[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, far be it from me to take away from your blaster pityfest.
[/ QUOTE ]
You said "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.". I asked you for a cite because I had no recollection of Statesman having made any such statement. In what way is that a "pityfest"?
[/ QUOTE ]
The extreme readiness to say "nuh uh, Statesman did not say they were going to fix blasters."
There was also that monosyllabic "Cite." You might as well grunt your displeasure.
[ QUOTE ]
Fix Defiance. Fix Blaster secondaries. Add more powers to primaries and secondaries. Fix ED. Adding additional powersets.
Were happy with Defiance.
We will look at Blaster secondaries; we know some need attention.
Wed like to add more power sets and powers; its just that they take a LONG time. A single new power set can take as long as a month to finish; that isnt a man month in terms of manpower. Thats a real month. Adding individual powers to sets take longer, because an artist needs to change styles to match each set.
Were happy with ED.
[/ QUOTE ]
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 ]
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 anyone out of scrappers or tanks had their defenses divided by 8 or more. Going from two guaranteed toggle-drops and possibility of more, to 1:20 and 1:4.8 or so is a much more profound change than anything that came from the global defense nerf. You did see the percentages Castle posted earlier in the thread? There isn't any question about it, it's as good as done.
[ QUOTE ]
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.
[/ QUOTE ]
All I can say is - yuck. Making snipes that optimal still wouldn't do that much for blasters vs. non-squishies, but would make them so attractive that you'd see a hell of a lot more stealthed blasters sniping from their max range, which imo is the AT at its worst. Certainly it's the least pleasant way for a melee to be engaged by a blaster.
People will drop their loads if blasters are given more damage, I don't think that will fly too well either.
[ QUOTE ]
It may have been confirmed in a PM, thus Statesman addressing the question of whether they'd be getting rid of melee attacks.
[/ QUOTE ]
He also said they'd be giving Tankers what Brutes ended up getting, Fury. Blaster secondaries are pretty fun and please many paying customers, if they do anything profound it'll involve adding NEW sets rather than taking away the melee attacks in nearly all the secondaries. They do goofy things sometimes but they're not stupid.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It may have been confirmed in a PM, thus Statesman addressing the question of whether they'd be getting rid of melee attacks.
[/ QUOTE ]
He also said they'd be giving Tankers what Brutes ended up getting, Fury. Blaster secondaries are pretty fun and please many paying customers, if they do anything profound it'll involve adding NEW sets rather than taking away the melee attacks in nearly all the secondaries. They do goofy things sometimes but they're not stupid.
[/ QUOTE ]
He said they would, then tested it and said "This is too powerful for tankers."
I don't know what happened to the discussion, but there was talk of letting people keep the old sets or respec into the new ones, and explicit referencing of bringing all of the secondaries in line with each other. Unlike the Fury thing, I haven't seen any later statements changing that.
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 ]
All I can say is - yuck. Making snipes that optimal still wouldn't do that much for blasters vs. non-squishies, but would make them so attractive that you'd see a hell of a lot more stealthed blasters sniping from their max range, which imo is the AT at its worst. Certainly it's the least pleasant way for a melee to be engaged by a blaster.
People will drop their loads if blasters are given more damage, I don't think that will fly too well either.
[/ QUOTE ]
You know, I'd believe the damage thing if ED hadn't happened. With ED in place, there's room to buff damage a bit. If the devs buffed blaster damage, that'd also make room to buff other ATs that could use the damage love - like Defenders and Dominators.
As for the snipe thing, it's really easy to get +Perception, as many Stalkers will complain about at length. It's also worth noting that blaster damage is already 30% unresistable, so giving snipes a boost on that isn't as huge a thing as it might appear.
Anyway, I don't see how it'd be that big a problem, as stalkers will already be doing the "snipe from stealth" trick with their PPPs.
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 ]
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 anyone out of scrappers or tanks had their defenses divided by 8 or more. Going from two guaranteed toggle-drops and possibility of more, to 1:20 and 1:4.8 or so is a much more profound change than anything that came from the global defense nerf. You did see the percentages Castle posted earlier in the thread? There isn't any question about it, it's as good as done.
[/ QUOTE ]
Reducing the chance of toggle-drops to 1/8 of the former chance (using the 1/8 number you pulled out) is not the same as reducing defenses by 1/8, or reducing offense by 1/8.
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)
Okay, if you want a more exact number, I don't think anyone out of scrappers or tanks had any defenses DIVIDED BY ONE HUNDRED - going from two guaranteed toggle drops to .05 x .22 = 0.011. The poster I responded to was the one who brought in the term "proportional".
[ QUOTE ]
Okay, if you want a more exact number, I don't think anyone out of scrappers or tanks had any defenses DIVIDED BY ONE HUNDRED - going from two guaranteed toggle drops to .05 x .22 = 0.011. The poster I responded to was the one who brought in the term "proportional".
[/ QUOTE ]
I wasn't quibbling over the number. I pointed out that having even a 1/100th of your former chance of dropping a toggle isn't 1/100th of your former power.
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 ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, far be it from me to take away from your blaster pityfest.
[/ QUOTE ]
You said "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.". I asked you for a cite because I had no recollection of Statesman having made any such statement. In what way is that a "pityfest"?
[/ QUOTE ]
The extreme readiness to say "nuh uh, Statesman did not say they were going to fix blasters."
There was also that monosyllabic "Cite." You might as well grunt your displeasure.
[ QUOTE ]
Fix Defiance. Fix Blaster secondaries. Add more powers to primaries and secondaries. Fix ED. Adding additional powersets.
We’re happy with Defiance.
We will look at Blaster secondaries; we know some need attention.
