Should they look at Scrapper Inherent?
By
Ahmon,
Posted on: 2009-07-23 20:21 in Archetypes and Powers General Discussion
[ QUOTE ]
QR
After reading this thread I've realized something.
Of all the AT's Scrapper haven't had any AT changes since the formalizing of Critical Hits as the inherant
Scrappers are also the only AT with only 3 APP choices.
Scrapper primaries lean heavily towards Smash/Lethal
Devs Hate Scrappers 
[/ QUOTE ]
Katana animation revamp?
Decreasing Defense and Resistance scales in I3? Stacking armors? Unyielding from Unyielding Stance?
GDR in I5, so many changes, one of which was increasing their damage scale 12.5%?
Massive changes in animation times (most would say vast improvements)?
Recent MA and Invuln buffs?
I know you were being tongue-in-cheek, but it would have worked much better with just the second and third points; the first point broke my immersion and turned my funny off. 
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.
[ QUOTE ]
*Glares at Stalker Ela*
[/ QUOTE ]
I felt bad for Stalker players when they got that. 
The City of Heroes Community is a special one and I will always look fondly on my times arguing, discussing and playing with you all. Thanks and thanks to the developers for a special experience.
forgot about Katana revamp
Defense and Resistance scale changes weren't specific to Scrappers neither was GDR. Stacking armors was a problem specific to Dark Armor as the other sets did stack.
Animation time changes are for powersets not AT's same for MA and Invuln buffs.
I was thinking along the lines of Defiance 2.0,Stalker Buffs, Dominator Revamp. You know those things that only effect the one AT.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Honestly I think if anyone needs a buff it's Stalkers. As far as the melees go, it just makes sense in my head that the more durable one is, the less damage they should do. So it should be like this:
Damage > Survival
Stalker
Scrapper
Brute
Tank
Instead, it's basically Scrappers/Brutes at the top (depending on situation and fury/FS/blah/Rage/whatever), with Tanks at the bottom for damage, and Stalkers just above. Stalkers are the lowest for survival, though, so they get the short end of the stick by being the weakest survival-wise but also being outclassed for damage by at least two other melees. Add to that the fact that they get few, if any AoEs in some sets.
[/ QUOTE ]
How are your figuring this? Stalkers just got huge buffs to damage and survivabilty. Chance of AoE fear with assasin strike and not aggroing on a missed AS is huge, plus I believe they got a slight HP bump, or maybe it was the max HP level. Either way they are more survivable now than ever before.
On top of that they now do crits when not hidden more often than Scrappers when on teams. I don't see your logic. Stalker are quite good now IMO.
[/ QUOTE ]
Everything you just said is true. Stalkers do more damage and are harder to kill than they were before.
They're still lower than the other ATs, though.
Stalkers have Blaster HP, which is less than Scrapper, which is less than Brute, which is less than Tank. HP:
Tank
Brute
Scrapper
Stalker
Stalkers, Scrappers, and Brutes have the same modifiers for defensive buffs. So a Stalker and Brute get the same amount of RES from a power. However, Stalkers get less from heals, regen boosts, and are still weaker compared because of lower HP. In addition, Stalker HP cap is lower than the others. Base HP is actually quite close to cap, and it's easy to hit it and make powers like Dull Pain worthless. Survival:
Tank
Brute
Scrapper
Stalker
They have 1.00 scale damage. Scrappers have 1.125. Tanks have 0.8. Brutes have 0.75 but get Fury for up to +200%. All melee ATs outside of Scrappers have +80% for BU and the 80% modifier for other similar powers. Scrappers get +100%. Their damage buffs are higher. Meaning a Scrapper does more base damage and gets higher damage buffs. Damage potential:
Scrapper/Brute (huge debate here, but let's say they tie)
Stalker
Tank
Stalkers have a low balance of base damage vs damage cap. Brutes are 850% with 0.75. Scrappers are 500% with 1.125. They don't lose to Tanks, at least. Damage cap:
Brute (850 * 0.8 = 637.5)
Scrapper (500 * 1.125 = 562.5)
Stalker (500 * 1.00 = 500)
Tank (400 * 0.8 = 320)
Stalkers lose AoE powers (usually) to gain AS. They have less AoEs than all the other melee ATs. So they focus more on single target. For some sets like EM, this means they get zero AoE/cone attacks. AoEs:
Tank (one or two sets have an extra AoE that the others don't, like fire)
Brute/Scrapper
Stalker
Single target would be harder to judge. AS wins there of course but it's a one-use sort of thing. For the sake of argument let's say Stalkers are at least second place, though Scrappers and Brutes could probably outperform anyway.
