Melee Secondaries for Blasters
By
Adeon Hawkwood,
Posted on: 2010-01-16 10:49 in Suggestions and Ideas
i vote for more melee sets to be turned into manipulation sets for blasters but thats gonna be a hard one.
as for a mix of melee/res/def... NO. even watered down it would still cause blaster damage to get nerfed.
Blast/Armour AT, please.
That is all.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zwillinger
GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Captain_Photon
NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.
 |
Quote:
You're not gonna' get anything which qualifies as "Blast" paired up with Armour, but if we ask nicely enough, we may be able to get an Assault/Armour AT at some point.
|
Originally Posted by Techbot Alpha
Blast/Armour AT, please.
That is all. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Techbot Alpha
Blast/Armour AT, please.
That is all. |
...You mean Crab Spider? I think you mean Crab Spider.
NPCs: A Single Method to Greatly Expand Bases
Quote:
If they do come out with such a pairing, I also don't necessarily see it being as valuable on teams. The higher damage of a blaster will always be better, providing the team offers mitigation, performing the same role.*|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
You're not gonna' get anything which qualifies as "Blast" paired up with Armour, but if we ask nicely enough, we may be able to get an Assault/Armour AT at some point.
|
With that said, it would be a fun solo AT, and certainly it would be welcomed on teams. But, it wouldn't be the best at any specific role, and would probably be better suited redside, since the AT's there tend to be a little more independent.
*unless Castle goes bonkers and decides to give it blaster-level damage.
Quote:
The big problem with Blasters, and I agree with Arcana on this one, is massive, large-scale AoEs that can, on larger teams, multiply their output to sickening levels. Slash Blaster AoEs, and Blaster damage isn't actually all that spectacular. I mean, yes, it is a LOT, but it is not THAT much higher than everybody else's. A Blaster isn't really terribly more expedient at speed-killing a boss than a Scrapper is, and in fact a Blaster tends to have WORSE single-target damage than most Scrappers. Worse if the Blaster tries to stay at range to avoid getting caught in accidental AoEs.|
Originally Posted by Tonality
If they do come out with such a pairing, I also don't necessarily see it being as valuable on teams. The higher damage of a blaster will always be better, providing the team offers mitigation, performing the same role.*
With that said, it would be a fun solo AT, and certainly it would be welcomed on teams. But, it wouldn't be the best at any specific role, and would probably be better suited redside, since the AT's there tend to be a little more independent. *unless Castle goes bonkers and decides to give it blaster-level damage. |
It is therefore my assertion that an Assault/Defence AT could very well have a very high damage mod (not necessarily as high as a Blaster, but high nontheless) and decent defence and still not be very overpowered. Throw some kind of quirky inherent on top of that since that seems to be the new rock and roll, and you have something that could be quite very decent.
And again, an Assault (or Assault-like) set doesn't have to be a ranged-heavy set, which could bring this close to a Scrapper in terms of function.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Do you think a AT with an Assault primary and a defense secondary would be desirable on teams? Personally, it does sound fun to play. But, will this AT be valued on SF's?
I started looking at some of the assault sets. I'm not wild about an Earth/?? set, but Thorny/Fire would be pretty sick. Energy Assault looks like fun.
Alright.
/Signed.
(For the hope of dual pistols assault)
Things like DP/SR, Energy/Invul, one of the few sorts of characters we can't really make yet. Yes, EATs sort of fit into that category. With a very, very limtied pool of powers.
If anything, however, the EATs have shown that a Ranged/Armour set can be balanced.
PBs: Assault style primary. Armour secondary with a heal
WSs: Ranged/Control style primary. Armour secondary with a few gimmicky bits
'Huntsmen' and Crab Spiders: Ranged/assault primary, Armour and team buff secondary.
Fortunata's: Control/blast primary, armour team secondary
I left Widows and Banes out because they are much closer to scrapper/stalker style than anything else, and are balanced according to their roles.