We’d like to add more power sets and powers; it’s just that they take a LONG time. A single new power set can take as long as a month to finish; that isn’t a man month in terms of manpower. That’s a real month. Adding individual powers to sets take longer, because an artist needs to change styles to match each set.
We’re happy with ED.
[/ QUOTE ]
[/ QUOTE ]
But I thought a Blaster pityfest would be more along the lines of "Them mean old scrappers took away my I win button". Or something like that. Also, I never said "Statesman did not say they were going to fix blasters.". Until now. Because Statesman did not say they were going to fix blasters. He said they were going to look at them. That could be good, it could be bad, it could be both, it could be neither. We won't know until the Devs tell us what exactly they are doing.
And yes Cite is monosyllabic. So is please. And together they are no more rude than "find it yourself".
[ 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 ]
Ah, we are back to 1v1 arguements again. Assume team buffs and it doesn't work that way. At least from the villains point of view. Didn't you guys come out of the woodworks and say that all my arguements were 1v1? What exactly are you presenting here? One, a Brute or melee toon that apparently doesn't know what a break free is for, and one that apparently can't kill a blaster while the blaster is in the TF animation of doom. Two, you present a blaster that apparently doesn't have to worry about his health and can "attack attack attack" and that the Brute or melee toon is not buffed to resist any damage. Who is bringing up 1v1 arguements? Did you read any of my arguements or examples from PvP play in TEAMS. Mathematicaly, in TEAMS the brute is not going to be held or stunned. He is going to be kicking the blasters [censored]. Been there and done it often enough.
[ 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 ]
Yeah, a year ago. Over a year ago. It may get re-worked now only becuase if toggle drops stay the way they are, it will be necessary.
[ QUOTE ]
- 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.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah they should, they wouldn't [censored] so much about toggle droppers if they did. Melee is far from crippled in PvP due to toggle droppers.
[ QUOTE ]
- 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.
[/ QUOTE ]
Funny, in almost every one of the arguements I have set forth on the issue of toggle dropping, it has always been that if Blasters are to play their role in teams they must be a threat to the melee classes and a fast threat. Notice the word team. I haven't changed my tune. I have stated that PvP degenerates into a series of 1v1 brawls. That is absolutely true. There is still team support however in the forum of buffs.
[ QUOTE ]
- 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.
[/ QUOTE ]
Here is the biggest myth of all. Toggle dropping was introduced in a time when defenses were higher. No doubt. Since toggle drops reduce the benefit of a toggle to zero it cannot be argued what they were balanced for. If they balanced the sets around GDN it would still apply to the higher values of the defensive toggles before GDN hit simply because it reduced those values to zero. So, simply saying that defenses were reduced does not mean that toggle drops are unbalanced. Also, at the time that toggle drops were introduced the developers were playing with GDN values on their test machines. It could be argued that they current toggle drops have always been balanced around GDN.
[ QUOTE ]
- 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
[/ QUOTE ]
The core issue. Ice/EM. It always seems to come back to this. Personaly, I fear an Ice/Ice corruptor more but that is just due to some personal experiences I have had recently in PvP.
It has always been a percentage chance that the melee player will be stunned. That chance hovered around 20% with EM unless he activated TF, or he applied a mez before ATTEMPTING to drop the mez protection of the melee toon. It also disregards mez protection that is in click form and not toggle form. It also disregards that in team PvP there is normaly mez protection being passed around. Notice, my arguements in Brute VS. Blaster is that a brute does indeed have enough damage to kill a blaster before the opposite is true. I don't even think about mez. Granted, I carry break frees or team something that most melee toons haven't figured out yet. They probably never will if things stay as they are. They'll just complain about how easy it is for a controller or dominator to hold them. It has already started actually.
So essentially, your argueing about the possibility of this happening. As if it simply should never happen. Not surprising. Blasters want 50/50, melee wants what? Thats right, a team to challenge them.
You are absolutely correct however, there are several sets that could have used more toggle droppers. How ironic that the devs instead of bringing those sets up to par, nerfed the working sets into obscurity and mediocrity. /Fire and /Ice should have had more toggle drops, your right. They should have at least equaled Energy Melee and Elec Melee. TA defenders should have been given toggle drops as should Dark Defenders in some form or another. Probably a 20% chance on the heal or something like that.
That didn't happen however, and believe me, in 1v1 duels it hurts an incredible amount not to be able to drop toggles. Not against melee, but for my own defender against corruptors. Yes, I know. Incredible as it may sound all those arguements I made about toggle drops not being completely designed against melee had a point. More than melee uses toggles and the toggle debuffs are the strongest AoE debuffs in the game. Believe me, I would love to be able to knock snowstorm down from a corruptor when they are useing it to completely neuter my TA defender. I can't though because players whined their [censored] of about toggle drops.
Remember when Blueeyed and I argued that if the developers nerfed toggle drops it would effect defenders just as much as everyone else. All the melee proponents said the developers wouldn't do anything as stupid as that. Who was right Kali? Who was right? Who got hurt in the end? Yep, the poor defender got nerfed along with everyone else.
Yet, the melee toons don't know when to stop and pause in their nerf cry. It all has to come down and be damned if there are no fixes to fix the mess it creates. Something irritates melee, it must be fixed NOW and bedamned the defenders.
[ QUOTE ]
- The most common argument pro-TD posters produce is "I hate those damned dirty melee characters for whining and getting us all nerfed."
[/ QUOTE ]
Gosh Kali, watching my defenders get nerfed along with everything else. Why would I be upset with melee? What possible reason could I have for being upset at all the nerf calls that melee made when we warned them that this would be the consequence.
