[ QUOTE ]
but all other team mates damage as well. If a defender taken alone is worth maybe 65% of the net damage of the average blaster, but improves the average output of each team member by 15%
[/ QUOTE ] So here, you are addressing the extrinsic aspect of my test. On a simulation, it might show up that with three teammates, a defender's debuffs/buffs increases the team damage by more than the blaster's raw DPS contribution.
But this is why I talked about the extrinsic value first. Extrinsically, the devs see what you pointed out...the players don't. Intrinsically, I won't see a Rad/ as a replacement for a Fire/ blaster even if emprically it's higher DPS. Why? The context of the game. Even if the DPS value is higher with a the Rad/, "death is the ultimate debuff." Unless I am fighting AV's every mission, that higher DPS is largely immaterial. All I need is peak damage to kill mobs...not sustained DPS. A blaster gives me that, a defender does not.
The simulation says the defender is better...game play shows the blaster is more effective. Remember..I'm talking about just looking for killing power, not safety...like when I'm a solo tank.
Not that it refutes anything you've said, but I'll leave it to the tanker community to vocalize their opinion on whether a defender has ever been seen as a subsitute for a blaster for raw damage.
[ QUOTE ]
And the main thing throwing off that equation is containment.
[/ QUOTE ] This is separate issue for me. Whether defenders or controllers do more damage, is not, imo, central to the issue of parity between the controller/defender overlap and the defender/blaster overlap. As defender, if a controller can spell me....then I want to be able to spell a blaster. Whether a controller can spell me in damage is not relevant to whether I can spell a blaster.
[ QUOTE ]
Because containment is so dramatic in benefit
[/ QUOTE ] I don't see this. With the exception of Ill/* or PvP solo battles, I don't see Containment being a factor in teams. I've been teaming with a lvl 39 Ice/FF and maybe he kills one mob while my DM/SR and the Ice/En blaster kill 10. What is huge is the bubbles...major major factor in team effectiveness...and Ice Slick.
So getting back to the point, the devs may feel extrinsically, defenders do make up for lack of blasters on teams? Do people who play defenders feel this is apparent or even true?
[ QUOTE ]
It's not until we get to the fourth definition of the term that we start seeing the word as a synonym for "bad".
[/ QUOTE ]
And the third definition of "Seethe" is the one everyone uses. Dictionaries are flameproof but they don't protect a very large area. . .
(ed. I was using m-w.com ; dictionary.com has a slightly different ordering, it seems. What a blow to the perfectly ordered world! )
Mini-guides: Force Field Defenders, Blasters, Market Self-Defense, Frankenslotting.
So you think you're a hero, huh.
@Boltcutter in game.
Containment is only really throwing the equation way out of whack in PvP. A controller can take a squishy down faster than my defender could ever dream of doing.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
* Bug: Absorb Pain inflicts the user with the inability to be healed, even if the target had been defeated before the power could go off. (Rigel_Kent)
[/ QUOTE ]
The two effects are only linked in the fiction of the power. In reality, each effect is put on its target (Healer for Self Damage, Heal for TargetPlayer) as soon as the power is 'paid for.' It probably won't change, since we would have to do some fairly major gymnastics with the powers system to get it to work properly.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't mind taking the damage if my team mate drops before the heal hits. However, the length of time from activation to healing is the main problem with AP. It's just too long.
There is a very noticable delay between hitting the power and healing the target. I believe that this is caused by the order of the effects in the power. The damage effect is the processed first and has to complete before the healing effect fires. The effects definitely do not happen at the same time.
Would it be possible to place the healing effect of the power before the damage? This would reduce the length of time between the activation of the power and the actual healing.
SA
@Griffyn
"40 characters is my limit... okay, 50... 50 is my limit... okay, 60... 60 is my limit... okay, 70..."
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Define "marginal." My estimates suggest that controller bubbles admit something between 30% and 100% more damage than defender bubbles, depending on situation.
