[ QUOTE ]
Good thing this change didn't nerf Dominator abilities to bypass mez protection. Oh... oh... Wait, no, it did. Ew.
[/ QUOTE ]
Dominators with Domination can easily break melee mez protection. I don't know if they can do it without Domination, but we already know that there's issues with the AT.
[ QUOTE ]
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 ]
I don't know, Blueeyed. Please tell me why melee ATs should need break frees to handle status effects that they have defenses against, but blasters don't need enrages to deal a lot of damage?
[ QUOTE ]
[ 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.
[/ QUOTE ]
Siphon Power will - assuming three damage SOs - reduce their damage by 10% per hit, right? It's still boosting your damage by 25%. Is the latter less effective because the former is not doing the full 20 or 25% reduction?
[ QUOTE ]
Unless the melee AT was outnumbered, they still benefited from their toggles. _Castle_'s statement was only that you should prepare for the worst.
[/ QUOTE ]
For like five seconds, and then they're gone.
[ QUOTE ]
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 ]
And lord knows, there's no defender primary with autohit debuffs.
[ QUOTE ]
[ 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 ]
Strangely, these are a consequence of poorly designed powersets, a controller not trying very hard, and a balancing element designed into the AT, in that order.
Controllers can render a tanker completely irrelevant pretty easily. Masterminds don't have to buff their pets with the tier 9 power. /fire needs help, and /devices possibly could.
[ QUOTE ]
And we all know we can trust the patch notes. Like "Enervating Field not changed", or "This change will not affect PvE".
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't believe either of those is comparable.
[ 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 ]
Why? It's a blaster power, but a controller effect. Controllers should be able to stack effects on their own much more easily than any other AT. Blasters shouldn't. It's really that simple. Heck, neither should defenders, tankers, or scrappers. That's not to say they shouldn't have any control - I certainly don't think that. I just don't think their control should be as good. If a controller can blow through mez protection, a blaster should not.
[ 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."
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, because it's only about irritation.
[ QUOTE ]
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.
[/ QUOTE ]
What, give up damage? Bull. Blasters still have their primary capability.
As for the advantage - the advantage that was supposed to be reduced was issue 4 defenses, something that no longer exists.
[ QUOTE ]
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 ]
So you pop up and hit bonesmasher, and most likely two of my toggles are gone. How is that not negating? You think having them up for all of one attack means they're effective?
[ 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 ]
Don't even play that card. You spend all of your time ranting about how awful FF and Storm has it, and how melee has it way too good. You leak bias with every post.
All of my characters in my sig have PVP zone badges. None of them have any real PVP rank because most of my PVP has been on the test server.
[ QUOTE ]
Remember BreakFrees? Remember how melee ATists keep pointing out that TDs ignore Break Frees? Whohoo, what an impressive jump there.
[/ QUOTE ]
So if you lay a hold on a stormer, dropping his snow storm and hurricane and travel power, the break free magically turns them back on?
Right, then.
[ 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?
[/ QUOTE ]
Now you're just taking the piss. Storm is a very potent set. I've never seen anyone in-game playing a storm defender actually claim with a straight face that storm is weak. I've only seen that on the forum. In the game, storm has in the past bordered on tankmagery - and that's arguable with /storm controllers.
[ QUOTE ]
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.
[/ QUOTE ]
So low, Storm/ could solo AVs in issue 4. Like Rad and Dark, the nature of Storm's debuffs are such that they can defend themselves very handily.
Blasters have the lowest personal defense. Defenders do not.
[ QUOTE ]
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 irritated you?
[/ QUOTE ]
It wasn't about irritation.
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 ]
Please tell me why melee ATs should need break frees to handle status effects that they have defenses against, but blasters don't need enrages to deal a lot of damage?
[/ QUOTE ]
At least currently? I'd be sure to bring some reds on my Scrapper. He already needed yellows up the wazoo, and that was with permaFollowUp.
[ QUOTE ]
Siphon Power will - assuming three damage SOs - reduce their damage by 10% per hit, right? It's still boosting your damage by 25%. Is the latter less effective because the former is not doing the full 20 or 25% reduction?
[/ QUOTE ]
Er, no, it's boosting my damage by 12%. I've got SOs, too, at least if I want to add something meaningful?
[ QUOTE ]
For like five seconds, and then they're gone.
[/ QUOTE ]
... according to the numbers released on Patch Notes, which we know are currenlty too low for at least Brawl and ThunderClap, that's only true if they Blasters gets remarkably lucky, or if you have fewer than three toggles.
[ QUOTE ]
And lord knows, there's no defender primary with autohit debuffs.
[/ QUOTE ]
And lord knows, there's no Tanker primary with massively useful click powers.
[ QUOTE ]
Strangely, these are a consequence of poorly designed powersets, a controller not trying very hard, and a balancing element designed into the AT, in that order.
