[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
more like "you should need someone with dedicated mez abilities to bypass my mez protection, solo"
[/ QUOTE ]
So while we're adhering to a rigid tank/healer/damage/crowdcontrol model, shouldn't it be expected that a tank or brute shouldn't actually be able to get any kills themselves, but get a damagedealer. I considered putting a question mark after that sentence, but frankly I don't care about your answer.
[/ QUOTE ]
Brutes have an offense primary. Tankers have an offense secondary. Where do blasters have a control primary or secondary?
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)
Hey you're right. I don't see Control in tanker or scrapper primary OR secondary roles. They need to take hold/disorient etc. out IMMEDIATELY! How is it EM gets a boss-level stun? Clearly iniquitous! No fair!
I was just pointing out how people keep funneling every aspect of character mechanics into specific pigeonholes, and you kindly provided another example. A recap of how things "should be" according to many in this thread:
- Blasters should stay at range
- Tanks/scrappers/brutes should usually or always win when someone enters their melee range (many people have said exactly this, in so many words)
- Tanks/scrappers/brutes should just have to start their toggles and hit 1 2 3 4 once or twice to win any fight
- Blasters must get a team to even think about pvp, but tanks/scrappers/brutes should never have to
- Character A, with ~200% (?) hitpoints of Character B *and* 80% or more smashing resistance, 10+ BI attacks at a base damage of 80% is .... balanced ...........
Why am I bothering? It's in, heads are jammed wayyyy up there, and I like the new Brute sets. *goes off to play her brute*
[ QUOTE ]
Hey you're right. I don't see Control in tanker or scrapper primary OR secondary roles. They need to take hold/disorient etc. out IMMEDIATELY! How is it EM gets a boss-level stun? Clearly iniquitous! No fair!
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh, yeah, that's exactly what I said. Is it possible for you to take a statement and not immediately try to interpret it as extreme and stupid?
[ QUOTE ]
I was just pointing out how people keep funneling every aspect of character mechanics into specific pigeonholes, and you kindly provided another example. A recap of how things "should be" according to many in this thread:
[/ QUOTE ]
Of course you were. It couldn't possibly be that you misunderstood the argument.
[ QUOTE ]
Why am I bothering? It's in, heads are jammed wayyyy up there, and I like the new Brute sets. *goes off to play her brute*
[/ QUOTE ]
I suggest you pull your head back out, then? I dunno, it'd help if you weren't so quick to make up arguments to assign to me.
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 ]
I'm on to you Meat man, oh yes, I'm on to you. 
[/ QUOTE ]
PG-13, please!
*snicker* 
Your point was, since a Blaster's "primary" and "secondary" are not rigidly described as "control", they should never be able to "control" a tank (e.g. via stun) under any circumstances.
My point was, since a Tanker/Brute's "primary" and "secondary" are not ridigly described as "control", they should't be expecting mag 4 stuns either, but they get them. I don't ask that that should be taken out, because that would be bad for everyone, but I just highlighted that particular incidence where the rigid conceptions of "the fighter" and "the mage" and "the cleric" break down. And not in a bad way either.
I don't think that's an extreme or stupid way to look at it at all. I do think it's extremely stupid to invest more effort in this debate, when the great majority of responses (not just from you, but you are definitely included) boil down to "but it's SUPPOSED to be like X".
And ps: dividing the frequency a power occurs by 100 is the same as reducing its effectiveness by 99%.
*really, really, really exits thread*
*I mean it, dammit*
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Funny thing is: I'm a horrible Stalker lol
[/ QUOTE ]
It's your mouth-watering, meaty aroma. We can always tell when you're close by.
[/ QUOTE ]
Damn... guess it's time I took that shower I've been putting off since Issue 3...
[ QUOTE ]
Your point was, since a Blaster's "primary" and "secondary" are not rigidly described as "control", they should never be able to "control" a tank (e.g. via stun) under any circumstances.