[/ QUOTE ]
Marginal, i.e., by some margin. I was not suggesting that the difference is negligible; that's your inference, not my implication.
[/ QUOTE ]
This would be an example of intellectual dishonesty, as most people would define it: explicitly or implicitly suggesting that one was unaware or not fully cogniscent of the facts, in direct contradiction to how they were originally used for effect.
[/ QUOTE ]
Use of the term "marginal" is not ipso facto editorializing, and need not imply "small to the point of irrelevance"; in point of fact the first (and therefore most common) definition of the term up on Dictionary.com is "of, relating to, located at, or constituting a margin, a border, or an edge". Far from brain-death as a prerequisite to adopting this definition, it is, in fact, widely accepted usage in economics (for instance, "marginal costs" being the additional costs of input necessary to generate the next unit of output, above and beyond the costs of input necessary to generate the current unit of output). It's not until we get to the fourth definition of the term that we start seeing the word as a synonym for "bad".
Had I said, "the margin by which a FF/* Defender's buffs and debuffs are superior to a */FF Controller's buffs and debuffs does not offset the superior damage mitigation the Controller can bring to the table through his primary and his superiority with the controls in his secondary", you not only would have understood me, but it would have been functionally identical to what I did say. It was not my implication that the difference between Defender buffs/debuffs and Controller buffs/debuffs is small to the point of irrelevancy, either relatively or absolutely; and you would have to be basically brain-dead not to see that this was not my meaning given both the context, and the definition which I gave you, when you asked.
[/ QUOTE ]
I find your argument to be not marginally dishonest.
[ QUOTE ]
I think I brought up these points back when containment was first being introduced. I was told by controllers that the defender inherant ability would solve the issues with defenders.
[/ QUOTE ] And in theory, it almost does. With Vigilance (which I love) Defenders can theoretically debuff and blast when it's needed most. The question is whether it does in practice. If Controllers have to take three extra powers to Control and Debuff, one should expect less debuf from controllers.
Awesome Quizzles, sounds like you'd go for getting rid of containment and giving us our pets back 
And Concern, there is a big difference between a level 6 and 10 power, and a level 1 and 32 power, even though its much less than before 
, pets are still something to work for for controllers. if they would decide to change the pet order it would probably not go earlier than the 18 power. Since the hold nerfs of i5 though, id much happier take the pet at 18 and just off the control till 32. But again, that kinda takes away the point of the controller, which is to control, of course i never take those holds anymore so it would work just fine for me :P.
Plasmic's Guide to Sonic/Mental
Plasmic's Guide to Regeneration
Plasmic Fire - 50 Fire/Rad Victory Server
[ QUOTE ]
I find your argument to be not marginally dishonest.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's always great when trolls self-identify; makes it easier to add them to my /ignore list.
*plonk*
[ QUOTE ]
Awesome Quizzles, sounds like you'd go for getting rid of containment and giving us our pets back
And Concern, there is a big difference between a level 6 and 10 power, and a level 1 and 32 power, even though its much less than before , pets are still something to work for for controllers. if they would decide to change the pet order it would probably not go earlier than the 18 power. Since the hold nerfs of i5 though, id much happier take the pet at 18 and just off the control till 32. But again, that kinda takes away the point of the controller, which is to control, of course i never take those holds anymore so it would work just fine for me :P.
[/ QUOTE ]
Exactly why should pets be something to work towards? Are they the goal of the set? I thought controll was the goal of the set?
Not only that but in the case of Ill, Ice, Earth, and Grav, the pets are additional control for the early game either through knockback or straight out and out holds and immobilizes.
I had this same arguement with controllers before containment and now I find that I have it with them after containment.
Are masterminds broken with pets in the early levels? Nope. Although, it should be noted that I am advocating for containment to be removed from Controllers and to simply make the shuffle in powers. It would help give defenders a bit more of a point in PvP and would help controllers, across the board, across most levels. It would also help keep controllers from being too much like blasters and keeps them relying on indirect damage which would a plus for defenders. People wanting direct damage could go and get a defender, those who wanted to do things differently from just smash and blast could go and get a controller. They would actually have different play styles rather than being as similar as they are now.
