And the Blaster Community Representative is...
By
AmericanSteel,
Posted on: 2006-01-21 17:46 in Blasters
<<So, I'll believe blaster changes when I see them>>
It bears repeating again.
Nerf Blaster Controllers!!!!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
...yet another unkept promise.
The Devs haven't said boo about getting Community Representatives for Archetypes other than Stalkers. Oh, and before you mention that _Castle_ picked up the Defender issues--he dumped them a few weeks later.
[/ QUOTE ]
I did? Funny, I still read them every day.
Oh, and I'm going to look at Blasters now that I've gone through the consolidated Defenders bug list. You guys got one?
[/ QUOTE ]
I got one. Where are our redone secondaries we've been hearing about for many many months?
Think Blasters overall are fine compared to say Defenders. Hell Blasters in my books are now one of the better AT's in the game.
Worst AT in the game is Defenders bar none. Sure Blasters have issues but nothing in the lines that Defenders do. Controllers can do there job better and safer than they can. Some powers are just plain pointless (Sonic Buffs and Assasin Strike). Scrappers unresistable buff overrides a Defenders. Defenders Damage is in the category of total suckage to pure suckage. Defenders Primary Powers to Control Incoming Damage is better in a Controllers secondary than on a Defenders Primary and this was by design. Sorry but it's upsetting to see Castle coming here when so many issues are still unresolved (and probably won't be resolved) with a class that I consider the worst in the game.
At one time Blasters were bottom of the barrel compared to others but with ED, more health, and even Defiance (compare it to Vigilance) Blasters are now at the top again.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
<<I'll celebrate when things get fixed. Been down this road before.
EDIT: Nothing personal Castle. >>
This bears repeating.
[/ QUOTE ]
It also bears repeating that _Castle_ gets [censored] done. Some people deserve a certain level of faith given their track record for hard work and results.
[/ QUOTE ]
QFT. It is expected that not every answer Castle has will be agreeable. However, it is communication, and some things will get fixed or improved.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
I posted this a while back and it reflects a lot on something that goes to the core of the Blaster Archtype, and I feel is appropriate for a repost here:
[ QUOTE ]
I believe the fundamental core of the Blaster's problems actually is due to an early game misconception based in an overarching emphasis on melee combat. The game designers felt that Blasters, if they could do everything at range it would make them immune to too many of the threats that would be presented in the game. This of course was actually due to their own self imposed error by trying to make the core of the game mostly melee based rather than a mix of both melee and ranged early on (a fact that has greatly changed). It was theorized by them that if an archtype like the Blaster could do everything at range and thus have no reason or incentive to enter melee ranged combat and avoid any mob approaching them and trying to engage in melee combat that Blaster could avoid all risk, thus Blasters would become the dominate Archtype because it would be all reward and no risk. This, of course, we all know is false now. People will choose melee Archtypes for love of melee Archtypes if nothing else.
.
However, the legacy of that decision was built into the core of the Blaster's powersets, limiting the amount of ranged combat the Archtype could do. Melee attacks for Blasters then had to be more powerful than what should have been thier main line of attacks otherwise it would make very little sense to be entering melee when your ranged attacks were more powerful to start with. This is also exasterbated by the circular logic of smashing/lethal, where the attack being most resisted must be harder hitting and because they are harder hitting must be more resisted.
.
This results in an Archtype that has two powersets that do, in effect, the same function, damage, whether it be at ranged or melee, with the irony being that ranged attacks are just as damaging at point blank as they are at great range (which could have a kernal of a core concept that could have made a better inherent). This left the Archtype with no support powerset for either range or melee. Nothing to blunt or mitigate damage or threat, or to support the Blaster in general, essentially creating a bi-polar Archtype who's powersets wanted it to be in both range and melee at the same time.
.
This gets even more exaggerated by the fact that Power Pool sets are also designed with a particular emphasis on denying ranged attacks and are chocked full of melee attacks. Any melee based or non-melee based archtype can easily and early on supplement their attack chains with Power Pool powers for melee attacks. This is great for Controllers now with the inherent power of Containment, as well as Defenders, neither of which have strong melee components to begin with, and both with various mez powers, Buff/DeBuff abilities, even self heals, defensive forcefeilds, and even pets.
.
None of this may have actually mattered if not early on in the game's history had the Blaster Archtype not been the fastest of the Archtypes to mature. With only one skill to master, damage, and only 40 levels to go, the learning curve was much less for the Archtype. Many mob types lacked sufficient ranged fire power or even ranged attacks, and other Archtypes did have problems that at the time did need addressing in order to get them up to speed, and a single bugged power (smoke grenade) did not help the Blaster's assumed image of being overpowered and thus in no need of improvement anytime soon.
