New AT

Concept and play style is up to the individual player, not the developer and we all remember how well the player base reacted when the developers tried defining fun.


>

That's true but the more AT's and powers available the more options for concept and playstyle. In regards to fun, it's another possible AT to play, some will enjoy playing it some won't. It's all about options!

Because it would allow for a lot more variety in the available powers. With EATs we have a very limited selection of powerset combos (8 max, depecding on how you count them). A new AT would have 49 combos right off the bat (7 assault sets and 7 of the 8 scrapper defensive sets).

Calling Masterminds "Ranged" is completely off base. Two MM primaries are ranged (Bots and Mercs), two are Melee (Ninja and Necro) and one is a mix of both (Thugs). While the attacks in the sets are ranged attacks, Mastermind sets are not "ranged damage" sets in the slightest.

I had to think about Masterminds a little longer than some of the ATs.
Please remember that those are generalizations, but here is my reasoning.

PETS! These are powers that exist "at range" and can deal damage "at range" from the Mastermind. Calling Pets a "Ranged" effect is, again, a generalization, but not far off base.
If I made a mistake, I am sure its in the "additional capabilities" for Masterminds.


Edit::: Just looked it over again. I am sorry Eiko, gonna have to stand by my original definition of Ranged.

Pets are also defence for the mastermind and the mastermind's team, both in terms of taking damage they don't and because of Bodyguard mode.

The real problem with Masterminds is they don't fit into a nice niche (or combination of niches) like the other ATs. They're really not like anything else.

Agreed !

Because the EATs shoehorn you into a very narrow concept with a (mostly) fixed background and story.
Thats not always a bad thing. But you cant, for example, make a DP/SR gunslinger. Well, you sort of can, with massive IO abuse and mashing into a build. But its far from ideal or intuitive. It's also, really, one of the few gaps left that is halfway feasible.

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.

Originally Posted by Captain_Photon NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.

See, I was never bothered by the existing background or story of the EATs or VEATs. I can make use of the powersets to create character concepts of my own.


>

It could very well be my playstyle, I admit this. Without hover on a toon, I have a horrible tendency to wind up in melee range. And I don't care much for kiting, as that means I'm busy running around and not button smashing my awesome attacks.

Yes I've done it, but it means you're not constantly attacking. And I want to constantly attack. Though I don't find the constant jumping to keep you alive if you don't have a team to spread the aggro around.

As to if you're post meant "lrn2ply" or not *shrug* I know I know how to play. So, I wasn't to worried about it.

But Sam has a point as well. With ranged attacks that follow you, and the fact that all the target has to do, is use an attack right as you pass by, I don't find the constant jumping to help all that much on big groups.

Now hovering above them, when they can't fly, works very well.

That's all fine and good. Yup, with Kheldian's you can come very close to a Dark/Defense or Energy/Defense, and with VEATs you can make PSI/Defense or Rifle (or Backpack)/Defense.

Now take those primaries, and make a Fire Blast/Defense or a DP/Defense.

So what I'm hearing is that the sets you seek are possible with a liberal application of power customization.

The real issue with a Range/Defense set is that if it were possible to create something like that within the confines of game balance then they would be in the game. Perhaps that is why the epic archetypes exist in the first place.

Also bear in mind that the Incarnate system is coming sometime this year which may offer more in the way of ranged attacks for high defense archetypes or defense for ranged damage archetypes. Until then we have EATs, VEATs and blappers to tide us over.


>

Actually no. The veats/heats don't have the power customization, to give me much room to deviate from the norm.

Though I have found it weird that people are so oppossed to such an AT being created.

The same ones who say "I don't see how my /WP Brute can't pick up a sword and start hacking away with it" alot of times seem to be the ones who say "No range/defense sets". When I couldn't see why a /WP whatever, could just as easily pick up a gun, and start grinning before shooting things.

With the VEATS/HEATS, it's shown you can balance range with defense...so all we need is fr time to be allocated to make the AT available. Whether that happens or not, no idea.

That is completely and utterly illogical. The fact that something is not in the game does not automatically imply that it is imbalanced. It simply means that the devs have not implemented it. An inability to balance it is only one possible reason for them to not include it. They could equally well decide that it's doable but not worth the time and effort required or simply that it will take the game in a direction they don't want to go or any one of a number of good reasons.

