[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Are /fire and /ice defeating you in the same mannor?
[/ QUOTE ]You know, I don't recall ever seeing a /Fire or an /Ice Blaster in PvP.
I know I haven't seen any of those secondary's used against me. Well, at least not the melee attacks.
[/ QUOTE ]
There are a few players on Virtue with those secondarys, and they do very well. They will generally kite their opponent from range, sometimes swooping in to finish with melee, but usually just Blasting from range. And yes, they do take down Brutes with a frightening efficiency.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Look past that and see the root of the problem. The melee player does not want to have the weakness of knockback or immobilization and thus feels compelled to eliminate the weakness. Otherwise, what is forceing them to get SJ? If they accepted the weakness then they could pick any travel pool they wanted, but melee players don't want any weakness. They can't handle it.
[/ QUOTE ]
No. In Dark's case, Dark Armor relies on being near or in a crowd of enemies to function to its full potential (Dark Regeneration, Cloak of Fear, Death Shroud, Oppressive Gloom), never mind that with only a few exceptions, melee ATs generally don't have ranged attacks. Knockback minimizes those strengths and can negate them entirely depending upon how much KB there is. For brutes who have taunt inherent to their attacks and auras, it's even worse because the brute takes more fire than a scrapper or stalker.
There's also the fact that most melee defenses have KB protection, with only three on live giving it up for (according to Statesman) protection from a relatively rare damage type, or for damage that has been nerfed several times.
However, since you are unable or unwilling to imagine that anyone might have a valid complaint about melee ATs that doesn't parse down to "melee is overpowered," every complaint must be unjustified and characterized as petty. This happens every single time balance discussions about melee characters come up.
[/ QUOTE ]
Take a chill pill Kali, if you look it was a comment made in regards to the new Elec set which as far as I can tell we still don't have all the numbers for.
Also, even in the elec debates I stated that one of the reasons that I supported knockback protection being added to /Dark was because of the mechanics behind Dark Regeneration. Hell, I even [censored] about it on the scrapper forums. Don't come at me suggesting that I am throwing balance to the wind or that I am suddenly changeing my stance on issues. It won't fly.
[ QUOTE ]
The thing is that it did not take 3 people to drop 4+ toggles it took 1 player 2 hits
EP ---> BS then you have 100 % chance to drop 2 toggles, 75% chance to drop a 3rd, another 75% chance to drop a forth, and then a 33% chance to drop a 5th.
Roughly the odds work out to 2 hits dropping atleast 3 toggles and usually 4 toggles.
The change is good, it takes what was once dependable... and makes it undependable as it should be.
[/ QUOTE ]
The current situation on test is that you can depend on them not to drop toggles.
Also, on live having a blaster drop four toggles off of my brute is incredibly rare. Only once have I had more than three dropped on my brute. Which means that it hardly happens all the time. Maybe you should PvP more with teams, and maybe get them to buff you a bit. Your experience may improve to the point that you don't have to whine.
[ QUOTE ]
If the game was somehow engineered in such a way that blasters' optimal attack strategy is always to stay at range, and gains no advantage from entering melee range, then what would that mean for blaster vs melee fights, when the melee doesn't have range?
[/ QUOTE ]
I pointed this out many pages ago, but it bounced off someone's Invincibility and was lost. Enjoy the kiting guys, it's what you seem to want. 1 in 20 or 25 odds to knock your mez toggle isn't too attractive.
[ QUOTE ]
Hyperbole? Not at all. When dueling other melee characters, I found it very easy to constantly knock toggles off with just brawl. I mean, only a 33% chance, but since I was spamming it like crazy, I could whittle a DA scrapper's defenses down to the minimum and then smack him around with all my knockdown/up and mez powers (yay stone melee).
[/ QUOTE ]
Is it really 33%, because I recently went to see how good brawl was at dropping toggles and we got something closer to 20%?
[ QUOTE ]
If I could, in two seconds, knock out two toggles, with a very high chance to get three, a moderate chance to get four, and a low chance to get five on top of probably stacking a stun that might land through knocked out mez shield, I don't see how any melee character could retoggle in any decent amount of time.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you are fighting a squishy, I don't see why any melee character would need to re-toggle.