This idea is far from refined, mainly because I'm no Arcanaville when it comes to numbers. As a very, *very* vague idea, something like Corr level damage (Medium) and an armour level between Scrappers and Tankers. I think Brutes pack better armour than scrappers, but leaning a bit too much towards Tanker level to be comparable. Again, I'm really not sure.
As for team usefullness; It's an AT that increase damage output while not requiring as much 'maintenance' as a blaster (i.e. heals, making sure you keep stuff off them, etc) More of a standard cannon than a glass cannon, something reliable rather than make or break.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zwillinger
GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Captain_Photon
NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.
|
Quote:
My VEATS would disagree. |
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
You're not gonna' get anything which qualifies as "Blast" paired up with Armour, but if we ask nicely enough, we may be able to get an Assault/Armour AT at some point.
|
BrandX Future Staff Fighter
The BrandX Collection
Quote:
At least Arachnos Soldiers do indeed seem to get Blaster-size AoEs, on cursory examination, but I have to ask - where do they get status protection? I wasn't able to find that in their powersets. As well, where's all the survivability? Looking at Soldiers of Arachnos, the only thing that really qualifies is Tactical Training: Maneuvers, and that's barely 10% defence with not a lot of defence debuff resistance. I did spot a ranged-only defence buff somewhere, but if you go Bane, at least, you'll be in melee a lot of the time.|
Originally Posted by BrandX
My VEATS would disagree.
|
I did manage to spot some status protection, which I guess counts, but overall, I didn't see impressive amounts of defence or resistance, I didn't see any heals and I saw only partial status protection. They do have a lot of offensive benefits, but the numbers I saw don't even come up to a Shield Scrapper's levels, considering a Shield Scrapper isn't exactly the most survivable thing.
And, of course, an Epic AT that you have to get to 50 to have and still has its own design quirks is quite a bit different from, say, a Fire Blast/Willpower Blaster. And keep in mind that a Blaster has 1205 hit points at level 50, whereas an Arachnos Soldier has 1071. Soldiers of Arachnos do bridge the AT divide, but they are not quite the same as just giving ATs powersets they shouldn't have access to.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
Well, an Assault/Defence character really wouldn't be designed to tank, so damage is pretty much what you'll want out of him. With enough of a gimmick inherent, such an AT could be made to do respectable damage, but yet not overshadow traditional melee ATs.
|
Originally Posted by Tonality
Do you think a AT with an Assault primary and a defense secondary would be desirable on teams? Personally, it does sound fun to play. But, will this AT be valued on SF's?
I started looking at some of the assault sets. I'm not wild about an Earth/?? set, but Thorny/Fire would be pretty sick. Energy Assault looks like fun. Alright. /Signed. (For the hope of dual pistols assault) |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Soldiers get their status protection from their level 1 armour (wolf, Crab or Spider) while not as good as a melee class status protection it's more than any other ranged damage dealer.
Soldiers also get decent level of protection from things like Weave (6% defence), they can also take Maneuvers TWICE (own version which offers 12% defence and the power pool version which offers 6%) which gives them a total of 24% defence, then they get their tactical training defence which is another 7-8% or so making 31-32% defence which is about equal to SR.
Widows (including Fortunatas) get a copy of Indomitable will in addition to their SR level defenses.
Quote:
I can't see people particularly looking for them but I also don't think they'll get turned away. Obviously it'll depend a bit on the modifiers but in general I'd expect it to play a bit like a Scrapper with some ranged damage.|
Originally Posted by Tonality
Do you think a AT with an Assault primary and a defense secondary would be desirable on teams? Personally, it does sound fun to play. But, will this AT be valued on SF's?
|
Quote:
| (For the hope of dual pistols assault) |
Quote:
Actually soldier maneuvers is around 15-16%, once fully enhanced. It's 10% base. Also, crab spiders get fortification which gives more status protection, plus significant resistances. 25%-ish to smash/lethal, 40ish to all others except psi I think?|
Originally Posted by Dr_Mechano
Soldiers get their status protection from their level 1 armour (wolf, Crab or Spider) while not as good as a melee class status protection it's more than any other ranged damage dealer.
