Quote:
Better question: What powers aren't?
|
Originally Posted by Mod_Noc
I will start off...
1. Stalker Sharks 2. |
Quote:
True.. but so many people always seem to have something to complain about and I wanted to know what powers are they taking about. They keep on saying that the sides are unbalanced, but since GR is coming out it will be balanced since each sides will consist of all AT's.
|
Originally Posted by Tokyo
Better question: What powers aren't?
|
Stalker Placate...but Psi/ Blaster Placate works like a charm.
"Forum PvP doesn't give drops. Just so all of you who participated in this thread are aware." -Mod08-
"when a stalker goes blue side, assassination strike should be renamed "bunny hugs", and a rainbow should fly out" -Harbinger-
Quote:
The list of broken powers has already been posted over and over. If you really want to know just read some of the older thread.
|
Originally Posted by Mod_Noc
True.. but so many people always seem to have something to complain about and I wanted to know what powers are they taking about. They keep on saying that the sides are unbalanced, but since GR is coming out it will be balanced since each sides will consist of all AT's.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by __Divine__
The list of broken powers has already been posted over and over. If you really want to know just read some of the older thread.
|
That is true I can look up some old threads, but my search fu is weak and I just like read new reasons why powers are broken. Give me a break I am at work and I am bored...
Quote:
I wonder if we can get a Mod to sticky the list of powers considered broke by the community. d;P
|
Originally Posted by __Divine__
The list of broken powers has already been posted over and over. If you really want to know just read some of the older thread.
|
Quote:
Why would you start off by listing a not-broken power?
|
Originally Posted by Mod_Noc
I will start off...
1. Stalker Sharks 2. |
Yeah, it's not that Sharks is broken; it's just considered to be OP by a lot of people. I'm assuming you're asking about this because of the FPvPL debate. The biggest issue in that case is actually the line-up submission process, which is hidden under the current rules; a stalker sharks team can be countered, but the counters for it require a line-up that is considered (by most) to be too specialized for the league.
In the (non-existant atm) ladder, part of the match process was being able to see what the other team was bringing (within the arena terminal) and then being able to make team changes on your side to counter or generate more favorable match-ups for your side. Since that process always has the potential to be a bit lengthy, the PvPEC decided to eliminate it in favor of a hidden line-up submission.
Quote:
I don't understand what the debate is even about. The argument is to either ban sharks or limit the number of stalkers. Most are leaning towards limiting the number of stalkers, which will probably mean 1 or 2 per team. So there will be no such thing as a "stalker sharks team".|
Originally Posted by Psoma
a stalker sharks team
|
If your team can't handle a total of 1 or 2 stalkers throwing sharks, then the team has problems. Stalkers that can actually AS will always be a bigger threat.
Why dont they just remove the ability for inherent power to work with epic powers.. Scrappers won't be able to crit with fire blasts, stalkers cant crit with sharks, tanks cant taunt with fossilize, etc...
Just a random thought...
Proton Sentry Peacebringer:lvl 50+++ - Human Build / Triform Build
Quasar Sentry Warshade:lvl 50+- Human Build / Triform Build
Red Katipo Arachnos Soldier:lvl 50+++ - Crab Build / Bane Build
Black Katipo Arachnos Widowlvl 50+++ - Fortunata Build / Night Widow Build
Quote:
i agree....thats why i recruited steaoda for my team...just in case somebody tries to bring a lol "stalker" team.
|
Originally Posted by Supermax
I don't understand what the debate is even about. The argument is to either ban sharks or limit the number of stalkers. Most are leaning towards limiting the number of stalkers, which will probably mean 1 or 2 per team. So there will be no such thing as a "stalker sharks team".
If your team can't handle a total of 1 or 2 stalkers throwing sharks, then the team has problems. Stalkers that can actually AS will always be a bigger threat. |
Quote:
Well, I wasn't complaining or debating to start with, and yeah, I thought it was pretty much settled that there would just be a 2-stalker limit. For the OP, I was just simply explaining the rationale behind the people that were debating sharks in the league threads. The OP seemed to think that Sharks was broken, and I was assuming he/she thought so because of the debate.
|
Originally Posted by Supermax
I don't understand what the debate is even about. The argument is to either ban sharks or limit the number of stalkers. Most are leaning towards limiting the number of stalkers, which will probably mean 1 or 2 per team. So there will be no such thing as a "stalker sharks team".