[ QUOTE ]
PVP is not balanced on live right now. The only thing propping some blaster secondaries up is a cheap trick that flies in the face of genre and fun - and you have admitted repeatedly that it's not fun.
[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely; you don't see the developers shedding a tear over it do you? You didn't see them come out and say that perhaps some of the other blaster secondary sets will be getting a change soon did you? I didn't. I know they are thinking about re-working them, but that is pie in the sky.
[ QUOTE ]
So it comes down to Concern making swipes against other players because he doesn't really have a strong argument? You're whining like a regen scrapper with a small tweak in his finger.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, I admit that the math from Blueeyed and my own personal experiences is probably not enough of arguement for the melee proponents in this game but that is all I have. Just the numbers and my own experiences to back me up. What have you got?
*looks back at the pro-nerf arguements*
Oh, it seems alot of whine. Here, the developers handed you your cheese, I hope you enjoy it while it lasts.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the game was somehow engineered in such a way that blasters' optimal attack strategy is always to stay at range, and gains no advantage from entering melee range, then what would that mean for blaster vs melee fights, when the melee doesn't have range?
[/ QUOTE ]
I pointed this out many pages ago, but it bounced off someone's Invincibility and was lost. Enjoy the kiting guys, it's what you seem to want. 1 in 20 or 25 odds to knock your mez toggle isn't too attractive.
[/ QUOTE ]
The odds are lower than that on some melee builds. Hell, the odds of dropping a toggle in melee before the melee player kills you is already rediculously low. It is the latter part that melee players don't understand.
Oh I think most of them understand it just fine.
yep, we just want our god mode back. it's really just that simple.
Level 50 is a journey, not a destination.
▲Scrapper Issues List - Going Rogue Edition▲
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am not saying blaster were not designed to be effective in melee... but they were not designed to have a melee effect so good they have little to no reason to use their range, or that their ideal position was melee. A blasters weakness should be if a players is in melee range (expecially a melee toon,) not their strength.
[/ QUOTE ]
And now I lob yet another complexity grenade:
If the game was somehow engineered in such a way that blasters' optimal attack strategy is always to stay at range, and gains no advantage from entering melee range, then what would that mean for blaster vs melee fights, when the melee doesn't have range?
Kaboom.
/runs off
(Blasters should gain advantages *and* disadvantages at range, not strictly be at a disadvantage in melee, or that flapping sound you hear is a revival of the sport of kiting.)
[/ QUOTE ]
Nice strawman, but if debating please make use of none fallacious replies... No where did I state a blaster should always stay at range.
A blaster should be somewhat balanced between using range and melee. I know its hard for people to understand this strange concept of "use both range and melee for their advantages" but thats the concept none the less.
There is a HUGE difference between having serious damage potential at melee (which blaster still do with their high BI melee and 1.0 and 30% unresisted dmg, etc.) and being able to be at melee with very little to no risk.
This is very simplistic and in no way specific overview so times and number are likely way off and only server to show a point.
Blaster vs melee
AT melee whole time melee extreme advantage.
Blaster gets off at range for say 6 shots at range even battle.
Blaster gets off 7+ shots at range advantage blaster.
Or it would somewhat resemble this with other ranged toons.
A non blaster must keep melee at range for 20 seconds to have advantage
A blaster must keep a melee at range for 10 seconds to have advantage.
See the trend... which is not a blaster can be at melee entire battle at no risk. Its a blaster using both range and melee to take advantage of ... 0 melee dmg at range... and there very high melee dmg in melee.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The thing is that it did not take 3 people to drop 4+ toggles it took 1 player 2 hits
EP ---> BS then you have 100 % chance to drop 2 toggles, 75% chance to drop a 3rd, another 75% chance to drop a forth, and then a 33% chance to drop a 5th.
Roughly the odds work out to 2 hits dropping atleast 3 toggles and usually 4 toggles.
The change is good, it takes what was once dependable... and makes it undependable as it should be.