Stalkers are next to last or dead last in just about everything. They aren't bad, and they are better than they were, but that's not to say they couldn't be better. They have low HP, are close to their HP cap, have a lack of AoEs, and do less base damage than Scrappers. Really, they could be and should be better.
I have one Stalker, who I don't play. So this isn't a rally for a Stalker buff because I want my characters to be better. I don't play them because they SHOULD be better.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PRAF68_EU
Dispari has more than enough credability, and certainly doesn't need to borrow any from you.
|
[ QUOTE ]
Decreasing Defense and Resistance scales in I3? Stacking armors? Unyielding from Unyielding Stance?
GDR in I5, so many changes, one of which was increasing their damage scale 12.5%?
Massive changes in animation times (most would say vast improvements)?
Recent MA and Invuln buffs?
[/ QUOTE ]
None of those except for the damage scale increase (which I forgot about when making my earlier post) are AT specific. Changes to specific powersets do not benefit the whole AT, or even just the Scrapper AT, depending on the powerset. GDR and ED were game-wide and affected all ATs.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
[ QUOTE ]
Changes to specific powersets do not benefit the whole AT, or even just the Scrapper AT, depending on the powerset.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is true. However, since every Scrapper primary has had changes to animations and/or effects, I would say the whole AT was touched and that the changes were driven not because they desired to improve one or a few powersets, but because they were looking at armored AT's attack powers in general (with a side-effect spilling into some blaster/dominator powers). Not necessarily scrapper specific, but scrappers as an AT were impacted in major ways.
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Changes to specific powersets do not benefit the whole AT, or even just the Scrapper AT, depending on the powerset.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is true. However, since every Scrapper primary has had changes to animations and/or effects
[/ QUOTE ]
It did not. Spines had no changes. Neither did Dual Blades. (It was the template around which the changes were modeled.)
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Changes to specific powersets do not benefit the whole AT, or even just the Scrapper AT, depending on the powerset.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is true. However, since every Scrapper primary has had changes to animations and/or effects
[/ QUOTE ]
It did not. Spines had no changes. Neither did Dual Blades. (It was the template around which the changes were modeled.)
[/ QUOTE ]
Both of those sets had some changes since Criticals were added (especially Dual Blades, it was massively reworked).
I would like to take this moment to re-iterate the following:
In response to this humorous post:
[ QUOTE ]
Of all the AT's Scrapper haven't had any AT changes since the formalizing of Critical Hits as the inherant
Scrappers are also the only AT with only 3 APP choices.
Scrapper primaries lean heavily towards Smash/Lethal
Devs Hate Scrappers
[/ QUOTE ]
I wrote:
[ QUOTE ]
I know you were being tongue-in-cheek, but it would have worked much better with just the second and third points; the first point broke my immersion and turned my funny off.
[/ QUOTE ]
You, however, have turned my funny back on. For that, I thank you. 
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.
The only change that will need to occur after I-16 goes live is the addition of the brute evasion taunt aura to scrapper SR.
And more proliferation.
And talons instead of wrist mounted claws.
And bigger mouths with more sharp, pointy teeth.
Only four changes need to be made to scrappers after I-16.
And click mez protection acting as a breakfree.
FIVE changes... only five changes after I-16 goes live.
And...
Oh bollocks, I'll come in again.
Be well, people of CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
Both of those sets had some changes since Criticals were added (especially Dual Blades, it was massively reworked).
[/ QUOTE ]
1) What were the "some changes" to Spines?
2) What's this about Dual Blades being massively reworked? That's news to me. It's practically brand new, I'm not seeing when it even had time to be "massively reworked".