Soldiers also get decent level of protection from things like Weave (6% defence), they can also take Maneuvers TWICE (own version which offers 12% defence and the power pool version which offers 6%) which gives them a total of 24% defence, then they get their tactical training defence which is another 7-8% or so making 31-32% defence which is about equal to SR. Widows (including Fortunatas) get a copy of Indomitable will in addition to their SR level defenses. |
Widows also get mindlink, which with enough recharge can be made permanent for another 15% or so defense to all positions.
[Admin] Emperor Marcus Cole: STOP!
[Admin] Emperor Marcus Cole: WAIT ONE SECOND!
[Admin] Emperor Marcus Cole: WHAT IS A SEAGULL DOING ON MY THRONE!?!?
Quote:
If you use a 'Huntsman Build' (Gun attacks with Bane armours), then you get status protection passive from Wolf Spider Armour and Bane spider armour. The same is true of Crabs, with more added in Fortification alongside resistances.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
At least Arachnos Soldiers do indeed seem to get Blaster-size AoEs, on cursory examination, but I have to ask - where do they get status protection? I wasn't able to find that in their powersets. As well, where's all the survivability? Looking at Soldiers of Arachnos, the only thing that really qualifies is Tactical Training: Maneuvers, and that's barely 10% defence with not a lot of defence debuff resistance. I did spot a ranged-only defence buff somewhere, but if you go Bane, at least, you'll be in melee a lot of the time.
I did manage to spot some status protection, which I guess counts, but overall, I didn't see impressive amounts of defence or resistance, I didn't see any heals and I saw only partial status protection. They do have a lot of offensive benefits, but the numbers I saw don't even come up to a Shield Scrapper's levels, considering a Shield Scrapper isn't exactly the most survivable thing. And, of course, an Epic AT that you have to get to 50 to have and still has its own design quirks is quite a bit different from, say, a Fire Blast/Willpower Blaster. And keep in mind that a Blaster has 1205 hit points at level 50, whereas an Arachnos Soldier has 1071. Soldiers of Arachnos do bridge the AT divide, but they are not quite the same as just giving ATs powersets they shouldn't have access to. |
Along with an auto defence power for ranged, Huntsman builds can also get the cloaking field, which adds in more.
Crab Spiders also get a Dull Pain clone.
For the 50 arguement, remember the VEATs were ONLY made a 50 unlockable to preserve some balance. They had to keep them on line with Kheldians, or face major backlash.
All in all, VEATs rely more on defence or team-mates than blasters do, with evening out damage. If you made an AT with both Blasts and Armour, it IS possible to balance it, that much is pretty much a given. Sure, it'd take some number crunching and tweaking while being ironed out, but doesnt anything worthwhile?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zwillinger
GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Captain_Photon
NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.
|
Quote:
Something I just thought of, What if their inherent worked like a defenders (dons high fire resist of fire armor) in that your inherent would be team-reliant. You would get a damage buff for each member of your team. You would have an above average base damage and for each team member you would get a damage buff. The damage buff would work on a negative exponential decrease so as your damage was buffed for each team member you would get half the damage buff from before as your team count increased. It would work so that fully slotted your archetype would be just under a well slotted melee AT damage.