Nevertheless I suppose I shall whither the never ending complaints that the change would bring about doom to controllers even though I just don't see what they are saying.
Let me try and get you to understand what I see in every powerset EXCEPT CONTROLLERS. I see that their final powers are situational. Can you tell me with a straight face that most controllers don't use their pets as often as they can and basicaly usually never do missions without them? What is the current situational power in Controller sets? Right, their AoE hold that got put on an uber timer. So, move the power that is their damage power (read, bread and butter) to the front of the set so that controllers can have their damage early on (not to mention giving grav it's controll early on) and put the AoE hold in the back like the situational power that it is.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I find your argument to be not marginally dishonest.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's always great when trolls self-identify; makes it easier to add them to my /ignore list.
*plonk*
[/ QUOTE ]
Troll? I was using marginal as in "by some margin". So by saying "not marginal", I meant "not by some margin", or in other words "by no margin". So I was actually saying you were being honest.
Lol. Ok maybe in poor taste but it was meant in jest. And here I thought I was being somewhat witty with my double entendre. Too late at night for humour I guess.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think I brought up these points back when containment was first being introduced. I was told by controllers that the defender inherent ability would solve the issues with defenders.
[/ QUOTE ] And in theory, it almost does. With Vigilance (which I love) Defenders can theoretically debuff and blast when it's needed most. The question is whether it does in practice. If Controllers have to take three extra powers to Control and Debuff, one should expect less debuf from controllers.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have never once since its inception noticed any effect from Vigilance. When I perform my duties of buffing, debuffing and controlling (the features of a Dark/Dark build with Leadership) I extraordinarily rarely run low on endurance. This is because my character is designed to be an efficient soloist, which requires effective endurance supply and management.
It is apparent to me that other Defender primary powersets would also gain extremely conditional benefit from Vigilance. Force Field and Sonic Resonance both come to mind, but honestly, I have no experience playing them.
But I am deeply underwhelmed with Vigilance, and was the very first time I heard it described. I consider is the least useful of all inherent powers, lagging behind even Desperation. On an empath, or any reactive powerset, I can see its use. On a proactive powerset, I cannot.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I find your argument to be not marginally dishonest.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's always great when trolls self-identify; makes it easier to add them to my /ignore list.
*plonk*
[/ QUOTE ]
Troll? I was using marginal as in "by some margin". So by saying "not marginal", I meant "not by some margin", or in other words "by no margin". So I was actually saying you were being honest.
Lol. Ok maybe in poor taste but it was meant in jest. And here I thought I was being somewhat witty with my double entendre. Too late at night for humour I guess.
[/ QUOTE ]
I parsed it correctly, then.
However, one could reasonably take it to mean "your argument is more than marginally dishonest" although that may not be strictly correct, grammatically.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
[ QUOTE ]
I have never once since its inception noticed any effect from Vigilance.
[/ QUOTE ] Of the five defenders I have played, only one has Stamina...my D3. I can tell you without equivocation that my TA/A sees a dramatic difference in endo when teaming. In fact, /Regens and Blasters are like like having six slotted Stamina.
In fact, I will consciously modify my play style depending on my endo. When the team is taking very little damage, depending on the teammates, I will focus on just defendering or offending. Lots of tanks and scrappers? I will probably go straight offending. Lots of blasters...more defending. I love big teams with lots of squishies...I can blast and defend to my hearts content.
You know what's really funny? When I do play my Corrupter, I keep wishing I had Vigilance. When I play my blaster, I keep looking for Scourge.
