[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: Additionally, this change was mostly aimed at the Bloody Bay and Siren's Call levels where Stalkers are so far above any other AT in Kill Count vs Death Count that it isn't even funny. In higher level PvP zones, players have plenty of options of dealing with Stalkers, which *should* force Stalkers to Team more.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nerf Teleport. Add in a bunch of -Jump and -Teleport powers. Then kill count to death count will balance out.
I've never seen a Stalker that has *only* Fly or Super Speed.
[/ QUOTE ]
TP doesnt suppress after an attack does it?
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope, and it also allows me to bypass the debuff on hurricane for one attack.
Currently roleplaying, badgehunting, and laughing at the PvPers of CoX. lol, PvP.
Truedusk - Human Rogue
[ QUOTE ]
This statement implies that the gap between stalkers and the second best AT is so large that required a fix... not that there should be no difference between the AT's at all.
[/ QUOTE ]
The statement didnt name the 2nd best AT.
From experience in all the pvp zones and the arena, I have to say scrappers are above and beyond more effective soloing then a stalker. Thanks to the fact there are far less restrictions to scrapper damage output.
In good teams blasters are easier to be kept healed, thanks to higher HP and constant damage output it also higher then stalkers.
I dont get the information Castle gave, it has to be deluded with all the times in Bloody Bay and Sirens Call when the only people in the zone are perceptionless heroes and stalkers.
If the numbers only reflected times when Sirens and BB had decent teams going(you know the ones that use the dev provided tools against stalkers) then I suspect the Stalker killl to death ratio to be closer to that of a blaster but not as good since when teamed most blasters can 2-3 shot a stalker.
[ QUOTE ]
I dont get the information Castle gave, it has to be deluded with all the times in Bloody Bay and Sirens Call when the only people in the zone are perceptionless heroes and stalkers.
If the numbers only reflected times when Sirens and BB had decent teams going(you know the ones that use the dev provided tools against stalkers) then I suspect the Stalker killl to death ratio to be closer to that of a blaster but not as good since when teamed most blasters can 2-3 shot a stalker.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Kill Count vs Death Count is higher. Right.
Now, is this Kill Count vs Death Count TOTAL? Because if it is, we could argue that it's due to stalkers having a high presence in Bloody Bay and Siren's due to most other villain ATs not shining at that level/refusing to go there.
Is this Kill Count vs Death Count judged by TIME? If I have a 10 kill 1 death ratio over one hour, I'll be performing substantially worse than, for example, a blaster who managed to score a 30 kill 20 death ratio.
That's all I'm going to ask.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
well i agree that the kill count v death count was is most likely higher but then again there are more stalkers in those lower lv pvp zone than there are other villain ATs after all if stalkers want to become a viable choice in the pv3 game we have to come into our own earlier than other ATs around lv 6.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the question i have is...what's wrong with stalkers having higher kill counts? we are the assassin class
are all AT's supposed to be about equal? should stalkers have similar k/d ratios to defenders? mm's? doms?
[/ QUOTE ]
Amazing.
Truly amazing.
And I'm the one who gets accused of "spinning". 
Denial's not going to help you. You know that, right?
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
But actually, that's what the numbers reflect. Most people out in pvp zones, and I don't doubt that it's so on freedom too, go without any sort of +perception, and promptly become stalker food.
Just like how most people out in pvp zones go without any sort of knowledge of how to drop hurricane users, and get completely nullified by this power.
Does this mean that their complaints are completely unjustified? People who say 'get a team' or 'get tactics' are in essence going 'lrn2play n00b'. Valid, but it's questionable whether it's perfectly reasonable to ask players to change their playstyle (or even their builds) to enjoy pvp.
It's just a big problem with pvp in this game... the difference between the 'average' game and the high-end game. And as much as the 'high-end' people will hate it, pvp will get dumbed down.
[ QUOTE ]
The statement didnt name the 2nd best AT.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, it does not say what the second best AT is in terms of k/d ratio... it does not have to.
Why?... because it says "so far above any other AT"
That means that if you take every single other AT in the game and line them up in order... Stalkers are way above even their closest competitor... in otherwords, they win hands down, it is not even a contest so far as the numbers are concerned.
[ QUOTE ]
From experience in all the pvp zones and the arena, I have to say scrappers are above and beyond more effective soloing then a stalker.
[/ QUOTE ]
This may be your personal experience... unfortunately the data the developers have collected not only dissagrees with you... but even if scrappers are second best, they stall land far below Stalkers in terms of k/d ratio.
[ QUOTE ]
I dont get the information Castle gave, it has to be deluded with all the times in Bloody Bay and Sirens Call when the only people in the zone are perceptionless heroes and stalkers.
