The game mechanic was badly broken prior to ED and the GDN. Dumpster Nuking wasn't a tactic, any more than boss farms are a tactic. It was a fast, boring way to earn gobs of xp with very little risk. At least the boss farms require interaction by the team. Dumpster nuking just needed a tank and a blaster, with a bunch of people standing around doing /emotes. Missions were a joke, with tanks insisting that everyone "wait at the door". Teaming to actually run missions as intended was either done with like minded friends or solo. It was as bad then as the boss farms are now, but at least boss farms require input from most of the team.
AOE's have a limit based on the type of aoe.Targeted AOE>cone>melee. I don't recall the limits because it doesn't affect how I play.
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
it sounds like what everyone is saying here is that
SCRAPPERS NEED TO BE HIT OVER THE HEAD WITH THE NERF BAT
muahawwaahwaaa
[ QUOTE ]
Controllers got hit the hardest, becuase they had AOE controls doubled in recharge time AND had duration cut in half.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ah yes, the first 12 months of a game that's been going for five years. Hard to say who got "hit the hardest" from issue 4 to 6.
INV Tankers, going from 300 times tougher than a Blaster (and 10 times tougher than an Ice tank) to only about 10 times tougher?
Fire/kin controllers, going from like 15 imps to 3?
Blasters, going from nuking 300 guys at once at 400% damage (and dying on the spot from the return fire) to only 16 guys at 360%?
There's plenty of balance to go around.
... ask a Dark Armor scrapper about the good old days. I dare ya.
Mini-guides: Force Field Defenders, Blasters, Market Self-Defense, Frankenslotting.
So you think you're a hero, huh.
@Boltcutter in game.
[ QUOTE ]
As far as I understand it the devs are trying to promote balance throughout all ATs to give everyone the opportunity to experience the game at a relative rate teamed or solo no matter what AT they choose
Otherwise, why the tank nerfs? or blaster nerfs? or stalker buffs?
I feel a lot of changes (buffs/nerfs) have been done with that in mind and I feel blasters should be next
And I've stated several times I don't think a damage buff is the answer
[/ QUOTE ]
While I think your examples are a bit backwards, the main point is correct. Back during the Defiance discussions, we were told explicitly that the goal was to improve blaster performance, because blasters were progressing through the game at an unacceptably slow rate compared to other ATs. So, yes. I think we can safely conclude that the devs want the relative rates of progress to be at least close to the same, and are willing to take action to make it so.
I would assume that they're willing to tolerate some range of performance in this sense, and not going for making them all exactly the same. I suspect the fact that we were getting such a global change, and that Castle actually told us it was to improve performance, means that blasters before that change were really underperforming other ATs in game progress. Not just by a little bit.
I'm sure those changes did improve things. I don't know if it improved them enough to bring blasters up into the acceptable range. No way I can, really. I think probably so. But I don't know.
FWIW, I support this balance goal in general. I'd hate for blasters to lose all the challenge, because I like that, but I think it's good for the game to have your rate of progression not depend too heavily on the initial choice of character type at creation.
Not everyone agrees with that outlook, of course. It's a judgment call. Reasonable people can disagree, etc.
[ QUOTE ]
Now that's total bunk. Blasters can and do solo AVs.
[/ QUOTE ]
*self edits* my mistake, I should have added onto the end of what I said "So we can't solo AV's and EB's Without insps so what?"
Fair point on the scrappers too Fulmens. Though can we agree that just as not every blaster build is a mitigation king (say ice/ice vs fire/fire) Not every scrapper build will be an AV killing machine? Yes I'm generalizing a bit, but I hope the overall point was still sound?
Sam: Regarding the zeus's and preparing for a fight. Let's face it, Malta is an outlier when it comes to hard mode in CoX, you know it, I know it, everyone knows it, and the zeus is by far one of the hardest boss in the game hands down. I'd rather fight the KoA chicks any day of the week. Do you have these same issues as a blaster when it comes to a fake nemesis, or a council vamp, or a greater devoured? Bosses come in all flavors and styles, and different levels of damage/status resistances. We can't use just one, complain about how it's too hard, and say oh look blasters have issues! It doesn't work.