[ QUOTE ]
I would like to take this moment to re-iterate the following...
You ... have turned my funny back on. For that, I thank you.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm glad I'm amusing you, but neither of the things you quote is the post I've responded to in this subthread.
The entire Scrapper archetype has not been revisited in one notable way since it received Criticals. That was when it got a melee damage scale increase from 1.0 to 1.125. Naming changes to individual powers, individual powersets (especially shared ones), or naming changes that were universal to all ATs and putting them forth as examples of the Scrapper archetype being revisited is specious.
The post in which you did this wasn't dressed in any way to be humorous, so I countered it as factually inaccurate, and you've since defended it further. If your defense of the point is meant in jest, then just say so; it's not clear that just because you found part of this thread humorous that everything you're saying here should be taken with salt.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
[ QUOTE ]
They have 1.00 scale damage. Scrappers have 1.125. Tanks have 0.8. Brutes have 0.75 but get Fury for up to +200%. All melee ATs outside of Scrappers have +80% for BU and the 80% modifier for other similar powers. Scrappers get +100%. Their damage buffs are higher. Meaning a Scrapper does more base damage and gets higher damage buffs. Damage potential:
Scrapper/Brute (huge debate here, but let's say they tie)
Stalker
Tank
Stalkers have a low balance of base damage vs damage cap. Brutes are 850% with 0.75. Scrappers are 500% with 1.125. They don't lose to Tanks, at least. Damage cap:
Brute (850 * 0.8 = 637.5)
Scrapper (500 * 1.125 = 562.5)
Stalker (500 * 1.00 = 500)
Tank (400 * 0.8 = 320)
[/ QUOTE ]
Excellent job completely ignoring the Stalker inherent here btw. Simply incredible since it serves to make your point actually seem to be true. Too bad it's not.
Looking at average solo play, Stalker's don't particularly win out simply because they've only got a crit rate of 10% (well, they would if you discounted attacking from stealth). This gives them a functional scalar of 1.10 + a little extra versus a Scrapper's 1.21 (1.125 * 1.075). That's not actually all that bad, considering Scrappers are probably the single best soloing AT in the game (or at least are routinely shown to be).
Looking at maximized team play, Stalkers are, by far, the biggest winners around. (10 + 7 * 3) = 31% crit rate not including control crits from stealth and placate is a huge boon for Stalkers. Stalkers get put up to a (1*(1+4)* 1.31) = 6.55 functional scalar. Scrappers are only (1.125*(1+4)*1.1) = 6.1875 functional scalar, assuming that they're only targeting lieutenants or higher. Brutes get (.75*(1+7.5)) = 6.375, and Blasters get (1.125 * (1+4)) = 5.625. Less importantly than any of the previously mentioned, Tankers get (.8 * (1+3)) = 3.2.
This puts Stalkers a fair deal above everyone else in the maximum damage department (of course, this uses scalars rather than actual capability which assumes the same values across all powers and the same attack strings and slottings).
Ignoring an inherent that is so fundamental to an AT's performance as a Stalker's is simply foolhardy. You might as well ignore Containment when comparing Controller damage to all of the other ATs.
Please don't take this the wrong way, but have you played a stalker on a team before? Have you done a SF on one?
Stalkers are incredibly squishy (LOLz ElA) and compared to brutes do not offer the consistent AoE damage potential sought after on teams. They do incredible burst damage, but stalkers come in dead last when people recruit for SFs for a reason.
Hide and assassin strike is deliciously fun, but on a steam-rolling team, you quickly discover that by the time you're hidden, the team just finished that mob - hence why stalkers on more intense teams tend to play as scrappers.
I agree, single target strikes on a hard target are absolutely sick on a stalker. However, that's their one trick. After that strike and placated strike, their damage is sub-brute. They work for burst damage. Once that drops off, their sustained DPS isn't very impressive.
[ QUOTE ]
Please don't take this the wrong way, but have you played a stalker on a team before? Have you done a SF on one?
Stalkers are incredibly squishy (LOLz ElA) and compared to brutes do not offer the consistent AoE damage potential sought after on teams. They do incredible burst damage, but stalkers come in dead last when people recruit for SFs for a reason.
