Powerset killed by power _____

"Most limited," as in doing less damage than it should be, hitting less targets than it should be and exposing you to more danger than practically every other power in the game.

I'm not saying Full Auto is a BAD power. It isn't. However, its current state of neglect is NOT a good thing and it NEEDS to be improved to at least meet what other "mini-nukes" can do. And unless you're prepared to vote for a nerf to either Rain of Rarrows or Hail of Bullets, then AR's Full Auto needs something to happen to it at SOME point.

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.

Hail of Bullets is probably fine. However, Rain of Arrows does a bit more damage than I would normally think it would given its other attributes, and Full Auto a bit less.

If we naively balanced both as normal attacks and not tier 9 attacks (and this is only for guidence: tier 9's are not balanced in this way traditionally) then with an AoE spherical area of 25 feet of radius RoA has an AoE factor of 4.75. It should do about scale 2.1 damage to each target. It actually does closer to 3.6 (normalized for blasters). Contrawise Full Auto has an AoE factor of about 3.03 as an 80 foot radius 20 degree arc cone. It should do about 3.29 damage total to each target, and it actually averages closer to 2.854.

Actually, if you made the crit 50/50, it would basically land right on the target damage of a power with that recharge and area of effect.

Like I said, something. Even critical damage will do. Right now, the critical damage is... Not really all that much. Either more of it or a higher chance for it would be swell. A to-hit debuff for the duration of the auto fire would also be nice. Be a little safer for those four long seconds.

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.

Wasn't Castle not a part of the original dev team? I coulda swore he was added on later. In which case, he would not be the authority on what the ORIGINAL "intent" of the ATs were. He CAN, however, state what the CURRENT goals and "intent" of the devs are, which may be different than they used to be.

I'll have to disagree with that. Energy Manipulation is pretty much entirely melee and those stuns work great.

Going the blapper route is all about understanding how aggro works and who has it.

You said what blasters *should* be doing, which implies you were commenting on how they are implemented now. Castle's opinion on that is definitive, becaue he was in charge of giving it to them in I11.

But the subject of the original intent has also been covered many times, and is documented. When the concept of archetypes itself was created, Blasters were conceptualized to be the pure damage archetype:

- Jack Emmert, City of Heroes Development Diary Volume 3

This is the Word of God definition of the Blaster archetype as originally conceived: does tons of damage. He called Scrappers the "hand to hand" specialist. If he thought Blasters were the Ranged specialist, there is zero question in my mind he would have said so there, because there's no reason not to: Scrapper: hand to hand; Blaster: ranged. He doesn't, because that is not what he is thinking.

In fact, Jack's brainstorm shows this in the same article:

Important to note two things. First, he's just listing things so you can't take order *too* importantly, but he does originally conceptualize blasters as Melee/Ranged and not the reverse. Secondly, his discussion of Defenders and proto-Corruptors actually hints at something that would become forum debate fodder years later. Some people suggest that because a powerset is *primary* that is de facto the whole purpose of the archetype: the secondary is just that: secondary. Clearly, Jack thought differently. If he actually *saw* a reason to emphasize the difference, he did (Scrappers and Tankers) but if he *didn't* see a reason to emphasize the difference, he didn't bother (Defenders and what would eventually become Corruptors). And that means its just as likely that Blasters have Ranged as the primary set for practical reasons, and not definitive ones. Because if the conceptual distinction was important enough to the developers at the time, there would be a Melee/Ranged archetype as well. There isn't, because they didn't think it was needed.


So, just to recap: Blasters were conceptualized to be the focused damage dealers dealing melee and ranged damage at the beginning of time (literally the moment archetypes themselves were invented), they were originally implemented that way, they were modified to add utility but were never claimed to be ranged only in beta (as far as I know), released as the focused damage dealer with both ranged and melee options, and have been balanced as such up to the last moment when the archetype was revisited, when it was declared to be the damage dealer with ranged and melee options and implemented on the assumption that both options were valid.

* ORIGINAL INTENT: Lots of Damage
* ORIGINAL IMPLEMENTATION: Ranged and Melee Damage
* RELEASED DESIGN: Ranged Damage, Melee Damage, Utility
* LAST ARCHETYPE BALANCING: Attempt to balance melee and ranged options, increase survivability through enhanced ability to deliver damage.

