New AT

Actually, I want to show the small distribution study that I did in order to see what possible AT choices would make the most sense to add. By making sense, they would represent choices that are not represented in the current mix of ATs.

So first I decided on 5 categories of focus, which (of course) matches the original AT choices: Melee, Ranged, Control, Defense, Support
I did a large amount of generalization, so please understand that there are powers and powersets which don't "fit" in these molds as well, but in order to create my distribution, it was necessary to "generalize".

Lets look at the Existing ATs, which we will summarize based on "Main-Focus" and also on "Additional Capability"
AT NAME --> MAIN FOCUS --> ADDITIONAL CAPABILITIES(non-epic)
Blaster -->Ranged -->Melee/Control
Controller -->Control -->Support/Ranged
Defender -->Support -->Ranged/Control
Scrapper -->Melee -->Defense
Tanker -->Defense -->Melee
Brute -->Melee -->Defense
Stalker -->Melee -->Defense
Dominator -->Control -->Melee/Ranged
Mastermind -->Ranged -->Support
Corruptor -->Ranged -->Support/Control

Lets Total our choices in the two divisions
MAIN FOCUS: Ranged(3), Melee(3), Control (2), Defense (1), Support (1)
SECONDARY ABILITIES: Defense (3), Melee (2), Support (2), Ranged (1.5), Control (1.5)

For main focus we have balance in Control, surplus in Ranged and Melee and Deficit in Defense and Support. The secondaries are much closer to overall balance, so too close to call Ranged or Control a deficit, but worth noting they are Half as represented as Self-Defense sets.

Now lets make up TWO new ATs in a general sense and see what happens;

AT ONE: Support Main Focus combined with Melee Secondary
AT TWO: Defense Main Focus combined with Control/Ranged Secondary

How does this change our distribution;
MAIN FOCUS: Ranged(3), Melee(3), Control (2), Defense (2), Support (2)
SECONDARY ABILITIES: Defense (3), Melee (3), Support (2), Ranged (2), Control (2)

Looks good to me.

I have some ideas on the Two AT types I have suggested, but will leave that for another thread.

Personally, I think an Assault/Defense AT would be balanced with the right AT modifiers. The trick (which has already been bought up) is that it needs to not do so much Ranged damage as to render Blaster obsolete and not be so tough as to render Scrappers obsolete. To some extent the first requirement is already incorporated in the design of the Assault sets themselves. Assault sets do not have the ranged AoE capability of Blast sets; generally only having a cone for ranged AoE with all other AoEs being melee range. Thus they are forced to close to melee range if they want to maximize their AoE potential. So realistically I think the AT can be balanced with respect to Blasters simply by carful setting of the damage modifiers (I'd suggest 1.0 ranged and 1.1 melee)

The issue with not rendering Scrappers obsolete is a little trickier. Here are the unenhanced resistance values for Kheldians in Human form which is essentially an Assault/Defense AT (ignoring Eclipse for Warshades):
22.5/22.5/22.5/22.5/33.8/33.8/15/0 (Warshades also get 3.75% defense)

Now compare this to the resistance values for a few Scrapper sets:
Electric: 26.3/26.3/26.3/26.3/61.9/22.5/0/26.3
Fire: 22.5/22.5/67.5/15/22.5/22.5/15/0
Invulnerability: 33.8/33.8/15/15/15/15/15/0 (also has 7.5%-15% defense depending on how many enemies are in melee range)

So overall the Kheldian resistance values are in line with Scrapper values except that Khelds do not get status protection unless they go into Dwarf form (at which point they are no longer an Assault/Defense AT).


Now lets look at the Crab Soldier, unlike the Kheldians he does get status protection (except Knockback) alongside both Resistance and Defense. Specifically he gets (assuming Wolf Spider Armor is skipped):
Defense: 17.5 Ranged, 10% to all others (both Typed and Positional)
Resistance: 18/18/25/25/25/25/2

Now for Scrappers there aren't really any direct comparisons but lets consider the two closest sets. Shield Defense gets 15% positional defense and 11.3% resistance to all but psi. Super Reflexes gets 19.5% positional defense plus scaling resistances at lower health. As with the Khelds these numbers are reasonably in line with the Scrapper numbers for similar sets.

So in conclusion since the EATs are already Assault/Defense ATs with Scrapper level defenses I think a generic Assault/Defense AT could be made without marginalizing either Scrappers or Blasters simply by giving it lower damage modifiers than they have. Besides, both ATs were marginalized in team play by Defenders years ago.

In terms of powersets, I'd say for the Assault sets replace Power Boost with Build Up since Power Boost would be problematic for the AT. Additionally for secondaries Shield would have to be left out since the assault sets use Blast set animations involving both arms.

My thoughts for a Ranged/Defense AT is to make the Defense Primary and then have a Controller/Blaster hybrid as the secondary. You give them low HPs to avoid actually being Tanks, even though they have Tanker-Level Defense.

Since their Attack set would be reduced to a dmg mod of .75 to .85 they should be durable, but with lower damage so Blasters and Corruptors will not be Jealous of their damage. You then Mix in Single Target Blasts and Controls but very little AoE so that controllers are not marginalized. No need for melee attacks, but perhaps some could be added in the ancillary powers.

At the Tier 9 instead of Pets, you could have a Defender-Strength Nuke. It would be interesting to have an AT with both a primary and a secondary Crash power. But my original thought was to come up with a completely new and unique Tier 9 instead.