Hide and assassin strike is deliciously fun, but on a steam-rolling team, you quickly discover that by the time you're hidden, the team just finished that mob - hence why stalkers on more intense teams tend to play as scrappers.
I agree, single target strikes on a hard target are absolutely sick on a stalker. However, that's their one trick. After that strike and placated strike, their damage is sub-brute. They work for burst damage. Once that drops off, their sustained DPS isn't very impressive.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's more an issue about AoE damage being so much better/more important while teaming than ST damage than any fundamental flaw of Stalkers, plus there's the whole issue of Brutes being completely overpowered when they're buffed to the gills (because having the potential to be stupidly resistant while doing top tier damage is different enough from having to actually balance around it, right?). My main is a very ST centric character (Dark Melee anyone?) so I'm able to empathize there (plus, DM is very heavy on large amounts of damage over an extended period of time rather than in a short burst so that's even more of an issue), though I don't presume to know about Stalker squishiness within the same context.
Personally, I've found that Stalkers, from a sheer number and design perspective, seem reasonably well balanced: they've got the best damage potential (assuming all sets are balanced to make scalar a viable tool for comparison), a decent bit of control capability, but have lower overall survivability that is generally reliant on a series of AT specific tools (Hide and Placate).
I think you might overestimate the area of the stalker critical.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Devs Hate Scrappers
[/ QUOTE ]
Why -> ?
That's been true for awhile. Were it not true, we would be awaiting SS or EM or Ninjitsu in I16 instead of the utter fail that is ElA.
/threadjack
[/ QUOTE ]
Quiet, you. Some of us have been waiting ages to make DB/Elec Scrappers. 
Storm Summoning is great because it makes you better than everyone else in the game. - Camma
Knockback is mitigation. It won't be removed just because meleers ***** and moan. - Chaos Creator
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Devs Hate Scrappers
[/ QUOTE ]
Why -> ?
That's been true for awhile. Were it not true, we would be awaiting SS or EM or Ninjitsu in I16 instead of the utter fail that is ElA.
/threadjack
[/ QUOTE ]
Quiet, you. Some of us have been waiting ages to make DB/Elec Scrappers.
[/ QUOTE ]That too, I want an elec/elec scrapper.
I don't know why I do this. I guess its just to amuse myself.
[ QUOTE ]
1) What were the "some changes" to Spines?
[/ QUOTE ]
Off the top of my head Impale's range was reduced to 40 feet and Throw Spines had an animation tweak. I can't think of anything else, but since we are talking about changes since Criticals were added, there may well have been more.
[ QUOTE ]
2) What's this about Dual Blades being massively reworked? That's news to me. It's practically brand new, I'm not seeing when it even had time to be "massively reworked".
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, we are talking about changes since Criticals were added. You know, back in 2004, before I even started playing, right around when you registered to the forums. Since the whole Dual Blades set was added some time after that, it would qualify. Do you have smileys turned off or something?
[ QUOTE ]
I'm glad I'm amusing you, but neither of the things you quote is the post I've responded to in this subthread.
[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe not. But they were pretty important context for the discussion.
[ QUOTE ]
The post in which you did this wasn't dressed in any way to be humorous
[/ QUOTE ]
1) The post I responded to was tongue-in-cheek. 2) I responded with several statements, but ended those statements with question marks, a sure sign of sarcasm and or ribbing. 3) I acknowledged I was being specious in my last sentence of that post and ended it with a raspberry. The fact that you missed all three of those signs should bother you, it obviously bothers me.
There is some seriousness in my replies, but I believe the poster I originally responded to also knows of at least some of the changes; I do not believe they actually meant what they said entirely, although they probably meant it a bit, knowing there were exceptions. I do believe the animation changes to many scrapper attacks were a result of the devs looking at armored AT's attack powers in general, which is a general AT change, even if some sets received few or no changes, they were still looked at holistically. While the defense scale change was not specific to scrappers, I am pretty sure it was added to address a Tanker-Scrapper balance issue and therefore was a mostly a scrapper AT wide change. Unyielding and DA changes were also accompanied by some changes to Regen; scrapper (and tanker) changes in I3, while often powerset specific, were obviously the result of examining the AT as a whole.