I know this horse has been kicked long since it went to the glue factory. May I make a suggestion regarding Clear Mind and empathy. In light of _Castle_'s pronouncement that Clear Mind was to be a quick fix not a long term buff (and I will completely ignore the supposition that this is why it needs to have a 4 second, could be four hours, too darn long activation). There are TWO possible defender powers that could be just copied over to the empaths' Clear Mind power: Clarity (which would admittedly look funny for an empathy defender to use) and Increase Density. I vote for increase density. I don't think the empaths would mind the subtle changes in the attributes of the powers if it were to reduce the activation time substantially. The usual artistic application of the purple effect instead of the kinetic orange-yellow shouldn't take too much adaptation. In my amateur opinion, this could be done with a patch before a complete Issue of revisions were released. Yay? Nay?
Triumphant Defenders Forever
Psylenz FF/Psi, ArticQuark Storm/Rad, Symon BarSisyphus Bots/psn, Max VanSydow Thugs/Dk, Cyclone Symon Bots/stm, Blue Loki Ice/Cd, Widow 46526
HelinCarnate:OMG it is so terrible. I have the option to take 3 more powers but no additional slots. Boo F'ing hoo.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I find your argument to be not marginally dishonest.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's always great when trolls self-identify; makes it easier to add them to my /ignore list.
*plonk*
[/ QUOTE ]
Troll? I was using marginal as in "by some margin". So by saying "not marginal", I meant "not by some margin", or in other words "by no margin". So I was actually saying you were being honest.
Lol. Ok maybe in poor taste but it was meant in jest. And here I thought I was being somewhat witty with my double entendre. Too late at night for humour I guess.
[/ QUOTE ]
I parsed it correctly, then.
However, one could reasonably take it to mean "your argument is more than marginally dishonest" although that may not be strictly correct, grammatically.
[/ QUOTE ]
It may not be strictly correct, but considering human nature i would've expected it be an ironic statement and consequently have the less strictly correct meaning. (Ironic in the literary sense, not the popular sense.) It seems to me that Centerfire's reaction would only tend to confirm that interpretation, despite how the poster may have intended it. This is really rather amusing.
Moving right along...
i think that part of the issue with the overlap between controllers, defenders and blasters best illustrated by Castle's statement that a defender's weaker control in certain powers from their primary when compared to a controller is balanced by their greater damage. This is patently absurd since the damage is so miniscule compared to other attacks and the control aspect of the power itself. i've used Force Bolt to play Hellion golf with my FF defender because i know i can hit a -30 mob more than 6 times without "arresting" it. Yet i can use Force Bolt to reduce a mob's ability to retaliate to almost nothing when fighting +4's with both my controller and defender. This means that Force Bolt has at least as much utility for my Gravity/FF controller as my FF/Rad defender, if not more.
Similarly, the secondary effect of most defender blasts does not synergize well with defender primaries, and in most cases where it does is such a minor effect that defender's increased secondary effect is nowhere near enough to compensate for the drastically lower damage. Yet most controller secondaries work very well at complementing and increasing the DPS/efficiency of the controller's primary.
While i can't claim to have done a DPS comparison, when playing it certainly feels like controllers are far closer to a blaster's DPS than defenders in most cases, even if this is not actually true. Honestly, i think defenders could receive a lower damage penalty to their secondary and still not outdamage a blaster who also uses both their sets to complement each other.
Even with 75% blaster damage i don't think that an Empathy/Electrical defender would outdamage an Electrical/Devices blaster, or a Radiation/Energy defender outdamage a Fire/Energy blaster.
Dr. Todt's theme.
i make stuff...
[ QUOTE ]
i think that part of the issue with the overlap between controllers, defenders and blasters best illustrated by Castle's statement that a defender's weaker control in certain powers from their primary when compared to a controller is balanced by their greater damage. This is patently absurd since the damage is so miniscule compared to other attacks and the control aspect of the power itself. i've used Force Bolt to play Hellion golf with my FF defender because i know i can hit a -30 mob more than 6 times without "arresting" it. Yet i can use Force Bolt to reduce a mob's ability to retaliate to almost nothing when fighting +4's with both my controller and defender. This means that Force Bolt has at least as much utility for my Gravity/FF controller as my FF/Rad defender, if not more.
