Defenders vs Controller Disparity.

Controllers seem to be fine as of now. I do not wish to see controlelrs weakened for a Defender and corruptor problem. Weakening Controllers wont do anything to solve the defender/corruptor problem. We'll still suck at soloing, we'll still have a craptastic inheritent power and we'll still be replaced by Controllers and even masterminds (when going rogue comes out, honestly cant wait either way). So the solution has to be to solve the defender/corruptor problem by improving the defender/corruptor, not nerfing the controller.

i really like the idea of boosting our damage multiplier to 0.9. I'd also like to see our buffs somehow affect us. I'm not asking for self-targeted shields or heals but somehow reward Defenders/corruptors for supporting the team and using our primary skills. So far, theres absolutely nothing that gives us a nitch in the support roll. We need something that makes groups say "yeah, a controller has good support abilities but Defenders can __________ with their support powers!"

Okay, so it's not that Controllers are more powerful just because they're designed that way, no, it's ONE power in ONE set. Gotchya.

Nerfing Kinetics wouldn't stop Controllers from being a larger asset to the team than a defender. You know why? Because they can still CONTROL. With ONE click, a Controller can neuter an entire mob of 16 foes. Enemies not attacking at all trumps healing, defense buffs, resist buffs, and mez protection buffs. But of course, Controllers get the ability to do just that, too. The only time Defenders > Controllers is in the early to mid levels when thier buffs come earlier and put up higher numbers. By the end game though? Tough to say.

I say, give Defenders better values for their buffs and debuffs, a little better damage, and better AoE control options. Nerfing every other AT in the game isn't the answer (Rememebr how much everyone LOVED ED?), nor is crying about one power (though FS for 'trollers/Corrs SHOULD use Controller numbers, or maybe even a touch less).

Just to quote myself:

Saying that all controllers do more damage than defenders is highly debatable. Earth, Ice and possibly mind controllers, in my experience, do far less damage than a defender merely because the powers that do damage for them are generally not slotted for damage - and to compound matters Earth and Ice controllers best controls don't *do* any damage (Earthquake, Ice Slick, Arctic Air, etc). We all know the outlier control sets, but this thread seems to be judging the entire controller population on the outlier sets, which isn't entirely accurate.

Let me clarify....

When I said, my Storm/Dark Defender did poorly, I was making that point from the vantage of damage dealt and how long it takes me to kill a boss. Mostly a commentary on how weak Dark is from dealing damage pespective, I also believe the amount of ACC debuff for the power set is also too low. I often experience fights with Bosses, and despite I had hit them with my dark bolts, etc. and eventually kill them from sheer mini-damage, and them not missing me once. (I tested this while hovering, with my hurricane off)

While my Storm set does a reasonably good job at keeping me safe in close quarters, my abilities to consistently damage resistance debuff and keep mobs debuffed is very limited, all too often when fighting EBs and AVs the slow component of my Icestorm is essentially ignored, thus the debuff ceases to affect them the moment they step out, hence rendering the power ineffective or impractical.

I believe the real issue, with regards to balance, is that the damage mitigation standards is simply wrong and needs to be revised. Let me explain:

Lets use the Tanker versus Blaster model as a reference.

Tanker: Virtually immune to status effects, very high resistance to damage, and high levels of defense, medium damage.

Blaster: Extremely high damage, no status effect resistances, no comprehensive damage mitigation, no comprehensive defense.

Now if the game was to be effectively balanced, and thus fair...

It makes sense that the Tanker should do 65% of the damage capability of a Blaster, for they are so well protected against damage.

Conversely, would it not make sense that Blasters should have 65% of the protections of a tanker, since they have such good damage? But they don't.

When you look at the other Hero ATs, Controllers and Defenders; they are actually hybrids of tankers and blasters, let me further explain:

Controller: Has the Blaster characteristics of no status effect resistances, no comprehensive resistance to damage, and no comprehensive defense. So one would expect the Controller to do damage in the Blaster class at first glance. But what we do see, is that the Controllers primary allows them to hold, immobilize, confuse, etc. their targets. Thus achieving a hybrid form of protections as the tankers receive. But there is a great difference between these two forms of protections. The Controller depends on a to-hit and a to-affect situation. For intance no controller can 1 round hold a boss, and even hope to hold an EB in less that 5 rounds, and AVs alone, just simply can't be held; while a Tanker's protections are unconditionally there all the time. So what we can deduce is that the Controlelr does not quite have the protections a tanker does have, and thus should not be Blaster class. I would think that when one revdiews how effective a Controller's holds are as a whole, that perhaps their damage should be 75% of a blaster.

Defender: Has the Blaster signature lack of protections, so one could expect their damage to be in the Blaster Class. But Defender primaries debuff the ability of their targets to do damage or resist it. The issue is to determine, well how good these debuffs are when compared to the always there tanks protections, and even referenced to the effectiveness of the Controller's holds. Truthfully, as a whole, these defenses are inferior to both Tankers and Controllers for they lack the permanency of tankers and the total immediate hold effect of the Controller; the Defenders is a slow and tedius debuff process which never achieves the complete shut down as the Controllers gets. So Defenders are obviously weaker in the defensive side when compared to tankers and controllers, but obviously have more defenses than Blasters. I would suggest Defender's damage should be placed at 85% of what blasters damage could be.

Scrapers are an odd duck of sorts, they are forced in general to melee with mobs, just as a Tanker has, so in many respecs their defenses should match those of a tanker. But they do more damage than a Tanker, so what is the correct mix of weaker protections and greater damage. I would suggest to set Scrapers at 85% damage of a Blaster, but have their status effects the same as a tanker, their resistances to damage to be 75% of a tankers, and their defense to be 125% of the tanker.

Hugs

Stormy

Wow, this thread is STILL going?

For those looking for nerfs: nerf-o-rama is closed until about Christmas. The dev team is not so naive as to introduce anything that could force a large segment of population to look the other way.

Aside: this is eerily similar to the "Warlocks need 2b nerfed!" threads I used to see on WoW forums...

QR-

Here's how to improve this problem:

Defenders-
*Give them an inherent that actually does something
*Increase their secondary's secondary effects
(Blaster blast = high damage, low effects)
(Defender blast = low damage, high effects)

Controllers-
*Give them MM-level secondaries