As soon as I was done reading the patron power list I thought to myself....oh boy, blasters are gonna cry about stalkers having snipe. LoL
Please some of the people some of the time right?
Exaulted -
Willow the Wisp - kinetic meleeSR brute
Aurablade - DBRegen Scrapper
Nichole Tesla - ElecKin controller
[ QUOTE ]
You guys have defiance.
[/ QUOTE ]
Buhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah
ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahhahahahah ahahhahahahaha......Buhahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahhaahahahahhaha
hahaahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahaha... ....Buhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahha
hahahahahahahahahahahhaaahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahaha...... sto......stah.....Buhahahahahahahahahaha
hahahhahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha. ....somebubbubua....ddy k,k,k,k,call 9, nine, 1 1 .ca, ca, quick...buhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahah ahahahahaha... I I cant stah....stap.... lu...bhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhah ahahahahahahahahahahahhahaha....uaghing.....
------->"Sic Semper Tyrannis"<-------
Do not underestimate defiance, many will say "oh but even brawl will kill us when the defiance bar becomes useful", I have seen a good Blaster pop purples after intentionally letting his health hit under 1/3 and nail even Inv Brutes running dullpain. I personally have done this vs frostfire on my Blaster, popped a few purples and he could not even hit me and I did him in 3 hits.
How is this worse for Blasters? It affects all heroes. It actually affects Controllers and Defenders more.
Meh, all this means is that we will have to cooperate to gank all the Stalkers...then they'll whine until we're nerfed, then we gank them again...
It's a vicious cycle... with the Stalkers winning because they have a dev on their side.
[ QUOTE ]
Meh, all this means is that we will have to cooperate to gank all the Stalkers...then they'll whine until we're nerfed, then we gank them again...
It's a vicious cycle... with the Stalkers winning because they have a dev on their side.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hold on while I add you to the list of people who think Castle does everything he can to buff stalkers and nerf other ATs.
Stalkers have Castle on their side? Can you explain your reasoning?
[ QUOTE ]
Do not underestimate defiance, many will say "oh but even brawl will kill us when the defiance bar becomes useful", I have seen a good Blaster pop purples after intentionally letting his health hit under 1/3 and nail even Inv Brutes running dullpain. I personally have done this vs frostfire on my Blaster, popped a few purples and he could not even hit me and I did him in 3 hits.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's how I played mine. I wouldn't always do it, but in times of great need, it was a nice way to make use of it and overcome.
[ QUOTE ]
Stalkers have Castle on their side? Can you explain your reasoning?
[/ QUOTE ]
Because he originally came in as a Stalker rep, I'm sure. Whether he tries to make things easier for Stalkers, in general, I can't really say... but I can say that I don't like him due to a certain Stalker change he wishes to push in. >/
Sorry, Fury_Flechette, but you're changing the terms of your own argument in the middle to "prove" yourself right. Dirty pool.
You said Blasters get "ranged holds, defenses, and additional nukes". You didn't say anything about teaming with an Empathy Defender, and if you wish to go down that route, we can talk about Stalkers teaming with Thermal Radiation Corruptors or Kinetics Corruptors. But that wasn't what you were talking about initially, and opening that up now is just a rhetorical device you're using to try to "win" your point back.
It still doesn't work anyway. Six-sevenths (6/7) of Assassin's Strike's damage is unresistable, so Temporary Invulnerability, Fire Shield, Charged Armor, Body Armor, and even Force of Nature are virtually useless against them. This means Blasters will take in excess of 85.7% of the damage from an Assassin's Strike, regardless of whether or not his defenses are up. Of course, this depends upon whether or not these defenses remain after being detoggled by Assassin's Strike in the first place, though at that point, it hardly matters.
Even further, your argument about Stalker mez protection being "easily dropped" is totally bogus. It's no more easily dropped than any other AT's mez protections, and Stalkers also have Break Frees available to them in addition to the defenses available from their secondary power sets and the power pool powers. Sorry, but that argument is a non-starter, especially when using it to compare Stalkers' mez protection against Blasters' mez protection.
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
stalkers should never be doing blaster damage...
Blasters are the damage juggernauts.
