There seems to be a majority of agreement
And if you say things like
1) inspirations ftw
2) build with IOs
3) lower your difficulty
then you are in agreement
So where do we go from here?
I doubt raising damage will help- there are already some monster builds out there
Adding defensive powers would take away from the original intent of the design
Changing pool power values seems to be a good idea to expand upon
There was quite a bit of dialogue already about the inherent leading to the change, and while attacking when mezzed helped immeasurably, the damage bonus is lacking (what I meant when I said I wouldn't miss it)
Be nice to see some more positive input
Define positive input.
I see some negative posts in that some of them are overly aggressive.
My input is simply that your experiance with your fire fire blaster has led you to believe that something is wrong with the AT as a whole. My experiance with the AT as a whole is that it's well balanced, fun to play, and performs as I expect.
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
Thomas Jefferson
[ QUOTE ]
My input is simply that your experiance with your fire fire blaster has led you to believe that something is wrong with the AT as a whole. My experiance with the AT as a whole is that it's well balanced, fun to play, and performs as I expect.
[/ QUOTE ]
And that's cool- I have more than just that one (whos at 43 now)
And I think blasters are pretty balanced against each other so I know what to expect out of fire/fire
But they're just not balanced with other ATs
It's a little unreasonable to expect "positive input" when you post yet another "blasters are broken" thread on the Blaster forum.
Be that as it may, however, I'll cast my two cents with those who believe the AT is fine as it is. Comparing one AT with another is like comparing apples and oranges (a fact that many people never seem to grasp) -- your blaster isn't supposed to perform like a Tanker, Scrapper, whatever, so why insist it's broken when it has to be played differently?
I'll add that I have several blasters in the mid-to-upper-30s, and I've never thought of them as "broken". I don't see how using inspirations is "bad" or an indication of "brokenness". (How hard is it to stock a few break-frees for the inevitable mezzing? Suck it up and shell out the 50 inf. already.) And as I pointed out in another thread, I have a lvl 32 Psi/MM blaster who has faceplanted exactly 4 times, soloing on Rugged. I'm not boasting or anything, just making the point that it's all a question of perspective and experience.
Hope you work out your difficulties and get back to enjoying the AT.
Blasters have been the red headed step child of inter-AT balance forever.
ED, the GDN, Defiance, the damage adjustments have all brought the Blaster closer in line to inter-AT balance then they have ever been. Scrappers have always been easy mode CoH, Blasters have always been hard mode, and it will likely continue to be so.
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
Thomas Jefferson
[ QUOTE ]
There seems to be a majority of agreement
And if you say things like
1) inspirations ftw
2) build with IOs
3) lower your difficulty
then you are in agreement
So where do we go from here?
I doubt raising damage will help- there are already some monster builds out there
Adding defensive powers would take away from the original intent of the design
Changing pool power values seems to be a good idea to expand upon
There was quite a bit of dialogue already about the inherent leading to the change, and while attacking when mezzed helped immeasurably, the damage bonus is lacking (what I meant when I said I wouldn't miss it)
Be nice to see some more positive input
[/ QUOTE ]
You also can't make your comparisons in the dark. Who is playing these other ATs you mention? My Energy/Energy/Force blapper out performs and out survives most of the people I team with except for a few stone tanks. That blaster has a full set of IOs (none of which add defense or resistance) but do the rest of the players? What is their experience level?
When defiance 2.0 was getting tested several of the things you bring up were mentioned. The biggest blaster killer was determined to be mez. The devs "cured" this by allowing the blaster to use 3 attacks while mezzed.
Inspirations are called blaster candy for good reason. One of the other things sited by the players in defiance 2.0 testing was a blaster's defense is the inspiration tray but we never had the right mix of insps dropping. Shortly after the release of I11 we got combining 3 like insps to make a different one. I don't think that was for tanks or scrappers do you? It did spill over onto the other ATs but "most" of my other non-blaster toons rarely need to use insps.
No toggle drop on mez was also mainly for the blaster (and because Castle hated toggle drops but hadn't found the code to prevent them prior to that) blasters that spent their time defeated or retoggling couldn't do their jobs properly which was dealing damage. Another change mainly for blasters that spilled over onto other ATs.
