Please oh please just do away with AS and just give my stalker exactly the same melee attacks, damage base, toggle drops, and versions of AIM/BU that blappers get. I would trade in a heartbeat. Just give us a couple more attacks to chain since we won't have the ranged attacks to supplement our melee with and we'll work just fine in PvE too. You can take away stealth stacking too for all I care...just get rid of perception stacking to compensate.
Personally I'd be much happier 3-shotting someone in 2.5 seconds with 3 uninterruptible attacks than with trying to line up an interruptible melee range sniper attack that takes 3-4 seconds of time during which I can't take any damage or be hit by effects that don't even do anything to me to even go off.
[ QUOTE ]
Please oh please just do away with AS and just give my stalker exactly the same melee attacks, damage base, toggle drops, and versions of AIM/BU that blappers get. I would trade in a heartbeat. Just give us a couple more attacks to chain since we won't have the ranged attacks to supplement our melee with and we'll work just fine in PvE too. You can take away stealth stacking too for all I care...just get rid of perception stacking to compensate.
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you giving away your status protection and your defenses too?
[ QUOTE ]
Personally I'd be much happier 3-shotting someone in 2.5 seconds with 3 uninterruptible attacks than with trying to line up an interruptible melee range sniper attack that takes 3-4 seconds of time during which I can't take any damage or be hit by effects that don't even do anything to me to even go off.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hm, EM stalker. Yeah, I can see why you'd talk as if you're TOTALLY RELIANT on Assassin's Strike.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
 |
[ QUOTE ]
Assassin strike at level 50 vs a target with no resists at all, at the damage cap:
Base: 250.24
Critical: 1501.47
Total: 1751.71 hp in one hit.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is without Enhancemnts or Build-up?
What the [censored] are you guys smoking?
You know with Earth Embrace on my Controller my health is around 1601 or 1609... something between those two numbers.
On my Tank with DP I'm around 3200....
My Blaster is around 1400 Health with all my accolades.
Let me guess...
Stalkers are squishy...
Stalkers need there De-Toggles...
Stalkers AS can be interrupted....
All I ask is that AS be positional if your going to leave it as is. That's all... Make them earn that [censored] because as is it's pure [censored] crap.
Cuddles, that's at the damage cap. I'm not defending or criticizing the figures quoted, I'm just pointing out that your question about enhancements and build up is moot.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please oh please just do away with AS and just give my stalker exactly the same melee attacks, damage base, toggle drops, and versions of AIM/BU that blappers get. I would trade in a heartbeat. Just give us a couple more attacks to chain since we won't have the ranged attacks to supplement our melee with and we'll work just fine in PvE too. You can take away stealth stacking too for all I care...just get rid of perception stacking to compensate.
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you giving away your status protection and your defenses too?
[ QUOTE ]
Personally I'd be much happier 3-shotting someone in 2.5 seconds with 3 uninterruptible attacks than with trying to line up an interruptible melee range sniper attack that takes 3-4 seconds of time during which I can't take any damage or be hit by effects that don't even do anything to me to even go off.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hm, EM stalker. Yeah, I can see why you'd talk as if you're TOTALLY RELIANT on Assassin's Strike.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not totally reliant on AS. I have 2 stalkers though...a 40 MA and a 38 EM. People are complaining about the attack that takes all of their life and about our stacked stealth. Well I'm agreeing to give it up for blaster damage/melee attacks. No, I wasn't giving up my defenses entirely since I wasn't asking for the Blasters' ranged attacks/AE's/holds/etc....just trading their melee attack damage for mine.
Come on now...I'm agreeing to trade the most offensive villain AT's primary powersets for blaster secondary sets. Surely that's a fair trade, yeah? I mean if our offense is so insane, then just give us the secondary set of a ranged archetype. Surely their secondary isn't better than our overpowered Stalker primaries, is it?
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not totally reliant on AS. I have 2 stalkers though...a 40 MA and a 38 EM. People are complaining about the attack that takes all of their life and about our stacked stealth. Well I'm agreeing to give it up for blaster damage/melee attacks. No, I wasn't giving up my defenses entirely since I wasn't asking for the Blasters' ranged attacks/AE's/holds/etc....just trading their melee attack damage for mine.
[/ QUOTE ]
Fair enough. I didn't see your MA in your sig. Or rather, I did, but I only saw the Scrapper. 
