Well if its PvP then I can't fairly comment since I've never properly tried out my blaster in the zones/arena (few fun matches with friends). When I'm playing a stalker I think it favours the other player since the stealth can be glitchy, placate is glitchy combined with the whole EM>all problem.
PvE I'd say its harder on a blaster solo purely because he has no status protection, let alone defences for the majority of the build. However the flip side is that the stalker will be weaker in damage output in the earlier levels (pre 26) so slower to level.
Basically, both will struggle at times like any AT really 
I think the meat of the "war" is that Blasters perform much better when teamed than Stalkers do. PvE or PvP.
This is because
(i) there are more opportunities to team hero-side.
(ii) Blasters are generally favoured in PvE teams - big AoEs, unresisted heavy damage, pulling ability.
(iii) Stalkers are generally shunned in PvE teams - not taking their share of the aggro, placating onto squishies, no AoEs, running off when they get hit, uncovering the map before it's cleared, etc.
In PvP Blasters will do better in teams simply because they can hit from range. Solo, they're just about even when played well... if they're both alert they won't reliably be able to kill each other, and if one is caught unawares then the other can reliably kill them in two to three hits. A Stalker will do much better against [unskilled to mediocre] opponents than a Blaster though. The differences really come down to (Higher HP and ranged damage) versus (built-in mez protection and hide).
I don't think that anyone could reasonably argue that Stalkers are squishier than Blasters when taken one-on-one without outside buffs... but give the Blaster mez protection and a little more spike damage survivability (Fortitude and Clear Mind?) and there's no contest. The Blaster's pitfalls can be covered by team buffs, but you can't buff a Stalker to give them unresisted, heavy ranged damage.
I agree Mael and i dissagree by far that Blasters > Stalkers in easy difficulty. Although seeing buffed blasters shouting about stalkers is a complete joke. Playing an EM stalker and a buffed blaster is completely the same thing, and the blaster would even survive more. Another thing is that a bad player on a buffed blaster wont kill anything at all, while an experienced player will kill more stuff solo. A bad stalker solo will do so-so things in pvp. An experienced player will do crazy things with a stalker in pvp. In PvE stalkers are pretty much, solo ATs. I had no problem doing paper missions on relentless with my stalkers at all (solo)and it was fast xp. While a blaster would die easily in solo unless he has break frees, because the biggest problem of blaster's in both pvp and pve is Mez's.
TBH a buffed blaster might be strong but doesnt mean he is unkillable if the blaster doesn't kite etc no ammount of heals will save him.
[ QUOTE ]
TBH a buffed blaster might be strong but doesnt mean he is unkillable if the blaster doesn't kite etc no ammount of heals will save him.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yup, thats why i made the definition of a bad and an experienced blaster 
I'm just affraid that when they will "fix" defiance, it will have some sort of mez protection, which will destroy the whole glass cannon thing.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm just affraid that when they will "fix" defiance, it will have some sort of mez protection, which will destroy the whole glass cannon thing.
[/ QUOTE ]
They wont.
Blasters with mez protection would be a silly add on to PvP... but well, we already got stalkers, so who knows 
[ QUOTE ]
Blasters with mez protection would be a silly add on to PvP... but well, we already got stalkers, so who knows
[/ QUOTE ]
Thats why you got 2 of them 
Only one is lv50, and my kill/death ratio is silly, even soloing vs teams, so since I have played it vastly I can give an opinion
I dont claim to be experienced in pvp, infact, im pretty bad at anything that aint 1v1. However, to me blasters are easier to play in pvp, in general. Fly over your target, sit back, blast em to hell. "See that stalker down there? BOOM! Dead stalker". No amount of running will help a stalker with a fireball chasing him. On the other hand a stalker needs to be selective on their targets, has to be in melee range, and people never stay still for long.
In team pvp, if a blaster has a fender around, especially an emp, might as well just leave the zone sometimes, having no protection even at stealth cap from being blasted from the sky, gets annoying.