I dont want any freakin mez protection or anything, just want to be the most damaging AT again. The stalkers most damaging attack doesnt drain all of his indurance and leave him stunned like a blaster's does. Sure, we have some great powers, I love blasters and all the other AT's except stalkers in PvP. Nobody should have to get tactics and FA simply because they need to combat one AT in PvP with the catch that if they dont get these powers to combat that AT then they will be totally uneffective in PvP altogether.
as far as the _Castle_ thing, ya, he favors stalkers, he helps other ATs but not in the way he does with stalkers.
@TheBro
solo pvp?
Cooler than every single owl EVER.
[ QUOTE ]
How is this worse for Blasters? It affects all heroes. It actually affects Controllers and Defenders more.
[/ QUOTE ]
Heh at least on Pinnacle if a stalker has to choose between a troller, defender, or a blaster; the blaster is usually first to drop.
How about this scenario, Stalker sits on roof, snipes with mace beam or water spout unsuspecting squishy on the ground. As soon as power goes off he jumps down and finishes off squishy that just got knocked on his rear.
As to the blasters have armors argument. Inane, you now have ranged holds. If you miss darn.
The only times defiance ever was useful for me was while fighting brutes.
You can't kill what you can't hit period.
[ QUOTE ]
Nobody should have to get tactics and FA simply because they need to combat one AT in PvP with the catch that if they dont get these powers to combat that AT then they will be totally uneffective in PvP altogether.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
To be fair, Tactics is not required at all to combat Stalkers. I play my Brute exclusivly in Warburg, so I combat Stalkers as well as all of the other AT's. When I suspect that a Stalker is around, I simply pop 2 yellows and bam! No more hide.(and those premtive 2 yellows are the only way I am going to whack through their toggles anyways 
)
For difficulty of foes to defeat in PvP, I actually rank stalkers as number 3. For me, the list is...
1. Blasters
2. Spine Scrappers
3. Stalkers
4. Trollers
5. Corrupters
So yeah, can't say I am sympathetic. (Although to be fair, after the WW nerf, I may not be quite so scared of Spine Scrappers and Blasters)
[ QUOTE ]
The stalkers most damaging attack doesnt drain all of his indurance and leave him stunned like a blaster's does.
[/ QUOTE ]
Stalkers also lack the AoE with enough damage to call for such a drain.
_Castle_ Has stated that Stalkers are FAR out killing in PVP, versus any other AT. Is it really required for anyone to even argue some of the points after that?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fury_Flechette:
You ignored quite a few things to be able to say
[ QUOTE ]
Further, most blasters get ranged holds, defenses and additional nukes. I think in the 40+ game, stalkers will have to be, oh, I don't know, a bit more skilled.
[/ QUOTE ]
1) All Stalkers have Mez Resistance of one form or another. This completely negates Blasters' ranged holds. So your first point is moot.
2a) While Blasters get some defensive powers in the Ancillary sets, they have absolutely no Mez Resistance except that which is available in the Power Pools. With the sole exception of Force of Nature, any Mez will detoggle a Blaster's Ancillary defensive toggles.
2b) Stalkers' Patron Powers included ranged Mez powers. This means what little defensive powers Blasters have will be rendered more or less moot.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry CB, but I just see things differently. Blaster + empath > stalker. If it's a skilled team, blaster + empath > multiple stalkers. I've seen it done.
Being able to mez isn't that great unless you can stack lots of them quickly. In the duration of the single break free, a skilled blaster can take out that mezzing stalker who is now out of hide. Blasters don't have to worry about toggles, they just pop the pill and fire back.
Also, stalker mez protection can easily be dropped. The same technique used to detoggle that scrapper can be used on a stalker. Throw a hold, detoggle the mez protection, hold takes effect, finish him off. I've seen it done countless times.
Fire shield, temporary invulnerability, body armor is far from junk. It means that the AS that is meant to kill you doesn't.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree and disagree with Fury. I do think that CB is going a bit overboard on how much of a threat stalkers are. Especially when I think about the highend game.
However, I have to agree with him that the shields are not going to be usefull against AS. An AS usually doesn't kill a blaster now, and looking at powers like ET and Impale, it looks like the follow up attacks will kill anyway. The Apps will be usefull, but more against MMs and Brutes than Stalkers, Corruptors or Dominators (pending toggledrop nerf).
An empath is a mighty thing in PvP. I have to agree with FF here. I do believe however that with travel powers suddenly becoming a bit less usefull in PvP with the new villain PPPs and the nerfage of WW that they will become less of a duo than they were. Ill/Emps will still rock the house, make no doubt about it. Emp defenders not so much.