[/ QUOTE ]
So what you are saying is that the developers data is only accurate for real ingame scenarios over the course of 6 months of data mining, but that it should not matter.
That if people played differently their numbers would be different.
Alright... then your proposed solution is to have the developers demand that everyone play differently so that the numbers come out better for stalkers.
Do you see that happening?... I don't.
The developers cannot make the players play differently just so they can avoid balancing anything... they have to react to how things evolve in the game as it is actually being played.
ya, for example:
Scrappers should have a mederate kill count with a low to moderate death count.
Tankers should have a low kill count and low death count
Blasters should have a high kill count and high death count
Trollers/defenders should have a (depending on class type) low-high(depending on whether or not theyre being taken out intentionally) kill count and low death count but should keep people held and people buffed/debuffed
now just insert the appropriate villain archetype (call brutes scrappers) and thats perfect.
As of right now, most of the PvE is incredibly balanced.
As soon as the placate nerf comes into play wiht the GI nerf in PvP then i think everything will be fine FTMP
@TheBro
solo pvp?
Cooler than every single owl EVER.
[ QUOTE ]
As soon as the placate nerf comes into play wiht the GI nerf in PvP then i think everything will be fine FTMP
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't understand:
Stealth and Grant Invis already supressed after AS. The change in mechanics isn't so much a nerf as it is an extension of something we've already dealt with perfectly well so far.
Yeah, GI WASN'T NERFED. We just didn't know how it worked. As _Castle_ said, it's been around ever since stealth suppression... which I imagine is a long time ago.
[ QUOTE ]
So what you are saying is that the developers data is only accurate for real ingame scenarios over the course of 6 months of data mining, but that it should not matter.
That if people played differently their numbers would be different.
Alright... then your proposed solution is to have the developers demand that everyone play differently so that the numbers come out better for stalkers.
Do you see that happening?... I don't.
The developers cannot make the players play differently just so they can avoid balancing anything... they have to react to how things evolve in the game as it is actually being played.
[/ QUOTE ]
I am saying that Stalkers > Perceptionless players and that more often then not perceptionless players are the ones in pvp zones with stalkers.
I am saying that Players that use anti-stalker tools > Stalkers. But this type of player is not in pvp zones as long as the perceptionless player and that when the zone is full of players with perception alot of stalkers leave...
Alot of Stalker players will play when they can kill similar to killing in pve but will leave when those things change. The numbers of kill to death might not even change much if stalker players leave when they die a few times.
Unless the devs can make stalkers stay and die then I doubt the kill to death ratio will change with this Assassin class.
[ QUOTE ]
This may be your personal experience... unfortunately the data the developers have collected not only dissagrees with you... but even if scrappers are second best, they stall land far below Stalkers in terms of k/d ratio.
[/ QUOTE ]
stalker k/d ratio is better then a scrappers. I REALLY REALLY have to see that and can the devs look up my toons Stalker: Locked N' Bound and Scrapper: KillerRabbit for personal reference? That would be appreciated.
[ QUOTE ]
That means that if you take every single other AT in the game and line them up in order... Stalkers are way above even their closest competitor... in otherwords, they win hands down, it is not even a contest so far as the numbers are concerned.
[/ QUOTE ]
It also means other ATs face more dangers. For example a Thermal COR on a team with 3 Stalkers. Go figure who will be targetted and die more often. Then you have ATs that cant get a pvp kill solo and the kill ends up going to stalkers. Another reason stalkers can get kills is because of 'bait' from more visible ATs.
But I can go on and on about the reasons the devs got the numbers they got but since they interpreted one way, it has to be right. Since it was from a red name and all. Red names arent wrong. 
I dont see how this placate change will effect stalkers on their k/d ratio when stalker will just continue to pick on the targets that die quickly or just leave the zone as to not die themselves.
Goodluck with this nerf changing k/d ratio.
[ QUOTE ]
I am saying that Stalkers > Perceptionless players and that more often then not perceptionless players are the ones in pvp zones with stalkers.
[/ QUOTE ]
So instead of adjusting stalkers the developers should not allow perceptionless players into the pvp zones?
[ QUOTE ]
I am saying that Players that use anti-stalker tools > Stalkers. But this type of player is not in pvp zones as long as the perceptionless player and that when the zone is full of players with perception alot of stalkers leave...
[/ QUOTE ]
So instead of adjusting stalkers the developers should not allow stalkers to leave the pvp zones when the zone is full of players with lots of perception?
[ QUOTE ]
Unless the devs can make stalkers stay and die then I doubt the kill to death ratio will change with this Assassin class.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually there are 2 ways to reduce the kill to death ratio.