In PvE, ide say stalkers are easier, but not the easiest AT to play well by far.
At the end of the day, different ATs are easy for different people. I found I had trouble playing a blaster cos of the playstyle, whereas I find playing a stalker easy. On the other hand, my MM was the easiest toon I have ever played, and my Domi the hardest by far. Other find Domies easy, and cant get the hang of stalkers. So really, it all depends on the players and how they play, in both PvE and PvP.
Blaster is by far harder than a stalker in a PvP zone.
The blaster MUST DO's in a pvp zone are:
- Constant movement
-Constant insp readiness
- Constant surroundings awareness.
These 3 alone give a blaster a very increased level of difficulty.
Not any newbie can get on a blaster and score kills even if he manages to stay alive.
Blasters advantages = 25% more hp; ranged damage
Stalkers advantage = heals/high defense, mez protection, hide, stealth cap, +perception, highest unresisted damage attack in game,
[ QUOTE ]
I think the meat of the "war" is that Blasters perform much better when teamed than Stalkers do. PvE or PvP.
[/ QUOTE ]
Questionable statement, at best.
[ QUOTE ]
(i) there are more opportunities to team hero-side.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is not related to blasters at all, or their performance. While it is certainly true, it is also true that Blasters are by far the LEAST favored AT in hero side, even less than scrappers (by their very nature, the solo-friendly class). When you set up a team, you favor a tank (1), a controller (2), a defender (3), an off-tank scrapper (4) and then you'll likely try to double up those numbers. The blaster is only invited as the fifth character, if he's lucky.
[ QUOTE ]
(ii) Blasters are generally favoured in PvE teams - big AoEs, unresisted heavy damage, pulling ability.
[/ QUOTE ]
Correction. Fire/ and Ice/ offer very good AoE and ST less resisted damage, on an experienced player's hands only. The other primaries lag behind those two, by a wide margin. By the same assumption, stalkers are awesome damage dealers because they're all either EM or DM.
And the 30% unresistable damage blasters get only works in PvP. Never in PvE, which is most of the game for most people who aren't stalkers.
[ QUOTE ]
(iii) Stalkers are generally shunned in PvE teams - not taking their share of the aggro, placating onto squishies, no AoEs, running off when they get hit, uncovering the map before it's cleared, etc.
[/ QUOTE ]
So now you're comparing the best blaster's primaries played in extreme to the worst nubish stalker urban myths we've been hearing about? I say the reputation here lies in the people who generally choose to start the game playing stalkers and never end up learning how to team, not on the AT itself.
Stalkers don't get invites because the other villain ATs are plainly better at doing damage+something else than they are. It's a problem with all damage ATs. If blasters could play villain side, I'd wager they wouldn't get alot of invites either, not in favor of brutes, masterminds, doms, corruptors... maybe they'd steal stalkers' places, if played in competent hands.
[ QUOTE ]
In PvP Blasters will do better in teams simply because they can hit from range.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's... just... wrong... in so many ways.
[ QUOTE ]
Solo, they're just about even when played well... if they're both alert they won't reliably be able to kill each other, and if one is caught unawares then the other can reliably kill them in two to three hits.
[/ QUOTE ]
Again, you must be joking. Or your definition of playing well depends on carrying like 20 breakfrees, going back to the store as soon as you run out. If that's the case, might I suggest you try bringing 20 lucks on your stalker? Might help...
[ QUOTE ]
A Stalker will do much better against [unskilled to mediocre] opponents than a Blaster though. The differences really come down to (Higher HP and ranged damage) versus (built-in mez protection and hide).
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah. Squishy1 in plain sight with 10% more hp as armor and squishy2 invisible with enough defenses to make Recluse cry in frustration... who am I going to target?
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think that anyone could reasonably argue that Stalkers are squishier than Blasters when taken one-on-one without outside buffs...