Controllers can render a tanker completely irrelevant pretty easily. Masterminds don't have to buff their pets with the tier 9 power. /fire needs help, and /devices possibly could.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tribal Boogie could not mez your Tanker, and had a build built around mezzing, to the point where he ignored damage (and, man, did he need it). Was he not trying very hard?
Fire Melee better have been considered fair or overpowered before this point, or otherwise you did and are calling for nerfs an underpowered set.
[ QUOTE ]
I don't believe either of those is comparable.
[/ QUOTE ]
Two examples of patch notes not knowing their [censored] from an atlas? Should I go with the "This change was made because Enervating Field was too easy to apply compared to Tar Patch or Freezing (yeah, the anchor power, easier than the two targetted clicks)?"
[ QUOTE ]
It's a blaster power, but a controller effect. Controllers should be able to stack effects on their own much more easily than any other AT.
[/ QUOTE ]
Can we negate every tanker damage power, then? It's a Tanker power, but it's a "Blaster Effect".
Hell, can we keep toggledroppers for Blazing Aura and Icicles? I mean, sure, it'll still bug the hell out of you, and negate primary powers, which used to be your arguements, but, hey, they're both "Scrapper Effect" powers.
And, hell, while we're at it, let's make all Blaster damage irresistable, and ignore defense buffs on non-Tankers. If they run into a Tanker, we'll just forcibly disconnect them with a "paradox error". After all, damage is a "Blaster Effect", and as a result, nothing can prevent that unless it's a "Tanker Effect".
[ QUOTE ]
What, give up damage? Bull. Blasters still have their primary capability.
[/ QUOTE ]
Damage has not been the Blaster primary capability for a long time. Weren't people just saying that Blasters were kings of Ranged Damage? Which it's kinda hard to
[ QUOTE ]
As for the advantage - the advantage that was supposed to be reduced was issue 4 defenses, something that no longer exists.
[/ QUOTE ]
The advantage went from 50x or 100x survivability and 0.7x ~ 0.9x damage, to 1.5 ~ 10x survivability and the same damage. I fail to see how this does anything but shrink the advantage. It certainly exists in the far cases. What luck that toggledropping had no effect on the middle ones.
[ QUOTE ]
So you pop up and hit bonesmasher, and most likely two of my toggles are gone. How is that not negating? You think having them up for all of one attack means they're effective?
[/ QUOTE ]
For a fourth of all damage in the fight, if some melee ATists are to be believed? Hell, yes.
Or do you survive for eight to ten hits after that?
[ QUOTE ]
Don't even play that card. You spend all of your time ranting about how awful FF and Storm has it, and how melee has it way too good. You leak bias with every post.
[/ QUOTE ]
I didn't say I was unbiased. I have, after all, a lot of Storming experience (and my Force Fielder was post 40 when he got a zipperless and lubricant-free reamage). Of course I'm biased. You're biased as hell against anything that'll put Tankers on the same level of survivability as Blasters.
Experience and facts tend to cause that sort of thing.
But claiming Concern is making this up, not believing it, because he could put a Blaster in his sig?
[ QUOTE ]
So if you lay a hold on a stormer, dropping his snow storm and hurricane and travel power, the break free magically turns them back on?
Right, then.
[/ QUOTE ]
...
You play a Dark/Dark Defender. Decently, for someone that picked the Energy Epic and :shudder: Black Hole. You know very well that anyone over 20 on a Defender knows how to pop Break Frees when a dangerous mezzer is around. Storm most of all. At least with Rad you can expect them to bug the tanker.
[ QUOTE ]
Now you're just taking the piss. Storm is a very potent set. I've never seen anyone in-game playing a storm defender actually claim with a straight face that storm is weak. I've only seen that on the forum. In the game, storm has in the past bordered on tankmagery - and that's arguable with /storm controllers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ask TheMightyScourge/Storm, then. I doubt there's a higher authority on the subject. It's powerful in situations, no doubt, but Radiation Emission or Dark Miasma is far more universally powerful, and does so without the costs Storm Summoning takes.
You are also the first person to state that Storm is powerful without adding the modifier "in the hands of a good player/creative person/who knows Storm". Storm is the only Defender set with both no self-heal, and no self-mez protection. It has no -dmg, and no meaningful defense against ranged attackers. Even Snow Storm can't be activated from a decent range.
Storm isn't powerful. It's good for a Defender set. That makes it *playable*. Seldom much more.
And Tankermagery requires tank-like levels of survival, which even if they repair Hurricane, without TDs, Storm will never get *close* to, and Damage. Defender... damage...
You know we can be beaten by Controllers in a damage race, right? That's tankmagey?
[ QUOTE ]
So low, Storm/ could solo AVs in issue 4. Like Rad and Dark, the nature of Storm's debuffs are such that they can defend themselves very handily.
Blasters have the lowest personal defense. Defenders do not.