1 is to reduce the number of kills stalkers get... the second would be to increase the number of times they die.
[ QUOTE ]
I dont see how this placate change will effect stalkers on their k/d ratio when stalker will just continue to pick on the targets that die quickly or just leave the zone as to not die themselves.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually the placate power is ideally suited to reduce the kill to death ratio.
Why?... because it serves simultaneously as a kill enhancer AND a death reducer.
It can be used to increase the number of kills a stalker gets by setting up opponents for additional AS attempts if the first one does not do the trick.
As an alternative it can be used as a get out of jail free card if things get too hairy for the stalker.
Reducing a stalkers offensive output outright would only reduce their number of kills while at the same time reducing their ability to perform their main function in both pvp and pve.
Reducing a stalkers defensive capabilities outright would only increase their number of deaths while at the same time reducing their ability to survive in pve.
Making placate have a to-hit check for pvp adjusts both ends of the spectrum while not touching stalkers in pve.
If you do not see how adjusting placate will reduce the k/d ratio perhaps it is because you have not considered how placate influences their k/d ratio in the first place.
In addition... why do you suspect that stalkers will only stay in the pvp zones if they can kill and not be killed?... no other AT plays this way... have stalkers become so spoiled by their current k/d ratio that anything less means avoiding pvp altogether and just leaving the zone?
Blasters manage to stay in the zone even when they die... so why would stalkers suddenly just vanish from the pvp zones unless they are immune to any retaliatory action?
If this is true it says something very odd about the mentality of the stalkers you are referring to.
I have no doubt adjusting Placate would tank a solo stalker's Kill-to-Death ratio.
I'm not clear how it would effect stalkers working in an organized team(Heck, when I work in a team of stalkers, I almost never find myself using it).
[ QUOTE ]
I have no doubt adjusting Placate would tank a solo stalker's Kill-to-Death ratio.
[/ QUOTE ]
It wont.....
[ QUOTE ]
Making placate have a to-hit check for pvp adjusts both ends of the spectrum while not touching stalkers in pve.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually this would be too much of a buff for defensive sets like Ice tanks and SR scrappers.
[ QUOTE ]
If you do not see how adjusting placate will reduce the k/d ratio perhaps it is because you have not considered how placate influences their k/d ratio in the first place.
[/ QUOTE ]
Would it decrease their kill count, doubt it.
Would it increase their deaths, of course it is a nerf after all.
Would it increase their deaths to be inline with other ATs, show me the numbers of all the ATs. This is a minor change to placate really so minor that if the difference in k/d ratio was that blatantly large, this change isnt enough.
If the difference is that great.
[ QUOTE ]
In addition... why do you suspect that stalkers will only stay in the pvp zones if they can kill and not be killed?... no other AT plays this way... have stalkers become so spoiled by their current k/d ratio that anything less means avoiding pvp altogether and just leaving the zone?
[/ QUOTE ]
Thats mostly how pve goes for solo stalkers, killing easily while not being killed.
[ QUOTE ]
Blasters manage to stay in the zone even when they die... so why would stalkers suddenly just vanish from the pvp zones unless they are immune to any retaliatory action?
[/ QUOTE ]
Thats mostly how blasters are used to playing in pve. Dying multiple times while soloing a blaster in pve is normal. Blasters can take a licking and keep on ticking.
[ QUOTE ]
If this is true it says something very odd about the mentality of the stalkers you are referring to.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just an observation from playing on in SC on Victory, Guardian, Freedom, and Triumph.
[ QUOTE ]
So instead of adjusting stalkers the developers should not allow perceptionless players into the pvp zones?
[/ QUOTE ]
And this change to placate will aid perceptionless players how exactly?
If I use placate on a perceptionless player it is used to get a crit from my next attack or setup AS. Reducing the defense I get in my placated state is not going to help my target.
Bah there I go telling you guys stalkers arent hurt by this nerf. I am out of place.
Yes this nerf is
DOOOOO000000OOOOOOoooOoooOOOOOM!!!!
[ QUOTE ]
Actually this would be too much of a buff for defensive sets like Ice tanks and SR scrappers.
[/ QUOTE ]
I apologise for the misunderstanding... I did not mean a standard to-hit check.
I was mistaken in thinking the change that is being implimented on test was similiar to the taunt to-hit check.
Please ignore that part of my post as it does not reflect actual changes.
[ QUOTE ]
Would it decrease their kill count, doubt it.
Would it increase their deaths, of course it is a nerf after all.
Would it increase their deaths to be inline with other ATs, show me the numbers of all the ATs. This is a minor change to placate really so minor that if the difference in k/d ratio was that blatantly large, this change isnt enough.