[/ QUOTE ]
Wow. Unbiased clarity. I thought you were going to pull out that extra 10% hp again.
[ QUOTE ]
but give the Blaster mez protection and a little more spike damage survivability (Fortitude and Clear Mind?) and there's no contest. The Blaster's pitfalls can be covered by team buffs, but you can't buff a Stalker to give them unresisted, heavy ranged damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
Corruptor secondaries have alot of tricks too. Might I suggest having a /rad debuff said blaster back into squishiness levels? I mean, it's a team, and anything goes... right? Or did you mean a blaster in a good team versus a stalker in a bad one?
Last note. I prefer stalkers to blasters, as they are, but both have problems. And I feel like BOTH are my ATs. I just don't understand the US pressure groups to hinder improvements to either of the ATs. They both clearly need help. So it's blasters' turn first. Fine. Larger player base, long (and I really mean long) awaited fix (if it even comes). But if stalker fanboys keep putting pressure on Castle to leave blasters out to dry, believe me when I say stalkers'll likely get the same treatment when their turn comes.
Also, the only definite buff right now is coming to stalkers (hide no longer costs endurance). Defiance fix might not happen after all.
Flying blaster lol :P. There is no way a flying blaster can chase you.
[ QUOTE ]
Flying blaster lol :P. There is no way a flying blaster can chase you.
[/ QUOTE ]
Where did that come from? 
My MA IDs:
Fiend Space: 211464
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the meat of the "war" is that Blasters perform much better when teamed than Stalkers do. PvE or PvP.
[/ QUOTE ]
Questionable statement, at best.
[/ QUOTE ]
Really? What's your question then?
Because if it's "Why" then the answer is in my previous post.
Solo, a good Stalker will not be able to kill a good Blaster.
Solo, a good Blaster will not be able to kill a good Stalker.
Because all it takes for a Stalker to avoid being hit is to stay hidden, and all it takes for the Blaster to avoid being Assassin Striked by the Stalker is to stay mobile.
When teamed, Blaster weaknesses (no mitigation or mez protection) are completely covered by teammate buffs.
Stalker's weaknesses (placate and AS mechanics do not lend themselves easily to teams, no ranged damage, lower base damage) cannot be covered by teammate buffs. A Stalker lends very little to a mobile high-level PvP team, and is often reduced to a "poor man's scrapper" on a PvE team.
[ QUOTE ]
it is also true that Blasters are by far the LEAST favored AT in hero side, even less than scrappers (by their very nature, the solo-friendly class).
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Correction. Fire/ and Ice/ offer very good AoE and ST less resisted damage, on an experienced player's hands only. The other primaries lag behind those two, by a wide margin. By the same assumption, stalkers are awesome damage dealers because they're all either EM or DM.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And the 30% unresistable damage blasters get only works in PvP. Never in PvE, which is most of the game for most people who aren't stalkers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Blasters are least favoured for teams??!? Fire/, Ice/, AR/, Archery/, Elec/, /Fire, /Dev.... most of the primaries and at least two secondaries (/elec is questionable) offer very good AoE damage.
Taken as an AT, Blasters are AoE damage kings. They do a lot of their damage at range. They have many powersets which are not based on solely Smashing/Lethal damage and thus are much less resisted by mobs and players alike (Energy/, Ice/, Fire/, Elec/, /Energy, /Elec, /Fire, /Ice, /Dev). They have a "Nuke" power which can wipe out most of a large herd in a split second.
I don't know what server you play on, but on the two that I frequent (Defiant and Union) a good Blaster is a godsend in a team with buffs and solid aggro control.
That's in regards to PvE teaming of course, I'll come to PvP teams in a minute.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(iii) Stalkers are generally shunned in PvE teams - not taking their share of the aggro, placating onto squishies, no AoEs, running off when they get hit, uncovering the map before it's cleared, etc.