[/ QUOTE ]
The current situation on test is that you can depend on them not to drop toggles.
Also, on live having a blaster drop four toggles off of my brute is incredibly rare. Only once have I had more than three dropped on my brute. Which means that it hardly happens all the time. Maybe you should PvP more with teams, and maybe get them to buff you a bit. Your experience may improve to the point that you don't have to whine.
[/ QUOTE ]
LOL then it is you who have not played good pvpers.
here you go once again EP - BS
100% chance to drop 2 toggles
75% chance to drop a 3rd toggle
another 75% chance to drop a 4th toggle
and 33% chance to drop 5 toggles.
So thats 2 every time for sure.... then 2 rolls of a 4 sided dice with 3 sides being toggle drops... then another roll of a 10 sided dice with 3 sides being a toggle drop.
Also let us not forget if any TD that drops your status protection leaves you stunned dropping every toggle you have, so you have atleast 2 chances out of how ever many toggles running for this and more likely 3 or 4.
almost always 3 toggles... and very likely 4+ and left stunned....
Also no where did I whine... In fact I am countering all the blasters complaining that they cannot drop toggles at will any more. Perhaps you should read the replies and ones before them before slinging insults. And perhaps when you learn to actually read the replies and play with people who do powerplay, then you will understand the reason why toggle dropping was indeed changed.
Happy Cinco de Mayo all.
I'm gonna drink til I drop a toggle or two. 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hyperbole? Not at all. When dueling other melee characters, I found it very easy to constantly knock toggles off with just brawl. I mean, only a 33% chance, but since I was spamming it like crazy, I could whittle a DA scrapper's defenses down to the minimum and then smack him around with all my knockdown/up and mez powers (yay stone melee).
[/ QUOTE ]
Is it really 33%, because I recently went to see how good brawl was at dropping toggles and we got something closer to 20%?
[/ QUOTE ]
Whichever it was, I was able to detoggle melee opponents fairly easily with just brawl.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I could, in two seconds, knock out two toggles, with a very high chance to get three, a moderate chance to get four, and a low chance to get five on top of probably stacking a stun that might land through knocked out mez shield, I don't see how any melee character could retoggle in any decent amount of time.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you are fighting a squishy, I don't see why any melee character would need to re-toggle.
[/ QUOTE ]
Bonesmasher - Energy Punch - Total Focus - attack - attack - attack
That is mathematically likely to leave the melee target unable to react due to having the hell stunned out of him and the number of toggles the first two attacks will drop. So this melee character who has a mez shield and probably has defense or resistance against the incoming damage loses those advantages in two hits.
[ QUOTE ]
Absolutely; you don't see the developers shedding a tear over it do you? You didn't see them come out and say that perhaps some of the other blaster secondary sets will be getting a change soon did you? I didn't. I know they are thinking about re-working them, but that is pie in the sky.
[/ QUOTE ]
I saw Statesman come out and say several months ago that the blaster secondaries will be reworked. Not thinking about, but that it will happen.
[ QUOTE ]
Well, I admit that the math from Blueeyed and my own personal experiences is probably not enough of arguement for the melee proponents in this game but that is all I have. Just the numbers and my own experiences to back me up. What have you got?
*looks back at the pro-nerf arguements*
Oh, it seems alot of whine. Here, the developers handed you your cheese, I hope you enjoy it while it lasts.
[/ QUOTE ]
First, I don't recall much beyond a hell of a lot of emotional appeals from you and Blueeyed in the older threads or in the I7 threads. I remember arguments that defenders would suck if the two sets that had reliable toggle-droppers lost them, and perhaps some pie-in-the-sky reasoning that the devs might add toggle-droppers to the less advantaged in PVP sets like Dark Miasma...
But math? I recall very little beyond the TA/A vs. Regen test.
Second, there's more to the argument against toggle-dropping than whining. You've acknowledged as much when you admitted that TD isn't a fun mechanic. Unfortunately you're so tied up in the idea that this mechanic is necessary for balance that you're not really willing to entertain that there are valid arguments to remove it.