[/ QUOTE ]
My apologies. I badly parsed that one. It's supposed to be that Storm and Force Field Defenders have the least personal protection of Defenders (argueably, Sonic can be added here, but liquify adds a lot), and that Defenders are easily the lowest PvP damage class.
[ QUOTE ]
It wasn't about irritation.
[/ QUOTE ]
It was about it being a kludge... that, despite victory here, you haven't bothered to excise from the other cracks in which it lurks.
It was about intra-AT balance... and now you have a whole AT relegated to the same sub-par performance levels as its worst sections before.
It was about inter-AT balance... and now Blasters will take their place firmly with Defenders and Dominators for lowest kills per death.
It was about the sanctity of powers... that is, powers whose effect matches their archetype. Oh, and isn't related to damage.
It was about evening the playing field... so now that Blasters make fertilizer, we real archetypes can play our games.
[ QUOTE ]
I jumped into SC to check out some changes against the NPCs and noticed a few heroes running around so I flew up and dropped down on them, with my built in +per from danger sense I never saw the stealthed Scrapper and the Blaster mysteriously threw something at me that detoggled everything I had on then again I was not sure if I had Kuji-in Rin running but I was able to immediately turn on fly and retoggle. There are still some temp powers that can detoggle your entire set of powers in one hit, I have seen villains using it too.
[/ QUOTE ]
I really don't think there isfor heroes, the only temp I can think of is the Nullifier X or whatever that is basicallly the sap stick and only villains have acces to that.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please tell me why melee ATs should need break frees to handle status effects that they have defenses against, but blasters don't need enrages to deal a lot of damage?
[/ QUOTE ]
At least currently? I'd be sure to bring some reds on my Scrapper. He already needed yellows up the wazoo, and that was with permaFollowUp.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying they're useless - just not required. Blasters and scrappers get the most benefit from enrages.
[ QUOTE ]
Er, no, it's boosting my damage by 12%. I've got SOs, too, at least if I want to add something meaningful?
[/ QUOTE ]
Okay, I should not have forgotten that it goes both ways.
Siphon Power's not so good for PVP.
[ QUOTE ]
... according to the numbers released on Patch Notes, which we know are currenlty too low for at least Brawl and ThunderClap, that's only true if they Blasters gets remarkably lucky, or if you have fewer than three toggles.
[/ QUOTE ]
Or I was talking about Live.
[ QUOTE ]
And lord knows, there's no Tanker primary with massively useful click powers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Which are strangely unclickable when you've been mezzed after your Unyielding or Rooted or Wet Ice drops.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Strangely, these are a consequence of poorly designed powersets, a controller not trying very hard, and a balancing element designed into the AT, in that order.
Controllers can render a tanker completely irrelevant pretty easily. Masterminds don't have to buff their pets with the tier 9 power. /fire needs help, and /devices possibly could.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tribal Boogie could not mez your Tanker, and had a build built around mezzing, to the point where he ignored damage (and, man, did he need it). Was he not trying very hard?
[/ QUOTE ]
Tribal Boogie did in fact mez my tanker. He wasn't able to just blow through her mez protection like he did your scrapper, but he did break it. He was also 20-something to my 38. If he were 38, his damage would be boosted by more than a bit.
[ QUOTE ]
Two examples of patch notes not knowing their [censored] from an atlas? Should I go with the "This change was made because Enervating Field was too easy to apply compared to Tar Patch or Freezing (yeah, the anchor power, easier than the two targetted clicks)?"
[/ QUOTE ]
I believe there were elements of ego and confusion involved in the EF patch notes. It was not one of Cryptic's better moments. However, we have hundreds of patch notes which are likely accurate.
[ QUOTE ]
Can we negate every tanker damage power, then? It's a Tanker power, but it's a "Blaster Effect".
Hell, can we keep toggledroppers for Blazing Aura and Icicles? I mean, sure, it'll still bug the hell out of you, and negate primary powers, which used to be your arguements, but, hey, they're both "Scrapper Effect" powers.
And, hell, while we're at it, let's make all Blaster damage irresistable, and ignore defense buffs on non-Tankers. If they run into a Tanker, we'll just forcibly disconnect them with a "paradox error". After all, damage is a "Blaster Effect", and as a result, nothing can prevent that unless it's a "Tanker Effect".
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh sure, because damage is a binary effect, just like mezzing, and when I said that a single blaster shouldn't be able to break mez protection, I never said that two or more characters should be able to stack and break that protection. I in fact said that the powers should just have pretty special effects and not actually do anything ever.
[ QUOTE ]
Damage has not been the Blaster primary capability for a long time. Weren't people just saying that Blasters were kings of Ranged Damage? Which it's kinda hard to
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, blasters do have the benefit of actually dealing the most damage at range of all ATs ever to walk the Earth. However, they also have some nice melee attacks.
[ QUOTE ]
I didn't say I was unbiased. I have, after all, a lot of Storming experience (and my Force Fielder was post 40 when he got a zipperless and lubricant-free reamage). Of course I'm biased. You're biased as hell against anything that'll put Tankers on the same level of survivability as Blasters.
