I agree that blasters completely suck for soloing, but there are ATs(scrappers, stalkers, brutes) that are pretty outclassed on teams.
[ QUOTE ]
For crap's sake. It's been how stinking long since launch? Certainly I wasn't the first person to figure out you could 'port AT around. Even if I was, that was a long time ago (pre-I3) and I'd been mentioning that it was possible ever since. So have lots of other folks. Why the change? Why the change now? Stupid work. Someone with AT and RF (or a buddy with RF) head over to Test and see if this is the change that took place please.
[/ QUOTE ]
You know... it wouldn't bother me so much if the timing didn't seem so odd. I mean... 8 issues in? On the tails of the latest, greatest and slowly-fading pleading cries for someone, anyone, to just give our AT a glance and *do* something, or at least *say* they would do something about our unfulfilled role in CoX...
...and they chose that moment to nerf the devices set again...
It really just seems like something out of a bad comedy.
[ QUOTE ]
I agree that blasters completely suck for soloing, but there are ATs(scrappers, stalkers, brutes) that are pretty outclassed on teams.
[/ QUOTE ]
With all due respect, are you serious?
Scrappers can do more, safer in teams than most blasters. I'm not talking aoe builds because most blasters sets don't do it particularly well. And brutes! Brutes are quite awesome on teams. Hell that's where they REALLY shine. Teammates can get them to their damage cap which puts their damage ahead of scrappers and can be buffed to tank caps.
@Deadedge and @Dead Edge
Peace through power! Freedom is slavery!
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a yo-yo
[ QUOTE ]
I8 Test Server Notes:
[ QUOTE ]
Many objects in the game which were meant to be immune to Teleportation have been made so. This affects several powers in the Traps Secondary and Gadgets secondary for players.
[/ QUOTE ]
Emphasis added.
Last time I checked, there is no Gadgets secondary. There is, however, one called Devices. Freudian slips like this and folks wonder why some hold the belief that the devs don't seem to know the Blaster AT all that much.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, Ohms, their use of "gadgets" was correct.
You see, they didn't include this in the patch notes, but before ED, when "devices" was effective and worth-while, we really were using "devices"... you know, instruments which could and would achieve a set task if used properly. "Devices".
After ED, though, what we had left was "gadgets". You know, teensy little contraptions that make noise, whizz and flutter, make sparks, etc., but perform no real function.
All they forgot to do was notify us they were changes the name of the set:
"Due to the newly inneffective nature of the devices secondary, we are altering the title to more accurately reflect the abilities of the set: Gadgets"
Honestly, I cannot believe they've left caltrops alone. Compared to the rest of the set, caltrops is WAY overpowered. In all seriousness.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree that blasters completely suck for soloing, but there are ATs(scrappers, stalkers, brutes) that are pretty outclassed on teams.
[/ QUOTE ]
With all due respect, are you serious?
Scrappers can do more, safer in teams than most blasters. I'm not talking aoe builds because most blasters sets don't do it particularly well. And brutes! Brutes are quite awesome on teams. Hell that's where they REALLY shine. Teammates can get them to their damage cap which puts their damage ahead of scrappers and can be buffed to tank caps.
[/ QUOTE ]
I play both, and yes, I'm serious.
Brutes? Sure, I can be an aggro magnet. Sort of. But kill anything? That's pretty laughable, is a situation where the rest of the team is actually taking away from my fury. Put more than two brutes on a team, and one of them is going to be grumpy.
And you seem to be generalising scrappers here... No, they can't do more ON AVERAGE. Sure, Spines/Dark can obliterate mobs faster than a fire blaster, but have you tried Katana, or bob-forbid, claws?? Not all blasters are these damage machines you make them out to be. Having played scrappers up, I know how useless I feel with a blaster on the team >_<
The brute thing I won't discuss further, that is an issue of play style. I tend not to worry about meatshielding and just smash stuff.