The last round of debt nerfs probably was another thing to solve blaster problems since the goal of defiance 2.0 was to allow blasters to accumulate rewards as fast as other ATs, not to make them less squishy. The one thing the devs didn't do was make them any less squishy and I believe that was one of their goals with the changes they did make.
XP smoothing was also probably a blaster buff that spilled over onto other ATs as well.
The devs went where they did because they thought that more would be overpowered and, except for a bit here or there, they would be. Once you learn positional awareness on a blaster if you translate that to any other AT you are vastly overperforming compared to say a leroy scrapper.
-Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein.
-I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo Galilei
-When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty. - Thomas Jefferson
[ QUOTE ]
DrMike: Build Up, Aim, Zapp may take out a +2 minion. Watch out for energy resistance (Rikti, I think some Malta, some armored Crey) throwing off your results. Blasters have two alpha damage boosts for a reason.
[/ QUOTE ]
Good point, Fulmens.
I've always alternated Build Up and Aim rather than stacked them, because otherwise its somewhere between 30 and 45 seconds (depending on Hasten) for them both to recharge.
Waiting between groups sort of negates the advantage of the high damage output that allows you to put each group down so quickly.
That said, I am experimenting with a "burst damage" blaster at the moment who specialises in nobbling bosses as quickly as possible, and have been stacking Aim and Build Up. Its very satisfying.
And yeah, I'm all too aware of who has Energy resistance and to what extent. Sappers have 50%!
[ QUOTE ]
My personal observation after 3+ years and playing every AT with a very wide array of powersets is that blasters are the ONLY AT that can struggle at what they are designed to do without outside help
[/ QUOTE ]
they dont struggle and even if they did, they arent the only AT that do. You could also argue that some scrappers struggle at their ability to do max damage, as well as some tanks being able to, well, tank.
[ QUOTE ]
If we have reached the point where a character HAS to be IO'd then let's just say that and forget all this, but across the board what other AT has to ?
[/ QUOTE ]
I would say that nothing has to be IO'ed however, to do what you want to do and play at the level that your wanting(or from what it sounds like your wanting) it would have to be IO'ed. If your wanting the best survivability and best damage, theres no question you need to IO your character, but lets not start complaining that an non IO'ed toon isnt as good as an IO'ed one.
[ QUOTE ]
I ask again- is it my imagination that blasters faceplant more than any other AT?
[/ QUOTE ]
yes
[ QUOTE ]
To clarify- I think the word "broken" is too strong and I don't really think they're completely broken
Just threw that in there for a little humor
[/ QUOTE ]
didnt really work.
personally, i agree with snakebit that you've had a bad experience with your fire/fire and thats given you a skewed perception of the AT. change your tactics up a bit maybe change powersets and see if that helps.
Positron's i13 letter: We are trying to make PvP more accessible to new players, while giving experienced PvP'ers the advantage that comes with formulating tactics around the new systems we're putting in place. PvP from now on will be on our priority list. If something isn't working out, we'll be in there tweaking it and making it work, for the entire future of the product, not just Issue 13.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I ask again- is it my imagination that blasters faceplant more than any other AT?
[/ QUOTE ]
yes
[/ QUOTE ]
I just can't help pointing out again--you do not know this. Neither do I. No one does, unless it's the devs with their datamining tools. For all we know, 90% of the people who try blasters feel the same way the OP does. My guess is it's not that high, but it's only a guess. Another guess, but I think it's good, is that the number who do is nontrivial.
Your experience doesn't match this? Good. No harm in saying so, either. The categorical statements don't hold up, though.
EDIT: I forgot this part, which is really what I was planning to say: "blasters faceplant more than any other AT" isn't a matter of opinion. It's an empirical statement: it's either objectively true or it's objectively false. None of us know, because we've only seen our little corner of the game, but there is an actual answer.
Now, if it is true, the question of whether or not it's a problem that needs to be addressed would be a matter of opinion. This discussion isn't even getting that far, though.