Experience and facts tend to cause that sort of thing.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, you are right about that. A tanker's primary is "I am tough enough to take a beating," so if they had the same survivability as blasters, that would be what we call "[censored] stupid."
However, I don't think tankers should be undefeatable. I do think that defeat should not be via knocking down their defenses.
[ QUOTE ]
But claiming Concern is making this up, not believing it, because he could put a Blaster in his sig?
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not parsing this.
[ QUOTE ]
...
You play a Dark/Dark Defender. Decently, for someone that picked the Energy Epic and :shudder: Black Hole. You know very well that anyone over 20 on a Defender knows how to pop Break Frees when a dangerous mezzer is around. Storm most of all. At least with Rad you can expect them to bug the tanker.
[/ QUOTE ]
That was a build I actually played for like two weeks, just so you know. I currently have blackstar instead of black hole. I still have the energy epic because I like total focus.
[ QUOTE ]
Ask TheMightyScourge/Storm, then. I doubt there's a higher authority on the subject. It's powerful in situations, no doubt, but Radiation Emission or Dark Miasma is far more universally powerful, and does so without the costs Storm Summoning takes.
You are also the first person to state that Storm is powerful without adding the modifier "in the hands of a good player/creative person/who knows Storm". Storm is the only Defender set with both no self-heal, and no self-mez protection. It has no -dmg, and no meaningful defense against ranged attackers. Even Snow Storm can't be activated from a decent range.
Storm isn't powerful. It's good for a Defender set. That makes it *playable*. Seldom much more.
[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe I'm just used to teaming with players like Myrmydon, WindGoddess, MightyStorm, Mario's stormer, and so on when it comes to storm. However, I don't recall ever teaming with a stormer who was actively bad, and most were pretty good. The results were typically fantastic.
[ QUOTE ]
And Tankermagery requires tank-like levels of survival, which even if they repair Hurricane, without TDs, Storm will never get *close* to, and Damage. Defender... damage...
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, yes, the damage is low, even with freezing rain.
[ QUOTE ]
You know we can be beaten by Controllers in a damage race, right? That's tankmagey?
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure I said /storm controllers are tankmages..
[ QUOTE ]
It was about it being a kludge... that, despite victory here, you haven't bothered to excise from the other cracks in which it lurks.
[/ QUOTE ]
It is a kludge. Honestly, I never expected the devs to nerf toggle dropping. I didn't expect the issue to take on such an emotional charge. From issue 4 going live to issue 6 going live, I pretty much ignored toggle-dropping as a necessary evil. Afterward, well...threads were started, as they are started about a great many things. If I had to choose an issue for the devs to notice and address like this, it would've been defenders not being effective enough compared to controllers, or tankers getting a boost to their passives so that their survivability is less dependent upon buffs.
But that doesn't change the fact that I feel that toggle-dropping is a poor rule and a poor way to balance the ATs in PVP.
Just wondering, though - why is it when the "these ATs perform badly solo" quote is brought up, the part where Castle says "teamed is a different story" gets brushed over? I am curious as to how well blasters, dominators, and defenders do on teams.
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'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 ]
Besides not all blasters get snipes or decent RANGED attacks to begin with. While I am at it, I am so glad for toggle drops being nerfed. My /Fire is totally useless in PvP now with the great secondary it is. /sarcasm off Everyone else was getting to whine about something I get to too
[ QUOTE ]
Which are strangely unclickable when you've been mezzed after your Unyielding or Rooted or Wet Ice drops.
[/ QUOTE ]
It is irritating to see this harped on over and over and over. Just because you're playing tank/brute/scrapper does not mean you are on a higher plane from everyone else and should simply never ever have to eat a breakfree. It would never occur to me when playing ANY character, brute or tank or whatever, to enter a PVP playfield without a few breakfrees. Refusing to make use of a readily available and very effective tool that is pretty much a requirement for everyone else is simply bad tactics, and imo nobody should be rewarded for stubbornly using bad tactics.
Repeatedly pushing this forward also seems to me to glaze over the fact that you CAN carry breakfrees just like everyone else, and much of the complaint in this thread would be simply irrelevant.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Which are strangely unclickable when you've been mezzed after your Unyielding or Rooted or Wet Ice drops.
[/ QUOTE ]
It is irritating to see this harped on over and over and over. Just because you're playing tank/brute/scrapper does not mean you are on a higher plane from everyone else and should simply never ever have to eat a breakfree. It would never occur to me when playing ANY character, brute or tank or whatever, to enter a PVP playfield without a few breakfrees. Refusing to make use of a readily available and very effective tool that is pretty much a requirement for everyone else is simply bad tactics, and imo nobody should be rewarded for stubbornly using bad tactics.