[ QUOTE ]
If your defense of the point is meant in jest, then just say so; it's not clear that just because you found part of this thread humorous that everything you're saying here should be taken with salt.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think you are missing that I was responding to someone who said (with their tongue planted firmly in their cheek) that scrappers "haven't had any AT changes since the formalizing of Critical Hits as the inherant (sic)". He might have been referring to I5 there, but since we were being silly anyway, I decided to take it as when crits were originally added. Tons of changes to scrappers as an AT have occurred since then and many of them would be the result of looking at the AT as a whole (kind of like the scrapper survival tests).
All that being said, yes I am mostly talking in jest. My primary point was that DMystic might have gone a bit too far. His hyperbole was too overboard for my sensibilities. Scrappers are weak and need buffs, Stalkers are overpowered and should be nerfed. Scrapper criticals should occur 30% against minions, 40% vs lts, and 50% vs higher ranks than that. 
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.
[ QUOTE ]
Excellent job completely ignoring the Stalker inherent here btw. Simply incredible since it serves to make your point actually seem to be true. Too bad it's not.
[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks for mentioning the inherents.
[ QUOTE ]
Looking at average solo play, Stalker's don't particularly win out simply because they've only got a crit rate of 10% (well, they would if you discounted attacking from stealth). This gives them a functional scalar of 1.10 + a little extra versus a Scrapper's 1.21 (1.125 * 1.075). That's not actually all that bad, considering Scrappers are probably the single best soloing AT in the game (or at least are routinely shown to be).
[/ QUOTE ]
Solo, Scrappers are still better, as you've noted here. They do more damage AND are stronger in survival.
[ QUOTE ]
Looking at maximized team play, Stalkers are, by far, the biggest winners around. (10 + 7 * 3) = 31% crit rate not including control crits from stealth and placate is a huge boon for Stalkers. Stalkers get put up to a (1*(1+4)* 1.31) = 6.55 functional scalar. Scrappers are only (1.125*(1+4)*1.1) = 6.1875 functional scalar, assuming that they're only targeting lieutenants or higher. Brutes get (.75*(1+7.5)) = 6.375, and Blasters get (1.125 * (1+4)) = 5.625. Less importantly than any of the previously mentioned, Tankers get (.8 * (1+3)) = 3.2.
[/ QUOTE ]
I didn't really want to include the damage cap in my initial notes, but it seemed like something worth doing considering the fact that Brutes have a low base damage but a high final damage, and with fury they can deal pretty good regular damage.
[ QUOTE ]
This puts Stalkers a fair deal above everyone else in the maximum damage department (of course, this uses scalars rather than actual capability which assumes the same values across all powers and the same attack strings and slottings).
[/ QUOTE ]
For single target damage, when a Kin is along, yes.
You are correct in the fact that Stalkers, when fully surrounded by allies, can do a lot of damage through crits. Of course, when we look at damage caps, that really only happens when you have a Kin. Unless we're pushed up toward the damage cap, though, there are some other factors.
First of which is Scrappers have higher +DMG bonuses. So any time you use BU on a Scrapper, or have Fiery Embrace, or AAO, you're getting a larger boost than a Stalker (not that Stalkers have /Fire or /Shield). With a set like Claws, this difference is pretty drastic. But even with a Stalker hitting the 31% crits, a Scrapper wins over with BU because of the larger boost. It helps to shrink the damage gap between them. This is actually the main argument I have for Scrappers being cooler than Brutes. Brutes have the potential to do more than Scrappers, but under various conditions, Scrappers come out ahead due to high base damage and larger bonuses from BU/AAO. This is however less of a factor than:
AoEs. Stalker is only going to get high damage when on a large team, surrounded by people. At which point, the most important factor is AoEs. So their damage goes up, but it's largely irrelevant because their AoEs suffer. So a Stalker hops in and has slightly higher damage than a Scrapper because of the high crit rate. Too bad he can't attack more than one enemy at a time because he doesn't have Whirling Hands. He's not getting tics off with Quills, or tripping foes with Dragon's Tail. When the Stalker actually gets his best damage bonus is the time when it's probably the least useful, because he has less AoEs than anyone else to be able to use the boost with.