I do think part of the problem, Bruise_Missile, is that the blaster you chose is one of the most (probably the most) team-dependent of the blasters. If you were playing another set combo, you wouldn't have to be so dependent on inspirations. Fire/fire shines on a good team, where other team members can take care of the mitigation and pure damage comes into its own, but can be a little frustrating for a lot of people either solo or on less skillful teams. It's part of the general trade-off of the AT.
[ QUOTE ]
Blasters have been the red headed step child of inter-AT balance forever.
ED, the GDN, Defiance, the damage adjustments have all brought the Blaster closer in line to inter-AT balance then they have ever been. Scrappers have always been easy mode CoH, Blasters have always been hard mode, and it will likely continue to be so.
[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely
More succinct than I have been
A lot of posters are trying to bring up points I'm not disagreeing with and I apologize for not making myself more clear
Forget IOs entirely, I'm talking about straight up SOs
Forget about the QOL changes for every AT that didn't bring blasters closer to any other AT
Forget fire/fire, I already stated I think blasters are balanced against each other and I know what I got myself into with this one
I am merely trying to start up some dialogue which may or may not culminate in some cool ideas to bring them a little closer
Now I haven't been backing up any of my statements with any kind of numbers or ridiculous claims, but if anyone, redname or otherwise, would like to post some proof that this AT absolutely competes with all other ATs across the board in terms of levelling efficiency, xp gain vs debt accumulation, etc... well then I'll pour myself a nice tall glass of shutty
Otherwise I'll get this guy to 50, make more, and be happy in the knowledge that blasters are more of a challenge than any other AT
There isn't anything wrong with Blasters currently, they have the ability to attack when mesmerized, they are able to generate huge damage numbers and when played correctly can be extremely resilient. It is that last statement that is the key difference between constantly face planting and staying alive.
Defenders have bigger issues then Blasters do, soloing a defender is painfully slow.
Virtue: @Santorican
Dark/Shield Build Thread
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My personal observation after 3+ years and playing every AT with a very wide array of powersets is that blasters are the ONLY AT that can struggle at what they are designed to do without outside help
[/ QUOTE ]And your personal observations are biased and bunkum. Especially since over those 3 years so much has changed, 90% of that experience has itself been rendered moot and worthless.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just to play a little Devil's Advocate here: how do you know it's not your personal observations that are biased and bunkum?
[/ QUOTE ]Because I didn't come in and say '3+ years and playing every AT with a wide array of powersets.' I spoke about my experience with my one fire/fire blaster and how it defied what people said, but I did not go on to say that everyone who said that was retarded. I also didn't cite 3 years ago as if it was germaine to a discussion about today - so much has changed for blasters today.
The OP's premise is flawed.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There seems to be a majority of agreement
And if you say things like
1) inspirations ftw
2) build with IOs
3) lower your difficulty
then you are in agreement
So where do we go from here?
I doubt raising damage will help- there are already some monster builds out there
Adding defensive powers would take away from the original intent of the design
Changing pool power values seems to be a good idea to expand upon
There was quite a bit of dialogue already about the inherent leading to the change, and while attacking when mezzed helped immeasurably, the damage bonus is lacking (what I meant when I said I wouldn't miss it)
Be nice to see some more positive input
[/ QUOTE ]
You also can't make your comparisons in the dark. Who is playing these other ATs you mention? My Energy/Energy/Force blapper out performs and out survives most of the people I team with except for a few stone tanks. That blaster has a full set of IOs (none of which add defense or resistance) but do the rest of the players? What is their experience level?
When defiance 2.0 was getting tested several of the things you bring up were mentioned. The biggest blaster killer was determined to be mez. The devs "cured" this by allowing the blaster to use 3 attacks while mezzed.
Inspirations are called blaster candy for good reason. One of the other things sited by the players in defiance 2.0 testing was a blaster's defense is the inspiration tray but we never had the right mix of insps dropping. Shortly after the release of I11 we got combining 3 like insps to make a different one. I don't think that was for tanks or scrappers do you? It did spill over onto the other ATs but "most" of my other non-blaster toons rarely need to use insps.
No toggle drop on mez was also mainly for the blaster (and because Castle hated toggle drops but hadn't found the code to prevent them prior to that) blasters that spent their time defeated or retoggling couldn't do their jobs properly which was dealing damage. Another change mainly for blasters that spilled over onto other ATs.