Blasters have it rougher than you do, period. They'd still have it rougher than you do, if AS didn't exist. Your request, tongue-in-cheek or not, is silly. You'd have to give up either your defenses, your status protection, or both to get what you're asking for.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not totally reliant on AS. I have 2 stalkers though...a 40 MA and a 38 EM. People are complaining about the attack that takes all of their life and about our stacked stealth. Well I'm agreeing to give it up for blaster damage/melee attacks. No, I wasn't giving up my defenses entirely since I wasn't asking for the Blasters' ranged attacks/AE's/holds/etc....just trading their melee attack damage for mine.
[/ QUOTE ]
Fair enough. I didn't see your MA in your sig. Or rather, I did, but I only saw the Scrapper.
Blasters have it rougher than you do, period. They'd still have it rougher than you do, if AS didn't exist. Your request, tongue-in-cheek or not, is silly. You'd have to give up either your defenses, your status protection, or both to get what you're asking for.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ok so do I get Nova and all the ranged attacks and holds, too? Do I get massive dmg resistance in my epic power pools? I was trading purely stalker melee damage capability for purely blaster melee damage capability. If you think blasters have so much better melee damage than stalkers do that we'd have to give up our secondaries as well as our primaries...just to get a ranged AT's melee damage by itself, then you prove my point that heroes are monstrously overpowered and not even stalkers hold a candle to their uberness.
[ QUOTE ]
Come on now...I'm agreeing to trade the most offensive villain AT's primary powersets for blaster secondary sets. Surely that's a fair trade, yeah? I mean if our offense is so insane, then just give us the secondary set of a ranged archetype. Surely their secondary isn't better than our overpowered Stalker primaries, is it?
[/ QUOTE ]
That's a gross, misleading oversimplification, and you (should) know it. On a powerset-by-powerset basis, anything can be seen to be reasonable. By your logic, why shouldn't Scrappers get Blaster Secondary melee ability? How about Tankers?
And just by the way, Stalker EM does have better melee powers than Blaster EM. The only difference is the damage scale. Could you imagine a Blaster with Energy Transfer? Didn't think so.
All the rest of the Stalker Primaries are based on Scrapper Primaries. See above.
The bottom line is that your Primary or Secondary alone is not what defines your character. And anyway, no one that I've seen has called Stalker Primaries as a whole overpowered. I've seen complaints about two primary-related things here: Assassin's Strike, which in your absurd example you concede, and Energy Melee.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
|
[ QUOTE ]
Ok so do I get Nova and all the ranged attacks and holds, too? Do I get massive dmg resistance in my epic power pools?
[/ QUOTE ]
1. "All the ranged holds" are in one powerset, Ice.
2. Is there a PvP zone available in which people can use Epic Power Pools? Um, no. We don't know yet what Stalkers will have for Epic Power Pools. You're complaining about something about which you have no clue yet.
[ QUOTE ]
If you think blasters have so much better melee damage than stalkers do that we'd have to give up our secondaries as well as our primaries...just to get a ranged AT's melee damage by itself, then you prove my point that heroes are monstrously overpowered and not even stalkers hold a candle to their uberness.
[/ QUOTE ]
Blasters incur incredible risk to close to use those melee abilities. If you were to maintain your status protection and defensive capabilities, then you'd get to have your cake and eat it too.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Come on now...I'm agreeing to trade the most offensive villain AT's primary powersets for blaster secondary sets. Surely that's a fair trade, yeah? I mean if our offense is so insane, then just give us the secondary set of a ranged archetype. Surely their secondary isn't better than our overpowered Stalker primaries, is it?
[/ QUOTE ]
That's a gross, misleading oversimplification, and you (should) know it. On a powerset-by-powerset basis, anything can be seen to be reasonable. By your logic, why shouldn't Scrappers get Blaster Secondary melee ability? How about Tankers?
And just by the way, Stalker EM does have better melee powers than Blaster EM. The only difference is the damage scale. Could you imagine a Blaster with Energy Transfer? Didn't think so.
All the rest of the Stalker Primaries are based on Scrapper Primaries. See above.