If your team can't handle a total of 1 or 2 stalkers throwing sharks, then the team has problems. Stalkers that can actually AS will always be a bigger threat. |
scrappers with /willpower, they used to be one of the best. now its like going out there with no secondary at all.
claws are still useless
almost every defender, unless you have a rad on team that can run in debuff & actually live or not get mezzed for it to mean something.
GR will change nothing except the side each f.o.t.m. is on. yes you can move to whichever side you want, but with things like HD , TS , & DM certain classes are completely useless.
nothing will ever begin to be remotely "even" until damage is eqaulized, powers actually do what they are supposed to, i.e. what we train characters up to in pve. holds should hold, being resistant to them should be resistant, heals should heal.
zones are meant for player vs. player, not for player vs. overpowered enviroment because some idiot thought it was a good idea to make changes to players powers in pvp zones and disregarded the impact that the longbow & arachnos have in lopsiding a fight especially when either side retrets to thier respective base. longbow & arachnos aren't there for the protection, the drones are.
all in all, the nerf bat is overpowered.
Fury.
I know it's not technically broken, but DR makes it worthless.
Do we really have hard stats on the DR curve on damage (like, is it a constant across all ATs, or do some ATs have stricter DR, or at about what point is it not worth getting more)? I was on my Stalker in some KBs today and I was noticing a difference between just running two reds, or two reds and BU, or double Fort and BU with a red or two...
@macskull, @Not Mac | XBL: macskull | Steam: macskull | Skype: macskull
"One day we all may see each other elsewhere. In Tyria, in Azeroth. We may pass each other and never know it. And that's sad. But if nothing else, we'll still have Rhode Island."
"One day we all may see each other elsewhere. In Tyria, in Azeroth. We may pass each other and never know it. And that's sad. But if nothing else, we'll still have Rhode Island."
Quote:
No, I don't believe it's a constant. I believe DR is AT dependent. Despite how bad DR is, the devs seem to have put a lot of work into its implementation..what a waste.|
Originally Posted by macskull
Do we really have hard stats on the DR curve on damage (like, is it a constant across all ATs, or do some ATs have stricter DR, or at about what point is it not worth getting more)? I was on my Stalker in some KBs today and I was noticing a difference between just running two reds, or two reds and BU, or double Fort and BU with a red or two...
|
Think Castle or another dev posted something about DR in PvP being AT specific. I'm actually curious now. I'd still like some hard numbers but I don't think the Developers even understand their own formulas.
Quote:
I was talking about DR on damage, specifically. Things like recharge are constant across ATs, but things like defense, resistance, and tohit have lower DR caps for squishies. I'm simply wondering if damage follows the former or the latter in regards to the DR curve.
|
Originally Posted by Tokyo
No, I don't believe it's a constant. I believe DR is AT dependent. Despite how bad DR is, the devs seem to have put a lot of work into its implementation..what a waste.
Think Castle or another dev posted something about DR in PvP being AT specific. I'm actually curious now. I'd still like some hard numbers but I don't think the Developers even understand their own formulas. |
@macskull, @Not Mac | XBL: macskull | Steam: macskull | Skype: macskull
"One day we all may see each other elsewhere. In Tyria, in Azeroth. We may pass each other and never know it. And that's sad. But if nothing else, we'll still have Rhode Island."
"One day we all may see each other elsewhere. In Tyria, in Azeroth. We may pass each other and never know it. And that's sad. But if nothing else, we'll still have Rhode Island."
Quote:
Reading Castle's i13 post on DR I'd say your guess is as good as his. :P|
Originally Posted by macskull
I was talking about DR on damage, specifically. Things like recharge are constant across ATs, but things like defense, resistance, and tohit have lower DR caps for squishies. I'm simply wondering if damage follows the former or the latter in regards to the DR curve.
|
Unless Castle willing to weigh in on this question I'd have to say if you find out that answer let us know, I'd like to know as well.
My guess is that it's AT specific or attribute specific. I would like to say my Dom attacks seem to be doing a bit more damage in PvP than in PvE but that's something i'll be testing later day.