[/ QUOTE ]
So now you're comparing the best blaster's primaries played in extreme to the worst nubish stalker urban myths we've been hearing about? I say the reputation here lies in the people who generally choose to start the game playing stalkers and never end up learning how to team, not on the AT itself.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm comparing a typical Blaster to a typical Stalker in PvE team situations.
Those are not all urban myths, that are how many non-veteran Stalkers actually play. I am not being Bias, I have three Stalkers and I've levelled Villains to 50 on each of the english-speaking EU servers. I can count on one hand the number of PUG Stalkers I've encountered who can team effectively in PvE.
On the other hand, even the most foolish PUG Blaster generally takes several attacks along with their nuke. Such a "worst nubish Blaster imaginable" can still be relied upon to deal damage effectively as long as the other teammembers competently handle aggro and buffing.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In PvP Blasters will do better in teams simply because they can hit from range.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's... just... wrong... in so many ways.
[/ QUOTE ]
Really? What ways?
In my experience that's exactly why Blasters are so popular in PvP, and why [Blaster + Empath] combinations work so well. Ranged, 30% unresisted damage. Generally also of a fairly unresisted damage type.
I'll give you an example: Fire Blasters and Ice Blasters are virtually always FOTM. Why?
Because those primaries can cycle their Single Target ranged attacks quickly and those Single Target ranged attacks hit heavily with a damage type that is generally unresisted.
In PvP teams, zone or arena, it's all about killing the opposition before they can kill you.
Your own self-buffs don't matter nearly as much as the damage you can do to the opposition, because buffing damage dealer toons is handled by dedicated support toons.
Blasters ranged damage can hit someone who is kiting them. Stalkers Melee damage can't.
That's also why /NRG and /Elec Blasters tend to use their melee secondary pool powers much less in teamed PvP, and why /NRG's Boost range is such a popular choice for top-tier PvP.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Solo, they're just about even when played well... if they're both alert they won't reliably be able to kill each other, and if one is caught unawares then the other can reliably kill them in two to three hits.
[/ QUOTE ]
Again, you must be joking. Or your definition of playing well depends on carrying like 20 breakfrees, going back to the store as soon as you run out. If that's the case, might I suggest you try bringing 20 lucks on your stalker? Might help...
[/ QUOTE ]
Given good skill levels on both sides:
A Blaster can not kill a hidden Stalker. A Stalker can not kill a mobile Blaster.
This is a very common situation in solo zone PvP. A Stalker will only get a kill on a Blaster when the Blaster stops moving, and likewise a Blaster will only get a kill on a Stalker when the Stalker drops out of hidden.
If you disagree, I'd be interested to hear your reasoning...
[ QUOTE ]
...it is also true that Blasters are by far the LEAST favored AT in hero side, even less than scrappers (by their very nature, the solo-friendly class)... The blaster is only invited as the fifth character, if he's lucky.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not too sure about this. I was on the other weekend looking to form a team and between level 15-36, blasters outnumbered all the other ATs, put together! Although you're right about unfavoured when teaming: none of them got invited (I was perhaps trying to max my cosmic balance bonus a little )
My perception of blasters (at least lower level ones, in PvE) is that they are the most likely toon to get killed unnecessarily and/or cause a teamwipe by over aggroing; scrappers do the latter, but generally hold the aggro by not doing the former. Can't really talk about Villain side, never seem to team over there as it's frustratingly difficult to get a well meshed team out of the villain ATs, or perhaps I just don't know how to play 'em.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the meat of the "war" is that Blasters perform much better when teamed than Stalkers do. PvE or PvP.