After all:
- On live, there's a have/have-not dichotomy where some powersets get a lot of toggle-dropping potential, often with good mezzing to back it up. Not only do you have a good chance to drop toggles, you can leverage that by mezzing your target if you knock off the right shields. This makes balancing these sets more difficult as well as encourages FotM PVP builds
- The fact is that a significant portion of every melee character's build is tied up in toggle defenses. By including a mechanic that renders those toggles pointless much of the time, you're effectively cheating those players out of those power choices. As _Castle_ has reportedly said, melee should play PVP as if they don't have shields.
- Despite protests to the contrary, the core of the pro-toggle dropping argument is that 1v1 PVP is unfair between squishies and melee, to the point of claiming that squishies simply cannot defeat melee characters without having toggle-dropping available. One of the older threads was repeatedly marked with insistence that a blaster can't solo a tanker is unfair, but followed with "if a tanker has problems taking on buld X, get a team to help." Apparently, squishies shouldn't ever need teams to accomplish their PVP goals.
- Toggle-dropping is not in genre. I mean, do you remember that time when Starfire blasted Superman and suddenly he fell out of the sky? Yeah, neither do I.
- Toggle-dropping was introduced in issue 4, when invuln and stone tankers could cap their resists without outside help, and invuln could also reach very high defense with bugged invincibility. Ice Armor was still able to reach a very high defense with Energy Absorption. In conditions like that, toggle-dropping is an end run around those powers to enable characters to overcome those defenses. In issue 5, defenses were reduced across the board. No defense primary or secondary was able to match the numbers they'd reached before. In issue 6, ED reduced those numbers further, compounding the GDR in issue 5. I realize that many would counter that damage also suffered from ED - and this is true. However, damage was not reduced in issue 5 before being reduced again in issue 6. The simple fact is that defenses were hit twice, and the first hit magnifies the result of the second. If toggle-dropping was balanced in issue 4, it is most assuredly not balanced now.
- The most common argument pro-TD posters produce is "I hate those damned dirty melee characters for whining and getting us all nerfed."
I admit that the last gives me a certain amount of schadenfreude given all the ungracious gloating that flooded the forum after various melee nerfs. It's funny how quick the tune changes when the shoes on the other foot and all.
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 ]
Take a chill pill Kali, if you look it was a comment made in regards to the new Elec set which as far as I can tell we still don't have all the numbers for.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you can cut the "whiny melee" crap, maybe. It's not doing any good.
[ QUOTE ]
Also, even in the elec debates I stated that one of the reasons that I supported knockback protection being added to /Dark was because of the mechanics behind Dark Regeneration. Hell, I even [censored] about it on the scrapper forums. Don't come at me suggesting that I am throwing balance to the wind or that I am suddenly changeing my stance on issues. It won't fly.
[/ QUOTE ]
I missed that post, but I am not saying you're suddenly changing your stance on issues. I am saying that you will reliably support squishy over melee, even if squishy ATs are benefiting from an unbalanced mechanic. Case in point: This thread.
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 ]
Nice strawman, but if debating please make on none fallacious point
[/ QUOTE ]
Okay. I think.
[ QUOTE ]
There is a HUGE difference between having serious damage potential at melee (which blaster still do with their high BI melee and 1.0 and 30% unresisted dmg, etc.) and being able to be at melee with very little to no risk.
[/ QUOTE ]
Toggle dropping has little to do with blaster risk: its a (possibly overinflated) reward for being in melee range. The only way a toggle drop will suddenly mitigate blaster risk is if they toggle drop mez protection *and* land a mez simultaneously. Even with the (stupidly high) I6 toggle drop numbers, that wasn't exactly an automatic thing. Its probably specifically for this reason that powers like total focus, with a 100% mag 4 disorient, *can't* toggle drop.
Now, since I really hate it when people accuse me of using strawmen (I *never* use strawmen) lets take a moment to put this particular argument together.
There's no question that, toggle dropping or no toggle dropping, blasters are at greater risk in general in melee range than at range. That's pretty much ipso facto, and particularly true against melee ATs.