.
But as this game has matured, the melee component emphasis of the game became overpowering. Game threats where amplified in order to provide enough risk to keep the melee Archtypes in check, and in supreme irony, it was melee, not range, that broke the game, thus the Global Defense Adjustment and Enhancement Diversification.
.
Now that that is over with, maybe this error in design philosopy can be recongized. The Blaster Archtype needs to be redesigned in its own right and not with the misconceptions that it would overshadow other Archtypes, or detract from them, or be subservient or only complementry to them, or that melee needs to be the core of the game, or that they are immune from risk by being at range (which it is most definitively not!)
[/ QUOTE ]
Three things I think could help with what is illustrated above are:
- [*]A Power Pool (not epic) which Blasters can supplement and diversify their ranged attacks from early on, rather than relying on only a single power set for such.[*]Bring Ranged Damage up a notch or two so it is a more significant source of damage compared to Melee.[*]Replace the inherent power of Defiance with something else that has better synergy, is intuitive rather than counter-intuitive, complements the Archtype rather than highlighting its weakness, and does not decrease in effectiveness as a function of level progression. [/list]
How bout making all range attack 80 with shorter recharge time and faster activation, tripple the value buffs of both aim and builup and last 21 secs. hmmmmm /devs is lacking buildup 
It's simple and painless to code for 
disclaimer though this could be just a crazy idea
I'd really like to see Devices looked at as a powerset. There are several underperformers that could use tweaking.
Devices took a BIG hit with ED. The balancing factor of Targeting Drone versus Build Up was that Device blasters could drop an extra Damage SO into their attacks. Now, with ED, all blasters slot the same amount of Damage SO's (3). At best, Targeting Drone saves the character a few slots that would otherwise be spent on ACC - with the big disadvantage of being crippled after a toggle drop.
Taser is, as others have posted, useless (except for stacking with Beanbag). Adding a short range to the power would help. Switching it to a hold (so it could stack with Tesla Cage or the epic holds) would help, though AR users might complain.
Devices also has the poor man's invisibility combo of Cloaking Device + Smoke Grenade. Except that if you take Grant Invisibility + Invisibility instead, you don't have to worry about trying to hit foes before you can sneak past them (and can even bring your buddies along).
Time Bomb pretty much requires you to be invisible to be used properly - and that's hard to do effectively unless you skip CD + Smoke Grenade for the Concealment pool. More often, the blaster simply gets forced into taking Superspeed. This problem and the previous one comes back to Smoke Grenade being a power that requires a to hit roll, meaning any decent size group will be hard to sneak into.
Auto Turret has a HUGE Endurance cost, that is really out of line with its effectiveness.
I hope this post doesn't come out wrong, but.....
_Castle_, Blasters have had problems for a loooong time. There have been MANY, MANY, MANY threads here about improvements. They have gone on for pages. But, no one reads them, or at least a red name never comments, and they get wiped when the boards are cleaned up.
Our first problem is: we need a rep that regularly plays a Blaster and has played at least three combos (like AR/Dev, Fire/Fire, and Archery/Fire) all the way through the game to 50. We can tell you what we think until we are blue in the virtual face (and many folks here have), but unless our rep is involved in this AT, it won't connect.
Well, I started this thread to get the ball rolling.
Ideally, the tank will die precisely as everyone else starts fighting, allowing aggro to be spread evenly among the blaster. -seebs, "How to Suck at CoH/CoV" Guide
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
...yet another unkept promise.
The Devs haven't said boo about getting Community Representatives for Archetypes other than Stalkers. Oh, and before you mention that _Castle_ picked up the Defender issues--he dumped them a few weeks later.
[/ QUOTE ]
I did? Funny, I still read them every day.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, in fact, you pretty much did:
Link to _Castle_'s post:
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I grabbed a copy of the "Defender Issues" post a couple weeks ago and am working through it in my spare time. Considering the length of it, I will probably have gotten through it sometime in Janurary. (Circuit Boy's Note: Original Post Dated Tuesday, December 06, 2005)
[/ QUOTE ]
Just a quick update: It's probably going to take longer than expected for this. I'm sorry, but things are busy, busy, busy here. I'm pretty much booked solid, but I'll find time to get through this as soon as I can. (Circuit Boy's Note: Post Dated Wednesday, January 18, 2006, almost six weeks later.)