The devs haven't implemented Carp Melee. It's not inherently imbalanced, it's just silly.

The only way I'd agree to that is if they had all new animations for those sets (and therefore, inherently unique). But since all those pretty much used canned powers we already have, I'd prefer more powerset type combos so I can just make my own version of the examples above. You can already make a Wyvern, Legacy Chain, Longbow, Council, CoT character sans some costume options. The others are close too but just missing some power options that would be possible with more powerset combos.

Lastly, the whole tankmage argument doesn't seem to make much sense to me. People complain about not liking tankers and tankers damage isn't even bad. Instead, they go for the super highly specialized damage of Scrappers, Brutes or Blasters. Do you honestly think, just because the AT can plink at something at range will instantly make this *THE GOD* AT? Nobody cares if you can shoot! If it can't outpace that Brute or Scrap, it will be in the same boat as Tankers or Doms just without the super self/overal mitigation and replaced with moderate mitigation.

Eh, the game as it was originally envisioned and alpha tested would have allowed players to create ranged/defense sets. The original idea was to allow you to choose any two powersets from a much larger list of powers. That proved to be much harder to balance and was scrapped for the existing system we have now.

You make very good points about work load. Work load is always consideration and, in my mind, there are other things that take precedence over building a new archetype that for all intents and purposes already exists in the game.

As for Carp Melee I think it's the Monty Python dance animation that is slowing that down.


>

But back then, there wasn't travel suppression, no ED, mobs weren't all balanced with adequate ranged attacks with obscene range, no target caps and all sorts of other changes. So ranged/defense might really have been OP back then to a degree that they simply couldn't make such a combo work. Now? I dunno, you tell me. I don't really play EATs...I *do* wish they'd make a melee/buff AT already though! For bonus points, call it an Enforcer!

Even so there's a big difference between "able to choose any two powersets" and "able to make ranged/defense characters". Part of the reason for having ATs with fixed powerset types is that it allows them to fine tune the AT modifiers to a greater degree than in a free-form system. In a free-form system a Ranged/Defense characters and a Ranged/Manipulation character (i.e. a Blaster) would do the same damage with their attacks. Similarly a Ranged/Defense character and a Melee/Defense character (i.e. a Scrapper) would have the same defensive numbers. With the AT system a Ranged/Defense character can be made to do less damage than a Blaster and/or have weaker defenses than a Scrapper.

Side note: This shouldn't be construed as supporting a Ranged/Defense AT, I used it since it was used in the post I quoted. I like the idea of an Assault/Defense AT and think it would be balanced but I don't care for the idea of a Ranged/Defense AT. My concern is not balance since in the mechanical sense I think it could be balanced but because I think it's a poor pairing given the current design of both Ranged sets and Defense sets. A Ranged/Defense AT would IMHO require significant redesign of the Defense sets to support it.

I suggested a melee/buff set in the other new archetype thread. It was more of what I envisioned the way that tankers should have been handled. It's the Brawler suggestion, check it out and let me know what you think.


>

More to the point, what compelling reason is there for the devs to introduce an AT that basically duplicates the playstyle of something already in the game?

You've already pretty much admitted that what you want is basically the same thing as an EAT. In fact you used it as an argument in favor of your position.

Why should the devs create an entirely new AT that will play almost exactly like an EAT, when EATs already exist?

They've already spoken out in the past against the idea of duplicating powersets within an AT, why would you think their position on duplicating ATs would be different? Duplicating powersets would be things like: Creating a set identical to Shield Defense, but wthout the shield.

Duplicating an AT would be: Creating an AT that has Ranged/Melee damage in it's primary and defense/resistance in it's secondary. That is a basic description of what a VEAT is, and to an extent a HEAT as well.

Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison See, it's gems like these that make me check Claws' post history every once in a while to make sure I haven't missed anything good lately.

That would imply that claws and mace play almost exactly like katana and dark melee or that psi blast and energy blast play almost exactly like fire blast and sonic blast.

They don't.

