Yearning for new assault set combos after AE...
By
Besserwisser,
Posted on: 2009-05-20 07:10 in Archetypes and Powers General Discussion
First of all, I am totally with you man. Also, mixing in some more Tech'ish sets into Assault Sets would be awesome, however they could manage it.
[ QUOTE ]
Assault Primary/Modified Pet Secondary
These Hyperagressive MMs would be all about damage, and lots of it.
Inherent? oh, something weird. Increase own damage for every foe inside 20 feet (scale with foe rank) increase radius in PvP. Also Increase team damage for every teammate inside 20 feet. (or whatever). Your pet set might need to lose a power for a mez shield. Epic sets would include mostly control and debuff powers.
Why would you want to take one of these rather than a MM? you like a little more risk, and you want to kill things faster.
[/ QUOTE ]
But this is definately what I'd love to see.
More specifically, I'd be in favor of a less "pet army" intensive style, with maybe focusing on having only 1 pet. Something akin to how it works in some other games, where you can only have 1 pet type out at a time.
For instance, the Robotic Set could have 3 pet powers, including the Assault Bot boss pet, along with a more defense focused boss pet, similar to a protector bot which could perhaps have the force shield buff + a dispersion bubble, etc, and then a third boss pet which could be a mix or something else totally different, such as control, or a tank with a taunt.
I'd love that setup cause then you could spec for all 3 pets perhaps for all situations, or focus on one and conform your playstyle to support it.
[ QUOTE ]
Assault Primary/Modified Pet Secondary
[/ QUOTE ]
This is actually fairly close to what I expect we'll see as a new GR AT. We know that a pet set is one of their big focus items, and that there's side-switching. It would make sense to introduce a pet-centric new AT to blueside. A third support-type that would pale to both defenders and controllers wouldn't be useful so - offensive sets. Only real issue might be overlap between the three attacks in the pet set and any that exist in the assault set. But that's not so hard to clear up.
I think it would work quite well actually, though I'd still have some degree of support locked in. Making the pets low damage but heavy on the support would work out well in my opinion. Just give them 2 pets (level 8 and level 28), 2 upgrade powers, and fill the rest of the set with minor control and debuff powers.
My choice would probably be an assault/buff debuff. kin corrs are my favourite to play, and if you've ever played a kin you know they like it up close and personal =D
What part of phnglui mglw'nafl Cthulhu r'lyeh w'gah nagl fhtagn don't you understand?
Most of these would be too similar to existing ATs. Unless you can think of a really AT defining inherent that makes them feel significantly different, I don't think it's worth the effort. The possible exception is Assault Primary/Modified Pet Secondary, that could be made interesting.
I think the existing ATs fit most combinations fairly well, but some of your ideas might work well for Epic ATs with a twist or two.
And I agree, the Assault/Pet idea sounds like it could be very fun. Like a cross between a Blaster and a Mastermind... it'd probably need less damage than a Blaster, depending on how powerful the pet is.
I despise Masterminds, but I might give a potential Assault/Modified Pet combo a whirl. It's not the AT I have an issue with, a well played one is an asset to any team,I just dislike the playstyle as I don't like my pets doing all the work.
A set combo where the pet(s) is there to support YOU rather than the other way around would appeal to me.
A low HP squishy pet that buffs you and maybe a couple minor defensive powers, and later in the set another pet or two that add damage of their own. It would be tricky to balance, but it could be very fun.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison See, it's gems like these that make me check Claws' post history every once in a while to make sure I haven't missed anything good lately. |
I just remembered, doesn't the Crab Spider VEATs already do this to some degree? I realize they've only got the single pet power, but they already accomplish the Assault/Pet+Debuff role to some degree, don't they?
[ QUOTE ]
I just remembered, doesn't the Crab Spider VEATs already do this to some degree? I realize they've only got the single pet power, but they already accomplish the Assault/Pet+Debuff role to some degree, don't they?
[/ QUOTE ]
Two pet powers actually, the disruptor bots along with the spiderlings. That isn't including the Patron Pet you could choose as well. But yeah, they do accomplish it. I'd love an AT though with a variety of sets to allow for a similar playstyle though.
I guess it comes down to how well you can do things.
There currently is no "Melee/buff" set, although you can take a controller, throw in seismic smash, have a few pool powers and get something close, it wouldn't be anything like what an assault/buff could do, either in ranged or melee damage. Playstyle? you can kind of get there, but you're doing things the AT wasn't really meant to do, and you'll be getting less performance.
Can a crab spider be assault/pets? sure... kind of. With enough IOs a crab can have a lot of pets out. You can't control them especially well, and they're not the primary part of your function, It's a stretch capacity of the AT. You're also limited to one type of concept. No ice attacks for you. No zombies. No protector bot...