[/ QUOTE ]
This was the last said on Defender Issues until yesterday, Monday, January 31st, 2006, forty-five (45) minutes _Castle_ posted here.
But it's great he's looking at our issues.
40062: The World's Worst PUG
84008: Jenkins's Guide to Super-Villainy
230187: The Hero of Kings Row
No H8 - 08.04.10
@Circuit Boy - Moderator - Pride global chat channel
He did eventually respond to them, Circuit Boy. He just didnt change anything (aside from fixing a few longstanding bugs), which is exactly what we're going to get here. A wishlist is just that, a wish. It doesnt mean they'll come true, as everything is probably 'working as intended'.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
...yet another unkept promise.
The Devs haven't said boo about getting Community Representatives for Archetypes other than Stalkers. Oh, and before you mention that _Castle_ picked up the Defender issues--he dumped them a few weeks later.
[/ QUOTE ]
I did? Funny, I still read them every day.
Oh, and I'm going to look at Blasters now that I've gone through the consolidated Defenders bug list. You guys got one?
[/ QUOTE ]
I want the secondaries looked at. Energy seems fine and Devices is good for the right kind of player but the others need a little fixing. Maybe more conserve energy type powers? and keep aim and build up of course.
Arc ID: 475246, "Bringing a Lord to Power"
"I'm only a simple man trying to cling to my tomorrow. Every day. By any means necessary."
-Caldwell B. Cladwell
First, nice save Salvo. Reposting that orginal thread will problably be the most usful thing written in this chain.
Second, Castle your reply was too cheeky for me. The Blaster community has posted 3 complied list of issues in the past...all were ignored and subsquently eaten by the forums.
Thrid, its been Castle looking into stalkers, then defenders, then blasters. You've had your hand in other projects too. You're also using spare time to look in to these things. It sounds to me like some one isn't doing thier job.
done
[ QUOTE ]
Thrid, its been Castle looking into stalkers, then defenders, then blasters. You've had your hand in other projects too. You're also using spare time to look in to these things. It sounds to me like some one isn't doing thier job.
[/ QUOTE ]
To be fair, there isn't anyone else really on the job other than Castle. The rest of the development team is working on new and shiny, which I am happy for because it brought me Mayhem missions, I am unhappy that apparently 2 years of pointing out what issues blasters have has gone somewhat unnoticed and that now 2 years later a new addition to the dev team asked us in a condescending way to produce one. As if we hadn't done it before. I don't think Castle understands exactly what it took for blasters to even get Statesman to post here much less actually get any dev interaction to understand why Circuit was being snide about AT representatives.
Now that he is looking I really don't think there is much he can do since blasters are really looking for some concept changes and entirely revamped secondary sets. That isn't his cup of tea since he can't apparently order animation changes, not even to fix the borked Archery animations.
Maybe he can clarify what the developer position is on the blaster role in relation to other ATs and specificaly what the developers believe balances blasters considering the amount of time that blasters spend in melee. If nothing else, he can describe how the developers play their blasters.
[ QUOTE ]
Also keep in mind they're dealing with the loss of Lord Recluse (and it seems Mako as well) so they're going to be up to their neck just trying to keep up with the schedule.
[/ QUOTE ]
Mako is still here. He's just sequestered and more busy than you would really want to know about.
A quick note on what I can and cannot do.
I can fix data bugs. I can explain why some things work the way they do. I can even advocate changes to folks above me.
Programming bugs or changes, Animation bugs or changes, Power FX or Sound FX bus or changes and overall design philosophy are things I have to kick over to others 99% of the time. When that happens, it means I get's put on the stack of things to do and someone other than me prioritizes them.
A great example is the Assault Rifle Smashing/Lethal damage being overly resisted complaint. It is, however, a much more pandemic problem than just AR. Claws, Katana, Super Strength, Ice Blasters to a lesser extent, Mace, Axe and Broadsword all have the exact same complaint (I might have missed a couple, this was off the top of my head.) That means, it is something that needs to be addressed globally, and is not an AT specific issue.
Possible fixes include going through all the various critters in the game and adjusting their resistances, modifying the base damage values for powers based on the 'standard resistance index' (a term I just coined) or by modifying individual powers.
