. The disorients combined with the extreme dmg, combined with the toggle dropping wipe most toons. Some cry me a river with your broken AT.

[ QUOTE ]
[ 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 ]

Break the AT? Wow, are we being a little over dramatic here? So your saying if AS+ BU only left ppl in PVP with a sliver of hps which required you to follow up with a second fast attack to finish your oppenent off, this would break the AT? Come on give me a break.

There's a few lvl 40 stalkers in my sg that pvp consistantly. You know what they do when they cant AS? They sneak up on someone, hit BU, TF, ET, and BS. Guess what most ppl are dead after that chain of attacks anyhow. The disorients combined with the extreme dmg, combined with the toggle dropping wipe most toons. Some cry me a river with your broken AT.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again another wonderful post. When does using two attack mean your using your AT. If your only using two attack then your not playing your toon right. If you can win with twi attacks something is wrong.

Who ever said that will break stalkers if the AS dmg was reduced go play as a rogue on WoW and see what kind of dmg can be done by a stealth class out of stealth.

[ QUOTE ]

For Stalkers, the prescription is +perception. But offering that as a defense is like offering control as a defense. It not only protects you, it makes them vulnerable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its not really the same. Using control prevents the opponent from acting, or limits their actions (in the case of an immobolize). +Perception doesnt limit the Stalker's ability to act and react, and use the other tools they have beside's Hide to fight and/or flee.

Given that Stalkers have equivalent defensives to Scrappers (or in the case of some sets like Ninjutsu, trade defensive capability for utility and control) I really dont buy the line of thinking that a visible Stalker is somehow extremely vulnerable. A visible Stalker is not necessarily at the mecy of the person who can see them.

[ QUOTE ]

Who ever said that will break stalkers if the AS dmg was reduced go play as a rogue on WoW and see what kind of dmg can be done by a stealth class out of stealth.

[/ QUOTE ]

WoW Rogues (at least when I played one, I don't know what changes have been made since I left WoW to come back to CoH) were one of the best-balanced of this type of character archetype that I've seen in a MMOG, and it was precisely because of this reason. Being able to frontload from stealth was a signature attack, but it was by no means the only thing that they could do, nor was it anything resembling an instant kill. WoW Rogues have a ton of nasty mez effects, poisons to slow, blind, DoT, etc. They were balanced because, like any other class, they were only successful if you drew from all of the tools the class has to offer. That simply isn't true in CoH, as is evidenced by the number of assertions that limiting the effectiveness of AS would ruin the class.

As a Stalker player myself, I sure as hell don't want to be a one-trick pony. I'm perfectly willing to see alpha strikes get reduced in exchange for some extra bit of roguish utility that helps me in situations where not everything is going my way.

[ QUOTE ]
Given that Stalkers have equivalent defensives to Scrappers (or in the case of some sets like Ninjutsu, trade defensive capability for utility and control) I really dont buy the line of thinking that a visible Stalker is somehow extremely vulnerable. A visible Stalker is not necessarily at the mecy of the person who can see them.

[/ QUOTE ]
most of the stalkers secondary are def roughly the equivalent of one luck and that's pushing it now take a guess how many builds have (build up, aim, targeting drone, rage or just plain accuracy inpiration) and how long it would take them to drop a stalker. Ninjitsu gets some cool toys but those toys are get me the hell out of here or set a trap tricks not stay and fight for long toys. I don't have a regen stalker so I am not sure how sturdy one is, scrappers on the other hand have two resistance sets one of which has major utility (dark armor). Also consider that stalkers have less HP than scrappers and an higher BI then even blasters, that also lowers their chance of survival you may not be buying it but it's the reality of it.

[ QUOTE ]
But the pretention that one should have to buy a specific power to counter each AT strikes me as odd. That means 9 powers we'd have to buy to have a counter to each AT.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or simply accept that you cant posibly win against every single AT.

As for other ways to prevent being killed by a stalker, +Def WILL help you against stalkers (AS is not auto hit)

Sure, its usualy coupled with a lot of acc buffs, but still it is posible to miss.

The only thing i would say does need some change, and this is not only for stalkers, is supression. The 4 seconds that are there currently are too short. After attacking players there should be a 15 to 20 seconds of supression of travel powers (teleport included), phase shifts, and stealth powers. This would actually make the desition to attack a real risk one.

Right now being able to jump in, kill, and run away is a bit unrisky. 4 seconds can be too little for a human to get to target you, specialy on a crouded space where tab will just jump arround everyone and targetting with mouse can get tricky.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But the pretention that one should have to buy a specific power to counter each AT strikes me as odd. That means 9 powers we'd have to buy to have a counter to each AT.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or simply accept that you cant posibly win against every single AT.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you miss this sentence in my post? I doubt it.