[ QUOTE ]
But I thought a Blaster pityfest would be more along the lines of "Them mean old scrappers took away my I win button". Or something like that. Also, I never said "Statesman did not say they were going to fix blasters.". Until now. Because Statesman did not say they were going to fix blasters. He said they were going to look at them. That could be good, it could be bad, it could be both, it could be neither. We won't know until the Devs tell us what exactly they are doing.
And yes Cite is monosyllabic. So is please. And together they are no more rude than "find it yourself".
[/ QUOTE ]
There's more discussion on the topic than I could find, with some details on how the secondaries were going to be fixed, what the consequences of that would be for existing characters, and so on.
Blaster pityfests also include "We never get anything nice."
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 ]
BTW, what the heck is schadenfreude? 
[/ QUOTE ]
Schadenfreude: A malicious satisfaction obtained from the misfortunes of others
[/ QUOTE ]
HA HA HA HA!! It makes me so happy that you didn't know that! Now you look stoopid! 
"OK, first of all... Shut Up." - My 13-Year-Old Daughter
29973 "The Running of the Bulls" [SFMA] - WINNER of the Mighty Big Story Arc Contest !
- The Stellar Wind Orbital Space Platform
[ QUOTE ]
Here is the biggest myth of all.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the melee toons don't know when to stop and pause in their nerf cry. It all has to come down and be damned if there are no fixes to fix the mess it creates. Something irritates melee, it must be fixed NOW and bedamned the defenders.
[/ QUOTE ]
i agree, huge myth.
Level 50 is a journey, not a destination.
▲Scrapper Issues List - Going Rogue Edition▲
[ QUOTE ]
Ah, we are back to 1v1 arguements again. Assume team buffs and it doesn't work that way. At least from the villains point of view. Didn't you guys come out of the woodworks and say that all my arguements were 1v1? What exactly are you presenting here? One, a Brute or melee toon that apparently doesn't know what a break free is for, and one that apparently can't kill a blaster while the blaster is in the TF animation of doom. Two, you present a blaster that apparently doesn't have to worry about his health and can "attack attack attack" and that the Brute or melee toon is not buffed to resist any damage. Who is bringing up 1v1 arguements? Did you read any of my arguements or examples from PvP play in TEAMS. Mathematicaly, in TEAMS the brute is not going to be held or stunned. He is going to be kicking the blasters [censored]. Been there and done it often enough.
[/ QUOTE ]
It is not always possible to keep status protection on everyone in a team in PVP. It's also not always possible to have someone on a team who can provide it. It is also really stupid to insist that status protection should be provided to protect melee characters who have status protection in their native powersets from any AT that isn't a controller or dominator.
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, a year ago. Over a year ago. It may get re-worked now only becuase if toggle drops stay the way they are, it will be necessary.
[/ QUOTE ]
It didn't happen in issue 5 because they wanted to do the GDR first. It didn't happen in issue 6 because it was City of Villains. It didn't happen in issue 7 because that was City of Villains too. The time taken over those three issues is inexcusable, and they really should've taken the time to work on blasters for issue 7.
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah they should, they wouldn't [censored] so much about toggle droppers if they did. Melee is far from crippled in PvP due to toggle droppers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Okay, it's fair for melee to PVP as if they don't have shields. At the same time, it's fair for defenders to PVP as if they don't have any buffs or debuffs. It's also fair for blasters to PVP as if they don't have any melee attacks. It's fair for Controllers to PVP as if they don't have any control. Masterminds should be playing as if they don't have pets.
Do you really want to make that argument?
[ QUOTE ]
Funny, in almost every one of the arguements I have set forth on the issue of toggle dropping, it has always been that if Blasters are to play their role in teams they must be a threat to the melee classes and a fast threat. Notice the word team. I haven't changed my tune. I have stated that PvP degenerates into a series of 1v1 brawls. That is absolutely true. There is still team support however in the forum of buffs.
[/ QUOTE ]
You sprinkle the word "team" into your arguments, but your arguments aren't about teams.
[ QUOTE ]
Here is the biggest myth of all. Toggle dropping was introduced in a time when defenses were higher. No doubt. Since toggle drops reduce the benefit of a toggle to zero it cannot be argued what they were balanced for. If they balanced the sets around GDN it would still apply to the higher values of the defensive toggles before GDN hit simply because it reduced those values to zero. So, simply saying that defenses were reduced does not mean that toggle drops are unbalanced. Also, at the time that toggle drops were introduced the developers were playing with GDN values on their test machines. It could be argued that they current toggle drops have always been balanced around GDN.
[/ QUOTE ]
Which is of course why the patch note says[ QUOTE ]
All player powers with Forced Toggle Drop effects have had the chance for those effects to go off reduced. The need for these effects is greatly reduced with the advent of Enhancement Diversification. No player power has a 100% chance of dropping toggles with this change.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It has always been a percentage chance that the melee player will be stunned. That chance hovered around 20% with EM unless he activated TF, or he applied a mez before ATTEMPTING to drop the mez protection of the melee toon. It also disregards mez protection that is in click form and not toggle form. It also disregards that in team PvP there is normaly mez protection being passed around. Notice, my arguements in Brute VS. Blaster is that a brute does indeed have enough damage to kill a blaster before the opposite is true. I don't even think about mez. Granted, I carry break frees or team something that most melee toons haven't figured out yet. They probably never will if things stay as they are. They'll just complain about how easy it is for a controller or dominator to hold them. It has already started actually.
[/ QUOTE ]
Has it? There is a good argument that if a Controller or Dominator can easily blow through status protection as if it weren't there that this might be too good as the point of status protection is to slow such things down. There's also a good argument that Controllers and Dominators should be able to break through status protection, because otherwise they're not really able to fulfill their purpose.