Can you make anything like and icy assault/ice armor character? sort-of-kind of. You can take an ice/ice tank with the right epic and you can stack IO procs and + damage like crazy, but that's not what such a build is normally about.
Can you make an "energy assault/invulnerability" or "psi/WP" character? well you can take a blaster and IO your way to some serious hit points and solid +def, but again, it's not really what the blaster AT is for.
Neither of these will be as good at the functions as something dedicated, and I suggest that there's a fair, interesting and valid place for an assault/defence armor AT, and lots of concepts to go with them, from though clearly there is no necessity for one.
AE allows me to make exactly what I want, more completely than the current system available to players. Yes there are more balance concerns for player characters, but I'm certain these are all resolvable. I think it's quite possible to add these combinations within the limits of PvE and PvP game balance.
It's more of a question of resource allocation and player interest, and the value of the investment is not so certain, Hell, if it was we'd probably have them.
The cake is a lie! The cake is a lie!
[ QUOTE ]
Neither of these will be as good at the functions as something dedicated, and I suggest that there's a fair, interesting and valid place for an assault/defence armor AT, and lots of concepts to go with them, from though clearly there is no necessity for one.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you want an "assault/defense" AT, make a scrapper that's either claws/* or spines/*. Both of them have an excellent blend of ranged, AoE, and melee damage, though, they pay for it by being lower damage than every other scrapper primary (we has numbers to demonstrate it too!).
As for making an AT that is, by definition, Assault/Defense, I doubt it would happen to such a degree that those who demand it would like it. Either the damage modifiers would be so low as to make the AT undesirable as a damage dealer (and would be dangerously close to the Scrappers mentioned earlier, which Castle has already said he would never put in game with ranged attacks if he had the choice) or the defensive modifiers would be so low as to make the AT much less survivable than many players would expect. Assault/Defense is going to hit the same "brick wall o' not gonna happen like you want it to" as Ranged/Defense concepts because of the Tankmage issue.
An Assault/Pet set is much more likely to happen, though, and would actually generate some interested play styles, especially if the pets were primarily support based.
Again, I think the one I'd like most would be assault/buff. A possible criticism might be that ele/thermal might seem like a bit of a PvP fotm, I'd submit that such is a minor concern since it'll all be different after the next rules swap... whenever that happens.
With regards to mods on assault/defence, I subnit that the very existance of VEATS should indicate that rather high levels of both defence (VEAT mods are notably high) and damage (VEATS can most certainly do damage) are considered acceptable. Again, not saying these are needed, just that they can exist.
In my opinion, the existence of Spines scrappers, and veats are actually a strong supporting argument for the suitability of assault defence characters. What can be done now mimics the power levels, and even the playstyle, but does not in any way allow coverage of the concepts or the specific power set properties.
With regards to assault/pets, I'd love to see some thematic buffing pets, and it's pretty easy to imagine how this could work. What's not so certain is how much control the character should have over those pets.
The cake is a lie! The cake is a lie!
[ QUOTE ]
the existence of Spines scrappers
[/ QUOTE ]
As I stated before, Spines Scrappers have been stated by Castle as only existing because they were there when he got here. Focus and Shockwave in Claws share this dubious attribution as well. He has specifically stated that he thinks that giving Scrappers ranged attacks in any primary powerset was a bad idea, but he's not going to change them because they're an integral part of the power sets at the moment. Spines/* and Claws/* shouldn't be used as evidence of this. They're specific and no-longer new-set-comparison viable outliers that you can expect there will not be any new sets based off of as long as Castle has the reigns on power design.
He said a lot more about Spines from what I remember as well, during the Issue 13 beta I believe. Spines basically has two very effective secondary effects, -recharge, slow, along with a damage aura, great AoE and good ST, ranged immob, ranged cone... Yeah. But he did say he wouldn't expect anything to change perhaps even in a year, so...
[ QUOTE ]
He said a lot more about Spines from what I remember as well, during the Issue 13 beta I believe. Spines basically has two very effective secondary effects, -recharge, slow, along with a damage aura, great AoE and good ST, ranged immob, ranged cone... Yeah. But he did say he wouldn't expect anything to change perhaps even in a year, so...
[/ QUOTE ]
I think most of that was because there are just too many things wrong with Spines from the perspective of a Scrapper set. It's got 2 substantial secondary effects (Toxic DoT and -rech/-spd) and at least 3 of the powers (Throw Spines, Impale, Quills) of the powers have no real place within a Scrapper primary. The amount of work required in reworking Spines/* would just be boggling... He did specifically mention that, if he did take a swing at it, most players wouldn't be happy with the changes though. He never said why, but I expect it's because he would tone down the AoE and ranged damage heavily, bring up the ST damage, and remove/change/nerf one of the 2 secondary effects.