That predetermines blaster melee attack damage: to balance risk/reward on melee attacks, melee attacks hit harder. That too is a trivial consequence of AT balancing.
Since melee damage is higher, the only question is whether the risk of entering melee range is worth it, or not.
Since you say that:
"but they were not designed to have a melee effect so good they have little to no reason to use their range, or that their ideal position was melee."
If their ideal position isn't melee, it has to be ranged. There are no other positions. And if ranged is their optimal position, it has to be because the risk of entering melee range is so high, it outweighs the considerable advantage of the melee-ranged attack damage.
That means there's no good reason to enter melee range. Its a natural consequence of saying "the blaster ideal position is not melee." That means the blaster idea position is ranged, and entering melee range is suboptimal: a good player won't PvP doing suboptimal things.
Now, technically:
"No where did I state a blaster should only be at range."
is true. But you imply that there should be no good reason for smart blaster to ever be in melee range, because the only way for it to be not ideal, is for it to be such a high risk gamble its not a rational thing to do.
Another thing: a potential weak spot in the argument is that its possible there are *no* ideal positions for the blaster at all: that they have the same risk/reward ratio at range *and* at melee range. Recognizing that, I added the caveat:
"(Blasters should gain advantages *and* disadvantages at range, not strictly be at a disadvantage in melee, or that flapping sound you hear is a revival of the sport of kiting.)"
But to expect those two to be *perfectly* balanced is hope beyond hope. One of the two will be better, given the huge advantages and disadvantages being balanced against each other.
The term "strawman" comes from the practice of using straw-filled targets as practice dummies. But my visual image tends to drift to the Wizard of Oz. What did the Strawman want from the Wizard?
Don't do it again.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hyperbole? Not at all. When dueling other melee characters, I found it very easy to constantly knock toggles off with just brawl. I mean, only a 33% chance, but since I was spamming it like crazy, I could whittle a DA scrapper's defenses down to the minimum and then smack him around with all my knockdown/up and mez powers (yay stone melee).
[/ QUOTE ]
Is it really 33%, because I recently went to see how good brawl was at dropping toggles and we got something closer to 20%?
[/ QUOTE ]
Whichever it was, I was able to detoggle melee opponents fairly easily with just brawl.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I could, in two seconds, knock out two toggles, with a very high chance to get three, a moderate chance to get four, and a low chance to get five on top of probably stacking a stun that might land through knocked out mez shield, I don't see how any melee character could retoggle in any decent amount of time.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you are fighting a squishy, I don't see why any melee character would need to re-toggle.
[/ QUOTE ]
Bonesmasher - Energy Punch - Total Focus - attack - attack - attack
That is mathematically likely to leave the melee target unable to react due to having the hell stunned out of him and the number of toggles the first two attacks will drop. So this melee character who has a mez shield and probably has defense or resistance against the incoming damage loses those advantages in two hits.
[ QUOTE ]
Absolutely; you don't see the developers shedding a tear over it do you? You didn't see them come out and say that perhaps some of the other blaster secondary sets will be getting a change soon did you? I didn't. I know they are thinking about re-working them, but that is pie in the sky.
[/ QUOTE ]
I saw Statesman come out and say several months ago that the blaster secondaries will be reworked. Not thinking about, but that it will happen.
[ QUOTE ]
Well, I admit that the math from Blueeyed and my own personal experiences is probably not enough of arguement for the melee proponents in this game but that is all I have. Just the numbers and my own experiences to back me up. What have you got?
*looks back at the pro-nerf arguements*
Oh, it seems alot of whine. Here, the developers handed you your cheese, I hope you enjoy it while it lasts.
[/ QUOTE ]
First, I don't recall much beyond a hell of a lot of emotional appeals from you and Blueeyed in the older threads or in the I7 threads. I remember arguments that defenders would suck if the two sets that had reliable toggle-droppers lost them, and perhaps some pie-in-the-sky reasoning that the devs might add toggle-droppers to the less advantaged in PVP sets like Dark Miasma...
But math? I recall very little beyond the TA/A vs. Regen test.