If you're going to point to my post about a Dominator perma-holding me, the thing I pointed out as wrong about that situation was that the Dominator was unable to defeat my Scrapper, not that the Dominator was able to break my mez protection. It took three applications of DOMINATION-backed holds to do it.
[ QUOTE ]
So essentially, your argueing about the possibility of this happening. As if it simply should never happen. Not surprising. Blasters want 50/50, melee wants what? Thats right, a team to challenge them.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, I'm arguing that it is ridiculous that a blaster can mez melee characters due to the ability to bypass mez protection entirely. I didn't say anything about how difficult a fight between a blaster and a melee character should be. That's another issue - it's just that the blaster shouldn't be able to stun the melee character unless other stuns are being stacked. If three blasters all TF the scrapper at once, should the scrapper survive, it should be stunned. One blaster alone? No way.
[ QUOTE ]
You are absolutely correct however, there are several sets that could have used more toggle droppers. How ironic that the devs instead of bringing those sets up to par, nerfed the working sets into obscurity and mediocrity. /Fire and /Ice should have had more toggle drops, your right. They should have at least equaled Energy Melee and Elec Melee. TA defenders should have been given toggle drops as should Dark Defenders in some form or another. Probably a 20% chance on the heal or something like that.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, toggle drops should just go away entirely. Get rid of the whole mess and find some other way to balance the ATs in PVP. The whole point of toggle-dropping is to simply negate entire powersets without recourse - something you consider to be fair because you primarily play characters that benefit from such abuse.
[ QUOTE ]
That didn't happen however, and believe me, in 1v1 duels it hurts an incredible amount not to be able to drop toggles. Not against melee, but for my own defender against corruptors. Yes, I know. Incredible as it may sound all those arguements I made about toggle drops not being completely designed against melee had a point. More than melee uses toggles and the toggle debuffs are the strongest AoE debuffs in the game. Believe me, I would love to be able to knock snowstorm down from a corruptor when they are useing it to completely neuter my TA defender. I can't though because players whined their [censored] of about toggle drops.
[/ QUOTE ]
There's always single-target holds, disorients, and other status effects. Only /sonic and /traps can provide themselves with status protection, and then to hold and stun. Admittedly, sleep isn't something defenders get much access to.
Also, admittedly, sonic and traps don't get snowstorm.
[ QUOTE ]
Remember when Blueeyed and I argued that if the developers nerfed toggle drops it would effect defenders just as much as everyone else. All the melee proponents said the developers wouldn't do anything as stupid as that. Who was right Kali? Who was right? Who got hurt in the end? Yep, the poor defender got nerfed along with everyone else.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh, please. Two whole defender powersets had enough toggle drops to rely on them. Storm and FF losing their TDs won't have any affect on Rad, Empathy, Dark, Sonic, Trick Arrow, and only minor effect on Kinetics as its TD was already very unreliable. Defenders as an AT did not rely upon TDs. Storm, already a strong defender primary, got toggle-drops on top of that, and FF, a weak primary that needs some attention and variety, used TDs to shore up its leaky corners.
Yet, the melee toons don't know when to stop and pause in their nerf cry. It all has to come down and be damned if there are no fixes to fix the mess it creates. Something irritates melee, it must be fixed NOW and bedamned the defenders.
[ QUOTE ]
Gosh Kali, watching my defenders get nerfed along with everything else. Why would I be upset with melee? What possible reason could I have for being upset at all the nerf calls that melee made when we warned them that this would be the consequence.
[/ QUOTE ]
I deconstructed this claim above. Defenders were by and large not nerfed. Defenders need help in PVP, to varying degrees. Claiming that their viability hinged on toggle-dropping is extremely misleading. It's like saying that nerfing Total Focus makes all blasters useless in melee.
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 ]
[ QUOTE ]
BTW, what the heck is schadenfreude?
[/ QUOTE ]
Schadenfreude: A malicious satisfaction obtained from the misfortunes of others
[/ QUOTE ]
HA HA HA HA!! It makes me so happy that you didn't know that! Now you look stoopid!
[/ QUOTE ]
Zub's awesome.
That's not irony or sarcasm, just plain damned fact.
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 ]
Here is the biggest myth of all.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the melee toons don't know when to stop and pause in their nerf cry. It all has to come down and be damned if there are no fixes to fix the mess it creates. Something irritates melee, it must be fixed NOW and bedamned the defenders.
[/ QUOTE ]
i agree, huge myth.
[/ QUOTE ]
Remember the good old days, when regen scrappers were able to jump into large crowds of +4 to +6 and not even get hit? Or when broadsword scrappers were two-shotting +2 or higher bosses? Or how scrappers were constantly and reliably sitting at the 500% damage cap?
Gosh, it's not like anyone who played a squishy AT made those claims.
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 ]
Okay, it's fair for melee to PVP as if they don't have shields. At the same time, it's fair for defenders to PVP as if they don't have any buffs or debuffs. It's also fair for blasters to PVP as if they don't have any melee attacks. It's fair for Controllers to PVP as if they don't have any control. Masterminds should be playing as if they don't have pets.
[/ QUOTE ]
For the most part, until the Domination PvP change, we Dominators HAD to pretend we didn't have Control. Now we only have to pretend Control isn't there until we get 12 or so attacks with our secondary off. 
Assuming Domination is recharged and we don't get smushed by a melee, that is.
[ QUOTE ]
Remember the good old days, when regen scrappers were able to jump into large crowds of +4 to +6 and not even get hit? Or when broadsword scrappers were two-shotting +2 or higher bosses? Or how scrappers were constantly and reliably sitting at the 500% damage cap?
.
Gosh, it's not like anyone who played a squishy AT made those claims.
[/ QUOTE ]
yeah, iirc, I think that was all me just bragging about how awesome I am. I do that sometimes.
.