[ QUOTE ]
Ignoring an inherent that is so fundamental to an AT's performance as a Stalker's is simply foolhardy. You might as well ignore Containment when comparing Controller damage to all of the other ATs.
[/ QUOTE ]
Even counting it, the difference is only really in single-target damage, which I pretty much said is difficult to compare anyway due to the mechanics of AS and other factors. Especially since Scrappers would have a 10%-15% crit rate against non-minions, and that's more time to leverage the BU difference.
And even then, you're only bumping Stalkers ahead in one factor. They may do more in single target, but only on a large team, where that ST damage is largely pointless. They're still the squishiest, with weak AoEs (any damage bonus they may have is negated by the -1 AoE penalty each set has). In other words, you may be able to bump Stalkers to #1 under single target damage only in teaming conditions, but the other points remain.
Though, the ultimate point is that we could throw numbers at eachother all day, but that won't change the fact that nobody is lining up to invite Stalkers to TFs. Or to anything, for that matter. Except maybe the new Khan TF, but only because it's forced, and has nothing to do with the AT itself.
Stalkers deserve better. For being the squishiest melee, they deserve the right to do high damage. At this point there's basically nothing that could be done to make them do enough AoE damage, considering everything is missing an AoE. They do deserve to at least be able to do more damage than a Scrapper in a solo situation, though, considering they're easier to kill.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PRAF68_EU
Dispari has more than enough credability, and certainly doesn't need to borrow any from you.
|
[ QUOTE ]
The only change that will need to occur after I-16 goes live is the addition of the brute evasion taunt aura to scrapper SR.
[/ QUOTE ] This. I want it so bad. I'm tired of little [censored] tankers taking my aggro when I know I can handle it better them then.
[ QUOTE ]
Stalkers deserve better. For being the squishiest melee, they deserve the right to do high damage. At this point there's basically nothing that could be done to make them do enough AoE damage, considering everything is missing an AoE. They do deserve to at least be able to do more damage than a Scrapper in a solo situation, though, considering they're easier to kill.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'd argue the degree of difference implied by the "squishiest" moniker if only because Placate is crazy powerful and the AS mez capabilities, especially within the confines of solo play.
The biggest problem I see is that there isn't really an in game reward for Stalkers that actually play "Stalker-ish". The game is based around killing everything in order to advance, which doesn't really suit the "I'll avoid conflict until I can kill you when no one notices" play style that would more adequately suit Stalkers.
Either way, I've always felt that Stalkers, like other very ST oriented characters, have a very solid place in AV killing groups. My DM/Regen ST Scrap is almost always given preferential invitation compared to more AoE oriented characters like Spines/* Scraps. AoE matters for a lot, but ST still has its place (although it's place occurs significantly less often than the places that AoE excels).
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The only change that will need to occur after I-16 goes live is the addition of the brute evasion taunt aura to scrapper SR.
[/ QUOTE ] This. I want it so bad. I'm tired of little [censored] tankers taking my aggro when I know I can handle it better them then.
[/ QUOTE ]
First of all, it's "then them"... second of all it's than, not then
QR regarding Brute/Scrapper vs Stalkers
I haven't been able to get much sleep tonight, so bear with me if this post is a bit disjointed.
<ul type="square">[*]Assassin's Strike - Solo this is very powerful. Being able to preemptively start the fight at spawn count -1 is awesome. On a team... not so impressive. It takes time to setup (more on this later) and I generally don't want to use it before someone else had aggroed the mob. Stalkers aren't so hot at eating the alpha, despite AS's fear proc (if the target lives). (Experience from a lvl38ish Elec/EA in SOs.)
[*]Placate - Again, more powerful solo than on teams. If you play a set that has any dots, using Placate at the wrong time can waste it. The Hide component can easily be wasted by other enemies (easily on teams) or by dots.