The last round of debt nerfs probably was another thing to solve blaster problems since the goal of defiance 2.0 was to allow blasters to accumulate rewards as fast as other ATs, not to make them less squishy. The one thing the devs didn't do was make them any less squishy and I believe that was one of their goals with the changes they did make.
XP smoothing was also probably a blaster buff that spilled over onto other ATs as well.
The devs went where they did because they thought that more would be overpowered and, except for a bit here or there, they would be. Once you learn positional awareness on a blaster if you translate that to any other AT you are vastly overperforming compared to say a leroy scrapper.
[/ QUOTE ]
I am pretty much in agreement with Miladys_Knight here that many of the global changes of recent times benefitted blasters perhaps a bit more than the other ATs when taken all together. I think that because the changes were incremental, it's easy to overlook the total difference they have made in playing a Blaster. When I look back now, it's sometimes hard to remember what playing a Blaster back in I4 or I5 felt like (other than the sheer adrenaline rush of it, LOL).
While I agree with Ipso that we as players don't have numbers to back up either position (and also grant that forum posters can't be even close to a valid statistical sample of the player population at large), I think that M_K's position that most of the issues with Blasters have been addressed. Perhaps there is an educational curve yet to be navigated in demonstrating how Inspiration Combination is so useful or the change to mezzes no longer dropping toggles has been probably more useful to ATs who get mezzed the most often. But I do think those changes have already addressed some of Bruise_Missile's positions regarding Blasters.
P.S. Bruise - use of Inspirations in an intended behavior, please stop using it as evidence of some sort of failure.
P.P.S. - I am so sigging the part of the Knight's post I bolded, it expresses my own postion that learning the game on a Blaster gives you the best foundation for the rest of the game.
Altoholic - but a Blaster at Heart!
Originally Posted by SpyralPegacyon
"You gave us a world where we could fly. I can't thank you enough for that."
Why do I think Blasters are, approximately, at a good place? I'm going to label my points so you may tell me where your experience diverges from mine.
1. In my experience: there is such a thing on a team as "more than enough protection." It's very easy to acheive a team where as long as a couple brain-dead primitive rules are applied ("Don't leave the team and start a fight") nobody's health drops below 75%.
2. In my experience: it is harder to acheive a team that kills so fast that you have "more than enough damage". I've been on about three of them. (one team could drop an AV in 30 seconds. I timed it.)
3. Therefore: Beyond a certain limit, easily acheived, your team is only held back by killing speed.
4. In my experience: if the team is otherwise safe, and if the blasters FEEL safe enough to let loose at full power, a blaster will do about 1.5 times the damage of a Scrapper or Tank, and about twice the damage of a typical Defender (whatever that is.)
5. Therefore: within a team, Blasters may die more than other teammates. But a team with several Blasters will hit harder and therefore move faster than a team with less Blasters.
Is my view skewed by my 135+ levels of Force Field defender? Perhaps... or maybe it just lets me see the actual level of damage disparity. When you want damage in a Force Fielded team, and you bring Scrappers, they slow the team down.
Is the Blaster solo experience worse than average? Well, I soloed a +2 Rikti boss once with a Force Field/Rad defender and it took 54 damage-dealing shots to drop that boss. I counted. That did not count Force Bolts (which do nearly zero damage.) And I think there was a moment where I took a break inside Personal Force Field for ten or fifteen seconds, let my endurance and health come back . It was safe, though. So there are some pretty bad soloing experiences out there.
Mini-guides: Force Field Defenders, Blasters, Market Self-Defense, Frankenslotting.
So you think you're a hero, huh.
@Boltcutter in game.
Fulmens - that was a QR to the OP, right?
because I think I agree with everything you said. 
Altoholic - but a Blaster at Heart!
Originally Posted by SpyralPegacyon
"You gave us a world where we could fly. I can't thank you enough for that."
[ QUOTE ]
I.E. kranik soloed the ITF with his fire/fire. i would provide the link but i cant seem to find it
[/ QUOTE ]
It got purged : (
Carry on with whatever this has degraded to now just figured I'd tie that loose end : )
Kranik, are you ever going to publish a guide on solo'ing the ITF with a blaster (for dummies)?