[/ QUOTE ]
I eat break frees all the time on my scrapper and tanker. This is because there are holes in their status protection - fear and confuse for my tanker, and confuse for my scrapper. However, I have a perfectly good power that should make break frees unnecessary for most uses of holds, stuns, and sleeps. Do you think that it's unreasonable to want a power that protects you from these effects to actually protect you from these effects? If you want to break my status shield, grab a goddamned controller.
[ QUOTE ]
Repeatedly pushing this forward also seems to me to glaze over the fact that you CAN carry breakfrees just like everyone else, and much of the complaint in this thread would be simply irrelevant.
[/ QUOTE ]
Break frees seem to run out fairly quickly, even if you're only using them to break confuse and fear.
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)
Before i7 - there was a very effective way for meleers to mitigate the effects of toggle drops: Team for non-toggle mez protection.
A blaster that immediately closed to melee range(even one with stacked CMs) was at an extreme disadvantage against a tank/scrapper/brute that could answer with an uninterrupted stream of damage, and click her self-heal once during the exchange.
Now with reduced toggle drops, meleers can solo perfectly safely again, with time to react to incoming damage and stacked holds.
Blasters will now have to leverage the defense of range to its fullest advantage - and by that I mean they will have to create Spines/Regen/body scrappers.
[ QUOTE ]
Blaster pityfests also include "We never get anything nice."
[/ QUOTE ]
Ah. Then it's a good thing I haven't said anything like that.
While I'm not too fond of them from an offensive stance I'm fond from a defensive stance.
Also...Blasters shouldn't be able to solo tankers an brutes...atleast not without a long tough fight.
And Brute vs Tanker should take awhile because they're big tough guys that wanna smash stuff...plus after awhile Fury builds up and the tanker could be toast...I guess that's how they balanced PPP powers vs APP powers 
[ QUOTE ]
I eat break frees all the time on my scrapper and tanker. This is because there are holes in their status protection - fear and confuse for my tanker, and confuse for my scrapper. However, I have a perfectly good power that should make break frees unnecessary for most uses of holds, stuns, and sleeps. Do you think that it's unreasonable to want a power that protects you from these effects to actually protect you from these effects? If you want to break my status shield, grab a goddamned controller.
[/ QUOTE ]
"You should need a team to beat me solo."
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I eat break frees all the time on my scrapper and tanker. This is because there are holes in their status protection - fear and confuse for my tanker, and confuse for my scrapper. However, I have a perfectly good power that should make break frees unnecessary for most uses of holds, stuns, and sleeps. Do you think that it's unreasonable to want a power that protects you from these effects to actually protect you from these effects? If you want to break my status shield, grab a goddamned controller.
[/ QUOTE ]
"You should need a team to beat me solo."
[/ QUOTE ]Where did kali say that? Seems to me Kali's saying that if you want to overcome a power designed to protect you from being mez'd, use the AT designed around mezing.
And its funny people have no problem with Scrapper, Tanks and Brutes spending power choices and slots on these toggle defenses and mez protection powers, and having them being completely negated by toggle drops.
If melee AT's have to carry as many BF's as folks without mez protection, why are we wasting a power choice and slots on are mez protection? Is it so f-ing unreasonable for a power that protects us from mez, actually give us some protection from being mez'ed? (And this issue is the only good thing about being SR, as Practiced Brawler can't be de-toggled, though it has been overpowered before. But seeing as how it took a couple Stalkers stacking Stuns or a Dominator to do it, that's fair in my mind.)
Heh. Why do you think toggle dropping was added in the first place? Because the 30% unresistable damage wasn't nearly cutting it. How many attack cycles do you think a blaster is supposed to wait through vs. an EM tank or brute at the extreme of the scale?
[ QUOTE ]
Is it so f-ing unreasonable for a power that protects us from mez, actually give us some protection from being mez'ed?
[/ QUOTE ]
If in the past you only ever fought toggle drop users and they always got your status toggle down in their alpha, sure. I think we all know that's a lot more uncommon than it is a given though, certainly in PVP zones on Infinity and Protector, the servers I play on.
PS: see Powerhelm's post for another perfect example. It's a common viewpoint, many cases in point throughout this thread.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I eat break frees all the time on my scrapper and tanker. This is because there are holes in their status protection - fear and confuse for my tanker, and confuse for my scrapper. However, I have a perfectly good power that should make break frees unnecessary for most uses of holds, stuns, and sleeps. Do you think that it's unreasonable to want a power that protects you from these effects to actually protect you from these effects? If you want to break my status shield, grab a goddamned controller.
[/ QUOTE ]
"You should need a team to beat me solo."
[/ QUOTE ]
more like "you should need someone with dedicated mez abilities to bypass my mez protection, solo"
Level 50 is a journey, not a destination.
▲Scrapper Issues List - Going Rogue Edition▲
[ QUOTE ]
Heh. Why do you think toggle dropping was added in the first place? Because the 30% unresistable damage wasn't nearly cutting it.