My point was, since a Tanker/Brute's "primary" and "secondary" are not ridigly described as "control", they should't be expecting mag 4 stuns either, but they get them. I don't ask that that should be taken out, because that would be bad for everyone, but I just highlighted that particular incidence where the rigid conceptions of "the fighter" and "the mage" and "the cleric" break down. And not in a bad way either.
[/ QUOTE ]
Your point had the faintest connection to my point, which was not that the mag 4 stuns/holds/whatever on blaster attacks should go away (I never implied anything of the sort).
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think that's an extreme or stupid way to look at it at all. I do think it's extremely stupid to invest more effort in this debate, when the great majority of responses (not just from you, but you are definitely included) boil down to "but it's SUPPOSED to be like X".
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh, it certainly is extreme. If your idea of a counterargument is to go off about things that only have a tangental relationship to what you're trying to refute, it's not a very good argument.
[ QUOTE ]
And ps: dividing the frequency a power occurs by 100 is the same as reducing its effectiveness by 99%.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, it's not. See, Bonesmasher isn't doing 1/100th its former damage. It still hits as hard as it ever did. It's not 1/100th of its former effectiveness.
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 ]
more like "you should need someone with dedicated mez abilities to bypass my mez protection, solo"
[/ QUOTE ]
So while we're adhering to a rigid tank/healer/damage/crowdcontrol model, shouldn't it be expected that a tank or brute shouldn't actually be able to get any kills themselves, but get a damagedealer. I considered putting a question mark after that sentence, but frankly I don't care about your answer.
[/ QUOTE ]
Brutes have an offense primary. Tankers have an offense secondary. Where do blasters have a control primary or secondary?
[/ QUOTE ]
When creating a blaster it says support for the secondary. Support comes in many ways. The only set that doesn't get any for of control hard or soft is /fire and it gets more damage. So I am fine that blasters can mez and do additional damage cause my poor controller can be beaten by 50 inf. Go buy a BF.
[ QUOTE ]
When creating a blaster it says support for the secondary. Support comes in many ways. The only set that doesn't get any for of control hard or soft is /fire and it gets more damage. So I am fine that blasters can mez and do additional damage cause my poor controller can be beaten by 50 inf. Go buy a BF.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying blasters should never be able to mez. I'm saying blasters should not be able to mez through status protection shields without help. Can you see the difference?
If you look at brutes, scrappers, stalkers, and tankers, they have defense as a secondary or primary. One of the powers in that powerset is there to protect from Sleep, Stun, and Hold, plus a few others from: KB, Immob, Fear, Confuse. Why should I need break frees against an AT whose primary role is damage-dealing when I have a power dedicated to not being mezzed?
Buy break frees to deal with controllers and dominators? Sure. Buy break frees to deal with status effects I have no protection against? Absolutely. Buy break frees to protect myself from being held, slept, or stunned by a solo blaster, defender, tanker, scrapper, stalker, brute, corruptor, or mastermind? No, that should not happen.
No, that doesn't mean those ATs shouldn't be able to fight melee ATs solo and defeat them, nor does it mean anything else.
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)
Fine then, take all mezzes away from anyone not controller or dominator. I really hate when I get held by tanks, brutes, etc.
Besides your statement is flawed when you say you were mezzed throgh your protection. You weren't. It was dropped. I guess I coulda done that with brawl or forcebolt the whole time anyways
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When creating a blaster it says support for the secondary. Support comes in many ways. The only set that doesn't get any for of control hard or soft is /fire and it gets more damage. So I am fine that blasters can mez and do additional damage cause my poor controller can be beaten by 50 inf. Go buy a BF.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying blasters should never be able to mez. I'm saying blasters should not be able to mez through status protection shields without help. Can you see the difference?
If you look at brutes, scrappers, stalkers, and tankers, they have defense as a secondary or primary. One of the powers in that powerset is there to protect from Sleep, Stun, and Hold, plus a few others from: KB, Immob, Fear, Confuse. Why should I need break frees against an AT whose primary role is damage-dealing when I have a power dedicated to not being mezzed?