Most players aren't happy with any changes it seems, especially here. Moreso than any other MMO I've played at least.
Hell, I even had to stop reading the Dominator Buff Thread as well, same as Castle. And I'm usually all for a revolution.
[ QUOTE ]
Most players aren't happy with any changes it seems, especially here. Moreso than any other MMO I've played at least.
Hell, I even had to stop reading the Dominator Buff Thread as well, same as Castle. And I'm usually all for a revolution.
[/ QUOTE ]
Eh, I think the Dom changes are absolutely great. I was worried that he was going to simply increase their scalar across the board but it's nice to see that he's doing it as a significant buff to non-Domination and only minor buff to Domination.
I do feel vindicated insofar as the internal memo he released saying that Dominators are going to be an AT focused simultaneously on control and damage, not a control heavy AT with a little bit of damage. I've been saying that for more than 2 years! Go me!
[ QUOTE ]
Eh, I think the Dom changes are absolutely great. I was worried that he was going to simply increase their scalar across the board but it's nice to see that he's doing it as a significant buff to non-Domination and only minor buff to Domination.
[/ QUOTE ]
Definitely of the same opinion.
[ QUOTE ]
I do feel vindicated insofar as the internal memo he released saying that Dominators are going to be an AT focused simultaneously on control and damage, not a control heavy AT with a little bit of damage. I've been saying that for more than 2 years! Go me!
[/ QUOTE ]
Which, getting back on this threads rails, sort of brings backing to the assault/defense AT's. Considering an AT can be primarily focused on both control and ranged attacks, why not assault and defense?
I'm pretty open to seeing everything get a shot. If they released 5 more Rogue AT's in this expansion I'd love it. I'd love to see another AT with the Blaster Secondary as a primary perhaps, a modified pet set most definately, another assault set for sure. Whatever they could screw together.
Interesting thoughts in here.
Based upon nothing at all but my own screwy mind, I'm anticipating the ability to select one or two powers from another AT and/or one inherent ability from another AT, at some penalty (shorter durations, smaller magnitudes, diminishing returns, etc.).
Which ATs? That will depend on your Rogue path and how committed to the other side you choose to be.
More to the OP, I expect to see new inherents. Dynamic inherents that could change if the player desires (similar to how one changes from Build 1 to Build 2 today, for example).
Repeat Offenders
[ QUOTE ]
Which, getting back on this threads rails, sort of brings backing to the assault/defense AT's. Considering an AT can be primarily focused on both control and ranged attacks, why not assault and defense?
[/ QUOTE ]
First off, Assault is melee/ranged damage fusion. It's Energy Melee smushed in all nasty like with Energy Blast and a little bit of Energy Manipulation to top it off.
Secondly, there isn't really much direct parity between control and defense sets. Controls aren't as potent as defensive sets, which is why you can generally get away with it. They're also a binary metric of damage reduction (on or off) rather than the partial reduction which is part and parcel with how defensive sets work.
Of course, I shouldn't shut down the idea completely. With appropriate scaling back of the self buff scalar, it could quite easily be a balanced AT. Damage would need to be lower than Scrappers or Blasters to account for the combination of ranged damage capability and increased survivability, but, I'm reasonably sure a happy medium could be found. I'm just not sure it's going to able to find a niche with Scrappers and Blasters around.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty open to seeing everything get a shot. If they released 5 more Rogue AT's in this expansion I'd love it. I'd love to see another AT with the Blaster Secondary as a primary perhaps, a modified pet set most definately, another assault set for sure. Whatever they could screw together.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm doubting whether they're going to release 5 new ATs. Opening up side switching is going to throw the rest of the game into enough chaos. At most, I'd expect a single additional AT (or EAT) added to each side to include some of unseen concept combinations.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the existence of Spines scrappers
[/ QUOTE ]
As I stated before, Spines Scrappers have been stated by Castle as only existing because they were there when he got here. Focus and Shockwave in Claws share this dubious attribution as well. He has specifically stated that he thinks that giving Scrappers ranged attacks in any primary powerset was a bad idea, but he's not going to change them because they're an integral part of the power sets at the moment. Spines/* and Claws/* shouldn't be used as evidence of this. They're specific and no-longer new-set-comparison viable outliers that you can expect there will not be any new sets based off of as long as Castle has the reigns on power design.
[/ QUOTE ]
I didn't actually expect this much attention to end up on assault/defence... I kind of expected most people would go on about assault/buff... however, I should probably be thankful that there seems to be interest in this at all.