If the difference is that great.
[/ QUOTE ]
Lets watch the magic of mathematics at work shall we?
Now I think it is safe to assume that stalkers kill their opponents far more often than they themselves are killed... meaning they have a k/d ratio greater than 1.
Lets assume for the sake of argument that ratio at the moment is 5 to 1
Now even if this change does not manage to decrease their kill count... but does manage to increase the number of times they die out of every 5 kills they get by even 1 death... we have managed to cut their ratio in half.
In otherwords... a small change had a BIG effect on the ratio.
It really depends on the specific numbers we are looking at... but it is entirely plausible than a very small increase in stalker deaths can bring down thet number by large margins.
[ QUOTE ]
Thats mostly how pve goes for solo stalkers, killing easily while not being killed.
[/ QUOTE ]
It goes this way for controllers in pve as well... my controller almost never dies in pve... and kills just fine... does that mean if he gets killed in pvp I should just leave the zone and not bother with it?
[ QUOTE ]
If I use placate on a perceptionless player it is used to get a crit from my next attack or setup AS. Reducing the defense I get in my placated state is not going to help my target.
Bah there I go telling you guys stalkers arent hurt by this nerf. I am out of place.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes actually... you are out of place... and I am now confused about the point you are trying to make.
How can you claim on the one hand that this change will do absolutely nothing to stalkers... and then call it a nerf?
If it does nothing then it is a neutral change.
If they decided to alter the stalker AT symbol from a black snipers target to a silver snipers target would that be a nerf too??
A nerf by definition has to reduce the ability of a player to succeed.
If this change will not affect the success of stalkers in any way... then it is not and cannot be called a nerf.
Hunter2357:
TJ_Solomon's over on another part of the board trying to argue that the "change to Placate" will entirely resolve the PvP imbalance and that no other changes are necessary.
In other words, he's not being entirely consistent with his arguments. Either it will balance PvP, as he's claimed elsewhere, or it will have absolutely no impact, as he's claiming here.
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
This thread is called placate nerf. I try use the word change more, but nerf keeps popping up. One players nerf is anothers change.
[ QUOTE ]
It goes this way for controllers in pve as well... my controller almost never dies in pve... and kills just fine... does that mean if he gets killed in pvp I should just leave the zone and not bother with it?
[/ QUOTE ]
I was speaking about the stalker AT not your controller build. I was speaking about the tendencies of some of the stalker players that pvp.
[ QUOTE ]
Lets watch the magic of mathematics at work shall we?
[/ QUOTE ]
As you stated it depends on what said ratio is to begin with.
Will an added number of deaths caused by this change really bring the k/d down to other AT levels?
I cant see this change adding many deaths to my stalker nor any of the stalkers I fight or team with.
But hey if the devs think 2 or 3 more death per hour of pvp will bring stalkers inline with other ATs k/d then let's do it.
This nerf has destroyed the stalker AT, let's strike the Test server....with a mallet.
[ QUOTE ]
This thread is called placate nerf. I try use the word change more, but nerf keeps popping up. One players nerf is anothers change.
[/ QUOTE ]
You are right... it is a matter of perspective.
Since you have made it clear that you do not think this alteration to placate will negatively affect stalkers, don't you think it would be appropriate for you in particular to call it a "change" and not a "nerf"?
I was inclined to call it a nerf because I was under the impression that it would actually reduce a stalkers k/d ratio... but since you dissagree, you cannot in good faith call it a nerf yourself... see what I mean?
[ QUOTE ]
I was speaking about the stalker AT not your controller build. I was speaking about the tendencies of some of the stalker players that pvp.
[/ QUOTE ]
Alright... so any build that performs well in pve without experiencing many deaths should just leave pvp if they get killed more often than in pve?
If so scrappers and tanks should not even bother pvping at all... those AT's do not die much in pve... but die MUCH more often in pvp.
[ QUOTE ]
I cant see this change adding many deaths to my stalker nor any of the stalkers I fight or team with.
[/ QUOTE ]
Lets assume you are correct and your particular stalker is not affected one iota.
Exactly what contribution to the total stalker kills/deaths do you think you brought to the table over the last 6 months?
With thousands of players playing for thousands of hours my guess would be your individual contribution is little more than a rain drop in the ocean.
What does this mean?... your performance can stay exactly the same and the k/d ratio can still plummet so long as the plethora of other stalkers out there have their k/d ratio's adjusted.
Maybe you are just too good to be affected by this change... I have no idea... but you have to leave open the possibility that you and your specific playstyle are not the target of this change.