.
Did I mention how awesome I am? 'Cause I'm really awesome. Seriously.
Level 50 is a journey, not a destination.
▲Scrapper Issues List - Going Rogue Edition▲
Bleh, go on to level my Kineticist for a few hours, and see what I come back to.
[ QUOTE ]
Whichever it was, I was able to detoggle melee opponents fairly easily with just brawl.
[/ QUOTE ]
For anyone interested, the average rate I came up with (134 attacks) was just under 22% for Brawl two months ago. That's obviously too small of a field to be certain from, but it still suggests a change, and I believe that's the most thorough testing on the actual post-i6 numbers I've heard of.
[ 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.
[/ QUOTE ]
So, what's the answer about the Brute seeing the Blaster coming and queueing up Energy Transfer (animates in less time than Bonesmasher, has a higher chance of stun) in response?
Or just having more than three toggles? I mean, Fire does still exist, right?
[ 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 ]
I saw him say the Legends and Skills systems were in the works. : )
[ QUOTE ]
But math? I recall very little beyond the TA/A vs. Regen test.
[/ QUOTE ]
Er... showing full attack chain comparisions between an unarmored Tanker and an unarmored Blaster showing that the two were likely to have be killed by the margin of one attack (which I'd consider pretty fair)? Showing that, no, the average tanker's defenses could typically stay up for at least half the fight (admittedly, not a huge benefit, but surprising given the tone of earlier tanker posts)?
Now, they may not have been response-worthy math, probably all stuff you've argued before, but it was out there.
[ QUOTE ]
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
[/ QUOTE ]
By definition, complaining that something isn't fun is whining, Kali. It's not a very good arguement, either, particularly since if I find something or its results 'fun', it means that I can't agree with you on the end result.
[ QUOTE ]
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
[/ QUOTE ]
This arguements a non-sequitar. It's a given - some builds will be more powerful than others in any one situation. An AoE-centric build will never take down a Boss as easily as a single-target centric build will. That's not been a problem for the last seven issues.
IF you could back up an arguement for either removing TDs, or for them being need, this is a good logical step in an arguement for moving toggledrops around. Doesn't explain nerfing those "have-not" sets, nor why TDs had to be removed rather than the "have-not" sets buffed.
[ QUOTE ]
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.
[/ QUOTE ]
O.... kay... that's a fact. In fact, that's the point of the whole system, to put melee archetypes who insist on both high personal defenses (1.5x ~ 9x survivability, complete mez protection) and reasonal damage levels (0.70 ~ 0.9 damage) on the same level as those with nearly no personal defenses.
Is the problem that powers are being negated in some situations? I'll skip the typical "hurricane/mez/knockback" rant here, simply because it's getting old to retype it, but some of these are obviously intentional designs, and some occur even in PvE as well. Should we remove them because they negate my Blaster's Hold that stacks to a max of mag 4?
[ QUOTE ]
Despite protests to the contrary, the core of the pro-toggle dropping argument is that 1v1 PVP is unfair between squishies and melee...
[/ QUOTE ]
That's kinda interesting. I still haven't found where the "Not balanced for 1v1" is, the closest I can find is Positron stating :
"Please report glaring unbalances here in this thread, so geko, Statesman, and the rest of us can get an idea what they are. One on One matches are less useful to us, because there is a LOT of Rock, Pape, Sissors, Spock, Lizard when it's just 1v1."
Less useful, or RPSSL, true, but not useless.
Admittedly, I've spent six hours beating up a Cisco Advanced Security IOS today(HATE, so my search-fu is a little exhausted.
But, given that we're apparently against kludges, at least when they apply to Tankers/Scrappers, we must be under the assumption that just because a Developer says it, doesn't mean it's right.
Why should PvP be balanced around multiple players?
Does it make it easier? No, it increases the maximum combinations exponentially, and means that you'll have to balance around things that aren't very common.
Does it increase the balance players percieve? Hell, no - this very thread is proof of that.
Does it make things more fun? I doubt it. It automatically excludes anyone outside of a group, and many players will find themselves balanced around things their group doesn't even provide. Fun's a user-dependent variable, and typically not one attached to a balance mechanism, but I can't see any part of balancing around teams that increases it.
Does it make them more hero- or villain-like? Certainly not - it's hard to think of a single super-powered fight scene where Superman, Batman, and Wonderwoman all ganged up on Lex Luthor while ... ah, screw it, I can't remember another villain name... picks on the Flash. You know what I'm getting to. Look at the stupid CoH comic - everyone split up to take on someone they thought they were suited to handling.
Were toggle-droppers overpowered in Team PvP? Probably. I can't think of a single player aspect that wouldn't be, at the recharge cap, or with a empath spamming Clear Mind onto it.
Were they, as a mechanic, overpowered in 1v1? Given that my /regener (weak to TDs) did reasonably well against them in my hands, I'm a little doubtful. I'm even more doubtful given how the datamining that _Castle_ showed all but Energy Melee (yes, even Electric Melee was underperforming) were showing on the same scale as Dominators and Defenders.
I'm still of the opinion that BoneSmasher's TDs should have been moved to Total Focus (at that length of an animation, countering it through an active mez wouldn't have been too difficult) or Energy Thrust, though.
[ QUOTE ]
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.
[/ QUOTE ]
I believe that the arguement was more along the lines of "A blaster can never kill a Tanker without TDs, and that's unfair. A Tanker may require a lot more skill or preperation than a Blaster counterpart to defeat, this should be fixed if it's the case, but at the current time, the tanker has the option of a team." There's a pretty significant difference between "Can't" and "It's hard".
If I posted it in another format, it's simply because I couldn't believe a Tanker was loosing by default to a Blaster without their being an extreme deficiet or surplus of skill on one side or the other
[ QUOTE ]
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.