Quote:
|
Diminishing Returns Nearly all attributes characters have are now subject to Diminishing Returns. The specific numbers vary from attribute to attribute, and from class to class (it's easier to Buff Resistance and Defense on a Tanker, than on a Blaster.) * In general, a single buff will have near full effect, while additional buffs begin to offer less and less benefit. Example: Under the old system, Aim + Build up might provide a combined 67% To Hit buff, while under this system it provides a combined 49% To Hit Buff. * The calculation is based on the sum of all buffs, so the order the buffs are applied in does not matter. * It is important to note that the Real Numbers tool will not always report the results of diminishing returns accurately, at least initially. This is specifically true of Damage Buffs, which always display the Pre-Diminished value. |
Quote:
|
Damage Powers * Powers now calculate damage based on their activation time, instead of their recharge. * Lower activation time powers get a slight bonus to damage, due to chaining low damage powers being difficult in PvP. * Longer Recharge time powers also get a slight damage bonus, so higher level powers with long recharge times deal extra damage. * Damage has been adjusted for all AT's, reducing the damage gap between each AT. |
Just about every PBAOE is broken. No one is in range long enough to actually be affected. What's more, the devs aparently had some morbid fear of these already useless powers... they still root and those toggles drop rather than being suppressed in PVP.
Ever try using a /DA toon in PVP? Gawd help you if you do... You can spend 5 times as much time trying to turn on your toggles as it takes every other freaking toon in the game to drop them. And, the way mez works now, they WILL drop them. Over and over and over with a single power.
Until this is fixed, I have to question ANY seriousness on the devs' part about PVP. Restructuring the mechanics so that already uber-weak PVP powers are now TOTALLY useless? Wow, we REALLY needed that.
PBAOE toggles need to supress only, just like any other toggle. Likewise, their area of effect (vs. players only) needs to double in radius just so the SS-bunny-hopping masses have a CHANCE to be hit with a tick of one of them every now and then...
Which brings me to the next issue. If every PVP toon needs a single power combo to compete, then that's a combo that needs to be controlled better. They put in travel supression to stop constant jousting... it failed due to no fix for the forward momentum mechanic. Everyone just uses SS and hops around letting their forward momentum to keep them kite-jousting around every melee toon out there. In effect, their attempts to curtail the phenomenae only made it worse.
I know this will draw out the haters, but mobility in PVP really needs to slow down if it's going to be a draw for most players. I don't mean that it needs to move at a crawl, a happy medium would be fine. But, when I enter RV to see nothing but a swarming mass of foes moving around at break-neck speed (which is just about all the time) I just leave. There's no point. Even with a team, unless we all have invested in exactly the same exploit of the mechanic, we cannot even try to make an impact.
The devs should actually invest their time in examining real word tactics. If one side of a conflict has the mobility to extend or close distance gaps at will, the advantage is overwhelming. The opponent may as well be standing still. In such a competative environment, all combatants will flock to that advantage until everyone is a mind-numbing homogenized vanilla in that aspect... or they just lose.
That is broken.
Infamy: SS/DA Brt, Brushfire Bill: Fire/Thorn Dom, Kill and Tell: Ninja/Trap MM, Dark Duelist: MA/DA Stk, Howling Rad: Rad/Sonic Cor, Silent Rebuke: Claw/EA Stk, Shadow Technician: Dark/Trap Cor, Forbidden Brute: DM/Fire Brt, Doctor Exile: Grav/Thorn Dom, Eternal Warrior: Mace/SD Brt, Electrogravitic: Grav/Elec Dom, Huntsman Gold: Bane, Captain Chill: AR/Cold Cor
Quote:
Just a question: Have you tried to make an impact? Serious question, no snark intended?|
Originally Posted by Infamy
i]unless we all have invested in exactly the same exploit of the mechanic[/i], we cannot even try to make an impact.
The devs should actually invest their time in examining real word tactics. If one side of a conflict has the mobility to extend or close distance gaps at will, the advantage is overwhelming. The opponent may as well be standing still. In such a competative environment, all combatants will flock to that advantage until everyone is a mind-numbing homogenized vanilla in that aspect... or they just lose. That is broken. |
From someone who started out playing melee in PvP, I COMPLETELY disagree with you.
This new PvP has made it a whole lot easier to deal with what you have just described. If you are trying to zero in on an opponent, like an FPS player would, then yes - you would be screwed. But since this isn't an FPS, we can just play it like any other MMO that has vertical movement in it.
If, on your melee character, you put someone 'jousting' on follow - you will hit them eventually. If you webnade them first (Or have your un-needed team help out) you can hit them again!