One other big difference, zeus's and gunslingers are all ranged damage, KoA and a majority of other game bosses are primarly melee bosses. And when range stops being a defense that's when blaster life does get a bit more tricky. But when it comes to most bosses any blaster with a decent build can kite, joust, or simply flat out root/hold/stun them by the end without any issue to keep the damage down. Granted I think jousting is a semi broken mechanic, and YES I know scrappers don't have to do stunts like that to wail on a boss, but I don't think this points out this mythical "disparity" people want to bring up between blasters and the other AT's. If I'm soloing a even con fake nem and a greater devoured plus mobs around them and the swarms being spawned without popping any insps I think I'm doing ok here.
Anyway back on topic. Triple damage? Seriously? Not touching that one, but the question stands how do we buff Blasters? Do they need a further one?
Answer to me? Nope. Defiance 2.0 really was the buff that made blasters that much better. Insofar as I'd say we should be compared to brutes now more then corrupters. We don't have a fury bar, but when you watch all those pretty buffs filling your screen just from attacking, and can see a noticable amp up in damage when using attacks like bitter ice blast you've got to love it. My ice/dev even plays like a brute now. The only time I don't stop attacking in a mission or moving forward is the 10sec intervals where I'm placing a fresh gun drone. Also I've learned to change my attack chain, and build up to the big attacks so they hit even harder, or throw down a few debuffs like web and freeze ray for their bonuses before attacking.
As for bosses this where blasters got even more love thanks to the high hp totals. Which lets us build defiance the way a brute builds fury, pile up damage, kill him that much faster, and we don't need to wait for his hp to get below 50% to do it *hates scourge as a mechanic*
Attacking while mezzed? LOVE it! Lets me keep the mezzer rooted away at least (think lost rectors and the big swords) and still keep plinking away. Unlike the days of malta stun grenade means i win button for them if you didn't have a break free. Now my blasters only carry one row of them, instead of the 8+ I used too.
Not defiance related, but I have to add to it the global change of defensive toggles not fully dropping when mezzed. No more turning back on TD, CJ, acro, and cloak every other fight, and when the first hold drops off my protection is right back up as well.
Honestly I can't think of any global buffs that blasters need by this point. Now individual powerset complaints? *coughtimebombcough* I think we can agree on that one. But if you gave me any more defense or damage, or something like a reduction in endurance use (didn't blasters get one back before I9?) and I'd be a tankmage, no need to break blasters in the other direction. And any change the devs make has to take possible IO slotted out characters into account too.
I like the challenge of playing blasters just fine the way they are, even more so after the global changes that have come down the line. Means I can find a real team in the 40's now, not bridge requests and dumpster divers. And I'll say it again myself. Hard is not equal to broken, merely different. It's why my ice/ice tank is sitting around 41 still, she's boring to play when there's no challenge involved past how many packs can I herd round the corner.
Blasters are fine the way they are. There may be a few individual powers that could probably stand to be upgraded a touch (read: a LOT) but over all, I think it comes down to a matter of playstyle. You can't play a blaster like you would a scrapper, or a corruptor, or a defender, and expect to do well. Blasters are their own special breed, like every other AT.
[ QUOTE ]
Those were not AT nerfs, they were game balance changes (good ones). They affected all AT's equally. Controllers got hit the hardest, becuase they had AOE controls doubled in recharge time AND had duration cut in half. The GDN didn't just change tank defenses, it also hit scrappers and pools. The taunt limit wasn't a nerf. It didn't reduce a tanks ability to do anything but taunt more than 5 foes.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, and also the ability to hold aggro was capped at 16 (along with aoe's I believe)
I didn't get here till i6 but I've heard the stories of lore and wasn't some of that to put ATs closer in line? To counter tactics like dumpster nuking?
I'm certainly not complaining and there's agreement some changes were made for the better, otherwise we'd all be playing fire tanks