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
Thomas Jefferson
Ad Astra: Yeah, response to the original poster. Had somethign written up, it timed out, I cut and refreshed and pasted and it ended up being a response to a different post. Sorry bout that.
Mini-guides: Force Field Defenders, Blasters, Market Self-Defense, Frankenslotting.
So you think you're a hero, huh.
@Boltcutter in game.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My personal observation after 3+ years and playing every AT with a very wide array of powersets is that blasters are the ONLY AT that can struggle at what they are designed to do without outside help
[/ QUOTE ]And your personal observations are biased and bunkum. Especially since over those 3 years so much has changed, 90% of that experience has itself been rendered moot and worthless.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just to play a little Devil's Advocate here: how do you know it's not your personal observations that are biased and bunkum?
[/ QUOTE ]Because I didn't come in and say '3+ years and playing every AT with a wide array of powersets.' I spoke about my experience with my one fire/fire blaster and how it defied what people said, but I did not go on to say that everyone who said that was retarded. I also didn't cite 3 years ago as if it was germaine to a discussion about today - so much has changed for blasters today.
The OP's premise is flawed.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, it is. It's true. His experience doesn't prove that blasters need help.
The idea that anyone else's experience proves that they're fine is flawed in exactly the same way. That's all I'm saying.
I may have misinterpreted you. If all you meant was "You can't make a judgment about blasters just from your experience, which might be unusual, and here's my totally different experience to prove it", then I can't really argue with that at all.
Meh. Anyway, I get the feeling that the OP's tone is what got under people's skin as much as anything. The same is probably true for me, WRT the replies. I agree that the game has changed in a bunch of ways, not all of them obvious, that benefit blasters. They're certainly improved a lot from when I started.
Should I?
Edit: Figured I should at least add a little to the discussion...
I think what should be gotten out of this thread is that you can have whatever opinion you want and no one, no matter how much evidence (Subjective or Objective) they provide can prove it wrong. Sure it's a little thick-skinned to scream 'Blasterz ez broke'd!' in a crowded room (Maybe even illegal) but if that's your opinion so be it, go play a Controller.
Further more, I agree with the guy who posted above me; what may have blown this up to a 6 page endeavour over who-knows-what is just the tonality used by both the OP and those responding. But that happens, it's the intrawebs and people get worked up of stuff like this, hell I get worked up of junk like this. We just gotta work on keep our heads cool, but since we're all Blasters that may never happen.
And now I'll stop lest I sound like Rocky after he beat the Russian and then proceeded to fix international relations with the world.
[ QUOTE ]
My personal observation after 3+ years and playing every AT with a very wide
array of powersets is that blasters are the ONLY AT that can struggle at what they are
designed to do without outside help
[/ QUOTE ]
Since we're discussing anecdotal perception, your feeling on it is valid. Just as my
feeling that the bolded part is mistaken is equally valid, according to my experience.
[ QUOTE ]
I ask again- is it my imagination that blasters faceplant more than any other AT?
[/ QUOTE ]
My answer to this is that *bad* blasters faceplant more.... I'm also one of those
silly guys that said "Defiance is dumb" from the very minute that they raised the idea.
I'd add that blasters who frequently get to the point where defiance even applies....
are playing the AT poorly (imho)...
Further, I'd also wager that they are, unsurprisingly, most often the ones who end up
padding the faceplant statistics...
To each, their own playstyle, but I'll state my own opinion that the AT isn't broken, and
most accomplished blasters that I know don't share the same perception as you.
Regards,
4
PS> Not that it matters, but I've been here since beta... and that toon (and my first
L50) was an Elec/Elec blaster...
I've been rich, and I've been poor. Rich is definitely better.
Light is faster than sound - that's why some people look smart until they speak.
For every seller who leaves the market dirty stinkin' rich,
there's a buyer who leaves the market dirty stinkin' IOed. - Obitus.
[ QUOTE ]
I'd add that blasters who frequently get to the point where defiance even applies....
are playing the AT poorly (imho)...
Further, I'd also wager that they are, unsurprisingly, most often the ones who end up
padding the faceplant statistics...
