Damage output
By
Another_Fan,
Posted on: 2009-12-09 20:15 in Archetypes and Powers General Discussion
Quote:
Why invite anything but a Blaster when with Leadership, as they can do tons of damage and be entirely indestructible at the same time? Heck, Leadership is just icing on a full team and it isn't even required.|
Originally Posted by Player99
But it still raises the question:
Why invite a blaster when other ATs can do their damage, while bringing other useful attributes to the team? |
This game is never as restrictive as your question, or some very, very stupid people's opinions, suggest.
Blue: ~Knockback Squad on Guardian~
Red: ~Undoing of Virtue on [3 guesses]~
so, you are suggesting blasters are fine compared to other Damage ATs because an 8man team of blasters all running leadership is fine?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by LostHalo
Why invite anything but a Blaster when with Leadership, as they can do tons of damage and be entirely indestructible at the same time? Heck, Leadership is just icing on a full team and it isn't even required.
This game is never as restrictive as your question, or some very, very stupid people's opinions, suggest. |
28% defense is not indestructible 80% dam is about 20% what a kin will do. There were some all blaster tfs on the old boards the death rate was astronomical
Quote:
---|
Originally Posted by Player99
Originally Posted by Shred_Monkey
Blasters do more AoE damage then scrappers by far. It's not just a damage thing, it's an area thing. The blaster AoEs have much larger ranges and radiai, so they hit more spawn. (shield charge and lighting rod are a very glaring exception to this, but I'd say those 2 powers are unbalanced, not blasters). isnt that a more build vs build thing? I know there are scrapper builds that ooze AoE havoc... Additionally, on most teams, there are enough forms of mitigation that scrapper survivabilty is completely worthless. You can just as easily say "blasters do more damage then scrappers, and they don't die... what's the point of scrappers nowadays?" Scrappers arent as likley to randomly fall in battle as a blaster, and dont require "babysitting" most of the time As far as blasters not being needed vs having more buffs/debuffs. You're missing something. A team of buffers and debuffers might be do a huge amount of force multiplying to make themselves equal or better then a team full of damage dealers. But if you add 1 or 2 damage dealers to that team of buffers/debuffers you'll have WAY more force to be "multiplied." A mixed team of buffers and damage dealers is better then all of 1 or all of the other. actually, 2 more buffers/debuffers would be making themselve sand the whole team each 2 x stronger. That is 8 players running around at 400%, as opposed to 6 defs and 2 blasters all running around at like 250% The blasters more likley than not do not contribute anything but extra damage to a team, whereas the buffers will make the team better as a whole. Multiply by 8 vs 6...there we go but yeah, that scenario is rare thankfully. But it still raises the question: Why invite a blaster when other ATs can do their damage, while bringing other useful attributes to the team? |
Scrapper attacks generally have a range of 7. If you're careful and take your time to gather a spawn in tight, yeah, you can hit a lot of it with your AoE attacks. Blaster just walk up and go boom, hitting practically everything (again, shield charge and lighting rod are exceptions that need looked it imho).
---
We have 3 hero side ATs who can babysit well. My point is that the fact that scrappers do not need babysitting isn't exactly a big bonus to a team full of babysitters. If your team happens to be short on babysitters, then yes, scrappers are better then blasters. But if you have a good tank and/or good debuffs, then a blaster does more damage and doesn't die.
Keep in mind, I'm not saying we don't need scrappers... I'm saying the argument that there's no reason to play blasters is flawed.
---
I run TFs a lot... There's no question that the fastest runs are on teams that have both good damage, and good buffs/debuffs. Teams with all debuffs with just a little damage ends up slower... we win, but it's slower. All damage and no debuffs also end up slower... again, we win, but it's slower. Combine both, and you have fast runs. Most buffs/debuffs have diminshing returns. They may stack with each other, but the 3rd and 4th buff/debuff dont' multiply the output relatively speaking in the same way as the 1st and 2nd did. The same is true for adding damage toons. The mix of both is where you have maximum effect.
I gotta make pain. I gotta make things right. I gotta stop what's comin'. 'Least I gotta try.