Buy break frees to deal with controllers and dominators? Sure. Buy break frees to deal with status effects I have no protection against? Absolutely. Buy break frees to protect myself from being held, slept, or stunned by a solo blaster, defender, tanker, scrapper, stalker, brute, corruptor, or mastermind? No, that should not happen.
No, that doesn't mean those ATs shouldn't be able to fight melee ATs solo and defeat them, nor does it mean anything else.
[/ QUOTE ]
Golly, I suppose that brutes and scrappers shouldn't have fear because it breaks through some of the Tankers mez protection.
I guess Tanks and brutes shouldn't have any mag four holds since those bypass Acrobatics and of course, Tanks were not meant to bypass mez protection.
Or maybe, just maybe you can back down off your high horse and admit that just possibly there should be a chance that you get mezzed by the AT with Blasts + Support.
Believe it or not, but there are some blasters that are designed to beat boss level mez protection. Why shouldn't they be able to beat yours? Are you considering yourself better than a boss? If so then hold the phone and get ready for more nerfs cause, a Boss is supposedly a Hero and a half.
You have really backed yourself into a corner with this arguement Kali. It doesn't make any sense and the more you argue about it, the more it appears you just want melee to reign supreme in battle.
I forgot Hotfeet with /Fire blasters. I AM SO SORRY. (hey it does slow)
[ QUOTE ]
Golly, I suppose that brutes and scrappers shouldn't have fear because it breaks through some of the Tankers mez protection.
I guess Tanks and brutes shouldn't have any mag four holds since those bypass Acrobatics and of course, Tanks were not meant to bypass mez protection.
[/ QUOTE ]
Now you're just trolling. Why stop there with the straw men?
[ QUOTE ]
Or maybe, just maybe you can back down off your high horse and admit that just possibly there should be a chance that you get mezzed by the AT with Blasts + Support.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's funny, considering how often people will post "there should never be a situation where any AT outdamages blasters," but apparently blasters should be able to equal other ATs in their things.
[ QUOTE ]
Believe it or not, but there are some blasters that are designed to beat boss level mez protection. Why shouldn't they be able to beat yours? Are you considering yourself better than a boss? If so then hold the phone and get ready for more nerfs cause, a Boss is supposedly a Hero and a half.
[/ QUOTE ]
Mechanically speaking, melee has much better status protection than bosses. A boss has magnitude 3 status protection, meaning you need magnitude 4 to overcome it. Scrappers have something like magnitude 9 or 10, and tankers have 12 or 13. If the devs wanted blasters to overcome those numbers, they'd give you holds with magnitude 5-6.
And then controllers would rightfully complain.
[ QUOTE ]
You have really backed yourself into a corner with this arguement Kali. It doesn't make any sense and the more you argue about it, the more it appears you just want melee to reign supreme in battle.
[/ QUOTE ]
Right...if you fabricate entire arguments from whole cloth and act like I said those things that by amazing coincidence I did not say. It's pretty pathetic that you're reduced to making [censored] up.
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 ]
I forgot Hotfeet with /Fire blasters. I AM SO SORRY. (hey it does slow)
[/ QUOTE ]
And most melee characters are susceptible to slows.
I know SR and Ice resist slows. Does anyone else?
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)
believe it or not. if tanks didnt have their crowd controll abilities and their holds. we would positivley get [censored] so [censored] hard up the [censored] it wouldnt be funny. we need crowd controll for mostly PVE and GVE and we need holds for two reasons. 1: to keep the pansies who cant take the heat from getting away, and 2: to save our [censored]. belive it or not. if the only class that had holds, disorient,sleep,fear,knockback,roots and placate were controlelers. then not only would this suddenly become a communist game.but anything but controllers would suck.
blasters and defenders need their holds to give them a chance at pvp and for general PVE crowd control.
although i do say, if overall mez protection was better on tanks i would be alot happier. it gets lame that on top of my normal mez protections i need at least 1-2 break frees running in the middle of a fight so i dont get held after 3 DOMINATOR holds
I believe in quality, not quantity. also i have a short attention span...