That the EATs has similar power choices of ranged attacks and defenses proves the mechanics work and can be balanced not that concept is already facilitated. Now are you intentionally being dense or just facetious?

What's Axe&Mace? Katana&Broadsword? Stalker/Scrapper/Tanker/Brute? Defender/Corruptor? Even if the mechanics are identical, it doesn't mean the concept or even style will be.

That they decided to ship out 4 melee ATs with varying styles is enough explanation for a new AT with alternate combination of powers not currently available.

Epic ATs are landlocked to a single concept - Peacebringers and Warshades to the Kheldian concept, Arachnos Soldiers and Widows to Arachnos, both thematically and conceptually. Even if you ignore the concept of the ATs, you're still limited to what the ATs actually DO. You could, theoretically, recolour Kheldian energy to be yellow like fire, or blue-ish like ice, but you can't turn it into a gun, a bow or a sword. Similarly, a Bane Spider uses a mace and/or a gun. You CANNOT alter that into a fire sword, a bow, a dual pistols, earth powers or even Dark powers. You can't, not even with power customization.

And even if, by some miracle of weird ideas, were WERE given all of these options, you're still left with highly non-standard ATs that have access to a toolkit that really doesn't befit a normal one. Kheldians have more powers than they can ever take, and Soldiers of Arachnos have their various ranks and training skills. They are both very SPECIFIC frameworks of such a build. They are not JUST Range/Defence, they are an exotic build.

The point of having a Ranged/Defence or Assault/Defence AT is to build something akin to, say, Bastion, who has Energy Blast powers, Energy Melee powers and Energy Aura powers. Or something similar to your typical Behemoth, who has Fire Blast, Fiery Melee and Fiery Aura powers. Or to pick a Dual Pistols/Katana or Dual Pistols/Martial Arts combo and pair it up with Super Reflexes. Or to make the much-requested gunblade character. The options presented to a generic AT as VASTLY superior to the options presented to an Epic one. In fact, you may or may not see power customization on Epic ATs, because their power's actual appearance is part of their story. Eventually, we'll probably see that, but this WAS put on the table as a definite possibility.

Basically, if I want to play a Blasting AT but don't want to shoot fire, I can. If I want to play a Kheldian AT but not shoot energy... I pretty much can't.

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.

See, the problem here is, whether I agree with anyone in this thread or not, at the end of the day it's not ME you need to convince.

You need to convince the devs that making a new AT, which is basically the thing they were trying to avoid by creating the AT system in the first place, is worth the time that would be required to program it.

I have serious doubts about your ability to do so. Because I think it just plain isn't going to happen.

Think about the most recent nerf to something: Blessing of the Zephyr. That nerf happened because it was too easy to stack for a crapload of defense on ranged characters, which the devs apparently never intended to be possible in the first place.

Somewhere in the BotZ thread Castle mentions that he wished that, with the GDN, a cap was put on defense for ATs not meant to have a lot of it. (Don't worry, he said in the same post that they aren't going to do it now, it wasn't done then so they have to live with it)

So, here you are essentially asking for an entirely new AT that flies in the face of the devs' apparent intentions regarding ranged characters. Hence my conclusion: Almost certainly not going to happen.

Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison See, it's gems like these that make me check Claws' post history every once in a while to make sure I haven't missed anything good lately.

The whole reason defence for ranged characters is a broken concept is because all current ranged characters do large amounts of damage with their ranged attacks. Blaster-level damage with Scrapper Defences is broken. The flaw with defence caps and invention set bonuses is not that ranged characters get defence at all, but that ranged characters get defence that the devs never accounted for when first developing them.

VEATs and HEATs prove that ranged/defence is not inherently unbalanced. If planned for and accounted for, ranged/defence can be a perfectly viable archetype. The problem with our current selections for ranged/defence is simply that such characters are right now tied inexorably to particular power sets - light/dark blasts for Kheldians, or mace/claw/gun for Arachnos.

Considering the one thing this game offers that all other (successful) MMOs
currently do not is the high level of customisation available to even starting characters, taking the existing, non-broken ranged/defence idea and allowing for more customisation in options could only serve to highlight how much better at that CoHV is than any other product on the market.