[/ QUOTE ]
I seem to remember The Flash smacking someone like a wuss, then managing to use the same attack that did nothing before and actually disable his opponent for a while. Like, in every freaking show.
But I'm not a comic book junky.
From the viewpoint of an MMORPG, which we are playing, though, the concept of smacking someone and having their skills go away isn't exactly new.
[ QUOTE ]
and invuln could also reach very high defense with bugged invincibility
[/ QUOTE ]
<nitpick>Not in PvP. Even with it doublestacking (and assuming your enemy was damned stupid enough to give you a defense buff), it still didn't go that high. Particularly since the assumption of no-toggledropping pretty much requires people to stay at range, which in turns, leads to no real melee defenses utility. If you count the buff to Invinc (increasing the value of the first enemy) and +25% buff to everyone's base defense, I doubt it's a big difference in damage mitigation here compared to never activating at all.</nitpick>
[ QUOTE ]
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.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wow. Good thing all the people argueing with you were common posters back then. Otherwise this would really make you look rude.
[ QUOTE ]
It is not always possible to keep status protection on everyone in a team in PVP. It's also not always possible to have someone on a team who can provide it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Stop right there. Then we come back to the blaster being at greater risk of being mezzed by the melee character. You are always going to lose on this issue. Either they both have buffs, or neither has buffs, either they both have insperations or neither has insperations. In any scenario where you paint it as balanced the melee toon has the advantage. Now they have more of an advantage. Your fine with that of course.
[ QUOTE ]
Okay, it's fair for melee to PVP as if they don't have shields. At the same time, it's fair for defenders to PVP as if they don't have any buffs or debuffs. It's also fair for blasters to PVP as if they don't have any melee attacks. It's fair for Controllers to PVP as if they don't have any control. Masterminds should be playing as if they don't have pets.
Do you really want to make that argument?
[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely. Especially in the case of defenders. Defenders PvP as if they don't have any -dmg debuffs. Because basicaly they don't. Not going to change either according the dev responses.
Also, playing as if you don't have toggles is not the same thing as saying you don't have them. It is telling you not to rely on them. They are an advantage similar to how range is an advantage for blasters. Since range is a blasters defense should he always be at range? That wouldn't be very fair to melee now would it?
You still have your defenses, you just can't rely on them. I can't rely on my debuffs hitting half the people I target if they have any kind of defense. That is the game I am playing in. Keep comeing up with these arguements where you try and convince yourself that you are getting the short end of the stick. You have toggles that almost never drop, hell give me some debuffs that almost never miss. I sure as hell don't have them.
Starting to understand that maybe melee is complaining about having to play the same game that everyone else is? Do you begin to realize how much of an advantage self buffs are? Probably not.
[ QUOTE ]
All player powers with Forced Toggle Drop effects have had the chance for those effects to go off reduced. The need for these effects is greatly reduced with the advent of Enhancement Diversification. No player power has a 100% chance of dropping toggles with this change.
[/ QUOTE ]
TAKE A GOOD LOOK, SEE ANYTHING ABOUT THE GLOBAL DEFENSE NERF? NO? Just wanted to make sure we were reading the same thing. So, does that mean that the toggles droppers were balanced around the GDN? If so, then one can argue that as much as the ED hurt defenses it also hurt blaster damage. Ignoring the other classes that were hurt by the toggle dropping nerf.
[ QUOTE ]
No, I'm arguing that it is ridiculous that a blaster can mez melee characters due to the ability to bypass mez protection entirely.
[/ QUOTE ]
You are argueing about something that has a chance to happen. It is not guaranteed unless the odds are overwhelmingly in one sides favor in which case everyone agrees that the side outnumbered should lose. There is a chance that it can happen, but a chance only. By saying that a blaster can negate the mez protection of a melee character and objecting to it, you are saying that you cannot accept even a CHANCE that it happens. There is a chance that a blaster can stack mez, there is a chance that he can knock off the right toggle by taking the risk of being attacked in melee. ALL CHANCES. Which you object to.
[ QUOTE ]
Actually, toggle drops should just go away entirely. Get rid of the whole mess and find some other way to balance the ATs in PVP.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have no problem with this. All that I ask is that they find the other form of balance first, then do away with the kludge, rather than nerf ATs that didn't need nerfing and ruining what little balance there was between the squishy and the melee.
[ QUOTE ]
I deconstructed this claim above. Defenders were by and large not nerfed. Defenders need help in PVP, to varying degrees.
[/ QUOTE ]
Defender builds were nerfed. There is no doubt about it. It was a direct result of the global toggle drop nerf. Defenders definately did not need a nerf to their ability to PvP and the current numbers for the toggle drops is a rather huge nerf for those defender builds. Defenders could have used a buff, they could have used re-worked mechanics that would actually make un-resistable debuffs mean something. They could have gotten a bunch of buffs to go along with the nerfs but they didn't. I do see melee getting pretty much what they asked for. Defenders were told that since those changes dealth with game mechanics, they weren't going to change. Why did defenders get ANY nerfs? Go ahead, give me a really good reason. For melee not to feel irritated? At least you have defenses that are useable in PvP, we have debuffs that don't even work.
These page long quotefests are starting to grate on my nerves @_@ I give up on the Toggle Dropper thread.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is not always possible to keep status protection on everyone in a team in PVP. It's also not always possible to have someone on a team who can provide it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Stop right there. Then we come back to the blaster being at greater risk of being mezzed by the melee character. You are always going to lose on this issue. Either they both have buffs, or neither has buffs, either they both have insperations or neither has insperations. In any scenario where you paint it as balanced the melee toon has the advantage. Now they have more of an advantage. Your fine with that of course.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, because a good defender will prioritize buffs. If scrappers, tankers, and brutes aren't arbitrarily losing their toggles because a blaster breathed on them, it's easier for the defender or corruptor to prioritize where the mez shields go (onto the squishies), rather than try to keep them on everyone. Considering that they typically have long animations (like Clear Mind) or short durations (like Increase Density), this isn't really a bad thing.