[/ QUOTE ]30% unresistable damage wasn't cutting it when resists where 2 to 3 times higher than they are now.
When toggle droping was first introduced, Tanks could hit Energy and Elemental resists in the 60-88% range. Now its more like 25-30%*. Scrappers are even lower.
*Granite Tanks are the execption, but with the -damage, -recharge and -speed debuffs they suffer, they aren't exactly a huge threat in PvP. If you don't want to fight a Granite Tank, walk away. Its not like he's gonna catch you 
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying they're useless - just not required. Blasters and scrappers get the most benefit from enrages.
[/ QUOTE ]
So... those archetypes with a lot of existing damage benefit the most from Enrages.
But, because you have mez protection, you should only need Break Frees when a very unusual Controller or Dominator pops up. That doesn't even make sense.
[ QUOTE ]
Or I was talking about Live.
[/ QUOTE ]
So was I. I don't believe Castle's number post has moved into the patch notes, yet, for that matter, either.
[ QUOTE ]
I believe there were elements of ego and confusion involved in the EF patch notes. It was not one of Cryptic's better moments. However, we have hundreds of patch notes which are likely accurate.
[/ QUOTE ]
Bolded for emphasis. Using an unreliable source for insight into the minds of people who... well, decided to buff Stalkers in i7... doesn't work wonders for an arguement.
For other examples, we have "Increased Defenders Freezing Rain Slow debuff. To make it better than the Controllers version. Defenders increased more." We know that isn't the case.
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I'm just used to teaming with players like Myrmydon, WindGoddess, MightyStorm, Mario's stormer, and so on when it comes to storm. However, I don't recall ever teaming with a stormer who was actively bad, and most were pretty good. The results were typically fantastic.
[/ QUOTE ]
Try a pickup group with one. Either playing as the Stormer, or with one. Chances are pretty good you'll find two out of three to start fights with Gale.
I didn't say it was a bad primary. If you work really, really hard, you can do almost as much as a /rad controller or a d3. It's still not an insanely strong primary set.
[ QUOTE ]
Just wondering, though - why is it when the "these ATs perform badly solo" quote is brought up, the part where Castle says "teamed is a different story" gets brushed over?
[/ QUOTE ]
Largely? We don't have that information. Also because I don't see the value of "Three Blasters against one BF-less Tanker" as being that valid of a result.
[ QUOTE ]
[ 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.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you are "powerplaying" your not stunned even if you are hit with three stacked mezzes and all your toggles are off. Come back to me when you have more experience in team PvP.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Which are strangely unclickable when you've been mezzed after your Unyielding or Rooted or Wet Ice drops.
[/ QUOTE ]
It is irritating to see this harped on over and over and over. Just because you're playing tank/brute/scrapper does not mean you are on a higher plane from everyone else and should simply never ever have to eat a breakfree. It would never occur to me when playing ANY character, brute or tank or whatever, to enter a PVP playfield without a few breakfrees. Refusing to make use of a readily available and very effective tool that is pretty much a requirement for everyone else is simply bad tactics, and imo nobody should be rewarded for stubbornly using bad tactics.
Repeatedly pushing this forward also seems to me to glaze over the fact that you CAN carry breakfrees just like everyone else, and much of the complaint in this thread would be simply irrelevant.
[/ QUOTE ]
There is a difference between what you are saying, above, and having to rely heavily on Break Frees as your mez protection. Having an AT inherent protection from mezzes should be useful. The problem with toggle dropping as a mechanic are that:
*) It allows the binary disabling of powers which are features of an AT.
*) Its chances to do this were, for some powersets, very high
*) Some of the powersets given the best ability to drop toggles were inexplicably the ones with the best ability to take advantage of it by combining high-percentage odds of dropping mez protection toggles with mezzing and excellent damage.
The first point there is the biggest problem with this. Having powers able to be just turned off is no fun in any context. Most of us hate it in PvE on any AT when mobs mez spam us and constantly make us retoggle, so I don't know why anyone would expect people to like it in PvP when it's possible to be "TD" spammed and have to retoggle. But more fundamentally, it's frustrating to have something that is part of your character's abilities just vanish frequently.
Note that the above is not some notion that "melee" ATs deserve special treatment in this. Instead, I contend that the design we have of armored ATs makes this frustration, true for all ATs, much more visible and much stronger an effect for them. Some people choose to interpret that as players of armored ATs asking for "god mode" or whining because they don't ever want to be defeated. I contend that nothing could be further from the truth. There is a vast difference in enjoyment in a battle you lose because the other guy/gal out-damaged you, out-played you or just had better build than you and losing because your powers turned off (without being mezzed).
Because only 20% of ATs possess direct mez protection powers, the other 80% constantly experience their toggle powers being turned off in PvE because of the prevalence of mezzing. The degree of inconvenience this causes varies by AT and powerset - I think it's fair to say that, in general, some powersets have at least one key toggle that dramatically affects their survivability . This is especially true among Defenders, but there are examples in other ATs - for some common builds it is an extreme inconvenience to lose Targeting Drone on a /Devices Blaster.