[/ QUOTE ]
Questionable statement, at best.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think it isn't. Stalkers are by far the less useful AT team wise among CoX and CoH
[ QUOTE ]
it is also true that Blasters are by far the LEAST favored AT in hero side, even less than scrappers (by their very nature, the solo-friendly class). When you set up a team, you favor a tank (1), a controller (2), a defender (3), an off-tank scrapper (4) and then you'll likely try to double up those numbers. The blaster is only invited as the fifth character, if he's lucky.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, wait, where is the hidden cam?? Scrappers are pretty redundant in teams, apart of maybe spines. Blasters are the AT most needed on a heavy melee team, just like a tank is the most desired on a full squishy team. Some trollers can do partially blaster's job, in terms of damage, but others can do the tank part as well... again, partially
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(ii) Blasters are generally favoured in PvE teams - big AoEs, unresisted heavy damage, pulling ability.
[/ QUOTE ]
Correction. Fire/ and Ice/ offer very good AoE and ST less resisted damage, on an experienced player's hands only. The other primaries lag behind those two, by a wide margin. By the same assumption, stalkers are awesome damage dealers because they're all either EM or DM.
[/ QUOTE ]
Any blaster will outdamage an EM/ stalker in PvE, mainly in teams, but also solo wise. Ofc, blaster's survavility is light years away from stalker's one, given the lack of mez protection and heals/high defense
[ QUOTE ]
(iii) Stalkers are generally shunned in PvE teams - not taking their share of the aggro, placating onto squishies, no AoEs, running off when they get hit, uncovering the map before it's cleared, etc.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So now you're comparing the best blaster's primaries played in extreme to the worst nubish stalker urban myths we've been hearing about? I say the reputation here lies in the people who generally choose to start the game playing stalkers and never end up learning how to team, not on the AT itself.
[/ QUOTE ]
My first stalker was my 12th lv50 iirc, and I still agree with Maelw on this
[ QUOTE ]
Stalkers don't get invites because the other villain ATs are plainly better at doing damage+something else than they are. It's a problem with all damage ATs. If blasters could play villain side, I'd wager they wouldn't get alot of invites either, not in favor of brutes, masterminds, doms, corruptors... maybe they'd steal stalkers' places, if played in competent hands.
[/ QUOTE ]
They would steal brutes place for farming for instance. Fire/fire blaster+thermal would become the fotm duo
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In PvP Blasters will do better in teams simply because they can hit from range.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's... just... wrong... in so many ways.
[/ QUOTE ]
No it isnt!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Solo, they're just about even when played well... if they're both alert they won't reliably be able to kill each other, and if one is caught unawares then the other can reliably kill them in two to three hits.
[/ QUOTE ]
Again, you must be joking. Or your definition of playing well depends on carrying like 20 breakfrees, going back to the store as soon as you run out. If that's the case, might I suggest you try bringing 20 lucks on your stalker? Might help...
[/ QUOTE ]
Lucks wont help vs blasters... although i agree on that solo wise, stalkers got a huge advantage
[ QUOTE ]
Given good skill levels on both sides:
A Blaster can not kill a hidden Stalker. A Stalker can not kill a mobile Blaster.
[/ QUOTE ]
A stalker can easily kill a mobile blaster given that blaster is alone too
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Given good skill levels on both sides:
A Blaster can not kill a hidden Stalker. A Stalker can not kill a mobile Blaster.
[/ QUOTE ]
A stalker can easily kill a mobile blaster given that blaster is alone too
[/ QUOTE ]
I realise that you've more experience than myself with Stalker PvP Dark... so I'll just say that this hasn't been my experience on my (EM) zonal Stalker.
Admittedly I've got no ranged attacks in my build other than "Water Spout"... Claws and Spines could maybe keep the "heat" on the blaster better with Focus/Impale if the Blaster couldn't get far enough away after the first hit. I very rarely see this happen in zones though. Personally I've got a high level Spines Scrapper but not a Spines Stalker, so I can only speak from third-hand experience here.