Quote:
This gets a hearty "QFT" from me. I think this is the case in 9/10 of the "someone post a fire/kin build" posts in the Controller forums.
|
Originally Posted by Silverado
I tend to stay away from these type of posts "make me an uber build! inf is not a problem!" because people with unlimited budget and very limited ingame knowledge tend to be RMT clients, sorry.
|
Global = Hedgefund (or some derivation thereof)
@shredmonkey:
allright, you may have a point there as I dont run teams all too often, but dont scrappers also usually get PBAoEs with decent enough range in their primaries?
but anyways, the point of this blaster discussion went out of hand a bit:
The concern here is that other ATs are regularly producng builds (or just the AT in general) that can approach blaster damage by a significant amount, while being either MUCH tougher, or bringing more to a team than a blaster does. For example, a fire/shield (insert melee AT) can do some pretty damn impressive damage, and can even outdo some Blaster combinations, while being 5-10x tougher to take down...
as I said earlier, Blasters dont seem to be providing enough Cannon for their Glass as opposed to other damage-centric ATs
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Deacon_NA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverado  I tend to stay away from these type of posts "make me an uber build! inf is not a problem!" because people with unlimited budget and very limited ingame knowledge tend to be RMT clients, sorry. This gets a hearty "QFT" from me. I think this is the case in 9/10 of the "someone post a fire/kin build" posts in the Controller forums. |
LOL a guy with the name hedgefund is saying people with unlimited budgets tend to be RMT clients ?
The limited in game knowledge is certainly correct, but then again that is why they are asking the question. If you don't feel like helping them for whatever reason thats fine, but there is no reason to urinate on them by demonizing them as well. Many people might be stating that just to see where they should work towards.
Quote:
If you completely disregard the second half of my mockery, yes. Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. But then, if you actually finish reading, no, that isn't what I am saying.|
Originally Posted by Player99
so, you are suggesting blasters are fine compared to other Damage ATs because an 8man team of blasters all running leadership is fine?
|
I'm making fun of your argument by invoking the amusing "circular" slippery slope that is powerteaming on CoX. 8 person teams that do poorly tend to have problems behind the keyboard long before they reach the game itself. Certain configurations have marginal improvements in underlying function but because of how CoX has been built, even those marginal improvements can be superceded by the "bad" configurations given proper ability and planning by the players. If it's by accident, it's a damn good coincidence but I'll give them benefit of the doubt and say it's spectacular design.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Another_Fan
28% defense is not indestructible 80% dam is about 20% what a kin will do. There were some all blaster tfs on the old boards the death rate was astronomical
|
I would leave it at that but I'd rather leave it at this: If your team of Blasters can't figure out a method to 'scrape by' on 28% defense to everything and an additional 80% damage buffing...it's so pitiable I'll just leave you with a metaphorical trailing off...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Another_Fan
Many people might be stating that just to see where they should work towards.
|
That said, if they actually have the money, the reason why it's perceived to be more likely than not that they're RMT clients is because of:
1) If they made their money by playing the market, they would NEVER give an "unlimited budget". They know what the market costs and how it works. And they know an "unlimited" budget doesn't work that way and can mean a whole lot of everything or a whole lot of nothing. What I'm saying is they aren't stupid. If they want a build, they want a build that does exactly what they want it to do. The idea of a "blank check" doesn't fly with them unless they're just going for opulence, which should come off in their manner of presentation.
2) If they made their money by playing the game explicitly, they must have gained some rudimentary understanding of how to build toons. I know this isn't always the case (several I can actually name off-hand that I know are outright bad at design and seek help regularly) but they don't use a term like an "unlimited budget". They, after earning that funding, will have a good understanding of what things cost and their availability. Secondly, they will also have a strong sense of what they do and don't like in their toons. They don't give a blank slate, they want [x] build to fulfill conditions [a], [b], and [c] because they've run into some limitation or they want to build a new toon but just don't have the...natural ability to get what they want out of Mids'.
Yeah, some people might just suck at presenting themselves on the Internet and we're being, admittedly, jaded cynics about it, but it's not like our views aren't totally random in their basis.
Blue: ~Knockback Squad on Guardian~
Red: ~Undoing of Virtue on [3 guesses]~
Quote:
The all blaster positron had something like 40 deaths. I forget what the all blaster synapses and sister psyches had but it was similar IIRC. All it takes is one good aoe hit on that team and that defense goes in the toilet same for mez.|
Originally Posted by LostHalo
Lol.
I would leave it at that but I'd rather leave it at this: If your team of Blasters can't figure out a method to 'scrape by' on 28% defense to everything and an additional 80% damage buffing...it's so pitiable I'll just leave you with a metaphorical trailing off... |
Quote:
|
It's not really being mean or anything. It's the way they're phrasing it that suggests shenanigans are afoot based on experience with interpretation of people on this particular medium. That said, if they actually have the money, the reason why it's perceived to be more likely than not that they're RMT clients is because of: 1) If they made their money by playing the market, they would NEVER give an "unlimited budget". They know what the market costs and how it works. And they know an "unlimited" budget doesn't work that way and can mean a whole lot of everything or a whole lot of nothing. What I'm saying is they aren't stupid. If they want a build, they want a build that does exactly what they want it to do. The idea of a "blank check" doesn't fly with them unless they're just going for opulence, which should come off in their manner of presentation. |
Quote:
|
2) If they made their money by playing the game explicitly, they must have gained some rudimentary understanding of how to build toons. I know this isn't always the case (several I can actually name off-hand that I know are outright bad at design and seek help regularly) but they don't use a term like an "unlimited budget". They, after earning that funding, will have a good understanding of what things cost and their availability. Secondly, they will also have a strong sense of what they do and don't like in their toons. They don't give a blank slate, they want [x] build to fulfill conditions [a], [b], and [c] because they've run into some limitation or they want to build a new toon but just don't have the...natural ability to get what they want out of Mids'. |
Quote:
| Yeah, some people might just suck at presenting themselves on the Internet and we're being, admittedly, jaded cynics about it, but it's not like our views aren't totally random in their basis. |
hmn, think a new thread should be started about the blaster vs damage AT issue?