The other 20% of ATs, the armored ones, typically have longer list of "key" toggles. They have two primary features in their toggles: defense-oriented powers and protection versus various mez effects. (Yes, I do know there are two "armor" powersets whose mez protection is a click power.) Because these ATs do possess an ability to avoid mezzing, they also have a much heavier reliance on toggles to function than most other ATs.
When someone has a toggle dropper power, they get to annoy just about anyone with it. But when there's a high chance of multiple toggles dropped, even if it involves multiple TD attacks, the armored ATs see the effect more strongly. Their design is toggle-heavy.
This is why the complaints come from armored ATs. No one reasonable is asking for "god mode". They're asking to not have their fundamental design have an end-run done around it. A fundamental design that is toggle-heavy on a predication that mez effects will not be immediately dropping all those toggles. Note that this is not the same as immunity from mezzing - it is threshold-based protection.
The complaint, simply is that TD is a bad mechanic because it performs an end-run around features of the AT for such characters. This is not the same as claiming that the result is therefore balanced (though, my opinion is that the result is not as catastrophic as some posters claim).
Indeed, many of the resulting balance complaints from the players of Blasters, in particular, actually involve dissatisfaction with their baseline AT performance. I maintain that, instead of asking for means to perform end-runs around features of other ATs, Blasters should be asking the devs what their intended performance should be, and, if it's not being achieved, what's being planned to fix that.
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
[ QUOTE ]
Heh. Why do you think toggle dropping was added in the first place? Because the 30% unresistable damage wasn't nearly cutting it. How many attack cycles do you think a blaster is supposed to wait through vs. an EM tank or brute at the extreme of the scale?
[/ QUOTE ]
I guess I was under the false impression that it was because I had 90% resists across the board while my toggles were operational. And did I mention the defense? Having that type of armor available was a pretty decent reason to pass out toggle dropping ability to everyone in bucketloads.
But it is gone now.
[ 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 ]
Who gives a crap about fair? THAT is the problem with this discussion. The ATs do not need to be equal. You sit there and talk about how some people just need to be more skillful then you claim that we need equality in the ATs. Which is it? People have to learn to adapt or all ATs have to be vanilla?
Tanks/Brutes have high defense and are hard to kill. That is how it is supposed to be. Just like blasters/corruptors have high damage and range attacks. They should fly around shooting at the melee folks. Is all of that fair? No and it is not supposed to be fair.
The melee people should not have to worry every time they see a blaster run up to them. It should be the other way around; blasters should be afraid to get into melee range.
[ QUOTE ]
The melee people should not have to worry every time they see a blaster run up to them. It should be the other way around; blasters should be afraid to get into melee range.
[/ QUOTE ]
I want to toss in that a melee character should have to worry. Blasters are supposed to have very high damage, and (looking at thier powersets) they are supposed to be extra damaging up close.
The difference is that a Blaster's up close damage needs to be very "bursty". They need to do a lot of damage fast and then get out of dodge, falling back to deal damage at range that may get them the win on their damaged foe. This is my image of how the AT should work. Just because they deal a lot of damage in melee range should not mean they want to stay there.
In practice there are problems with this because of things like the animation times of powers, etc. Jousting helps, in turn, counter some of these limitations.
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
[ 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 ]
From my own teaming experience in PvP, it seems as though they do prioritize. Usually with whoever is closest until the entire team is buffed. PuG PvP buffers for the win I guess. Not to mention the traps corruptors or other mez protection fields that both Heroes and Villains get. Team mez protection can be had by melee and melee definately benefits more from it with their toggles. Which do not automaticaly fail the instant a blaster breathes on them no matter how many times you sling the hyperbole around.
[ QUOTE ]
No, it's more like saying that the blaster should play as if he shouldn't use ranged attacks.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, a blaster should play as if he does not have ranged attacks. That would be similar to saying "Tanks should play as though they do not have toggles."
Which I actually covered in my response to your statement. Blasters do assume that their range will be negated and that they will be in melee. A defender knows that his debuffs are not always going to hit and thus cannot be counted on all the time. He knows that certain powersets negate his debuffs. He knows that certain mechanics simply don't work in PvP. All of this I have already stated, however you are trying to twist what Castle said into something he didn't say.
[ QUOTE ]
Strangely, buffs never seem to miss, but attacks can and do miss. I wonder which of these things debuff is more like...
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually buffs can miss. Siphon Speed, Siphon Power, Transferrence, Fulcrum Shift, Transfusion, Twilight Grasp, the level 32 /Ice corruptor power. All of those have buffs that can miss. Then there are the PbAoE buffs that require a team to gather together before dispersing again. Just a little bit more difficult to use than a self buff, wouldn't you say? It sure would be nice if defenders never had to worry about those hitting so that thier powers were usefull all the time. I mean, they are the primary powers right? Why shouldn't they work all the time? Gosh, thats irritating. Once again, melee got used to PvE, when PvP balance came around they got upset they couldn't eat their cake and stare at it too.