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Well, an Assault/Defence character really wouldn't be designed to tank, so damage is pretty much what you'll want out of him. With enough of a gimmick inherent, such an AT could be made to do respectable damage, but yet not overshadow traditional melee ATs.
|
Quote:
That would be a sure-fire way to get me to never, ever play the AT. Khelians are bad enough with their team-dependent inherent. I really do not want any more ATs being designed like this. Benefits for teaming are fine, but not at a steep cost to solo performance.
|
Originally Posted by JC_THREE
Something I just thought of, What if their inherent worked like a defenders (dons high fire resist of fire armor) in that your inherent would be team-reliant. You would get a damage buff for each member of your team. You would have an above average base damage and for each team member you would get a damage buff. The damage buff would work on a negative exponential decrease so as your damage was buffed for each team member you would get half the damage buff from before as your team count increased. It would work so that fully slotted your archetype would be just under a well slotted melee AT damage.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
I'm sure they can be balanced out, but I'm also sure that balancing point will be very low, certainly not at the 1.125 randed damage mod of a Blaster with Defiance on top of that, which is what defence sets on a Blaster would do. It just feels to me like they just won't give decent protection to an AT which didn't have to go into melee for at least SOME of its attacks, hence why I feel an Assault/Defence AT is much more likely to happen.|
Originally Posted by Techbot Alpha
All in all, VEATs rely more on defence or team-mates than blasters do, with evening out damage. If you made an AT with both Blasts and Armour, it IS possible to balance it, that much is pretty much a given. Sure, it'd take some number crunching and tweaking while being ironed out, but doesnt anything worthwhile?
|
Granted, I wouldn't refuse a Ranged/Defence AT, but then I'd probably just reroll all of my Blasters as that, which is why I find to be a potential problem.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
However, the lack of Blasters etc having armour atm also relies on either thier secondary to keep enemies OUT of melee, or a team (corrs and fenders) If you take away that mitigation, then you pretty much have to give them something that makes them self reliant. In this case, armour. |
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I'm sure they can be balanced out, but I'm also sure that balancing point will be very low, certainly not at the 1.125 randed damage mod of a Blaster with Defiance on top of that, which is what defence sets on a Blaster would do. It just feels to me like they just won't give decent protection to an AT which didn't have to go into melee for at least SOME of its attacks, hence why I feel an Assault/Defence AT is much more likely to happen.
Granted, I wouldn't refuse a Ranged/Defence AT, but then I'd probably just reroll all of my Blasters as that, which is why I find to be a potential problem. |
I fully agree you wouldn't want Blaster level damage on it, but seeing as defiance also counts towards Blasters damge AND mitigation (semi-mez shield, kinda sorta) removing that also helps out the balance.
No real idea as of yet what sorta inherent to give them. But fully agreed, NO crappy vigilance knock offs. That Inherent is bad enough as it is, even for a team AT. On a solo and team capable AT, it'd be fail.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zwillinger
GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Captain_Photon
NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.
|
Quote:
Err... Where does my Fire/Fire Blaster feature in that world view? |
Originally Posted by Techbot Alpha
However, the lack of Blasters etc having armour atm also relies on either thier secondary to keep enemies OUT of melee, or a team (corrs and fenders) If you take away that mitigation, then you pretty much have to give them something that makes them self reliant. In this case, armour.
|
To be serious for a moment, I do see your point, but I feel you overestimate the degree of mitigation found in secondaries. I've already been beaten over the head with Siren's Song (which is in a primary, actually) and I freely admit that Ice Manipulation is VERY good at it. But by and large, secondaries don't really offer enough mitigation by a long shot. Fire has NOTHING, Energy has one knockback and the world's slowest stun, Electricity has, I think, one hold... Yeah, mitigation is there, but it's nothing in the slightest like what you'd get with a full set of, say, Invulnerability. And mind you, Blasters have about Scrapper defensive modifiers, they just don't have powers to use them. They also have pretty much almost Scrapper health. Just dumping a Scrapper set on a Blaster will give them, if not the same, then at least somewhat comparable survivability, and THAT IS SCARY.
Look at it from the other side, though - if you had the ability to survive in melee, yet didn't have powers to actually use in melee... Wouldn't that be kind of a bummer? I mean, a lot of Blasters can deliver some SERIOUS hurt in melee, especially Electrical and Energy Manipulation, but if you yank their secondaries, all they have is ranged attacks. To me, that's kind of underwhelming for an AT that'll end up capable of scrapping it up. That's a lot of the reason why I enjoyed Dominators despite the AT being built against my preferences - because they had a selection of REALLY solid attacks covering a lot of bases. I'll admit it - part of the reason I'm asking for an Assault/Defence AT is because I think assault just looks cooler when you don't HAVE to stay at range or die.