[ QUOTE ]
Absolutely. Especially in the case of defenders. Defenders PvP as if they don't have any -dmg debuffs. Because basicaly they don't. Not going to change either according the dev responses.
[/ QUOTE ]
Right, because one debuff (which isn't completely inconsequential) is exactly the same as an entire powerset.
[ QUOTE ]
Also, playing as if you don't have toggles is not the same thing as saying you don't have them. It is telling you not to rely on them. They are an advantage similar to how range is an advantage for blasters. Since range is a blasters defense should he always be at range? That wouldn't be very fair to melee now would it?
[/ QUOTE ]
No, it's more like saying that the blaster should play as if he shouldn't use ranged attacks.
[ QUOTE ]
You still have your defenses, you just can't rely on them. I can't rely on my debuffs hitting half the people I target if they have any kind of defense. That is the game I am playing in. Keep comeing up with these arguements where you try and convince yourself that you are getting the short end of the stick. You have toggles that almost never drop, hell give me some debuffs that almost never miss. I sure as hell don't have them.
[/ QUOTE ]
Strangely, buffs never seem to miss, but attacks can and do miss. I wonder which of these things debuff is more like...
Even so, you can use debuffs to very good effect in PVP. If it were half as bad as you're saying, you would have nothing to fear from ice/cold or ice/rad dominators.
[ QUOTE ]
Starting to understand that maybe melee is complaining about having to play the same game that everyone else is? Do you begin to realize how much of an advantage self buffs are? Probably not.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, I realize that self buffs are an advantage. That's the point. Your powers are supposed to give you the ability to do things like that.
I do not think that melee is complaining about having to play the same game that everyone else is, though. I have played in Recluse's Victory, and I've found that while my tanker (40) and scrapper (50) are not particularly weak, they're strangely not immune to defeat. Generally speaking, brutes and stalkers aren't big threats. Corruptors, Dominators, and Masterminds tend to bring the trouble. Dominators with Domination up just blow through my mez protection - which is fine - and Corruptor debuffs can kill my mobility, on top of other things. One lingering radiation right as I hit hibernate kept my health from regenerating past 20% for the full duration of hibernate. Force Bubbles seemed pretty effective, especially combined with any kind of -jump power. My tanker is able to survive more damage than other ATs, but that's a major part of the point of a tanker.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All player powers with Forced Toggle Drop effects have had the chance for those effects to go off reduced. The need for these effects is greatly reduced with the advent of Enhancement Diversification. No player power has a 100% chance of dropping toggles with this change.
[/ QUOTE ]
TAKE A GOOD LOOK, SEE ANYTHING ABOUT THE GLOBAL DEFENSE NERF? NO? Just wanted to make sure we were reading the same thing. So, does that mean that the toggles droppers were balanced around the GDN? If so, then one can argue that as much as the ED hurt defenses it also hurt blaster damage. Ignoring the other classes that were hurt by the toggle dropping nerf.
[/ QUOTE ]
Now you're just reaching.
Here's another one, though: Obviously toggle-drops, designed as they were to bypass defenses, were balanced around the need to bypass issue 4 defenses. If they're weaker, you have much less need to bypass them.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No, I'm arguing that it is ridiculous that a blaster can mez melee characters due to the ability to bypass mez protection entirely.
[/ QUOTE ]
You are argueing about something that has a chance to happen. It is not guaranteed unless the odds are overwhelmingly in one sides favor in which case everyone agrees that the side outnumbered should lose. There is a chance that it can happen, but a chance only. By saying that a blaster can negate the mez protection of a melee character and objecting to it, you are saying that you cannot accept even a CHANCE that it happens. There is a chance that a blaster can stack mez, there is a chance that he can knock off the right toggle by taking the risk of being attacked in melee. ALL CHANCES. Which you object to.
[/ QUOTE ]
I object to knocking off the right toggle and mezzing right through it, yes. Blasters should not be able to overwhelm or bypass mez protection any more than controllers should be able to outdamage blasters. If you want to hold a tanker, scrapper, brute, or stalker, get a controller or dominator to help. That's how it should be. Otherwise, face them without mezzing them. Blasters already get fairly heavy melee damage in exchange for being in melee range. However, it should not really be that simple to jump in and stay there.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually, toggle drops should just go away entirely. Get rid of the whole mess and find some other way to balance the ATs in PVP.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have no problem with this. All that I ask is that they find the other form of balance first, then do away with the kludge, rather than nerf ATs that didn't need nerfing and ruining what little balance there was between the squishy and the melee.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'd prefer that too, but at the moment, it doesn't seem to be the case.
You might recall that I said I wanted the ATs to be rebalanced without toggle-dropping. That hasn't changed. I never campaigned to just eliminate toggle-drops and leave people swinging.
[ QUOTE ]
Defender builds were nerfed. There is no doubt about it. It was a direct result of the global toggle drop nerf. Defenders definately did not need a nerf to their ability to PvP and the current numbers for the toggle drops is a rather huge nerf for those defender builds. Defenders could have used a buff, they could have used re-worked mechanics that would actually make un-resistable debuffs mean something. They could have gotten a bunch of buffs to go along with the nerfs but they didn't. I do see melee getting pretty much what they asked for. Defenders were told that since those changes dealth with game mechanics, they weren't going to change. Why did defenders get ANY nerfs? Go ahead, give me a really good reason. For melee not to feel irritated? At least you have defenses that are useable in PvP, we have debuffs that don't even work.