But spines/dark scrapper shouldn't be able to outdo a fire blaster in AoE. But there are really only 2 AoE choices for blasters (well, archery after 32 too), the others are largely single target, a single target nonblapping blasters won't do the same damage as a scrapper. I wish I was a nuumber-y person so I could show you, all my experience with it is unfortunately anecdotal.
When you talk about AoE blaster builds versus AoE scrapper builds you said the scrapper comes out ahead. In single target non blapper builds vs. single target scrapper builds the scrapper comes out ahead. I think that's wrong.
edit - Where's Arcanaville when you need math?
@Deadedge and @Dead Edge
Peace through power! Freedom is slavery!
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a yo-yo
I've never outdone a blaster... I suppose I'm supposed to be playing broadsword?
Simple excerise using standard use powers: caveats - all attacks using 3 SOs, not including buildup, not standardizing BIs, assuming Sherk is right about the numbers
Katana - Energy Blast
Golden Dragonfly - 12.35 Power bolt - 5.4
Soaring Dragon - 9.75 Power blast - 8.9
Sting of the Wasp - 6.28 Power Burst - 10.2
Katana scrapper has 28.38, Energy has 24.5. Now all BIs are standardizes relative to blasters so the real difference is bigger. Of coure this also assumes a resist neutral mob
edit - If I screwed up correct me, like I said, I'm not a numbers guy.
@Deadedge and @Dead Edge
Peace through power! Freedom is slavery!
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a yo-yo
If you're using those attack chains, you have bigger problems.
Those attacks can be fired from range, and have shorter recharges (barring SOTW.) But if you want to be an energy blapper, why aren't you using Bone smasher(9.0) and total focus(9.889,) which has 100% mag3 disorient?
The point was to not include the melee attacks. I've never said blasters with melee attacks (/nrg and /elec) don't outdamage scrappers, they do and they should.
I said ranged blasters (if you count power burst as range >.>) should do at least equal single target damage. They don't.
@Deadedge and @Dead Edge
Peace through power! Freedom is slavery!
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a yo-yo
[ QUOTE ]
Last time I checked, there is no Gadgets secondary. There is, however, one called Devices. Freudian slips like this and folks wonder why some hold the belief that the devs don't seem to know the Blaster AT all that much.
[/ QUOTE ]
Gadgets is the internal name of Devices. It's a Legacy issue and it was my mistake when adding the patch note.
As for the change itself, there was an exploit involving TFoe and various stationary entities (like Auto Turret.) In fixing this, the player versions of these entities were locked down as well. I do realise this impacts one of the tactics Devices players used to bypass the limitations of the set. I'll be keeping an eye on this to see if the change hampers the gameplay too severely.
[ QUOTE ]
I agree that blasters completely suck for soloing, but there are ATs(scrappers, stalkers, brutes) that are pretty outclassed on teams.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wha? Blasters completely suck for soloing? News to me. You basing this on personal experiance? Are we talking PvP or PvE here? Scrappers and Brutes are outclassed on teams? By whom? When you have an AT that has great offense and defense they are going to be better on a team than an AT that has great offense but very little in the way of defense.
I don't know if this is all-PvP experiance you're coming from or what but you're about 180 degrees out of phase.
Thank you! A response!
@Deadedge and @Dead Edge
Peace through power! Freedom is slavery!
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a yo-yo
[ QUOTE ]
I8 Test Server Notes:
[ QUOTE ]
Many objects in the game which were meant to be immune to Teleportation have been made so. This affects several powers in the Traps Secondary and Gadgets secondary for players.
[/ QUOTE ]
Emphasis added.
Last time I checked, there is no Gadgets secondary. There is, however, one called Devices. Freudian slips like this and folks wonder why some hold the belief that the devs don't seem to know the Blaster AT all that much.
[/ QUOTE ]
Although, I was wandering around in the university this morning, and it took a *long* time for me to remember just exactly what a "snare" enhancement was.