The bottom line is that your Primary or Secondary alone is not what defines your character. And anyway, no one that I've seen has called Stalker Primaries as a whole overpowered. I've seen complaints about two primary-related things here: Assassin's Strike, which in your absurd example you concede, and Energy Melee.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's absurd only because the heroes have something more powerful and you know good and well you wouldn't want to face it from the villain side. Energy melee is held by 3 ATs, 2 of which are heroes. Stalkers, Tankers, and blasters. Of those 3, Blasters and Tankers both have higher base damage. Blasters by alot, and tankers by a little bit. Tankers also have more hp and better defenses. If anyone complains about EM, it should be villains.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Come on now...I'm agreeing to trade the most offensive villain AT's primary powersets for blaster secondary sets. Surely that's a fair trade, yeah? I mean if our offense is so insane, then just give us the secondary set of a ranged archetype. Surely their secondary isn't better than our overpowered Stalker primaries, is it?
[/ QUOTE ]
That's a gross, misleading oversimplification, and you (should) know it. On a powerset-by-powerset basis, anything can be seen to be reasonable. By your logic, why shouldn't Scrappers get Blaster Secondary melee ability? How about Tankers?
And just by the way, Stalker EM does have better melee powers than Blaster EM. The only difference is the damage scale. Could you imagine a Blaster with Energy Transfer? Didn't think so.
All the rest of the Stalker Primaries are based on Scrapper Primaries. See above.
The bottom line is that your Primary or Secondary alone is not what defines your character. And anyway, no one that I've seen has called Stalker Primaries as a whole overpowered. I've seen complaints about two primary-related things here: Assassin's Strike, which in your absurd example you concede, and Energy Melee.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's absurd only because the heroes have something more powerful and you know good and well you wouldn't want to face it from the villain side. Energy melee is held by 3 ATs, 2 of which are heroes. Stalkers, Tankers, and blasters. Of those 3, Blasters and Tankers both have higher base damage. Blasters by alot, and tankers by a little bit. Tankers also have more hp and better defenses. If anyone complains about EM, it should be villains.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, Blasters BI (Brawl Index) is 1.0, Stalkers 0.9 and Tankers 0.8
[ QUOTE ]
It's absurd only because the heroes have something more powerful and you know good and well you wouldn't want to face it from the villain side.
[/ QUOTE ]
This isn't some partisan debate. I'm not approaching this from the standpoint of "I'm a hero; you're a villain." Personally, I think that CoH ATs tend to synergize better than Villain ATs. So yes, there is a slight overall advantage for Hero ATs in team PvP.
That, however, does not speak to this issue of Blasters. Blasters are not the first thing that leaps to mind when I think of Hero ATs' superiority. Blasters are probably the worst PvP archetype, in general, certain powerset combos (Ice/Energy) notwithstanding.
[ QUOTE ]
Energy melee is held by 3 ATs, 2 of which are heroes. Stalkers, Tankers, and blasters. Of those 3, Blasters and Tankers both have higher base damage. Blasters by alot, and tankers by a little bit. Tankers also have more hp and better defenses. If anyone complains about EM, it should be villains.
[/ QUOTE ]
Firstly, Tankers have LOWER damage than Stalkers, genius. .8 < .9.
(And that's totally ignoring the significant damage advantage that Assassination grants Stalkers.)
Secondly, as I pointed out above, Blasters don't have Energy Transfer, which is the single best (PvP) attack in the so-called Energy Melee set. There's a reason for that.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ok so do I get Nova and all the ranged attacks and holds, too? Do I get massive dmg resistance in my epic power pools?
[/ QUOTE ]
1. "All the ranged holds" are in one powerset, Ice.
2. Is there a PvP zone available in which people can use Epic Power Pools? Um, no. We don't know yet what Stalkers will have for Epic Power Pools. You're complaining about something about which you have no clue yet.
[ QUOTE ]
If you think blasters have so much better melee damage than stalkers do that we'd have to give up our secondaries as well as our primaries...just to get a ranged AT's melee damage by itself, then you prove my point that heroes are monstrously overpowered and not even stalkers hold a candle to their uberness.