Second, there's more to the argument against toggle-dropping than whining. You've acknowledged as much when you admitted that TD isn't a fun mechanic. Unfortunately you're so tied up in the idea that this mechanic is necessary for balance that you're not really willing to entertain that there are valid arguments to remove it.
After all:
- On live, there's a have/have-not dichotomy where some powersets get a lot of toggle-dropping potential, often with good mezzing to back it up. Not only do you have a good chance to drop toggles, you can leverage that by mezzing your target if you knock off the right shields. This makes balancing these sets more difficult as well as encourages FotM PVP builds
- The fact is that a significant portion of every melee character's build is tied up in toggle defenses. By including a mechanic that renders those toggles pointless much of the time, you're effectively cheating those players out of those power choices. As _Castle_ has reportedly said, melee should play PVP as if they don't have shields.
- Despite protests to the contrary, the core of the pro-toggle dropping argument is that 1v1 PVP is unfair between squishies and melee, to the point of claiming that squishies simply cannot defeat melee characters without having toggle-dropping available. One of the older threads was repeatedly marked with insistence that a blaster can't solo a tanker is unfair, but followed with "if a tanker has problems taking on buld X, get a team to help." Apparently, squishies shouldn't ever need teams to accomplish their PVP goals.
- Toggle-dropping is not in genre. I mean, do you remember that time when Starfire blasted Superman and suddenly he fell out of the sky? Yeah, neither do I.
- Toggle-dropping was introduced in issue 4, when invuln and stone tankers could cap their resists without outside help, and invuln could also reach very high defense with bugged invincibility. Ice Armor was still able to reach a very high defense with Energy Absorption. In conditions like that, toggle-dropping is an end run around those powers to enable characters to overcome those defenses. In issue 5, defenses were reduced across the board. No defense primary or secondary was able to match the numbers they'd reached before. In issue 6, ED reduced those numbers further, compounding the GDR in issue 5. I realize that many would counter that damage also suffered from ED - and this is true. However, damage was not reduced in issue 5 before being reduced again in issue 6. The simple fact is that defenses were hit twice, and the first hit magnifies the result of the second. If toggle-dropping was balanced in issue 4, it is most assuredly not balanced now.
- The most common argument pro-TD posters produce is "I hate those damned dirty melee characters for whining and getting us all nerfed."
I admit that the last gives me a certain amount of schadenfreude given all the ungracious gloating that flooded the forum after various melee nerfs. It's funny how quick the tune changes when the shoes on the other foot and all.
[/ QUOTE ]
CLAP, CLAP, CLAP.
Thx Kali! Couldn't agree with you more! 
It's a dead issue at this point, because the Devs agree with our side. Toggle Dropping WILL be curtailed. The only question is, by how much?
Lower the percentage possibilities of TD proportionally to what melee toons lost after I5 and GDR...Boom! Problem solved.
BTW, what the heck is schadenfreude? 
[ QUOTE ]
BTW, what the heck is schadenfreude?
[/ QUOTE ]
Schadenfreude: A malicious satisfaction obtained from the misfortunes of others
[ QUOTE ]
I saw Statesman come out and say several months ago that the blaster secondaries will be reworked. Not thinking about, but that it will happen.
[/ QUOTE ]
Cite please.
[ QUOTE ]
CLAP, CLAP, CLAP.
Thx Kali! Couldn't agree with you more!
It's a dead issue at this point, because the Devs agree with our side. Toggle Dropping WILL be curtailed. The only question is, by how much?
Lower the percentage possibilities of TD proportionally to what melee toons lost after I5 and GDR...Boom! Problem solved.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think it's a dead issue. I think it's an issue that's getting tested. The devs at least agree that it's worthwhile to see how things play out with a lower chance to drop toggles. I also think that there are real balance issues that need to be addressed. I'd rather they weren't covered up with a bandaid like toggle-dropping. I'd like to see boosts for various ATs so that they're more competitive in PVP - like a higher percentage of unresistable damage from snipes (75%-85%) than other blaster attacks, and blasters might need a damage boost in the post-ED world.