A single stalker with a mez is probably not that big a deal. In a team where the MM has a couple of holds, the Dom has a couple of holds, and the stalker has a hold? Suddenly you can stack mez extremely fast with villains. The PPPs are going to change the way people think about mez. Villains got the ability to spam alot of it. Stalkers really needed ranged utility and they got it, hell, brutes got it.
I don't fear the stalker as much as I fear the Brute that never stops attacking even when he is at range. Brutes complain about Fury but it looks like they may get the ability to really build it in PvP.
Basicly, let me say that you both have good points.
[ QUOTE ]
_Castle_ Has stated that Stalkers are FAR out killing in PVP in Bloody Bay and Siren's Call, but not in higher zones, versus any other AT. Is it really required for anyone to even argue some of the points after that?
[/ QUOTE ]
Fixed that for you.
When _Castle_ himself had already admitted that "[. . .]Stalkers are so far above any other AT in Kill Count vs Death Count that it isn't even funny", I don't think anything I say about them can be construed as "going a bit overboard on how much of a threat stalkers are."
The question is no longer whether Stalkers are unbalanced in PvP. Any reasonable person can see that they are.
The question is what makes them unbalanced in PvP and how to fix those PvP imbalances.
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
[ QUOTE ]
When _Castle_ himself had already admitted that "[. . .]Stalkers are so far above any other AT in Kill Count vs Death Count that it isn't even funny", I don't think anything I say about them can be construed as "going a bit overboard on how much of a threat stalkers are."
The question is no longer whether Stalkers are unbalanced in PvP. Any reasonable person can see that they are.
The question is what makes them unbalanced in PvP and how to fix those PvP imbalances.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ahhh way to take a quote of context to prove your point. Allow me to provide the Full Quote:
_Castle_:
[ QUOTE ]
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 ]
Don't give the masses half information. Give them the whole story. You say "The question is no longer whether Stalkers are unbalanced in PvP. Any reasonable person can see that they are." The fact is that they are only unbalanced in the 2 lowest pvp zones. And _Castle_ has said that changes are being made to get stalkers to team more. Why don't you stop spinning _Castle_'s comments?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
_Castle_ Has stated that Stalkers are FAR out killing in PVP in Bloody Bay and Siren's Call, but not in higher zones, versus any other AT. Is it really required for anyone to even argue some of the points after that?
[/ QUOTE ]
downplayed the major point for you.
[/ QUOTE ]
There fixed that for you
@TheBro
solo pvp?
Cooler than every single owl EVER.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
_Castle_ Has stated that Stalkers are FAR out killing in PVP in Bloody Bay and Siren's Call, but not in higher zones, versus any other AT. Is it really required for anyone to even argue some of the points after that?
[/ QUOTE ]
downplayed the major point for you.
[/ QUOTE ]
There fixed that for you
[/ QUOTE ]
Heh, sadly you didn't change anything. Whats your major point? I believe you were trying to say Castle had said that Stalkers are overpowered. However, Castle only said stalkers were overpowered in the first 2 pvp zones. In fact, he said that in WB, there were many options to deal with stalkers.
Whats your point again?
Kahoru:
Actually, you're the one who's "spinning" _Castle_'s statements here.
_Castle_ did NOT state "that Stalkers are FAR out killing in PVP in Bloody Bay and Siren's Call, but not in higher zones (emphasis mine)". He did not say anything about what their Kill Count vs. Death Count in Warburg actually is.
Instead, he said "players have plenty of options of dealing with Stalkers, which *should* force Stalkers to Team more. " This is a teleological statement, not an ontological statement. In other words, he's talking about what "*should*" happen, not what actually *does* happen.
You cannot assume to know that the Stalker "Kill Count vs Death Count" is not higher in Warburg as well. _Castle_ simply did not say anything directly about that.
It's possible that Stalkers' "Kill Count vs Death Count" is higher in Warburg than it is for any other Archetype, as well, just not so much "that it isn't even funny".
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
[ QUOTE ]
Kahoru:
Actually, you're the one who's "spinning" _Castle_'s statements here.
_Castle_ did NOT state "that Stalkers are FAR out killing in PVP in Bloody Bay and Siren's Call, but not in higher zones (emphasis mine)". He did not say anything about what their Kill Count vs. Death Count in Warburg actually is.