[/ QUOTE ]
Blasters incur incredible risk to close to use those melee abilities. If you were to maintain your status protection and defensive capabilities, then you'd get to have your cake and eat it too.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ok I build an ice/energy blaster with teleport, flight, fitness (or leadership), and concealment as my powerpools. I hover around overhead invisible until I find someone I want to assassinate. I swap to stealth, Aim+BU+TP down to the enemy with the first of my 2 massive toggledroppers queued. I finish off my 2 to 4 hit attack chain depending on the AT of my victim. This takes between 2 and 3 seconds since villains have such squishy ATs and won't even require me to use a TF. I then have TP queued to send me straight up in the air...or maybe just phase shift.
Where is this risk? What do I care even if I did die, if I can kill anyone I want first? Heroes are the ones who want to have their cake and eat it too. They want their strong builds but want to take away the very few that villains can muster.
[ QUOTE ]
Where is this risk? What do I care even if I did die, if I can kill anyone I want first? Heroes are the ones who want to have their cake and eat it too. They want their strong builds but want to take away the very few that villains can muster.
[/ QUOTE ]
Assuming the highly specialized build and the ideal situation you describe, there is still one great risk: Being stunned. Have you tried this tactic on your /energy blaster?
And again, I don't even play a Blaster, and I don't exclusively play heroes, so stop trying to obfuscate your idiotic argument with partisan bantering. I'm not on a crusade to deprive villains of their "one good AT."
I am of the opinion that EM for Stalkers is overpowered, and that perhaps AS shouldn't drop toggles. Other than that, I'm fine with Stalkers. As to other Villain ATs, they could use a boost here and there. You're ascribing motives to me for which there's no evidence.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
|
[ QUOTE ]
That, however, does not speak to this issue of Blasters. Blasters are not the first thing that leaps to mind when I think of Hero ATs' superiority. Blasters are probably the worst PvP archetype, in general, certain powerset combos (Ice/Energy) notwithstanding.
[/ QUOTE ]
And... what server are you on? A majority of my deaths are caused by Blasters. None were Electric, Assault Rifle, or Archery, however.
[ QUOTE ]
Secondly, as I pointed out above, Blasters don't have Energy Transfer, which is the single best (PvP) attack in the so-called Energy Melee set. There's a reason for that.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not that they need it. If you dent'em enough, they can go on a villain killing spree without much worry. Especially those SS/SJ combo ones.
[ QUOTE ]
I am of the opinion that EM for Stalkers is overpowered,
[/ QUOTE ]
Not just for Stalkers. */Energy Blasters are a horrendous pain to even touch.
[ QUOTE ]
and that perhaps AS shouldn't drop toggles. Other than that, I'm fine with Stalkers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tch. Maybe they shouldn't drop TWO toggles, but one? I dunno. I'm kinda attached to that one toggle drop. The second can bite it, for all I care.
[ QUOTE ]
As to other Villain ATs, they could use a boost here and there.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'd be pretty happy, if it meant there were more of the other villain ATs in PVP. >_>
[ QUOTE ]
And... what server are you on? A majority of my deaths are caused by Blasters. None were Electric, Assault Rifle, or Archery, however.
[/ QUOTE ]
Fair enough. And how good do you suppose their kill/death ratio is, in general? I'll bet yours is better.
[ QUOTE ]
Not that they need it. If you dent'em enough, they can go on a villain killing spree without much worry. Especially those SS/SJ combo ones.
[/ QUOTE ]
Dent 'em enough? What do you mean?
Regardless, that's not the point. THe point is that Stalkers DO have Energy Transfer, and this Dwarflord fellow is advocating blaster-level melee damage for Stalkers. Do the math.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Where is this risk? What do I care even if I did die, if I can kill anyone I want first? Heroes are the ones who want to have their cake and eat it too. They want their strong builds but want to take away the very few that villains can muster.
[/ QUOTE ]
Assuming the highly specialized build and the ideal situation you describe, there is still one great risk: Being stunned. Have you tried this tactic on your /energy blaster?
And again, I don't even play a Blaster, and I don't exclusively play heroes, so stop trying to obfuscate your idiotic argument with partisan bantering. I'm not on a crusade to deprive villains of their "one good AT."
I am of the opinion that EM for Stalkers is overpowered, and that perhaps AS shouldn't drop toggles. Other than that, I'm fine with Stalkers. As to other Villain ATs, they could use a boost here and there. You're ascribing motives to me for which there's no evidence.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm ascribing motives to this thread which obviously do exist as they have been stated and restated countless times. If AS doesn't drop toggles anymore, I want all toggle drops except brawl removed from the game. Heroes have more toggle drops than villains anyhow. If EM gets removed from stalkers, get rid of /EM and /Elec blaster secondaries and get rid of tanker EM, too. The set is either overpowered or it's not.