[ QUOTE ]
Not an "I WIN" button, just a "They don't necessarily win" button.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
The only thing i would say does need some change, and this is not only for stalkers, is supression. The 4 seconds that are there currently are too short. After attacking players there should be a 15 to 20 seconds of supression of travel powers (teleport included), phase shifts, and stealth powers. This would actually make the desition to attack a real risk one.

Right now being able to jump in, kill, and run away is a bit unrisky. 4 seconds can be too little for a human to get to target you, specialy on a crouded space where tab will just jump arround everyone and targetting with mouse can get tricky.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a valid point. While I think a larger change is warranted, I can see this as a place where reasonable people can disagree.

But I would add that one of the key ways Stalkers (and other stealthers) have an unfair advantage in PVP at current is in his ability to pick his battles. I think things like "info" that allow a Stalker to size you up in detail before striking should be disabled in PVP zones. It's no risk to take on an opponent you know didn't buy the countermeasures even if you have to stay and fight.

With the help of Quason and the numbers he provided (I am not sure if they are 100% accurate... but they should be a pretty close approximation, more than good enough for the purposes of this discussion) I am pretty confidant in asserting that stalkers defensive capacity falls smack in the middle between scrappers and blasters.

This is taking into account both hit points and their defensive sets... but completely ignoring offensive capacity and buffs/debuffs their foes might encounter.

Needless to say, I am not so sure the conclusions you are drawing by saying that their defenses are only euivalant to 1 luck is really very valid... the reason is that while a blaster can achieve 25% def by popping 1 luck... a fully slotted sr stalker or scrapper will achieve 50% def with that single inspiration. So how are the defenses so useless?

Taking all factors into account SR stalkers and scrappers function as if they ALWAYS have 1 luck running... plus they have elude and status protection to make their sets even more defensive than a squishy AT running that same single inspiration.

Personally I do not feel the SR set is as useless as you seem to be claiming... they recieve roughly 50% damage mitigation against EVERYTHING... compare that to an Invuln scrapper who maxes out at around 50% to s/l and 30% to everything else except psi... and suddenly SR looks like under average conditions they are in a better defensive position.

So far as the numbers I ran... Stalkers should see around 66% the survival of a comparably slotted Scrapper.

Blasters by comparison should see around 66% the survival of a Stalker who opts to slot out their defenses... should they choose to ignore their defenses, that is another story.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Given that Stalkers have equivalent defensives to Scrappers (or in the case of some sets like Ninjutsu, trade defensive capability for utility and control) I really dont buy the line of thinking that a visible Stalker is somehow extremely vulnerable. A visible Stalker is not necessarily at the mecy of the person who can see them.

[/ QUOTE ]
most of the stalkers secondary are def roughly the equivalent of one luck and that's pushing it now take a guess how many builds have (build up, aim, targeting drone, rage or just plain accuracy inpiration) and how long it would take them to drop a stalker. Ninjitsu gets some cool toys but those toys are get me the hell out of here or set a trap tricks not stay and fight for long toys. I don't have a regen stalker so I am not sure how sturdy one is, scrappers on the other hand have two resistance sets one of which has major utility (dark armor). Also consider that stalkers have less HP than scrappers and an higher BI then even blasters, that also lowers their chance of survival you may not be buying it but it's the reality of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what if they have less HP than Scrappers? Thats the trade off for Hide, Placate and controlled crits. For reference Stalker HP is equal to Controller/Defender HP from what I've heard. Regen is generally going to be less effective for a Stalker admitedly, since Regen functions off your total health. The less your HP total, the less health you're going to regen. This is probably why Regen stalkers seem to be quite rare.

Defense can be overcome with Accuracy inspirations, this is true, but you can also up your defense with Lucks. And remember that in PvP zones base to hit is only 50%. If a Stalker has around 25% defense in PvE, then that defense is effectively being doubled in a PvP zone.

I dont understand what you're saying about BI. Are you saying Stalkers have higher BI than Blasters?

If you really think you're squishy, I'd suggest that you try playing something with equivalent HP (say an Empath or Trick Arrow defender) but no defense, mez protection or stealth and see the difference.

[ QUOTE ]
Did you miss this sentence in my post? I doubt it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me rephrace (and i tought i did that before posting it):

Or simply accept that you cant posibly survive against every single AT.


[ QUOTE ]
I think things like "info" that allow a Stalker to size you up in detail before striking should be disabled in PVP zones.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sort of agree. Sort off because I think the only thing you need to disable is the power information tab, bio, badges and pvp ratings should still be visible to anyone.