[*]Hide - In my experience, this mechanic has a number of problems. First, it can force downtime if spawns are <8s of travel time apart. Where a Brute, Scrapper, or even a Tank can just go from spawn to spawn, a Stalker has to pause in order to setup Hide. This can be especially problematic on teams which can move fast. The next fight may be underway before you can setup Hide/AS and take out a high priority target. Further, there are numerous missions / mechanics that work against Hide (ambushes, Mayhem Missions, etc).
[*]Squishy - Their tools can help them survive, but there are several factors that work against them. First, they work best with def based sets (stay hidden, slip back into hide, etc), but most of those sets have no resistance, so when a Stalker gets hit, they get hit hard. A Stalker at their hp cap has as much hp as a Scrapper with +20% hp Accolades. I vividly remember fighting Metal Shift on my Elec/EA Stalker. One hit from him took off 2/3 to 3/4 my health, if not more. If he got lucky and hit me twice, I was dead.[/list]Outside of Lightning Rod, I was never that impressed with my Stalker. Loved the concept, wanted to like the character, but aspects of the AT always got in the way. I always felt like a different AT would've benefited the team more.
Disclaimer: I've only really played that one Stalker. Don't take my word as authoritative, it's just what I've seen with my limited experience.
[ QUOTE ]
I think you might overestimate the area of the stalker critical.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think he does. Not vs. "hard targets" and on a large team.
The damage a Stalker can put out on a large team is positively sick, IMO. (Read that as: "I love it.") It's good enough that when running Villain Hamidon Raids on Justice, we think siccing Stalkers (especially /Regen ones) on the yellow Mitos is actively a good idea as long as there are Brutes involved to hold Mito aggro.
The true beauty of the team size buff is that it gets rid of the Stalker's reliance on Hide and even AS to deal a lot of damage.
I do agree with folks that think this great damage output isn't the end-all, be-all of making a Stalker a great idea on a team. The main issue is that they are comparatively fragile, and only Spines does much in the AoE department. (Spines on a large team can be...startling.) There's also the matter that "hard targets" aren't that big a part of the game. However, I think that people who actually think there is still a problem with the damage a Stalker can deal have either not played one extensively after the recent buffs or not played alongside them in ways that made their damage contribution apparent.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
Look, I get now that most of what you've been saying was being goofy. If it bothers you that I didn't pick up on it, try considering that some of that has to lie with your posting and not this idea that it's all something wrong with my ability to parse your posts. Text is poor at conveying intent. I don't find your "sure signs" of sarcasm (raspberries and statements with question marks) to be sure signs at all. I don't use them to indicate sarcasm, for example.
That said, I still take issue with the kernels of seriousness that underlay your posts. I disagree intensely with your interpretation of most of these things you list as being changes to an archetype, as opposed to changes to individual powersets that over- or underperform, or wholistic changes to the game as a whole. Very simply, changes to an archetype are things like changes to an inherent, base HP, caps or effect scalars.
[ QUOTE ]
While the defense scale change was not specific to scrappers, I am pretty sure it was added to address a Tanker-Scrapper balance issue and therefore was a mostly a scrapper AT wide change.
[/ QUOTE ]
That must be why it changed the two AT's mitigations exactly proportionally, while they hammered, say, Blaster mitigation, by stripping down pool power mitigation levels.
[ QUOTE ]
Unyielding and DA changes were also accompanied by some changes to Regen; scrapper (and tanker) changes in I3, while often powerset specific, were obviously the result of examining the AT as a whole.
[/ QUOTE ]
"Obviously"? Were you around for the dev comments on these changes? If you were, I think you'd think otherwise. Seriously now, do you think the devs said "hey, Scrappers aren't up to snuff. Let's make DA's armors stack!"
Finally, understand that this disagreement of mine with things like the above this further obscured your sarcastic intent. The fact that what you think is "obvious" sarcasm doesn't hold up so well when someone disagrees with the very reason you think what you're saying is sarcastic.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
Besides Scrappers are the At that seemingly has everything how can the devs possible hate such a creation?
EDIT: With ELa at least Scrappers have the HP and damage output that it would be unlikely for them to run into many problems using the set. *Glares at Stalker Ela*