[/ QUOTE ]
Umm, FourSpeed -
Are you talking about Old Defiance here?
'Cause all of my Blasters start building Defiance 2.0 damage boost with their very first shot, and pretty frequently have to fire through Mez.
I don't *think* I'm a bad blaster.
Altoholic - but a Blaster at Heart!
Originally Posted by SpyralPegacyon
"You gave us a world where we could fly. I can't thank you enough for that."
[ QUOTE ]
My answer to this is that *bad* blasters faceplant more.... I'm also one of those
silly guys that said "Defiance is dumb" from the very minute that they raised the idea.
I'd add that blasters who frequently get to the point where defiance even applies....
are playing the AT poorly (imho)...
Further, I'd also wager that they are, unsurprisingly, most often the ones who end up
padding the faceplant statistics...
[/ QUOTE ]
Color me baffled.
Defiance comes into play every time a foe lands a mezz on me - that's pretty often. My Mezz resistances are high enough that I typically can continue blasting away with 3 solid attacks (thanks to Defiance) without using a Break Free.
Oh, incidentally, I hardly ever go down (only happens when I mess up against an AV, really).
When I said 3+ years playing all the ATs etc... I was merely trying to say that MY PERSONAL OBSERVATION is that there seems to be more separation between blasters and the others, and my experience was not in a vacuum
I'm not claiming that you shouldn't have to eat inspirations, I carry them, eat them, love them- but I disagree when it's said that I should carry or use x when my observation is that my other chars don't need to
Fulmens and Snakebit, I think, have put it best, and probably stated my position more clearly than I have
I don't think a damage boost would work as it would, after all multipliers, be too much, but if Fulmens is right saying blasters do 1.5% to scarappers, then I don't think there's enough separation between the two- my feeling is that's not enough seperation in damage output vs damage mitigation
My interpretation of blasters is that they, bar none, deal more damage than any other AT, and not by a little
OK so, on a good team there's not too much worry about survivability and it's great to go hogwild and really feel like a contributer- BUT, what happens when you put out so much damage that all the aggro is directed to you? That doesn't seem right
Or, when solo, it takes a certain amount of time to go thru an attack chain which, sometimes is longer than how long it takes to be put down
Just a couple examples of where my opinion came from
I'd like to be able to make a couple suggestions, but I don't have any- if I did, I'd be posting over there
[ QUOTE ]
Though my ice/dev probably could bump the slider if I wanted the risk vs reward factor between actually getting missions done vs xp from the mobs within keeps me just high enough for hard mobs and real bosses.
Just chill, turn the settings down a bit, and you'll probably do better.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. One other thing to keep in mind is TIME when picking a difficulty level. Now I have a few scrappers that can chew through missions on rugged with no problem and handle the bosses like they were Lieutenants. On the other hand my Tanks have the damage to do that but with fewer and, in most cases, slower attacks. Rugged or higher means I am going a lot slower and getting in fewer missions. Setting the diff to level 1 or 2 MAY make it appear I am earning less XP but I can get to mission complete faster, get the nice end bonus and move on to the next. In the end if I play for a few hours in the evening I actually earn more overall XP on heroic than I would if I was on Rugged. With an AT like Blasters where that diff may also make the difference between getting through missions without using an awake or making a trip to the hospital and the XP earned increases as well.. since you aren't working off debt or using patrol XP to remove it.
Another good point I saw was concerning inspirations. They are available for a reason and that is to make our characters function and survive better. You don't run around with enhancements empty do you? (unless of course you don't have the INF at that moment to fill them) If I am doing missions that mean I will see a lot of AVs I head to base and pick up the tier 3s I earned doing TFs. Normally I may not need to use an inspiration at all but if I know I'm going to be pounding on an AV for a while before it goes down I want the best I can get.. same holds true, when I have the time, for battling a Giant Monster. It is not a crime, a sin, or anything to be embarassed about if you use inspirations to survive. Its why they gave them to us in the first place.
�We�re always the good guys. In D&D, we�re lawful good. In City of Heroes we�re the heroes. In Grand Theft Auto we pay the prostitutes promptly and never hit them with a bat.� � Leonard
�Those women are prostitutes? You said they were raising money for stem cell research!� � Sheldon