Instead, he said "players have plenty of options of dealing with Stalkers, which *should* force Stalkers to Team more. " This is a teleological statement, not an ontological statement. In other words, he's talking about what "*should*" happen, not what actually *does* happen.
You cannot assume to know that the Stalker "Kill Count vs Death Count" is not higher in Warburg as well. _Castle_ simply did not say anything directly about that.
It's possible that Stalkers' "Kill Count vs Death Count" is higher in Warburg than it is for any other Archetype, as well, just not so much "that it isn't even funny".
[/ QUOTE ]
Reread what I wrote and what you said.
Me: "that Stalkers are FAR out killing in PVP in Bloody Bay and Siren's Call, but not in higher zones (emphasis mine)"
You: "It's possible that Stalkers' "Kill Count vs Death Count" is higher in Warburg than it is for any other Archetype, as well, just not so much "that it isn't even funny"."
We're saying the exact same thing. And of course your current argument that I slant Castle's words do nothing about your slanting of his words.
I don't need to link you to the post of "Why argue that Stalker's are overpowered when Castle said they are?". An argument can be made against that as Castle did not say they are overpowered all the time. Only at low levels.
Now you're not only spinning _Castle_'s statements, you're spinning your own.
"[. . .]FAR out killing[. . .]" weren't even your own words. They were Lallendos's.
YOUR words were "in Bloody Bay and Siren's Call, but not in higher zones (emphasis in the original)".
By the way, don't think I did not notice that you edited out the two other times you said Stalkers did not outkill other ATs in Warburg after I called you on that point.
We really cannot have a reasonable discussion if you keep editing out the points I disprove. You were doing that earlier in this thread, too, when I disproved your claim that Blasters had Mez protection.
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
Once you admit that Stalkers are broken, i'll quit saying it. They are broken. Wlecome to the world of Issue 2 regen scrappers. You are either in flawless victory, or did something stupid. I just hope for your sake that you don't get -quite- a /regen level beatdown.
You added an empath earlier to a 1v1 conflict. Let's toss a brute in that conflict then, or especially a dominator. Of course, I don't PVP, so i'm sure there are plenty of even uglier team scenarios. My point is, you kepp backpedaling, and changing context when losing. Why not just say what I read on the stalker boards:
"GAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA
#5158627 - 03/31/06 02:55 PM
Every single patron power pool has a snipe AND a single-target hold.
Oooh, is this gonna be fun.
--------------------
Virtue
Vortex Reborn, L40 EM/EA stalker. 201 badges!
JERK 4 LIFE."
Thx Vort, you made my point about stalkers AND PVP of late.
I almost forgot the topic since the two of you spent all this time fighting over _Castle_'s choice of words. but yeah back to the real point. I've been killed by my share of stalkers and i enjoy the challenge trying to get revenge but this is outrageous. They should be the way they are. Plus stalkers get AS earlier than whan us blasters. Anyway i hope my comments don't start any riots
[ QUOTE ]
Good point...however, I think you underestimate just how far a two or three range SO moonbeam will carry. The other non interuptable attacks are more effective dmg wise, but if a line of stalkers fires off 8 moonbeams, it will be possibly LESS effective for dmg, BUT, will be effective enough to do the job, WITH ZERO RISK!! By the time the poor sniped souls team sees where the snipes came from, much less travel the distance to close for combat, the whole squad of stalkers can be hundreds of yds away and rehidden setting up the next target.
Its not the tactic itself I am against, its the zero risk factor. the devs have basically eliminated the zero risk stuff from pve, introducing somthing like that into pvp at this point is asking for trouble.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not trying to discredit anything you've said, because you've brought up quite a few good points. I just wish to point out that I believe a team of Stalkers SHOULD be able to take down a single target without risk. While not snipers, a full team of Scrappers, Blasters, and Tankers take out solo villains and small groups of villains with no risk (apart from outside forces).
As for the Alpha and SS/SJ away thing... I've ad this happen to me a number of times and it never ceases to annoy me. Happened to my MM with a Broadsword Scrapper. Happened to my Blaster with a Corruptor. Happened to my Scrapper with a Stalker. Happened to my Stalker with a Blaster. I just want a stand-up fight. I really hate the SS/SJ combo...