If they increased the gpa necessary to graduate with honors for example there would be a subset of the student population that would see no change at all... why?... because they were at the top of the curve.
The net overall effect of such a change however would be less total students graduating with honors.
[ QUOTE ]
TJ_Solomon's over on another part of the board trying to argue that the "change to Placate" will entirely resolve the PvP imbalance and that no other changes are necessary.
In other words, he's not being entirely consistent with his arguments. Either it will balance PvP, as he's claimed elsewhere, or it will have absolutely no impact, as he's claiming here.
[/ QUOTE ]
Why the hell are you telling lies and trying to start flames, thats against forum rules.
If you are referring to your little thread, I said nearly the same thing, that this placate nerf wont effect my playstyle.
And that you are incorrect on your assumptions of the quote you are using in your sig and blatantly take things out of context.
What I have been saying time and time again is there are counters that have been provided by the devs. Use them.
Players that dont use the powers provided have put the devs in the boat of needing to put in further adjustments to stalkers.
Stalkers that dont read the boards think that in pvp placate only placates the one target and when this change hits might not even notice.
Stalkers that read the boards know placate works like an AOE in pvp but being board readers are above the skill level of average players and know how to pick which target will need the actually placate.
This doesnt address the issues players perceptually have with stalkers, AS damage and perception. Neither of which are issues against teams that use some of the antistalker powers provided.
Even after this patch goes Live, posters like CB will still have chips on their shoulders because they just dont get it.
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, GI WASN'T NERFED. We just didn't know how it worked. As _Castle_ said, it's been around ever since stealth suppression... which I imagine is a long time ago.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wow, I learned something new today.
I may be the only person on Virtue who didn't know how GI worked after the stealth change..
Where was my memo?!?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, GI WASN'T NERFED. We just didn't know how it worked. As _Castle_ said, it's been around ever since stealth suppression... which I imagine is a long time ago.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wow, I learned something new today.
I may be the only person on Virtue who didn't know how GI worked after the stealth change..
Where was my memo?!?
[/ QUOTE ]
For the longest time, I was under the impression that it only supressed after an attack - like hide and stealth.
You can't blame me for not noticing - It needs to be reapplied so often, regardless.
Edit: Tested it out myself, it's exactly as _Castle_ posted. GI has to be reapplied after every attack.
[ QUOTE ]
I have no doubt adjusting Placate would tank a solo stalker's Kill-to-Death ratio.
[/ QUOTE ]It will not affect much since the majority of Stalkers do not realize how placate works and many think it is a single target special and even then after a placate you are still unattackable right? This gives the Stalker the time to get away until stealth and hide kicks back in.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have no doubt adjusting Placate would tank a solo stalker's Kill-to-Death ratio.
[/ QUOTE ]It will not affect much since the majority of Stalkers do not realize how placate works and many think it is a single target special and even then after a placate you are still unattackable right? This gives the Stalker the time to get away until stealth and hide kicks back in.
[/ QUOTE ]
I believe many stalkers realize how placate works. The change merely makes it so the non-placated teammates of the placated hero have an easier time attacking the stalker.
[ QUOTE ]
I believe many stalkers realize how placate works. The change merely makes it so the non-placated teammates of the placated hero have an easier time attacking the stalker.
[/ QUOTE ]In PvE when you use placate on the target, the rest of the mob still chases you in anger except the placated foe, in PvP an average Stalker (which I have met many of) do not realize it affects everyone around you and makes you unattackable by everyone for the duration of placate, if you watch the "Bad Day" video, you will notice he turns around to placate the Tanker then turns back to attack his original target.
The note in the patchnotes did not look like it will be single-target placate, from what it says, it will just make you visible enough for everyone to see you after an attack.
[ QUOTE ]
the question i have is...what's wrong with stalkers having higher kill counts? we are the assassin class
are all AT's supposed to be about equal? should stalkers have similar k/d ratios to defenders? mm's? doms?
[/ QUOTE ]
The issue here is not that they have a higher k/d ratio... it is that the ratio is so much higher than all other AT's that it has become unacceptable.
See where _Castle_ said the following?
"Stalkers are so far above any other AT in Kill Count vs Death Count that it isn't even funny."
That is not just a slight difference here... it is a HUGE difference
I am sure the developers would be happy to accept slight deviations... but lets say that stalkers were racking up 1000 kills for every death... should nothing be done about it just because you do not see anything wrong with their ratio being better?
If their ratio is so far out of whack with every other AT in the game... then something probably needs to be fixed and there is no reasonable argument against it.
This statement implies that the gap between stalkers and the second best AT is so large that required a fix... not that there should be no difference between the AT's at all.