The first is a tremendous amount of work, which should probably be done at some point. I'd guess it would take me a full 5 weeks to do. The second requires new design, new code and would probably mean a direct nerf to all Negative Energy, Fire, and Cold attacks, since those resistance types are less common than Smashing, Lethal, Energy and Psionic. That means it would be unpopular with a large percentage of the playerbase. The third, and short term easiest version involves tweaking individual powers of effected sets -- which would almost certainly nerf some powers, buff others and cause a whole slew of new imbalances.
It's not as easy to get things done as you might think. 
[ QUOTE ]
The third, and short term easiest version involves tweaking individual powers of effected sets -- which would almost certainly nerf some powers, buff others and cause a whole slew of new imbalances.
It's not as easy to get things done as you might think.
[/ QUOTE ]
So noted. And I think I have a fair solution:
1. Add an energy component to Broadsword. Just seems fair.
2. Make Cold Blast attacks Cold/Energy instead of Cold/Smashing. Thematic with all the Ice/Eng Blasters out there *ahem*
(EvilGeko looks at his character list)
3. Also make Illusion controls power Psi/Eng instead of just Psi. I think you will agree that's needed.
4. Finally Spines should be all toxic damage.
I don't think that will cause any untoward imbalances.
The City of Heroes Community is a special one and I will always look fondly on my times arguing, discussing and playing with you all. Thanks and thanks to the developers for a special experience.
It's just very nice to have someone looking at things, even if it just ends up being passed on. We understand that issues like Defiance lag aren't really one-man fixes, but it's a very nice change.
EDIT: [ QUOTE ]
4. Finally Spines should be all toxic damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you NUTS? Theres only one power with enhancable toxic resistance in the game, and a couple powersets that NEED to lethal defense to avoid being constantly stuck in place.
[ QUOTE ]
A great example is the Assault Rifle Smashing/Lethal damage being overly resisted complaint. It is, however, a much more pandemic problem than just AR. Claws, Katana, Super Strength, Ice Blasters to a lesser extent, Mace, Axe and Broadsword all have the exact same complaint (I might have missed a couple, this was off the top of my head.) That means, it is something that needs to be addressed globally, and is not an AT specific issue.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have to disagree. Other ATs with the lethal/smash problems all have ways to mitigate incoming damage - Blasters do not. My Claws Scrapper has zero difficulty due to lethal damage because he's not in such a hurry to kill. He's able to stand toe-to-toe while my Blaster is forced to kill quickly because he can't manage incoming damage. This is why the lethal problem is so huge - it henders a Blaster's ability to kill quickly, thus increasing the chance of death.
I can't remember the last time I've had anybody I know who plays an SS Tank (or Brute for that matter) complain about lack of damage. In fact if you read most of the threads concerning SS, it's about the enormous amount of damage they are able to do - not a lack thereof.
The only melee AT that has problems with smash/lethal is Mace, I know this from personal experience.
Hi castle. I appreciate you taking the time to look into our concerns. You are teh man.
The problem with AR isn't that S/L is so heavily resisted. It's how it stacks up with other blast sets. See it has no AIM. See that there is what we called a double whammy. Okay.... Now here's where it get's worse. For conceptual reasons most new players tend to pair assault rifle with... wait for it.... DEVICES. Which has no build up.
The perfect gimp storm..... Heavily resisted damage/no aim/no buildup + squishy AT who kills fast or dies hard. See those other examples you mentioned.... they have some self buffage to deal with the problem. If you go tinkering with mob resistances you'll just overpower sets that have some means of debuffing or dealing enough damage to compensate.
You guys need to address this on the micro not macro level, set by set. (just buff claw damage fcs.) And while you're looking at assault rifle.... let's look at Archery. Good accuracy, lousy endurance use and sub blaster damage. It's like you guys are trading accuracy for damage or something. Take devices. No build up. but it has targeting drone. In the good old (god bless em) pre ED days devices blasters could just 6 slot TD with to hit buffs and 6 slot each attack for damage to compensate for the loss of buildup. This is no longer viable. Archery trades damage for higher accuracy... but in the post ED world blasters can afford to double slot any attack with double accuracy SO's.
Throw us a bone over hear.
[ QUOTE ]
... The third, and short term easiest version involves tweaking individual powers of effected sets -- which would almost certainly nerf some powers, buff others and cause a whole slew of new imbalances.
It's not as easy to get things done as you might think.
[/ QUOTE ]
If I might make a suggestion:
ASSUMING:
1) This appears to be more of an issue at the higher levels
2) Enhancements could be modified to work this way
Make SO- level enhancements that are TYPED. If my claw scrapper adds a "cold steel" damage enhancement to "slash" that adds 33% damage, that 33% increase is COLD damage. Likewise, damage resists could be typed, allowing tankers that might have less resistance to ice "mitigate" that weakness a little.