Quote:
|
I fully agree you wouldn't want Blaster level damage on it, but seeing as defiance also counts towards Blasters damge AND mitigation (semi-mez shield, kinda sorta) removing that also helps out the balance. No real idea as of yet what sorta inherent to give them. But fully agreed, NO crappy vigilance knock offs. That Inherent is bad enough as it is, even for a team AT. On a solo and team capable AT, it'd be fail. |
) that that's not gonna' happen due to technical difficulties. Since then, I've toyed with defence. Let me explain.As I envision such an AT, you'd get about equal measure ranged and melee attacks in your set. You start out with a naturally strong defence to ranged (and AoE) attacks, and for every enemy in melee, you lose some ranged defence and gain some melee defence. Additionally, each time you use a melee attack, you lose some melee defence and gain some ranged defence, and each ranged attack costs you some ranged defence and earns you some melee defence. The point of the inherent was both to reward you for using melee powers in melee and ranged powers at range AND to incite you to move from melee to range to melee dynamically.
I'm not sure if defence is the right way to go about it, other than some kind of damage buff, but general drive remains.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
So we can admit this as a hypothetical for Blasters. Now we just need people to actually *realize* it for Stalkers.| Just dumping a Scrapper set on a Blaster will give them, if not the same, then at least somewhat comparable survivability, and THAT IS SCARY. |
But if that would be a problem for this new AT, I could actually see a scaling buff for the armors it has that goes up with team size. Afterall, Blasters don't even need an inherent, it's just nice to have. So something that will make these new guys comparable without being overshadowed sounds like it'd be balanced.
Quote:
Well I can see that working for a EAT but not for a generic AT. There are two reasons for this. First off it's not an intuitively obvious mechanic which means for new players the AT will be hard to play (making it an EAT eliminates this somewhat since it won't be a person's first character). However more importantly this would make it very hard to port armor sets to the AT. Having an inherent that grants any noticeable amount of positional defense (i.e. 10% or so) would really screw with the balance of the different sets. Some sets would directly stack with the bonus (i.e. Super Reflexes would be much easier to softcap), some would benefit from it (i.e. Regen and the pure Resistance sets would benefit from having some basic defense), while others would get essentially no benefit since they already have typed Defense and there is little to no benefit in having both positional and typed defense.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
As I envision such an AT, you'd get about equal measure ranged and melee attacks in your set. You start out with a naturally strong defence to ranged (and AoE) attacks, and for every enemy in melee, you lose some ranged defence and gain some melee defence. Additionally, each time you use a melee attack, you lose some melee defence and gain some ranged defence, and each ranged attack costs you some ranged defence and earns you some melee defence. The point of the inherent was both to reward you for using melee powers in melee and ranged powers at range AND to incite you to move from melee to range to melee dynamically.
I'm not sure if defence is the right way to go about it, other than some kind of damage buff, but general drive remains. |
As a side note, a hypothetical Assault/Armor AT would almost certainly not be able to use Shield Defense. To many of the ranged powers in the Assault sets rely on having both hands for animations. So I guess you could use it but it would look silly.
Quote:
Fire's mitigation is MOAR DAMAGE!! |
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Err... Where does my Fire/Fire Blaster feature in that world view?