Definitely other villain AT's need some love though. Everyone plays stalkers on the villain side because the other villain AT's are inferior to the hero ATs. I would LOVE to see more diversity and to not feel like a gimp when I bring out my brute into a PvP zone. Hell, I'd even roll up a corruptor if they fixed their barely-better-than-defender damage and gave CoV a real ranged damage AT.
Blasters don't need nerfed so much as they need changed. Their best option for damage needs to be ranged damage. They don't need insano melee attacks. They need really good ranged attacks. I met an AR/dev blaster who couldn't even overcome my regen rate with dull pain up. I just stood there and let him shoot at me while I politely asked him to leave me alone so I could go to my next mission. He refused, so I killed him. WTH? Blasters should do great ranged damage...I should have had to run. The sad thing is, if he'd been an ice/EM blapper, I wouldn't even have had time to run, he'd have killed me so fast. This game is currently borked and some changes definitely need to be made, but neutering the only viable villain isn't the way to do it.
[ QUOTE ]
Dent 'em enough? What do you mean?
[/ QUOTE ] Defiance
[ QUOTE ]
Definitely other villain AT's need some love though. Everyone plays stalkers on the villain side because the other villain AT's are inferior to the hero ATs
[/ QUOTE ] Interesting that you brought that up. How about this....because stalkers do not need to team...they rob the other Villain AT's of linchpin for a viable? Did it ever occur to you that a villain team, where the stalker actually helped the team, might be as capable as a hero team?
What if Stalkers couldn't stack Stealth and AS didn't work if the target moved more than 5 ft? Stalkers might have to rely on corruptors and dominators more to set up their AS's. They might need Brutes to disract scrappers and tanks. They might use MM's as bait (which they already do..but not teamed).
The way I see it, the CoV AT's could do a great job as a team. AS + Scourge for teh win. But stalkers don't need to team. In fact, they force the heroes to team..and they still don't have to team.
The other AT's don't suck...they can be quite capable at higher levels. The fact is, many heroes are exemped 50's with more slots...and many of the heroes team out of necessity. Corrupter debuffs make a huge difference in PvP...but I guess you might not ever know that as a stalker.
[ QUOTE ]
Fair enough. And how good do you suppose their kill/death ratio is, in general? I'll bet yours is better.
[/ QUOTE ]
I can honestly say that Blasters have killed me more times than I've killed them. Not by much, but the ones I've seen are quite good at killing Stalkers. Good to the point I'm beginning to believe that they're better at hunting down Stalkers than Scrappers are.
[ QUOTE ]
Dent 'em enough? What do you mean?
[/ QUOTE ]
Defiance. The lower the Blaster's hp, after a certain point, the more damage they deal. So, imagine a Blaster dropping from a tall building and taking their hp into red (obviously around the safety of their base), going into Stealth, and then sniping/kiting villains. Sometimes, they TP Foe from a building ledge, allowing the villain to drop and unable to return fire as the Blaster... well.... blasts them into oblivion. Valid tactics, but just as painful as AS and safer (most of the time). I found the last one mentioned to be one of the funniest...
[ QUOTE ]
Regardless, that's not the point. THe point is that Stalkers DO have Energy Transfer, and this Dwarflord fellow is advocating blaster-level melee damage for Stalkers. Do the math.
[/ QUOTE ]
What about the Stalkers that AREN'T Energy Melee? Would it be so ridiculous of us to ask for that? D: *really does dislike the EM set... maybe out of jealousy or the fact that it gives the rest of us a bad rep*
[ QUOTE ]
Cuddles, that's at the damage cap. I'm not defending or criticizing the figures quoted, I'm just pointing out that your question about enhancements and build up is moot.
[/ QUOTE ]
Doh...
Thanks... Man I thought this was base. I was going to be seriously ticked off...
Thanks for correcting me.
[ QUOTE ]
SAGE.
(cookies if you understand the reference.)
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't have much time to post (Swaped past few weeks) so all I will say is:
/B/TARD! mah internets!