Similarly, the secondary effect of most defender blasts does not synergize well with defender primaries, and in most cases where it does is such a minor effect that defender's increased secondary effect is nowhere near enough to compensate for the drastically lower damage. Yet most controller secondaries work very well at complementing and increasing the DPS/efficiency of the controller's primary.
While i can't claim to have done a DPS comparison, when playing it certainly feels like controllers are far closer to a blaster's DPS than defenders in most cases, even if this is not actually true. Honestly, i think defenders could receive a lower damage penalty to their secondary and still not outdamage a blaster who also uses both their sets to complement each other.
Even with 75% blaster damage i don't think that an Empathy/Electrical defender would outdamage an Electrical/Devices blaster, or a Radiation/Energy defender outdamage a Fire/Energy blaster.
[/ QUOTE ]
This really is seems to be the crux of the problem. Controllers got a very large boost to solo damage with Containment as part of losing their stacking pets putting them suddenly up in a much higher damage bracket.
With the right debuffing sets, they can get to near blaster/scrapper levels of damage.
Defender were made to be specifically unable to even "match" Blaster DPS. 66% of "blaster damage" has been bandied about, but I'm not totally convinced of this. Most of the time it appears to be closer to 50% of "blaster damage."
The way I understand the developer philosophy is that all powers normally work at 100%, modified by AT bonus (and rarely, penalties.)
Controllers and Dominators get a 25% bonus (to duration and also control crits) to all control powers. Usually they have 7+ powers that they get this bonus. Controllers also get have containment which is a double (base?) damage.
Tankers are best at "self only buffs". This translates to a 25% bonus to defense and resist powers in 7+ powers in their primary.
Blasters and Scrappers are "damage" with things being a little skewed to Blaster to do more damage most by power set design and scrappers getting a crit bonus. This is around a 25% damage bonus (or better.) Controllers were the lowest damage at about "50% of blaster damage" which containment neatly does away.
Defenders are supposed to be best a group buffing and debuffing. This affects probably the least amount of powers in their primary and secondaries compared to all the other base ATs. Forcefields is arguably the worst off with only 4 (and relatively only 3) powers that get the bonus. They also have a fair penalty to damage, because debuffing can increase their damage (even though not all primaries can increase damage this way.)
Corruptors don't actually seem to have a speciality, but are built around a general compatibility of 100% buffs/debuffs and controls with their (roughly) 100% damage. Seen in this light, Corruptor are probably the best balanced of the ranged class, when their primaries synergize well with their secondaries.
Masterminds are a bit hard to quantify easily, but with 100% debuffing/buffing and controls in their secondary, it's easy to see why meat shields that do damage synergize well too.
Still here, even after all this time!
[ QUOTE ]
66% of "blaster damage" has been bandied about, but I'm not totally convinced of this. Most of the time it appears to be closer to 50% of "blaster damage."
[/ QUOTE ]
Futurias, there's a simple test. It will take 5 minutes, more if you have to recruit strangers.
Get an Energy Blaster and an Energy Defender to shoot the same badguy with the same attack, slotted for the same damage. I recommend a grey-con CoT, because it's funny, but any enemy will do.
Otherwise, you're not really "arguing" so much as "stating a fringe belief."
Mini-guides: Force Field Defenders, Blasters, Market Self-Defense, Frankenslotting.
So you think you're a hero, huh.
@Boltcutter in game.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
66% of "blaster damage" has been bandied about, but I'm not totally convinced of this. Most of the time it appears to be closer to 50% of "blaster damage."
[/ QUOTE ]
Futurias, there's a simple test. It will take 5 minutes, more if you have to recruit strangers.
Get an Energy Blaster and an Energy Defender to shoot the same badguy with the same attack, slotted for the same damage. I recommend a grey-con CoT, because it's funny, but any enemy will do.