Standing around swinging at each other isn't PvP in this game - and it shouldn't be in ANY game. Doing the PvP you describe results in the 'whoever has the best connection and can click the fastest = winnah' There is no skill in that.
*Edit*
I do agree with your first paragraph though. The mez changes and AoE's in general suck. Anything that uses offensive toggles as their primary means of mitigation - Rads, Storms, Dark Miasma, Dark Armor - Even Invuln to an extent (Since it's balanced around being a hybrid).
Quote:
it most definitely varies among ATs.|
Originally Posted by macskull
I was talking about DR on damage, specifically. Things like recharge are constant across ATs, but things like defense, resistance, and tohit have lower DR caps for squishies. I'm simply wondering if damage follows the former or the latter in regards to the DR curve.
|
during beta, i remember the complaints on blaster and dom damage happening early on (remember trollers and corruptors were containing and scourging for double damage and outdamaging blasters and doms back then), and the devs responded by loosening the DR curve on those two ATs.
i have no clue if the DR curve on dom damage was rebalanced post buff.
Quote:
The PvPEC didn't. I did. So any blame can go strait to me |
Originally Posted by Psoma
Since that process always has the potential to be a bit lengthy, the PvPEC decided to eliminate it in favor of a hidden line-up submission.
|
I don't really consider lineup changes to be a process either, and switching lineups is much different than it was back in i12.
For example: The classic "Dumb is bringing storms, get two kins" is much different from "Yo, they brought stalkers, let's get forts"... which is soon to be followed by "Yo, they brought forts, get off of your stalkers!"... to be followed by "Yo, they don't have stalkers, get off your forts!" and so on, until someone finally stops switching.
Quote:
no.|
Originally Posted by Silit
The PvPEC didn't. I did. So any blame can go strait to me
I don't really consider lineup changes to be a process either, and switching lineups is much different than it was back in i12. For example: The classic "Dumb is bringing storms, get two kins" is much different from "Yo, they brought stalkers, let's get forts"... which is soon to be followed by "Yo, they brought forts, get off of your stalkers!"... to be followed by "Yo, they don't have stalkers, get off your forts!" and so on, until someone finally stops switching. |
no.
no.
in i12, you did that, past the start time and you forfeited. (9:15 for a 9pm match).
sadly, a lot of the teams didn't have the balls required to say "start the match or you forfeit".
back then i remember kurgain would dual box two-stalkers just to throw people off, and i myself would always begin by running around on my fire/sonic corr even if i was slated to play fort or storm.
i still believe you should be able to shuffle around your lineup as much as you want prior to that specific point in time where if you don't have a full team, you forfeit and that's the end of it.
---
it took DR about 3 months to figure out bringing masterminds against UJL's trap+storm team was a stupid idea. there are a lot of DRs around. countering lineups is not easy for a lot of the "less stellar" intellects involved in this league.
the game becomes more simple under the current proposed rules.
and i dont think that's a good thing.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Silit
The PvPEC didn't. I did. So any blame can go strait to me
I don't really consider lineup changes to be a process either, and switching lineups is much different than it was back in i12. For example: The classic "Dumb is bringing storms, get two kins" is much different from "Yo, they brought stalkers, let's get forts"... which is soon to be followed by "Yo, they brought forts, get off of your stalkers!"... to be followed by "Yo, they don't have stalkers, get off your forts!" and so on, until someone finally stops switching. |
In i12, The same thing could have happened. If they other team saw storms and switched in a second kin, we could have switched out our /Dev blasters or TA defenders for more raw damage (Fire/EM, Psi/EM etc). We just chose to bring a team that we thought would be best and we just stayed that way until the match was over. We felt it was best to Win or Lose with what we wanted to play - and if the other team wanted to play away from their strengths to match up better to us, than so be it.
I doubt I'll be in a captaining a team again, but if I was, I would most definitely do as barrier suggest and call people out on the team changing. The old PvP was fun, and I wanted to do it, so it didn't really matter how long the matches took to get started. This new PvP is a mere shadow of its former self. Its not worth anyone's time to sit around and setup the 'perfect counter' lineup that takes hours to setup.
Again, I can't speak for how the dUmb team will be run, but Im guessing you will find little to no switching or mind games once people are logged in. I'd even wager that if you wanted, we would PM you are lineup a couple days before hand just so we can get this whole match started earlier.
I will start off...
1. Stalker Sharks
2.