A different kind of PvP balance discussion.
I wouldn't say Blasters are better than Stalkers. It seems to me that only the good Blasters are much of a threat in PvP, the rest are simply Scrapper fodder. However, even the worst Stalker can be a pain in the [censored], especially to PvP newcomers.
I dont think its a very good way at measuring balance.The AT's arent supposed to be able to do the same. A brute is something in between a tank and a scrapper. A corruptor isnt a defender, its something between a blaster and a defender.
The balance I think you're looking for isnt in powersets. Its somewhere else.
I think heroes are winning cause of something different. The simple fact that hero AT's have better roles in a team. You have defence specialists (defenders/controllers/tanks) and damage specialists (scrappers/blasters). Its very easy to make a good team, where you lower youre weaknesses cause they all add to the team by adding different aspects.
With villains its a different story. Corruptor cant choose to focus on one aspect of his build. If he does, he sucks. A dominator cant focus on holding alone and if he does, he will be outshined by a controller. A brute cant focus on tanking alone, he doesnt have the required protection.
Every AT has a dual job to do.
An example
1 defender and 1 blaster Vs. 2 corruptors.
The defender doesnt have to deliever damage. His job is to protect the blaster and him/her self. The blaster doesnt have to worry about defence, its not his job. His job is damage.
Corruptors both have a dual job. They need to heal/debuff/buff which all removes time from one aspect.
A Paragon Defender
I know what you mean, it is hard to compare them like for like. I'm not really trying to say that as such, I didn't really post it too well.
However I think you hit the nail on the head in one aspect, in that the hero AT's do compliment each other better in skill sets.
Also something I was trying to get across which I probably did badly is when you sit down and think about the secondary effects of toons the heros one mostly work better in PvP.
So taking the controller example triple damage and a chance to land a crit hold on something vs domination which is great if you can get it to work (double damage and secondary effect boost) however its very very very hard to get it into play against equally skilled opponents, and can be lost if the dominator face plans.
I think your point about a brute being a scrapper/tank hybrid is interesting. If I had to sum it up I would say for much of the time in PvP a brute has the defenses of a scrapper with the offense of a tank. Not really great when you think about it. Sure the offense does rise over time but again we are into a situational effect rather than off the mark power. If you were picking an AT for a fight which would you rather have on your team?
Most of the villain AT specific 'effects' require the battle to be fought for a while to come into play. Most of the hero ones don't.
If i sit here and think of if I was going to make a 'dream team' picked from any AT, I don't think there would be a single villain AT in there because of this, oh and villains don't have empathy as a set too .
Question:
Ah true, stalkers are easy to catch the unprepared, but assuming a good level of skill on the part of the players, the blaster has more options and tools at its disposal and if it so chooses could play like a stalker if it so wished. If you were going for PvP builds the blaster can also have control and a good deal of range and masses of easily cycle toggle dropping. I still would be far more fearful of a well prepared and played blaster than I ever would of a stalker assuming the team knew what it was doing.
I don't think the differences are necessarily that big. What I am talking about here is largely irrelivent as its not often you get 2 perfect balance sides going at each other, 99% of the time one side has more numbers, levels, or skill than the other.
It's just when I sit and think about it, I can't help but feel there is a certain synergy that the Hero ATs have both in their inherent abilities and their interlinked powersets, that the villain ATs lack to a small degree.
Again though its all hypothetical in terms of scenario, fights are rarely even in number or skill in a PvP zone. And it certainly won't stop me playing villains in PvP when there are so many heros to be pulped and my heroes won't be dropping their guard against the villains any time soon.
For me it never comes down to which ATs I want in a team, nor the builds that go into each AT but the players playing those builds. Mainly because a good player can make a poor build or power combination shine whereas a poor player will make a perfect build play badly.
So I would never get the point where I would make a list purely based on ATs....
Well almost never:
Assuming a balanced fight ie Arena
2 Defenders
2 Scrappers
2 Tanks
1 Stalker
1 Something else (but not alreadsy mentioned)
Defenders, Buff/DeBuff
Scrappers, Pure damage
Tanks, holding agro
Stalker single target kills, same idea as a Boss killer in PvE in PvP the Stalker goes off to kill the enemy controller.