Also, depending on your primary, you don't have much to fear from corruptors.
[ QUOTE ]
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 ]
You tried to say the exact same thing by insinuateing that the toggle drops are unbalanced now that the GDN went through. You have ignored the possibility that they were balanced around the lowered numbers. It can just as easily be said that toggle drops were balanced on the numbers after GDN since that is what they were testing on at the time. If ED is the culprit as in your quote then damage got reduced right along with defenses. The defenses that a blaster could get from team buffs went down. Meaning that the HP of the melee classes that did not go down gives them an increased advantage in the world of less damage and less defense. Especially when they can stack defenses faster and easier than the squishy ATs. Melee HP counts for alot in PvP when you look at team buffs. Especially when you look at powers like Frostworks and sets like EA and the new Electric Secondary. No offense, but looking at the decreases across the board and the HP advantage of melee ATs, toggle drops should have been increased.
[ 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 ]
All of which means you don't understand the support function of the secondary set. It really is there to support the blaster to do more damage and to get minimal defense by active manipulation of foes. The devs didn't simply let blaster mez go through tanker level mez protection. In fact, I don't think you can fire freeze ray fast enough to do that. They gave a chance for it to happen. If you can't accept a chance of failure then I doubt there will be any common ground that we can see. Hell, when I was trying to compromise with Circeus that was the one thing I realized that I had to compromise on. There had to be a chance of failure. I'm sorry you can even compromise that much.
[ 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 ]
No, but some of us had a pretty good idea that this was exactly what would happen. Actually, when you started on your campaign you simply wanted toggle dropping removed. You didn't have a solution. Which was fine with me, I rallied against simply getting rid of toggle dropping before there was a solution. I am still doing so since obviously no solution has been thought of by the developers. It wasn't like you guys were pushing for a new form of balance as much as you were pushing for a nerf to toggle droppers. Then there are the other melee players who were out and out calling for the end of toggle dropping. I point to Anarchicgorilla and his insipid commentary on toggle drops as well as his reasoning of why they needed to be removed. If there was ever a vocal melee player that spewed forth the nerfherding it was him/her.
[ QUOTE ]
Which debuffs don't work? I've tested -res, -damage, -acc. I've never tested -def, but I assume it works.
[/ QUOTE ]
-res against a set with resistance is resisted. It doesn't result in a straight subtraction from their resistance. In other words, a set with 30% lethal resistance is not negated by Enervating Field.
-dmg is negated by an enhancement, one. I would consider that not working.
-def seems to be resisted currently by classes with self defense buffs. It isn't supposed to be but it seems to be. -acc works thankfully. Still, 3 out of 4 is a pain in the rear and two are not going to be changeing.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Heh. Why do you think toggle dropping was added in the first place? Because the 30% unresistable damage wasn't nearly cutting it. How many attack cycles do you think a blaster is supposed to wait through vs. an EM tank or brute at the extreme of the scale?
[/ QUOTE ]
I guess I was under the false impression that it was because I had 90% resists across the board while my toggles were operational. And did I mention the defense? Having that type of armor available was a pretty decent reason to pass out toggle dropping ability to everyone in bucketloads.
But it is gone now.
[/ QUOTE ]
According to the quote that Kali made, you would be wrong. It was apparently not reduced because of GDN. So apparently the Global Defense Nerf was taken into consideration. It was apparently done as a result of ED. Which then brings into question the severity of the nerfs because in the grand scheme of PvP ED helped melee more than it helped blasters. Since melee didn't lose any of the HP that they had it means that team buffs helped them more.
So no, it wasn't because you had 90% resists.
[ QUOTE ]
[ 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 ]
I gave you the benefit of the doubt that anyone with a penchant at refutation by paraphrasing, attempts to make counterpoints already stated in the post you're replying to, and overlooks even simple statements directly adjacent to ones they quote which are relevant to their reply is displaying the symptoms of illiteracy.
I concede that those traits are more likely the result of stupidity.
[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 ]
Which debuffs don't work? I've tested -res, -damage, -acc. I've never tested -def, but I assume it works.
[/ QUOTE ]
-Damage is directly resisted by damage buffs. You very well know that. This makes powers that were constantly balanced around a 100% base largely useless. "Intended", no doubt, but hardly working.
-Res works 'right' in PvP.
<nitpick>There is no -acc Defender debuff in game currently.</nitpick>
I have heard reports of Focused Accuracy resisting Hurricane's tohit debuff.
<edit: I thought I knew Acid Arrow's defense debuff wasn't working, but I based that off the Streakbreaker, and I finally have proof the streakbreaker is broken, so I can't say for sure here.