[ QUOTE ]
Regardless, that's not the point. THe point is that Stalkers DO have Energy Transfer, and this Dwarflord fellow is advocating blaster-level melee damage for Stalkers. Do the math.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not advocating changing anything. I'm just saying if you think that stalkers do too much damage then let's give them the damage of one of the strong melee damage dealers from the hero side. But that's too powerful too...cause they do better damage with better effects than stalkers do and don't have set up for it like an AS. Also, I wasn't wanting my cake and eating it too...I didn't suggest stalkers keep ET if they got blaster melee damage. I was suggesting they get EXACTLY the melee capability that blappers have and maybe substituting another similar melee attack for the short range blast that they all use as a 3rd attack. I didn't say keep stalker EM and just up it to blaster dmg with toggle drops. Anyhow, it is ridiculous and the nerf cries would be even worse...
Heroes have AT's that are better at EVERYTHING than villains have. Best defense? tankers. Best melee damage? Blasters and scrappers Best buffs/debuffs? defenders Best crowd control? controllers Best healing? defenders Best ranged damage? blasters Do you see a pattern here? Yet people still want to nerf stalkers, because they are the only threat to heroes, even though they don't do as much melee damage as the most damaging melee heroes. Now please refute ANYTHING I just said as untrue.
[ QUOTE ]
How about this....because stalkers do not need to team...
[/ QUOTE ]
My Scrapper and Blaster don't need teams. I guess they need a swift kick in the junk, as well!
[ QUOTE ]
Did it ever occur to you that a villain team, where the stalker actually helped the team, might be as capable as a hero team?
[/ QUOTE ]
Only if the heroes are mentally incapable.
[ QUOTE ]
What if Stalkers couldn't stack Stealth and AS didn't work if the target moved more than 5 ft?
[/ QUOTE ]
Then they'd have to change all melee attacks to be more in-line with that.
[ QUOTE ]
Stalkers might have to rely on corruptors and dominators more to set up their AS's.
[/ QUOTE ]
We already do, when faced with hero teams.
[ QUOTE ]
They might need Brutes to disract scrappers and tanks. They might use MM's as bait (which they already do..but not teamed).
[/ QUOTE ]
Why would I need a Brute to distract a Tanker and/or Scrapper? The Brutes should go maul the support.
[ QUOTE ]
The way I see it, the CoV AT's could do a great job as a team.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just not as well as an equally composed Hero team.
[ QUOTE ]
AS + Scourge for teh win.
[/ QUOTE ]
I do have to agree on this, however.
[ QUOTE ]
But stalkers don't need to team. In fact, they force the heroes to team..and they still don't have to team.
[/ QUOTE ]
The only times I find myself not needing a team is when there aren't any hero teams. I guess it really depends on the server.
[ QUOTE ]
Corrupter debuffs make a huge difference in PvP...but I guess you might not ever know that as a stalker.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's amusing. It's like saying "all asians are perverts."
[ QUOTE ]
Are you suggesting there's something in that which is hypocritical or doesn't mesh with Risk-vs/Reward?
This game is filled with very powerful, but very situational attack and defense powers.
...and is the main reason why I find this 1% solution to be a stupid waste of time.
OK, GtG, thanks for indulging my bizarre views of PvP
[/ QUOTE ]
No, I am not suggesting there's something in what you said which is hypocritical or which doesn't mesh with Risk vs Reward.
There are many AT's / powersets that can create the correct situation for them to have a 1-shot kill, or now a very fast kill.
For me, the reason that I think the 1% solution is a waste of time was articulated in an earlier post where ChronoXIII said something along the lines of "how does this really help squishies? Energy Melee will still be able to hit a target, and kill them with an uneasy glance while the target is stunned.
Any combination of massive attack and quick follow up will effectively be a 1-shot kill. The fact that another attack needs to be triggered does not, IMHO, change the substance of the situation.
Forget about Stalkers for a second. How about a Fire/Dev TMing teleporter? You land in the TMs and 1 second later (after he hits Blaze with its 1 second activation time) you are dead. I think that is faster then you'll be able to eat green or react. Is that so much better then the TMs just killing you? Actually, in this specific case, since he will have more than 1 TM I guess he might not even need Blaze. In either case, Player B (the dead one) is probably just as peeved as before this fix.
So if the mechanics of the game are going to allow what is effectively insta-death, we might as well just get on with life. So to speak.