Guardian
Main: Goomba: 50-Tank Inv/stone...2892 hours
33-Brute
Pinnacle
Secondary Main: Captain Battleship: 22-Tank Inv/SS
[ QUOTE ]
But the great majority of melee-range damage is smashing, particularly for /Electric and /Energy, and nobody had their defenses cut that much in that department.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is false. Lethal/Smashing was reduced a minimum of 33-50% across the board, with some powers being reduced to 1/4 their original resistance.
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 ]
[ QUOTE ]
But the great majority of melee-range damage is smashing, particularly for /Electric and /Energy, and nobody had their defenses cut that much in that department.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is false. Lethal/Smashing was reduced a minimum of 33-50% across the board, with some powers being reduced to 1/4 their original resistance.
[/ QUOTE ]
Everyone, almost, had the resists to S/L cut. Inv tanks used to be able to cap at 90 with two powers and like 8 slots. Now it takes 4 powers and 12 slots. That's a big cut, Fire can't get near 90 (70 or so is their max.), Inv scrappers can't hit their caps unless using Unstoppable and toggle dropping has no effect on that. DA scrapper can't cap either now yet before they could. Granite tanks can cap with granite + stone skin I believe which before they could do it with granite alone.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
more like "you should need someone with dedicated mez abilities to bypass my mez protection, solo"
[/ QUOTE ]
So while we're adhering to a rigid tank/healer/damage/crowdcontrol model, shouldn't it be expected that a tank or brute shouldn't actually be able to get any kills themselves, but get a damagedealer. I considered putting a question mark after that sentence, but frankly I don't care about your answer.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh, I'm sorry. I thought this was a discussion. You know, an exchange of ideas and opinions on a particular topic? I wasn't aware that this was simply a room full of children shouting things at each other. What time was this post made at? 5:30 pm? Hmmm, clearly you missed your afternoon nap and graham cracker, so I'll forgive your crankiness.
for the adults still listening, the point of my earlier statement, and its a point that I think Kali covered just fine, is that I've got no problem with mez shields being dropped on my character, when someone can properly stack enough mez to overcome the magnitude of the shield. That's fine, that's what the shield was built for. I also have no problem with people using mezzes that my shield doesn't protect against, like fear and placate. It's a limitation imposed by the devs, that's fine.
Where we have a problem is when I'm forced to play as if that shield doesn't exist because it is routinely being being affected by toggle drops. So if someone who can't stack enough stuns or holds want to mez me with those effects, they should get a teammate who can stack them. Notice how that says absolutely nothing about who should be that teammmate. While cute in that sleepy loud kid way, Front_Loaded's incorrect reply about adhering to a rigid game model was his creation, not mine. I don't care if it's 2 Ice/ blasters who hold me or if its a single controller, as long as it's done by overcoming the magnitude of the shield.
Level 50 is a journey, not a destination.
▲Scrapper Issues List - Going Rogue Edition▲
What is the Mag of Tanker/Scrapper/Brute/Stalker hold protection?
And what is the recharge of all three of an Ice/Ice Blaster's holds + duration?
It seems to me to be more important what the durations and activation times need to be. With supression, especially, there's no real chance of keeping a melee AT held, but it may be possible to hold them initially and drop their toggles.
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 ]
I don't think that's an extreme or stupid way to look at it at all. I do think it's extremely stupid to invest more effort in this debate, when the great majority of responses (not just from you, but you are definitely included) boil down to "but it's SUPPOSED to be like X".
[/ QUOTE ]
Uh...
That's the point. If you reject the foundations of the AT designs, that's your perogative. What we're trying to say is that Toggle Dropping was warping the AT roles unaccountably.