Spines and claws DO exist, and that even with some of the hypothetical modifications to the secondary effects of spines that may, possibly, be coming down the pipe for that set, it wouldn't change the basic similarity it has to an assault set.
While there may be no new "SCRAPPER" sets that duplicate the same blend of aoe, st, ranged and melee damage, both new VEATs DO have similar mixes, as well as fairly high levels of durability, which are, at least potentially "in the same ballpark" as what is available to These were added in recent days, and I think it's reasonable to suggest that they evolved with Castle's blessing.
Remember also that I'm not proposing these to BE scrappers, or that "scrappers" should get assault sets, only that there could be workable new ATs with fun and playable levels of survival and damage with assault primaries and defence secondaries. Combinations of these sets could be used to build a lot of concepts which are a bit of a stretch for current ATs, both with regards to play style and power availability and could do so without doing anything that hasn't been done in recent game history with regards to total character power (VEATs).
The cake is a lie! The cake is a lie!
Broadsword Assault. Complete with shooting swords at people.
How about throwing swords at people?
Or worldstones?
The cake is a lie! The cake is a lie!
[ QUOTE ]
Broadsword Assault. Complete with shooting swords at people.
[/ QUOTE ]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDvuBY97cD4
indeed we are falling behind the times.
*Note Castle posted this before, but it works here*
I like dominator assault sets. I like the mix of range and melee, I like some of the specific powers, mostly I just like the very significant range of concept and focus, and the variety of metapowers. You really can beat the crap out of someone at range and up close, with the same type of conceptual powers at that. Sure a blaster can accomplish more than the same with their primary and secondary together, but assault sets seem to be such a nice, efficient combo, and they'd leave room for a whole other primary or secondary if another AT were to have them... Certain specific concept characters would be very well served by an assault set and... something else... if only there were such ATs.
Sure we'll probably never see these outside of AE content, but I've got them in my arcs, and I can dream...
As such:
Assault Primary/Defence Secondary
Ok, a thorns regen might be a bit close to something already out there, but you get the idea.
More ranged combat is possible, so HP could/should/would be lower than for scrappers. Otherwise somewhat similar in role. Melee attacks could be used if the situation allowed it or sit back and blast at somewhat lower dps. To some degree, this is not unlike the functional performance of VEATS. Epic powers would be controls and debuffs.
How would this be distinct from existing sets that have similar(ish) capacity?
Veats: Lower team buffs, no regen inherent, fewer controls than some, and potentially superior debuffs depending on set. Survival would be better for some builds, worse for others.
Khelds: Less AoE damage than a squid, less versatility (no forms) better mez protection, and potentially better all around survival, though obviously inferior to dwarf survival.
Spines scrappers: Admittedly very similar, though generally these would have lower HP, but...
So, why go with this instead of a spines scrapper? Lets pick an inherent that more than evens the odds in long fights. I'll call it focus. Each successive attack has a very small, but stacking, and long duration offensive debuff. It could be a stacking -res or it could be -def, It could be almost anything, even -recovery and -regen, heck it could even be a small - X% base HP... or whatever.
Defence Primary/Assault Secondary
Inherent: With no taunt power, aggro control is key. Ranged, melee and AoE attacks would all produce a modest (lower than tanks) taunt effect, with a small -range component. Perhaps as much as -30% or some such. This would be different (or much lower mag) in PvP
Epic sets would be similar to the assault/Def combo. Control and Debuff, throw in a pet for good measure.
So why these rather than tanks? An alternative to tanks, these would have better capacity to project power away from themselves, better control of remote aggro, and perhaps slightly better dps, but would generally be significantly more delicate. A consumate off tank, or exceptional small team tank. Def/Res Power mods would be somewhere between brutes and tanks, HP would also be somewhere between brutes and tanks.
Assault Primary/Modified Pet Secondary
These Hyperagressive MMs would be all about damage, and lots of it.
Inherent? oh, something weird. Increase own damage for every foe inside 20 feet (scale with foe rank) increase radius in PvP. Also Increase team damage for every teammate inside 20 feet. (or whatever). Your pet set might need to lose a power for a mez shield. Epic sets would include mostly control and debuff powers.
Why would you want to take one of these rather than a MM? you like a little more risk, and you want to kill things faster.
Assault Primary/Modified Buff debuff secondary
Potentially the most interesting set here. They could offer superior DPS to Corruptors at elevated risk. They'd retain most of a corruptor's debuffing/support power, but might trade a little off for one toggle. Why? These would probably need some type of mez protection to be playable, they'd also need an interesting inherent to compete with corruptors, who would be a bit more dependable, safer, and, more importantly, would have superior AoE dps in many ways. Epic Sets would include a def or rez shield, and some control powers. Throw in a pet for good measure.
The cake is a lie! The cake is a lie!