Was there ever a moment when the dev team either conceptualized, designed, implemented, adjusted, balanced, or declared the Blaster archetype as being ranged-focused or melee was not a valid option for damage dealing? As far as I'm aware, never, for any moment in time that the Blaster archetype existed at all.

I rolled one to 50 as well. Set him up with a (in comparison to my other characters) pretty good background, and actually worked to set up a thematically appropriate way for him to hit 50. Since he was supposed to be an escaped Arachnos, he dinged off of defeating Lord Recluse in the STF. I even had to take a screen shot of the event as he managed to actually GET the kill shot, a feat I probably won't be able to repeat. And yet as soon as I found out that actual Arachnos Soldiers are supposed to be allowed to switch sides in GR I scrapped him and rerolled in a heart beat. Why?

When I played him I felt like I was doing less damage than my comparatively slotted Tanker.

I'm not kidding, either. My Blaster felt weaker offensively than my Tanker. It was a really simple metric, too. I took the most powerful single target attack, Sniper Rifle for one, Knock Out Blow for the other, and slotted them up similarly, one Accuracy, three Damage. I then used all powers that boosted damage available to just the primary and secondary powers of each character, in other words Targeting Drone and Rage. I then turned the attack on an even level minion. In pretty much all cases, the Tank one shot the minion. The Blaster didn't.

Yes, I realize that Rage is a fairly hefty damage boost, while using Targeting Drone with Sniper Rifle at 50 adds like ten points of damage, but that's not the point. The entire point, at least what I was led to believe anyway, is that Tankers give up damage to be the most resilient characters in the game, while a Blaster has nothing BUT his damage. The fact that a Tank can outshine another AT at pretty much the Blaster's only reason for existence for any reason really says something to me.

That's not the only problem I have with the set, just the easiest to explain. So yeah, I'd have to say the power the killed AR for me was Knock Out Blow. Oh, and Foot Stomp.

That... Is pretty much the sum of my experience with my AR/Dev, as well. One day, after struggling for my life and dealing what felt like barely any damage, I switched over to my Stone/Stone villainside. I don't know how it happened, but I managed to deliver a Seismic Smash to an enemy for easily twice the damage my Blaster had been doing with Sniper Rifle. And then I got to wondering - if my Brute can partially out-damage my Blaster AND have tons more survivability... Why am I playing Blasters, again?

This has been what has always bugged me about Blasters. Yes, they do the most damage in the game. But their damage has never been proportional to their survivability. They simply give up far, FAR more survivability than they get damage in return. I don't know what "deal" it is that this balance keeps to, but I feel like I'm getting ripped off.

Again - Blasters deal a lot of damage. I'm not denying it. But several other ATs do, as well, and don't face nearly as much peril.

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.

I scrapped a Archery/EM back in I5 because of the redraw. I don't know whether it got any better. (And I wasn't sure about Trick Arrow at the time, so I didn't try a TA/A Defender.)

I think it's not so much the redraw time as much as the redraw style for me. I like Dual Pistols because the character doesn't reach behind them to draw the weapon with that weird creaking sound.

Speaking of sounds, another thing that was almost killed by sounds: Mind Control. After incessantly hearing the WEEEEOOOOOOO and SCRREEEEUUUUOOO of the early powers, I just set my sound to mute. If I had to listen to that all the time, no way I'd have played that powerset.

My comparison with Blaster damage has been my Dark Melee Scrappers. It could be due to my very weird luck with crits (quite streaky), but against a single target, my Dark Melee Scrappers felt like they could consistently dish out at least as much damage as all my Blasters over a period of time.

Now, I know the retort: my DM Scrapper does poorly in damaging large groups. (Survival-wise, obviously the Scrapper can stand up easier than the Blaster, but that's a false comparison anyway.) But I don't fight large groups. This is basically along the lines of "I don't team"; it's just not something I find enjoyable.

So I am assuming that the advantage of Blasters, which they give up for survivability, are their AoE capabilities. And perhaps that "thrill of being on the edge" which is obviously a draw for some, just as "thrill of being in control" is a draw for me.

EDIT: And the last time I brought Masterminds into this discussion I got a lot of "but MMs don't count" due to some reason or other.

Actually, that's a fairly safe assumption to make. Assault Rifle has many powers that target groups, while many of the melee sets are more single target focused. It's certainly the case with the Super Strength Tank I mentioned earlier, who only has the one AoE attack.