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 ]
Where we have a problem is when I'm forced to play as if that shield doesn't exist because it is routinely being being affected by toggle drops. So if someone who can't stack enough stuns or holds want to mez me with those effects, they should get a teammate who can stack them. Notice how that says absolutely nothing about who should be that teammmate. While cute in that sleepy loud kid way, Front_Loaded's incorrect reply about adhering to a rigid game model was his creation, not mine. I don't care if it's 2 Ice/ blasters who hold me or if its a single controller, as long as it's done by overcoming the magnitude of the shield.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I think some people are taking "only a dominator or controller should be able to stack enough mez to break a melee's mez shield solo" to mean "you should always need a controller or dominator to stack enough mez, solo or teamed." I also think there's some weird conflation of "mez" with "defeat." IME, mezzing doesn't always mean defeat, and defeat does not always require mezzing.
And Uberguy, a dominator managed to keep me held for a very long time in Recluse's Victory the other day and then managed to lay a hold on my again within seconds of the first set of holds wearing off. I'm not sure how long suppression is supposed to be, but I'm not sure it kicked in.
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)
Bear in mind that supression (a fruity mechanic in it's own right, though I really know of nothing better for it), starts when the hold starts. This means that, if you can keep someone held for around that time (or more) with a single hold application, you can, in fact, hold them forever. Assuming the hold recharges in time.
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 ]
[ QUOTE ]
Where we have a problem is when I'm forced to play as if that shield doesn't exist because it is routinely being being affected by toggle drops. So if someone who can't stack enough stuns or holds want to mez me with those effects, they should get a teammate who can stack them. Notice how that says absolutely nothing about who should be that teammmate. While cute in that sleepy loud kid way, Front_Loaded's incorrect reply about adhering to a rigid game model was his creation, not mine. I don't care if it's 2 Ice/ blasters who hold me or if its a single controller, as long as it's done by overcoming the magnitude of the shield.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I think some people are taking "only a dominator or controller should be able to stack enough mez to break a melee's mez shield solo" to mean "you should always need a controller or dominator to stack enough mez, solo or teamed." I also think there's some weird conflation of "mez" with "defeat." IME, mezzing doesn't always mean defeat, and defeat does not always require mezzing.
And Uberguy, a dominator managed to keep me held for a very long time in Recluse's Victory the other day and then managed to lay a hold on my again within seconds of the first set of holds wearing off. I'm not sure how long suppression is supposed to be, but I'm not sure it kicked in.
[/ QUOTE ]
I reported a very weird bug I encountered in RV when a Plant Dom used Seeds of Confusion on me and I was perma-confused until I died. I asked the Dom to help me replicate it and I found that, when the power was used when Domination was up, I would 'sometimes' become perma-confused. However, it didn't always happen. I'd say maybe 1 out of 3 times. Very, very weird.
The last time, I spent about 5 minutes confused and went around slaughtering everyone I saw until I finally decided to commit harey carey on a drone.
I bugged it, but I haven't heard of anyone else having this problem. It's entirely possible that I experienced a fluke or my perception of the duration was way off, but we were able to duplicate it. or at least it seemed we were able to.
I dunno, maybe this has something to do with the lack of suppression you had? Maybe something is screwy with the way Domination-boosted control powers are interacting with mezz duration and suppression.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
more like "you should need someone with dedicated mez abilities to bypass my mez protection, solo"
[/ QUOTE ]
So while we're adhering to a rigid tank/healer/damage/crowdcontrol model, shouldn't it be expected that a tank or brute shouldn't actually be able to get any kills themselves, but get a damagedealer. I considered putting a question mark after that sentence, but frankly I don't care about your answer.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tankers never had especially low damage, nor have the devs ever claimed they should be unable to deal their own damage.
The only ATs the devs have ever made comparisons to for damage/defense ratios are Scrappers and Tankers.
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