[/ QUOTE ]
Which debuffs don't work? I've tested -res, -damage, -acc. I've never tested -def, but I assume it works.
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 ]
It is also really stupid to insist that status protection should be provided to protect melee characters who have status protection in their native powersets from any AT that isn't a controller or dominator.
[/ QUOTE ]
Good thing this change didn't nerf Dominator abilities to bypass mez protection. Oh... oh... Wait, no, it did. Ew.
You already suggested counters to this arguement, Kali. Tankers, Scrappers, Brutes, and Stalkers all benefit from greens, purples, and blues (I'd bring up oranges... but really, those things are sad. Blasters benefit from reds and yellows, despite having multiple powers dedicated to the same thing. Even an inherent.
Why should this be different only for melee ATs, and only for Break Frees?
[ QUOTE ]
Okay, it's fair for melee to PVP as if they don't have shields. At the same time, it's fair for defenders to PVP as if they don't have any buffs or debuffs.
[/ QUOTE ]
Have you tried PvPing as a a Kineticist? You say screw the buffs after the second time you SP an enemy and they think you missed.
Unless the melee AT was outnumbered, they still benefited from their toggles. _Castle_'s statement was only that you should prepare for the worst.
You know, like Kineticists that have to assume they'll miss with all their buff/debuff powers, because otherwise an Ice Tanker wouldn't be doing well in PVP.
[ QUOTE ]
It's also fair for blasters to PVP as if they don't have any melee attacks. It's fair for Controllers to PVP as if they don't have any control. Masterminds should be playing as if they don't have pets.
[/ QUOTE ]
Devices and Fire Melee. Any Controller against a Tanker. Any Mastermind that doesn't have six minutes.
[ QUOTE ]
The need for these effects is greatly reduced with the advent of Enhancement Diversification.
[/ QUOTE ]
And we all know we can trust the patch notes. Like "Enervating Field not changed", or "This change will not affect PvE".
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thats right, a team to challenge them.
[/ QUOTE ]No, I'm arguing that it is ridiculous that a blaster can mez melee characters due to the ability to bypass mez protection entirely.
[/ QUOTE ]
I believe he's referring to UberGuy's "Blasters should need a team to kill me" statement, or similar statements.
Of course, stating that a Blaster power (stun) should only be useful in large groups of the same type seems like it might edge the sides there.
[ QUOTE ]
Actually, toggle drops should just go away entirely. Get rid of the whole mess and find some other way to balance the ATs in PVP. The whole point of toggle-dropping is to simply negate entire powersets without recourse.
[/ QUOTE ]
"I don't like something. Remove it. Oh, and if you can fix the now-nerfed sets, fine, but don't hold back the fix to what irritates me at all."
The whole point of toggledropping is to reduce the advantage some powers give to archetypes that, largely, aren't balanced in PvE or PvP, but only balanced to match what players feel is wanted. Again, melee AT with >1.5x the survivability, mez protection, and ~1x the damage (scrappers), for example. For equality, this changes requires Blasters to give up the primary capability they have.
It does not negate the power. There is no way that I can turn off your toggles without hitting you, at least not without developing real-life telekinetic powers.
[ QUOTE ]
- something you consider to be fair because you primarily play characters that benefit from such abuse
[/ QUOTE ]
VERY much a bad arugement to pick, Kali. I, for example, have made only one Blaster over 20, and she didn't make it to 25 (deleted before PvP was added to the game). I have more levels on one Fire/Stone tanker than I do on all my Blasters combined. My Force Fielder died a rather horrifying death around i6, and never entered a PvP zone or the Arena. My Stormers have avoided ThunderClap since it's a pathetic TDs and an even more pathetic PvE power.
My Regener is my character with the highest PVP rank, and the only one with any PvP zone badges.
So stuff the bias card.
[ QUOTE ]
There's always single-target holds, disorients, and other status effects. Only /sonic and /traps can provide themselves with status protection, and then to hold and stun. Admittedly, sleep isn't something defenders get much access to.
Also, admittedly, sonic and traps don't get snowstorm.
[/ QUOTE ]
Remember BreakFrees? Remember how melee ATists keep pointing out that TDs ignore Break Frees? Whohoo, what an impressive jump there.
[ QUOTE ]
Two whole defender powersets had enough toggle drops to rely on them. Storm and FF losing their TDs won't have any affect on Rad, Empathy, Dark, Sonic, Trick Arrow, and only minor effect on Kinetics as its TD was already very unreliable. Defenders as an AT did not rely upon TDs. Storm, already a strong defender primary, got toggle-drops on top of that, and FF, a weak primary that needs some attention and variety, used TDs to shore up its leaky corners.
[/ QUOTE ]
Storm was powerful?! Oh, you mean for a Defender set. Powerful for an archetype that rivaled Dominators for the lowest kill to death count.
Aren't people trying to get Dominators buffed?
I mean, let's not get into how Force Field and Storm have been screwed repeatedly because of a stupid PvP-only mechanic with no real thematic relevance. Let's not even look at how they're the on the single lowest-damage Hero archetype, with the lowest personal defense.
Let's look and see if you can possibly expect a solution to two powersets that were just neutered in PvP, when their entire AT is currently being backburned by the developers.
You've seen the "Drumroll Please..." thread. You're happy leaving people that weren't doing well in the first place even worse for issues on end because it [b]irritated[/i] you?
[ QUOTE ]
However, far be it from me to take away from your blaster pityfest.
[/ QUOTE ]
You said "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.". I asked you for a cite because I had no recollection of Statesman having made any such statement. In what way is that a "pityfest"?