To be serious for a moment, I do see your point, but I feel you overestimate the degree of mitigation found in secondaries. I've already been beaten over the head with Siren's Song (which is in a primary, actually) and I freely admit that Ice Manipulation is VERY good at it. But by and large, secondaries don't really offer enough mitigation by a long shot. Fire has NOTHING, Energy has one knockback and the world's slowest stun, Electricity has, I think, one hold... Yeah, mitigation is there, but it's nothing in the slightest like what you'd get with a full set of, say, Invulnerability. And mind you, Blasters have about Scrapper defensive modifiers, they just don't have powers to use them. They also have pretty much almost Scrapper health. Just dumping a Scrapper set on a Blaster will give them, if not the same, then at least somewhat comparable survivability, and THAT IS SCARY. Look at it from the other side, though - if you had the ability to survive in melee, yet didn't have powers to actually use in melee... Wouldn't that be kind of a bummer? I mean, a lot of Blasters can deliver some SERIOUS hurt in melee, especially Electrical and Energy Manipulation, but if you yank their secondaries, all they have is ranged attacks. To me, that's kind of underwhelming for an AT that'll end up capable of scrapping it up. That's a lot of the reason why I enjoyed Dominators despite the AT being built against my preferences - because they had a selection of REALLY solid attacks covering a lot of bases. I'll admit it - part of the reason I'm asking for an Assault/Defence AT is because I think assault just looks cooler when you don't HAVE to stay at range or die. |
Serious face, now. Whatever faults there are with blasters atm (And they cant be all bad if people still play them so much) is only half relevant to a new AT, and thats how to improve on past mistakes.
You don't HAVE to have it as Blaster level damage. Make it more than Defender and Corr damage, but below the Blaster scale. In fact, slightly lower the scale over the board, damage and armour to balance it out. Changes dont have to be ohgodtherats huge. Enough for stability though. And yes, maybe change some of the AoEs, or something, if that was actually an issue.
Quote:
|
Personally, I've suggested a couple of things. One was to boost ranged damage when at range and melee damage while in melee, but Castle told me (to my face, no less ) that that's not gonna' happen due to technical difficulties. Since then, I've toyed with defence. Let me explain. As I envision such an AT, you'd get about equal measure ranged and melee attacks in your set. You start out with a naturally strong defence to ranged (and AoE) attacks, and for every enemy in melee, you lose some ranged defence and gain some melee defence. Additionally, each time you use a melee attack, you lose some melee defence and gain some ranged defence, and each ranged attack costs you some ranged defence and earns you some melee defence. The point of the inherent was both to reward you for using melee powers in melee and ranged powers at range AND to incite you to move from melee to range to melee dynamically. I'm not sure if defence is the right way to go about it, other than some kind of damage buff, but general drive remains. |
This might sound mad, but maybe something like Defiance V1?
Yes, yes, shoot the heretic. However; the problem with Defiance V1 on Blasters was just that; you got more damage for dying...on a squishy. An AT that, when it takes damage, dies fast. Not a good mix.
Adding that to an AT that has shields to move the damage into more manageable numbers? That sounds a bit more feasible.
(Hmm...Defiance V1 on Tankers. I wish.)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zwillinger
GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Captain_Photon
NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.
|
Quote:
That might work. The only thing is it's going to play very differently on different sets. Resistance sets will (generally) get a low damage bonus most of the time while defense sets would get nothing with an occasional larger spike. The obvious downside is that Willpower and Regen wouldn't really get much benefit from it.
|
Originally Posted by Techbot Alpha
Eww. Ewwwww! That sounds ungodly complicated. Worse than trying to build and slot a Kheldian efficiently. First time around. Without reading guides.
This might sound mad, but maybe something like Defiance V1? Yes, yes, shoot the heretic. However; the problem with Defiance V1 on Blasters was just that; you got more damage for dying...on a squishy. An AT that, when it takes damage, dies fast. Not a good mix. Adding that to an AT that has shields to move the damage into more manageable numbers? That sounds a bit more feasible. |
Is it possible to create watered down versions of melee pools as secondaries for scrappers. Really it would apply to those heroes that have blasts, but also want melee sets, the difference, is that the melee sets might also include watered down versions of resistance and defence.
So let's say a karate kick, resistance and defence, and really this is so you don't have to resort to power pools.
I really am thinking about rifles, dual pistols when they come, and archery. But even those for heroes that want a blast primary and a melee secondary.