Also, the drop in defenses was not consistent across all sets, so it'd be difficult to standardize TD that way.
[ QUOTE ]
BTW, what the heck is schadenfreude?
[/ QUOTE ]
Taking pleasure in another's misfortune. It's a mean thing to feel.
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 ]
[ QUOTE ]
I saw Statesman come out and say several months ago that the blaster secondaries will be reworked. Not thinking about, but that it will happen.
[/ QUOTE ]
Cite please.
[/ QUOTE ]
Do a search for Statesman's posts in the blaster forum for the past two years.
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)
A straw man is when you take a point of an argument then set it up as if to be the main argument only to destroy it.
IE: you taking me saying a blaster should not have 0 to no risk in melee or that a blasters weakness to a melee toon should be at melee range and then using this to make the claim to seem something of this effect: " blasters' optimal attack strategy is always to stay at range "
So yes your whole point was nothing but a straw man, as for this one. For nowhere in my statement did I state what you quoted in yellow in that a blaster should always be at range to be optimized... Perhaps it is you who should ask for the "strawmans" gift from the wizard sense you appear to be lacking in that area. You state that you never use strawman within a second straw man reply which I will address next.
I will spare the time of address your other points that have been addressed in earlier threads in this issue... However, I never implied anything except that a blaster ideally is a balance of range and melee, the implication you stated I implied must be your thoughts. I, also, will further address this common misunderstanding which seems to branch of the prior statement I addressed:
"If their ideal position isn't melee, it has to be ranged. There are no other positions."
The dichotomy you present is false... reminds me of the election on this or that, only black and white with no grey.
Ideally a blaster will be able to flow in and out of melee and ranged to take advantage of each position. At melee: extreme damage. At range: cannot be attacked by melee attacks. So here you do not have a static ideal position but your ideal position is a ballistic flow of movement between the two to capitalize on the advantages each offer. However, I do not expect you to understand this as it appears you see the game in only black and white or static states as you statement would suggest. You seem to catch this in your statement when you say "blasters have no ideal position" however this is also false, for if each position is used properly it is a strength... playing to that strength or creating the situation to do so is the challage of the AT.
[ QUOTE ]
However, I do not expect you to understand this as it appears you see the game in only black and white or static states as you statement would suggest.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, but I do see that reading comprehension is not among your skills.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, I do not expect you to understand this as it appears you see the game in only black and white or static states as you statement would suggest.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, but I do see that reading comprehension is not among your skills.
[/ QUOTE ]
Here is another fallacy for you:
Ad Hominem: a general category of fallacies in which the author is attacked rather then the statement or arguement made by them.
Which is nothing more then what this next comment by you is.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I saw Statesman come out and say several months ago that the blaster secondaries will be reworked. Not thinking about, but that it will happen.
[/ QUOTE ]
Cite please.
[/ QUOTE ]
Do a search for Statesman's posts in the blaster forum for the past two years.
[/ QUOTE ]
Searched. Found this and this and this . Nothing like a guarantee. So, cite please.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I saw Statesman come out and say several months ago that the blaster secondaries will be reworked. Not thinking about, but that it will happen.
[/ QUOTE ]
Cite please.
[/ QUOTE ]
Do a search for Statesman's posts in the blaster forum for the past two years.
[/ QUOTE ]
Searched. Found this and this and this . Nothing like a guarantee. So, cite please.
[/ QUOTE ]
It may have been confirmed in a PM, thus Statesman addressing the question of whether they'd be getting rid of melee attacks.
However, far be it from me to take away from your blaster pityfest.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
I think that there is advantage for a Blaster in melee. His attacks there do more damage (per attack, at least).
The question is: is it too dangerous for a Blaster to be in melee with an armored AT. I think that if they cannot be constantly mezzed for no other reason than that they are in melee, the answer is no; they can afford to be in melee briefly - especially with Defender support (or a power like Force of Nature).
Of course, that cuts both ways. I don't think it's great fun for a Blaster to be able to mezz the bejesus out of people he gets in melee with. And I don't mean the guys with armor on.
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