Toe-to-toe, I'd say that a Stalker would waste a Blaster unless the Blaster is VERY alert and lucky with blapps. But in order to get toe-to-toe for a short attack chain or even an AS, they'd need to stop the Blaster from moving for a split second. I've found that to be virtually impossible to accomplish one-on-one in zone PvP, since outside of the small-charge temp power webgrenades and one patron pool (mace) I can't think of much that could make it happen.
Even a "joust" from my EM SJ'ing stalker on "AutoFollow + Forward" only hits once before the Blaster SJ's away again, the stun isn't guaranteed and a decent Blaster will usually be carrying breakfrees. If I can activate "Build Up" at the right time and immediately follow up with a second attack before the Blaster can pop a breakfree, then very occasionally Energy Transfer can kill a "kiting" toon, but it's by no means reliable. I've killed multitudes of idiot Blasters (and other ATs) who stop moving from time to time... I can AS someone in Mid-flight and even occasionally between jumps if they're predictable, but it's the ones that keep moving constantly (SJ, SS or Fly) and reasonably irregularly that I can't do much about.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the meat of the "war" is that Blasters perform much better when teamed than Stalkers do. PvE or PvP.
[/ QUOTE ]
Questionable statement, at best.
[/ QUOTE ]
Really? What's your question then?
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry, my dominion over the english language isn't perfect. I meant that the veracity of your statement is debatable, as in, some people might argue against it.
[ QUOTE ]
Because if it's "Why" then the answer is in my previous post.
Solo, a good Stalker will not be able to kill a good Blaster.
Solo, a good Blaster will not be able to kill a good Stalker.
[/ QUOTE ]
By a "good" blaster and stalker, you mean a perfectly played one in a scenario of perfect skill, full power allocation, perfect primaries and secondaries, zero interference and full slot of inspirations? How is that relevant to day-to-day play?
Because most of the time, pit an ordinary blaster against an ordinary stalker and the hero will faceplant.
[ QUOTE ]
Because all it takes for a Stalker to avoid being hit is to stay hidden, and all it takes for the Blaster to avoid being Assassin Striked by the Stalker is to stay mobile.
[/ QUOTE ]
Blaster tactic, running away... how heroic
[ QUOTE ]
Blasters are least favoured for teams??!? Fire/, Ice/, AR/, Archery/, Elec/, /Fire, /Dev.... most of the primaries and at least two secondaries (/elec is questionable) offer very good AoE damage.
Taken as an AT, Blasters are AoE damage kings. They do a lot of their damage at range. They have many powersets which are not based on solely Smashing/Lethal damage and thus are much less resisted by mobs and players alike (Energy/, Ice/, Fire/, Elec/, /Energy, /Elec, /Fire, /Ice, /Dev). They have a "Nuke" power which can wipe out most of a large herd in a split second.
I don't know what server you play on, but on the two that I frequent (Defiant and Union) a good Blaster is a godsend in a team with buffs and solid aggro control.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry, but I put my reasoning in the first post. Read through it if you want.
And you must be somewhat misguided if you think Electric/ (lol) and /Devices offers good AoE (or anything other than caltrops, really) on a team.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm comparing a typical Blaster to a typical Stalker in PvE team situations.
Those are not all urban myths, that are how many non-veteran Stalkers actually play. I am not being Bias, I have three Stalkers and I've levelled Villains to 50 on each of the english-speaking EU servers. I can count on one hand the number of PUG Stalkers I've encountered who can team effectively in PvE.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't even get your point. Most stalkers you've encountered don't know the tip of their blades from the hilt, so no one wants one in teams?
[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand, even the most foolish PUG Blaster generally takes several attacks along with their nuke. Such a "worst nubish Blaster imaginable" can still be relied upon to deal damage effectively as long as the other teammembers competently handle aggro and buffing.
[/ QUOTE ]
I can tell you that a nubish blaster is the primary party wiper in the game, precisely because of those vaunted ranged attacks and mistimed AoEs aggroing a second spawn. Usually the blaster is the first to be kicked in a PuG gone wrong. The thing is, since it's so hard to solo one past their 30's, either they've adapted to teamplay or changed AT. Go figure.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In PvP Blasters will do better in teams simply because they can hit from range.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's... just... wrong... in so many ways.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Really? What ways?