[ QUOTE ]
I dont understand what you're saying about BI. Are you saying Stalkers have higher BI than Blasters

[/ QUOTE ]
Scrappers have an Higher BI than blasters. [ QUOTE ]
So what if they have less HP than Scrappers? Thats the trade off for Hide, Placate and controlled crit

[/ QUOTE ]
less HP = less chance of survival you were arguing about their defense remember. [ QUOTE ]

If you really think you're squishy, I'd suggest that you try playing something with equivalent HP (say an Empath or Trick Arrow defender) but no defense, mez protection or stealth and see the difference.

[/ QUOTE ]
would a storm controller and a dark defender do, TA is recognized as the worst set I don't know what point you are trying to make and for the record you and I both know that emp is mostly a team build. Of course slap on a controller and you wouldn't know it. I just want to clarify I am refering to the any top tier powers since most of the PVP is done in siren's call this would be pre top tier powers. [ QUOTE ]
Defense can be overcome with Accuracy inspirations, this is true, but you can also up your defense with Lucks. And remember that in PvP zones base to hit is only 50%. If a Stalker has around 25% defense in PvE, then that defense is effectively being doubled in a PvP zone.

[/ QUOTE ]
yet when you take into account that most Heroes will have slotted for accuracy and Aim and build up can give you great accuracy it does not seem much now does it? As for inspirations take a guess which side has easier access to them and usually more influence and slots to carry and purchase them.

[ QUOTE ]

Blasters by comparison should see around 66% the survival of a Stalker who opts to slot out their defenses... should they choose to ignore their defenses, that is another story.

[/ QUOTE ]
blasters do more damage and 33% of their damage is unresistable, not to mention the fact that with EN and dev secondary they can toggle drop and tp foe into trip mines for an easy win. Also except for AR most blaster damage is non s/L which is another advantage while only EM has energy damage. I was not counting top tier powers but if you want to include them why not take into account blasters APP FON alone can cap resistance for a blaster. [ QUOTE ]
Taking all factors into account SR stalkers and scrappers function as if they ALWAYS have 1 luck running... plus they have elude and status protection to make their sets even more defensive than a squishy AT running that same single inspiration.


[/ QUOTE ]
I was not accounting for their top tier powers but if you want to include them you may as well include everyone else in the process. And there are other sets too you know like ninjitsu and EA. Stalkers get their top tier at level 38 so do you wish to take into account all the power and abilities other AT get by then as well?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Did you miss this sentence in my post? I doubt it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me rephrace (and i tought i did that before posting it):

Or simply accept that you cant posibly survive against every single AT.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's something I'm willing to accept. I would like to actually participate in the fight where they vanquish me, however.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think things like "info" that allow a Stalker to size you up in detail before striking should be disabled in PVP zones.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sort of agree. Sort off because I think the only thing you need to disable is the power information tab, bio, badges and pvp ratings should still be visible to anyone.

[/ QUOTE ]

I go so far as to take issue with seeing HP and END reticles on PVP foes, but I can see that perspective. I worry about things like badges, which can be pretty indicative of some of the hero's powers are. But, hey, not my game.

DarkPhoenix, if you would be kind enough to provide me with some base numbers for the stalker defensive sets I would be happy to run a comparison between them and stalkers under various accuracy slotting regimes... if you do not have those numbers that is okay too, I will just have to wait for them to come in from another source.

So far as buildup and aim go... those enhance damage as well, so resistance sets are equally effected... build-up adds 100% damage for scrappers and blasters and 80% damage for stalkers (I believe these numbers to be correct, but feel free to correct me if I am wrong)... these are only transitory buffs, and as such should not be considered the normal encounter scenario... especially when a stalker has the option to wait and see when their target uses these powers and then to attack while they are still recharging (effectively taking them out of the equation entirely).

Without considering ACC enhancers, SR stalkers have 66% the suvivability of an SR scrapper plus better defenses versus aoe's.

Their defenses are not quite as pitiful as you might be convinced... they are actually fairly decent.

Download the latest version of hero planner no need to beat around the bushes build a stalker to level 30 and see for yourself. http://joechott.com/coh [ QUOTE ]
So far as buildup and aim go... those enhance damage as well, so resistance sets are equally effected... build-up adds 100% damage for scrappers and blasters and 80% damage for stalkers

[/ QUOTE ]
not in reality because if you are relying on defense you either dodge or die with resistance if you have some type of resistance to the damage you get some time to react (respites, lucks, +HP powers). Once your defense is trumped you have nothing to protect you and less breathing room to react.

[ QUOTE ]
blasters do more damage and 33% of their damage is unresistable

[/ QUOTE ]

At present stalker AS damage is 86% unresistable... that's right 86%... because 6/7th's of it is critical damage.

As such I do not see blaster unresistable damage as being important to consider here.... especially considering that if you added up all the damage doled out by a stalker in a given period of time... I bet far more than 30% of it is unresistable.

I also was not counting their top tier powers by the way... that 66% defensive capacity of a scrapper is derived completely without considering elude.