Otherwise, you're not really "arguing" so much as "stating a fringe belief."
[/ QUOTE ]
It would probably be better to get a Defender, Blaster and Corruptor with energy blast to test that out with identical slotting (or even easier, no slotting) and hit Sirens Call.
Hmm. I may have to make a couple of alts and get them up to 15 and do some testing.
Still here, even after all this time!
Ok i have gottten the Gist of whats been goin on and whereas i admit to not being a Whiz att he numbers Crunch here is the yway i see it.. All the ATs have their specialty denoted as their "Primary" power sets if at any time One AT secondary is outdoing another ATs Primary and both are Comprable Lvl and Build..then something is wrong! its just that simple. I dont normally post and even more rare Gripe..but this Controller thing is out of Control! (parden the Pun) When i was teaming and realized that the Controller was out healing my Empath Defender aal of a sudden the Game started to frustrate me. I have faith that the Devs will address this and other issues though i beleive this should get high priority. good luck to the Devs! dont let COH wither on the Vine over issues that could be easily solved .. i am heading back to Paragon City..well atleast when the Login Server finally become available! (but thats another issue for another Board!
---Rook
[ QUOTE ]
I know this horse has been kicked long since it went to the glue factory. May I make a suggestion regarding Clear Mind and empathy. In light of _Castle_'s pronouncement that Clear Mind was to be a quick fix not a long term buff (and I will completely ignore the supposition that this is why it needs to have a 4 second, could be four hours, too darn long activation). There are TWO possible defender powers that could be just copied over to the empaths' Clear Mind power: Clarity (which would admittedly look funny for an empathy defender to use) and Increase Density. I vote for increase density. I don't think the empaths would mind the subtle changes in the attributes of the powers if it were to reduce the activation time substantially. The usual artistic application of the purple effect instead of the kinetic orange-yellow shouldn't take too much adaptation. In my amateur opinion, this could be done with a patch before a complete Issue of revisions were released. Yay? Nay?
[/ QUOTE ]
I love how empathy/ went from a preemptive buff set to a reactive one post ED. And apparently it was always meant to work that way..
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I know this horse has been kicked long since it went to the glue factory. May I make a suggestion regarding Clear Mind and empathy. In light of _Castle_'s pronouncement that Clear Mind was to be a quick fix not a long term buff (and I will completely ignore the supposition that this is why it needs to have a 4 second, could be four hours, too darn long activation). There are TWO possible defender powers that could be just copied over to the empaths' Clear Mind power: Clarity (which would admittedly look funny for an empathy defender to use) and Increase Density. I vote for increase density. I don't think the empaths would mind the subtle changes in the attributes of the powers if it were to reduce the activation time substantially. The usual artistic application of the purple effect instead of the kinetic orange-yellow shouldn't take too much adaptation. In my amateur opinion, this could be done with a patch before a complete Issue of revisions were released. Yay? Nay?
[/ QUOTE ]
I love how empathy/ went from a preemptive buff set to a reactive one post ED. And apparently it was always meant to work that way..
[/ QUOTE ]
Um, as this is an *animation* problem with the power and the duration is not changable (only control powers can have this enhancement), this has *nothing* to really do with ED.
Still here, even after all this time!
Err, you have a good point!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I find your argument to be not marginally dishonest.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's always great when trolls self-identify; makes it easier to add them to my /ignore list.
*plonk*
[/ QUOTE ]
As others have pointed out, he was supporting you, Centerfire. Ironically enough, he was using the definition of "marginal" that you defended earlier, while you apparently put him on your ignore list based on the definition Arcana used. 
What's interesting about this FF thing, to me, is that FF appears to be the Defender set with the CLEAREST advantage over the Controller version, in Issue 7. It's arguably the one set in which the "somewhat" (your word) better base values on certain buff powers provide a benefit for which the Controller counterpart cannot compensate easily -- or possibly even at all.