In my experience that's exactly why Blasters are so popular, and why [Blaster + Empath] combinations work so well.
I'll give you an example: Fire Blasters and Ice Blasters are virtually always FOTM. Why?
Because those primaries can cycle their Single Target ranged attacks quickly and those Single Target ranged attacks hit heavily with a damage type that is generally unresisted.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ok... A blaster in zone PvP needs: 3 powers for stamina, 3 powers for accro, 2 powers for aid self, 2 powers for superspeed, 2 powers for tactics = 12 powers
There's no way around it. And then they start to pick their attacks +aim +build-up.
Do you begin to see a problem here?
PvP blasters, and by that I mean Fire/ or Ice/ coupled with /Energy, despite being the best primary and secondary choices, make for very tight builds. You can't have that and still be a PvE AoE monster like you claim. It's very hard to make even a Sirens PvP blaster that isn't /Devices (and therefore a complete suckfest in teams), and even in Warburg and Recluses it's still pretty tight.
That's why most blasters you see wandering the PvP zones are just target practice.
[ QUOTE ]
In PvP teams, zone or arena, it's all about killing the opposition before they can kill you.
Your own self-buffs don't matter nearly as much as the damage you can do to the opposition, because buffing damage dealer toons is handled by dedicated support toons.
Blasters ranged damage can hit someone who is kiting them. Stalkers Melee damage can't.
[/ QUOTE ]
There are ranged stalker attacks, in spines and claws. If that means so much to you, pick those primaries. Or you can stop arguing nonsense because scrappers are melee and make for excellent PvP toons.
[ QUOTE ]
That's also why /NRG and /Elec Blasters tend to use their melee secondary pool powers much less in teamed PvP, and why /NRG's Boost range is such a popular choice for top-tier PvP.
[/ QUOTE ]
/Electric blasters tend to be sappers, not damage dealers. Electric/Electric is one of the few good blaster combos because of it.
[ QUOTE ]
Given good skill levels on both sides:
A Blaster can not kill a hidden Stalker. A Stalker can not kill a mobile Blaster.
This is a very common situation in solo zone PvP. A Stalker will only get a kill on a Blaster when the Blaster stops moving, and likewise a Blaster will only get a kill on a Stalker when the Stalker drops out of hidden.
If you disagree, I'd be interested to hear your reasoning...
[/ QUOTE ]
Tight, specialized PvP /Devices blaster builds can spot stalkers from a distance. They're aptly named Stalker hunters, because that's the only thing they're good at. They usually jump up from high above to 1 health, then strike with maximum defiance. Either that or teleminers. A sad build, nonetheless.
On the other hand, an ordinary PvE oriented stalker will still do fairly well in zone PvP.
Comparing highly specialized toons is hardly appropriate for determining average player performance on a given AT
[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand, an ordinary PvE oriented stalker will still do fairly well in zone PvP.
[/ QUOTE ]
By PVE oriented stalker do you mean a stalker with no stealth/invis/stealth IO's?
My MA IDs:
Fiend Space: 211464
Apologies in advance to the other forum users here.
I have something of a pedant for trying to correct an incorrect view if it's held up as "fact".
For that reason, I'm responding to this person for the last time in this topic, to attempt to clear up a few remaining points. Dark_Blasphemy has already backed up my earlier response (thanks Dark! ), so I don't think I need to address the previously-addressed points again unless someone has something new to add.
[ QUOTE ]
By a "good" blaster and stalker, you mean a perfectly played one in a scenario of perfect skill, full power allocation, perfect primaries and secondaries, zero interference and full slot of inspirations?