Assuming Open PvP ie Warburg
3/4 Scrappers/Tank/Stalker - Damage/Damage Mitigation/Agro Management
2 Controllers/Defenders - Buff/Debuff (also good as team leader as they should be able to watch battle field to check what the enemy is doing.)
2 Blaster/Corruptor/Dominators - Ranged Damage/Holds/Slows
However I very seldom try and work out which CoV AT role or powers is the same as the CoH ATs because while similar in powers the whole emphasis in CoH is team work while in CoV it isn't.
As already said, villain toons have that one single thing about them... they're more "overall". They do two jobs (usually). Now, in a 1 on 1 situation, this could be good. However, as soon as more people enteer the fight, heroes get the edge: specialization will always win.
Also, while a stalker can be a pain in the buttocks because of his/hers stealth, I can't help but feel that blasters get even more: good range, build up and aim (throw in a temporary stealth power and a dmg inspiration), and you got something that should not be able to enter any PvP zone in any game for balance reasons.
Been thinking about this the last couple of weeks while pvp'ing with a veriety of my heroes and villain and watching others trundle about going about their business.
I'm starting to think more and more that the hero AT's are inherintly better at PvP than their villain counterparts on a like for like basis.
If you consider:
Brutes - Scrappers
Dominators - Controllers
Corruptors - Defenders
Stalkers - Blasters
Mastermind - Tanks (This is a bit of an odd comparison, not too happy about it as Masterminds and tanks don't really compare that well, it could even be Mastermind - controller).
In every case, if I had to pick one in a general like for like comparison I would always pick the hero AT.
This has nothing to do with Heroes currently being 50 max, and villains max, more an observation on the overall powersets and more importantly the inherent ability of that class. There are of course combos within each AT that buck the trend somewhat but I can't help but feel overall this is the case.
For example (im not trying to say here that its one AT vs the other, more their uses overall in a fight). Also to note that at certain level splits abilities may vary, so for example a stalker at low level is quite formidable, less so at high level.
Brutes - Scrapper. The scrappers have a higher base damage, their secondary effect of a critical comes into play much more often (can be on the alpha strike) where as keeping up fury can be a pain for a brute and in many cases is more situational. The front load damage aspect can be difficult to achieve with a brute.
Blaster - Stalker. The stalker at its heart is a one trick pony. If you can see a stalker, it ceases to be anything like the threat value it would otherwise be. There are many ways around it. Blasters on the other hand, have the 2 shot kill option, and add a couple of other important attributes in range and control which many can easily add to their arsenal. Running away from a blaster is much harder than running from a stalker in most cases. Of the two when facing either I know which I would rather be seeing assuming equal player skills.
Defenders - corruptors. Very close this one with the marginally better offense of a corruptor. Individually a corruptor may be better off in solo but in a team environment defenders have the edge. Plus defenders have empathy as an option, probably the single powerset that tips the balance in their favour.
Controllers - Dominators: again on their own dominators can hang in there, in the team environment the controller starts to shine, again adding the empathy option and a good few other tricks. The secondary effect too, domination often is largely irrelevent in fights, when it kicks in great, but it takes too long and a single face plant can wipe it out.
Tanks/controllers - Masterminds. The mastermind always has the disadvantage of being the weak link. It can be good, and I still can't really compare it to a tank in all honestly, but it has to be in the heat of things to really make its pets shine. Still in comparison a mastermind is no controller in pvp, and tanks have the all important survivability aspect as well as taunt effects easily attained. I still don't like this comparison but if I had to pick one for a team it wouldn't have a master-mind in it.
As I say there are exceptions across the range, but comparing where possible the powersets that have closest match I can't help but feel heroes inherent abilities have the edge over the villains assuming an even playing field.
What does this mean for me? Well nothing I look forward to levelling more of my villains to pvp levels to go along with my hero chioces, after all player skill counts for more, and the playing field is rarely even to begin with.
Thoughts?
p.s. I'm not asking for comments like well my villain AT defetead 3 of a certain hero AT at once, so this isn't true, just when thinking about the tools available to each side I firmly believe Heroes > Villains.