Lots of things are called lots of things in different places. Even experienced players will sometimes refer to the actual set they are playing as the Trick Archery set, or the Energy Armor set. I still occasionally hear about this set called "Storm Control."
For that matter, and I understand the precident, it still drives me a little nuts when someone asks me about Super Reflexes' "shields."
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Last time I checked, there is no Gadgets secondary. There is, however, one called Devices. Freudian slips like this and folks wonder why some hold the belief that the devs don't seem to know the Blaster AT all that much.
[/ QUOTE ]
Gadgets is the internal name of Devices. It's a Legacy issue and it was my mistake when adding the patch note.
As for the change itself, there was an exploit involving TFoe and various stationary entities (like Auto Turret.) In fixing this, the player versions of these entities were locked down as well. I do realise this impacts one of the tactics Devices players used to bypass the limitations of the set. I'll be keeping an eye on this to see if the change hampers the gameplay too severely.
[/ QUOTE ]
Could you by any chance move the decimal on smoke grenade over (to the right) a couple spaces? I mean, you could make it look like an accident. I wouldn't mind.
@Deadedge and @Dead Edge
Peace through power! Freedom is slavery!
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a yo-yo
_Castle_ Thanks for replying. This does help to assuage concerns. As for impact... well, it's pretty much yam-bagged Auto Turret. I'm all for plugging exploits and all that, but could, in no way, see how my ability to 'port Deuce around qualified, especially this far along. Hopefully you can implement the change in such a way as to do what you had intended without sticking a fork in the eye of a thrice-blind powerset.
But you're also not including the usefulness of other powers in the set. Knockback, although annoying to kinneticists, is a valuable tool for an energy blaster. There's a decent AoE, nova, two excellent KB powers, and a good snipe(if you like to pull.)
Katana has one knockup, and a -acc for melee range.
Now, am I saying EB is better? No, not at all. They just have different uses.
[ QUOTE ]
But you're also not including the usefulness of other powers in the set. Knockback, although annoying to kinneticists, is a valuable tool for an energy blaster. There's a decent AoE, nova, two excellent KB powers, and a good snipe(if you like to pull.)
Katana has one knockup, and a -acc for melee range.
Now, am I saying EB is better? No, not at all. They just have different uses.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying the set isn't useful, it is. I LOVE knockback/down and tanks should stop whining about it. I'm talking about the regular use attacks, the stuff you'd throw together for a chain to take out...lets say a single lt that startled them. Also golden dragonfly is knockup...or down...one of them and they can juggle bosses with it (not that they'd need to what with their wonderful secondary of protectivity 
).
@Deadedge and @Dead Edge
Peace through power! Freedom is slavery!
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a yo-yo
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Last time I checked, there is no Gadgets secondary. There is, however, one called Devices. Freudian slips like this and folks wonder why some hold the belief that the devs don't seem to know the Blaster AT all that much.
[/ QUOTE ]
Gadgets is the internal name of Devices. It's a Legacy issue and it was my mistake when adding the patch note.
As for the change itself, there was an exploit involving TFoe and various stationary entities (like Auto Turret.) In fixing this, the player versions of these entities were locked down as well. I do realise this impacts one of the tactics Devices players used to bypass the limitations of the set. I'll be keeping an eye on this to see if the change hampers the gameplay too severely.
[/ QUOTE ]
If it does, consider (at least) making recharge recovery a little faster, so we can bring out new ones more often- Even if you have to reduce overall duration to keep things balanced. These already lasted too long to remain useful in their first location.
[ QUOTE ]
Gadgets is the internal name of Devices. It's a Legacy issue and it was my mistake when adding the patch note.