[/ QUOTE ]
I mean nothing more than I said. A good Blaster. One that can move about in the zone at the speed cap for whatever travel power they have, has well-slotted attacks, and has frequented PvP enough to know that in order to deal with the majority of Stalkers out there, all you need to do is keep moving and carry Breakfrees.
And by "a good Stalker", I mean one at the stealth cap with their defences and attacks slotted.
[ QUOTE ]
Blaster tactic, running away... how heroic
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry, but I put my reasoning in the first post. Read through it if you want.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Most stalkers you've encountered don't know the tip of their blades from the hilt, so no one wants one in teams?
[/ QUOTE ]
Blatant trolling, moving on.
[ QUOTE ]
And you must be somewhat misguided if you think Electric/ (lol) and /Devices offers good AoE (or anything other than caltrops, really) on a team.
[/ QUOTE ]
Electric has the highest number of AoE attacks after Fire. It's widely considered a good AoE primary.
Devices has trip mines, which whilst not used in a lot of traditional endgame PvE teams can contribute a surprising amount of regular AoE damage as a very regular toebomb "Nuke" power when the Blaster taking it has SS/StealthIO + Stealth/CloakingDevice.
[ QUOTE ]
The thing is, since it's so hard to solo one past their 30's, either they've adapted to teamplay or changed AT. Go figure.
[/ QUOTE ]
Blasters are one of the most popular heroside toons at higher levels.
[ QUOTE ]
That's why most blasters you see wandering the PvP zones are just target practice.
[/ QUOTE ]
Which is why good PvP Blasters stay mobile, or find a team.
[ QUOTE ]
Or you can stop arguing nonsense because scrappers are melee and make for excellent PvP toons.
[/ QUOTE ]
Apart from the widely resisted damage and lack of ranged attacks. When was the last time you saw any Scrapper picked for an Arena PvP team? All they're good at is fighting toe-to-toe.
In another recentish PvP topic we agreed that a lone Empath with their epic pool shields can stand toe-to-toe with a Katana Scrapper indefinately, simply because of the Scrapper's type of damage. Now add kiting.
[ QUOTE ]
/Electric blasters tend to be sappers, not damage dealers. Electric/Electric is one of the few good blaster combos because of it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Identical damage numbers to /NRG and Thunderstrike at level 28 says otherwise. Check the best FOTM Sirens Call "blapper" builds.
[ QUOTE ]
Tight, specialized PvP /Devices blaster builds can spot stalkers from a distance.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not since i9. At least, not good Stalkers.
My Stalker had a stealth IO when he hit level 31, and at that point I had no other high level villains on that server to transfer inf to him. These days Stealth IOs are far cheaper and much easier to come by. A Stalker that tries to do PvP without capped Stealth is not a good Stalker.
[ QUOTE ]
I say the reputation here lies in the people who generally choose to start the game playing stalkers and never end up learning how to team, not on the AT itself.
[/ QUOTE ]
For the record: I started with a Scrapper, rolling through Peacebringer, Tanker, Mastermind, Defender, Scrapper again, Blaster, Brute, Stalker, Mastermind, Mastermind and Blaster. In that order, plus low level "Alts".
My Stalker actually halted at level 30 until I'd levelled one Mastermind from one to 50 and a second Mastermind from one to 22, in order to get that Stalker all the relevant badges for accolade powers by level 30 for Siren's Call... so it's not like I take gameplay tactics and planning lightly.
At least seven of those twelve "mains" are now level 50, and I'd consider my (level 50) Peacebringer to be the most difficult of my toons to solo in PvE. By Far. My first Blaster (Fire/Ice) actually got pushed to one side for months because it got to the stage where enemies were no longer challenging in PvE.
I'm currently working on a Sonic/Elec Blaster and toying with a Mind/Empath 'troller + a Fire/Thermal Corr.
Link
Thoughts? Mind you that there was like 3 Stalkers vs blasters threads all locked at US, but some people claim that blasters are easier to play overall.
Discuss...