Even some powers that seem contradictory can be explained away easily enough: pyrokinetics might work by drawing ambient heat off surrounding things into one concentrated area, so i could do both fire/ice damage!
Heck, poor fire blasters who feel like they're tickling the "envoy of shadows" with his fire resists might just want to slot for smashing/lethal.
Sure, players with a load of free influence could go through the trouble of swapping out enhancements to match their upcoming foe... but honestly, doesn't the hero game need alot of "money sinks" right now?
I agree with the above, perhaps mixed damage types would be key here where appropriate?
For example, say 20% of an attack could be changed to a "secondary" type for those resisted types.
My suggestions:
Assault rifle: secondary damage smashing, getting hit by a bullet imparts a lot of force, breaking ribs even through kevlar armor
Archery: secondary damage smashing, see assault rifle
Electrical blast: Secondary damage fire, electricity burns
Sonics: I think these are lethal now? If so this makes no sense, it should be split 50/50 smashing energy.
Psi: Psionic tornado: Smashing, Mental blast and will domination: Negative energy. Psychic scream: half smashing, half energy as per sonics
Radiation: Negative energy. Positrons and whatnot
Broadsword: Smashing, you're hitting someone rather hard
Axe: Smashing, see above
Claws: Energy, just look at focus or shockwave's animations
Martial arts: Psionic, to represent Ki of course
Katana: Smashing or psionic "Ki" damage
Mace: Lethal (it has spikes on it)
Super strength: Energy for the sonic factor and the animations
Stone melee: I'm at a loss, maybe energy for the punchy ones and lethal for the mallety ones?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The third, and short term easiest version involves tweaking individual powers of effected sets -- which would almost certainly nerf some powers, buff others and cause a whole slew of new imbalances.
It's not as easy to get things done as you might think.
[/ QUOTE ]
So noted. And I think I have a fair solution:
1. Add an energy component to Broadsword. Just seems fair.
2. Make Cold Blast attacks Cold/Energy instead of Cold/Smashing. Thematic with all the Ice/Eng Blasters out there *ahem*
(EvilGeko looks at his character list)
3. Also make Illusion controls power Psi/Eng instead of just Psi. I think you will agree that's needed.
4. Finally Spines should be all toxic damage.
I don't think that will cause any untoward imbalances.
[/ QUOTE ]
Gonna Disagree on account of logic to only one tidbit here Evil Geko.
#4 is going a bit far as a pointed spine would indeed logically make lethal damage as well as toxic for its payload and indeed make more lethal off the bat and toxic later.
This just seems "right" to me in a thematical sense.
Also not sure about the Ice being energy thing but I can see the kinetic forces behind hurling the ice Thematically doing that.
Tranth
[ QUOTE ]
The first is a tremendous amount of work, which should probably be done at some point. I'd guess it would take me a full 5 weeks to do.
[/ QUOTE ]
The problem isn't exactly new. Ask Statesman why it hasn't been done yet - we've only been bringing it to his attention for a year now.
[ QUOTE ]
The second requires new design, new code and would probably mean a direct nerf to all Negative Energy, Fire, and Cold attacks, since those resistance types are less common than Smashing, Lethal, Energy and Psionic. That means it would be unpopular with a large percentage of the playerbase. The third, and short term easiest version involves tweaking individual powers of effected sets -- which would almost certainly nerf some powers, buff others and cause a whole slew of new imbalances.
[/ QUOTE ]
So in other words, the game has been balanced around sets that players have been saying were broken since I3? I4? This is what happens when the word "soon" gets thrown around when it comes to actually getting things working the way they're supposed to be.
[ QUOTE ]
If nothing else, he can describe how the developers play their blasters.
[/ QUOTE ]
[cynic mode]
Huh they play blasters? If they do, I bet it's only to make sure the FOTM isn't overpowered.
[/cynic mode]
I'm sorry I tend to get these moods when I read an issue update, apparently my mind reacts violently to the subliminal messages inside them.
...Me! make me a redname! please oh PLEEEASE?
[ QUOTE ]
Also keep in mind they're dealing with the loss of Lord Recluse (and it seems Mako as well) so they're going to be up to their neck just trying to keep up with the schedule.
[/ QUOTE ]
Recluse and Mako were in the kind of position that give the coders more work to do.
coders are the guys that squash bugs.
If anything, those guys leaving would have 'sped up' coding on outstanding issues.