As for the change itself, there was an exploit involving TFoe and various stationary entities (like Auto Turret.) In fixing this, the player versions of these entities were locked down as well. I do realise this impacts one of the tactics Devices players used to bypass the limitations of the set. I'll be keeping an eye on this to see if the change hampers the gameplay too severely.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wait a second here ... <shakes head in disbelief 
> ... let me get this straight. So not only did Devices not get the help it needs (which every */Dev has been asking for since I3 or so), but instead it had a restriction thrown on to it? I'm sorry I just don't understand 
. Should */Dev's complain that the set is too powerful in hopes that it gets a boost ? You said it yourself - the set has "limitations" - why make it worse?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Last time I checked, there is no Gadgets secondary. There is, however, one called Devices. Freudian slips like this and folks wonder why some hold the belief that the devs don't seem to know the Blaster AT all that much.
[/ QUOTE ]
Gadgets is the internal name of Devices. It's a Legacy issue and it was my mistake when adding the patch note.
As for the change itself, there was an exploit involving TFoe and various stationary entities (like Auto Turret.) In fixing this, the player versions of these entities were locked down as well. I do realise this impacts one of the tactics Devices players used to bypass the limitations of the set. I'll be keeping an eye on this to see if the change hampers the gameplay too severely.
[/ QUOTE ]
How about changing the auto turret for blasters into a little tank that follows you around blasting stuff? >_>
Don't mistake coincidence for fate.
Tyrant Kaiser Necro/Pois ~ 50
Moriyama Emp/Dark ~ 50
Divine Leliel Claws/Invuln ~ 50
Divine Zeruel Dark Melee/SR20DET ~ 50
Lil Mori Fire/Kin ~ 39
Wii: 1567 8323 2516 8943
XBox Live Gamertag: Loki 240SX
Castle thank for posting a reply on the matter.
I recently picked up auto-turrent on blaster and at lvl41 was planning on getting teleport friend to move it around if it survived a fight. As for game play it does effect me in solo play even now. I plant it spending a ton of blue to get it in place where it might be effective. As soon as it start blasting the bad guys shoot back often with AoE attacks and I get caught before i can get clear. I experience same thing with the mortar in the trap set. With teleport friend I could set it up someplace safe and then tp it to a location close the the mobs but safe enough I dont get caught in the alpha strike.
Also the auto turret is not equal to malta version which appears to have greater range and possible more damage .. sure they dont tp it around but it stays after the guy who set it defeated. Also, if i try to throw caltrops or mines around the turret I end up drawing lots of aggro myself.
Overall, i have to say I do not like the change .. its sucks to put it bluntly. I do not consider it an exploit. So few people take it .. mortar it too nice and comes early to not take it. This seems to be the only "nerf" placed in I8 I hope its rollback takes place on this issue.
David -
Tech Smith - AR/DEV blaster victory
[ QUOTE ]
I'll be keeping an eye on this to see if the change hampers the gameplay too severely.
[/ QUOTE ]
Castle, I'm afraid the blaster community has likely heard "we'll keep an eye on it" or "we're looking at it" with no subsequent action too often to take any such statements very seriously.
Heroes
Dysmal
Lumynous
Sam Steele
Pluck
Wile
Slagheap
Pressure Wave
Rhiannon Bel
Verified
Stellaric
Syd Mallorn
Villains
Jotunheim Skald
Saer Maen
Jen Corbae
Illuminance
Venator Arawn
Taiga Dryad
Tarranos
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'll be keeping an eye on this to see if the change hampers the gameplay too severely.
[/ QUOTE ]
Castle, I'm afraid the blaster community has likely heard "we'll keep an eye on it" or "we're looking at it" with no subsequent action to take any such statements very seriously.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's a game. You shouldn't take anything about it seriously.
I understand that, I have a ton of blasters I play and enjoy. But when a much better protected class does better damage, something is off. When devices was heralded as the pinnacle of a support secondary for blasters (by devs and players alike) and then repeatedly gets (to use Ohm's expression) yambagged, something is off. When you take one of the flakiest powers in the set and then nerf it, something is off. And then when they forget what they named the set you have to wonder if they even care that something is off.
@Deadedge and @Dead Edge
Peace through power! Freedom is slavery!
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a yo-yo