FF Defenders in Issue 7 will be able to essentially put an entire team at the DEF cap if they take Maneuvers. Controllers will get nowhere near the DEF cap. Their Forcefields are still good, but it's going to take a fair amount of Primary-powerset-sweat to provide an entire team with the same amount of mitigation that the FF Defender bestows simply by handing out buffs before a fight.
Granted, the whole buff-and-forget playstyle isn't appealing to many (myself included), and granted, there are still a number of overarching issues with regard to the Defender/Controller/Blaster love/hate triangle. I understand the notion that Controller powersets tend to synergize much better than do Defender powersets (mechanically, not thematically). It's a fair point.
It's also a fair point, perhaps, that certain of the non-DEF FF powers are poorly balanced or even poorly conceived. I'm not arguing with any of that; nor, do I believe, was Arcanaville.
Arcanaville's point (at the risk of putting words in her mouth) was simply that your contention (and others') that FF is superior for Controllers, is not as clear-cut as perhaps you might like to think. From my perspective, you haven't addressed any of her objections in a logical manner. Can you explain how exactly the Controller version of FF is superior, despite that the Defender version will be providing more than 40% more mitigation through DEF? Even if you DO include Controller Primaries in the discussion, which is a bit shady, that's going to be a hard case to make.
It's not clear to me, despite having read this entire thread, where or why the exchange between the two of you became so acrimonious, but it seems a shame, given the apparent triviality of the issue over which you disagree.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I find your argument to be not marginally dishonest.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's always great when trolls self-identify; makes it easier to add them to my /ignore list.
*plonk*
[/ QUOTE ]
As others have pointed out, he was supporting you, Centerfire. Ironically enough, he was using the definition of "marginal" that you defended earlier, while you apparently put him on your ignore list based on the definition Arcana used.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well at least one person got it.
What a hopelessly stupid attempt at a rebuttal, Arcana. If I didn't know better I'd think you were going out of your way to embarass yourself. Allow me to remark, briefly, on the superlative idiocy:
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Define "marginal." My estimates suggest that controller bubbles admit something between 30% and 100% more damage than defender bubbles, depending on situation.
[/ QUOTE ]
Marginal, i.e., by some margin. I was not suggesting that the difference is negligible; that's your inference, not my implication.
[/ QUOTE ]
This would be an example of intellectual dishonesty, as most people would define it: explicitly or implicitly suggesting that one was unaware or not fully cogniscent of the facts, in direct contradiction to how they were originally used for effect.
[/ QUOTE ]
Use of the term "marginal" is not ipso facto editorializing, and need not imply "small to the point of irrelevance"; in point of fact the first (and therefore most common) definition of the term up on Dictionary.com is "of, relating to, located at, or constituting a margin, a border, or an edge". Far from brain-death as a prerequisite to adopting this definition, it is, in fact, widely accepted usage in economics (for instance, "marginal costs" being the additional costs of input necessary to generate the next unit of output, above and beyond the costs of input necessary to generate the current unit of output). It's not until we get to the fourth definition of the term that we start seeing the word as a synonym for "bad".
Had I said, "the margin by which a FF/* Defender's buffs and debuffs are superior to a */FF Controller's buffs and debuffs does not offset the superior damage mitigation the Controller can bring to the table through his primary and his superiority with the controls in his secondary", you not only would have understood me, but it would have been functionally identical to what I did say. It was not my implication that the difference between Defender buffs/debuffs and Controller buffs/debuffs is small to the point of irrelevancy, either relatively or absolutely; and you would have to be basically brain-dead not to see that this was not my meaning given both the context, and the definition which I gave you, when you asked.
In short, you can only accuse me of intellectual dishonesty by attaching meaning to my words that I (a) never intended and (b) specifically disclaimed; you can only do it by, essentially, putting words in my mouth, which merely reinforces my point about your frivolity and bad faith.
Feel free to not comment on my "lack of argument", as you see it; in fact, I'll consider it a badge of honor if add me to your /ignore list posthaste.