I wish people would stop using shields as a comparison for damage output, it is an anomoly in this game that needs to be rectified. Shield Charge on a Scrapper does ridiculous amounts of AoE damage.
I agree that Blasters are weak, but that is what they do, they're glass cannons. They can do a crap load of damage, but one nice punch to the jaw and its lights out. With Inventions, well thats another elephant do deal with.
Do I think Blasters need a buff? No, I like mine the way they are.
Virtue: @Santorican
Dark/Shield Build Thread
If you want to do good damage and be softcapped you're looking for a /SR or /Shield Scrapper or Brute. As far as which primary... that depends on what sort of damage you want to do. If you want huge damage against single hard targets plus some AoE capabilities it's hard to beat Fire/Shield. On the other hand, if you want massive AoE damage at the cost of less single target effectiveness it's hard to beat Spines... either Spines / SR (if you like the softcapped defense route) or Spines / WP (if you prefer high regen and moderate defense). Redside, pretty much nothing beats a SS / Shield Brute with high global recharge.
Of course if you want absolute maximum damage you're going to have to give up some defense and play a Blaster. Fire Blasters outdamage pretty much any other AT in the game, whether single target or AoE. Fire / Energy is an Av / EB wrecking machine (assuming enough support to keep you alive), Fire / Electric is an AoE monster and single target monster all in one, and Fire / Mental with high global recharge is pretty much death incarnate, combining insane AoE damage, great single target damage, and massive regen and recovery. It's an expensive build solo but with a speed boost or two you can get by with less global recharge and still hit the really high DPS attack chains and keep Drain Psyche up most of the time.
Cascade, level 50 Blaster (NRG/NRG since before it was cool)
Mechmeister, level 50 Bots / Traps MM
FAR too many non-50 alts to name
[u]Arcs[u]
The Scavenger Hunt: 187076
The Instant Lair Delivery Service: 206636
Quote:
While a lot less popular /EA can be softcapped to most stuff.|
Originally Posted by StrykerX
If you want to do good damage and be softcapped you're looking for a /SR or /Shield Scrapper or Brute...
|
To start with the negative side; the toxic/psi defence hole is larger than just non-positionals and the defence debuff resistance doesn't go as high since you can't self stack a mezz toggle (and the DDRs are strangely unenhanceable). You also lose the obvious extras of aao/shield charge or quickness. Oh, and you lack a taunt aura so you do have to actually hit stuff to get its attention and build fury.
On the plus side however you get built in end management with a fairly decent heal (almost 60% every 30 seconds) if you're planning on being in the middle of things when you're using it. You also get unsuppressing stealth, which can be useful for if you want to annihilate just one spawn in a room.
isnt that a more build vs build thing? I know there are scrapper builds that ooze AoE havoc...
Additionally, on most teams, there are enough forms of mitigation that scrapper survivabilty is completely worthless. You can just as easily say "blasters do more damage then scrappers, and they don't die... what's the point of scrappers nowadays?"
Scrappers arent as likley to randomly fall in battle as a blaster, and dont require "babysitting" most of the time
As far as blasters not being needed vs having more buffs/debuffs. You're missing something. A team of buffers and debuffers might be do a huge amount of force multiplying to make themselves equal or better then a team full of damage dealers. But if you add 1 or 2 damage dealers to that team of buffers/debuffers you'll have WAY more force to be "multiplied." A mixed team of buffers and damage dealers is better then all of 1 or all of the other.
actually, 2 more buffers/debuffers would be making themselve sand the whole team each 2 x stronger. That is 8 players running around at 400%, as opposed to 6 defs and 2 blasters all running around at like 250%
The blasters more likley than not do not contribute anything but extra damage to a team, whereas the buffers will make the team better as a whole. Multiply by 8 vs 6...there we go
but yeah, that scenario is rare thankfully. But it still raises the question:
Why invite a blaster when other ATs can do their damage, while bringing other useful attributes to the team?