The thing is, the Tank wins out in the numbers game, too, at least while solo. The AoE doesn't really do a Blaster a lot of good with the return fire from three or more enemies can easily red line a Blaster. Meanwhile, the Tank has herded up (or bumped the difficulty) and is at the agro cap, and can tear through the minions, which form the bulk of the herd usually, with two or three Foot Stomps, saving the single target attacks for the Lieutenants. Granted, the mission isn't going any faster this way, but the numbers are rolling quicker.

Here's the thing, though - that's not always how it works out. OK, admittedly, AR is better at AoE than most, but there are two things that get in the way:

1. The easiest and most efficient way to leverage large-scale AoE is to scream "Wolverines!" and let rip. That's basically the only real way to deliver your full potential of AoE damage. Blasters, as I have been made PAINFULLY aware, just don't work well with that tactic because they don't have enough survivability to survive long enough to get all their AoEs out, or to survive what they get in return even if they do.

2. This comparison doesn't work well with certain Scrapper and Brute sets, specifically sets with additional damage and damage auras like Shield Defence, Fiery Aura, Spines, Claws, Battle Axe and so forth. Certain melee characters can deliver OBSCENE levels of AoE damage at pretty decent range that, even if they don't exactly exceed Blaster damage, do tend to come close.

I'm currently looking forward to an Axe/Shield Scrapper which should be... Kind of scary, actually, considering what my Sword/Shield Scrapper does.

Yeah, just... Don't bring Masterminds into this. We really don't want to bring developer attention to them, and they REALLY muddy the waters of expected performance Put it this way - even I'm not crazy enough to ask for Mastermind-level performance from... Pretty much anything that's not a Mastermind.

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.

Ha, yes. Weirdly, I've seen variations: my Bots/Dark, Thugs/Poison, and currently Demons/Thermal are massive overperformers as usual (well, at least compared to my Blasters), but my Ninja/Storm has some of the most shameful performance I've ever seen on a non-Kheldian. I suspect it's the Ninja aspect, since every time I try to suggest it could be Storm, or perhaps a combination of Ninja and Storm, I get so many retorts to the contrary I am forced to retract my guess.

(I know why my Kheldians suck: it's because I don't team.)

Yeah. Semi-on-topic, what ruins Kheldians for me is their dependence on teaming. If it had to come down to one power, it would have to be Cosmic Balance. Because this is expected to have such a huge effect on Kheldian performance, their basic performance is... Let's say "underwhelming" and leave it at that.

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.

Fire Manipulation also has Hot Feet, Which has the same radius, AND does more damage than Lightning Field out the box... so you're wondering why /Fire doesn't have even MORE AoE potential than every other set?

Not that I'd be opposed to /Fire having two 20' radius damage toggles...

But it already tops the AoE list in blaster secondaries by having 3 PBAoE attacks and 2 PBAoE damage toggles. Even if one of those toggles has a paltry 8' radius... it still has far more than any other secondary offers, So might be a bit unbalanced if they extended the radius of Blazing Aura on top of that.

I can't offer any input on Ninjas/Storm, but my Ninjas/Dark is pretty nasty... If my memory isn't failing, I think he's died less than 10 times total in his lifetime and is now level 29. Then again, /Dark can be awesome all by itself

Totally agree on khelds though, I've only gotten one past 20, and can't help but hope it'll get better as it matures in levels... I've seen them do pretty amazing things, but it just doesn't feel like it's going anywhere right now, and it's soooo slow when solo... worse than controllers before they get their pet(s) and that's saying something.

No reason why it can't, but also no reason why it should. Blazing Aura is a derivative of tanker damage auras, and has the same radius by default. Lightning field, on the other hand, seems to have been intended to be a damage mitigator (drain) that happens to deal damage, and has a larger radius as a result. In fact, I believe its almost certainly the case that while Blazing Aura was borrowed from Tankers and added to Blasters, Lightning Field was borrowed from critters and added to Blaster at the beginning of time (to save time in the mad rush to create the powersets that archetypes required). its radius is an artifact of that, and because the two powers have different intentions there's no impetus to normalize them against each other after the fact.

Could you offer some insight as to why the Blaster version of Ice Patch is so small, then? I mean, I don't expect controller-size Ice Patch cast from range, but the Ice Patch Blasters got is... Tiny? And why the swap from ranged summon to player-centric summon?

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.

Easy: presumably it's the Tanker version of Ice Patch. Arcanaville actually mentioned upthread that a lot of the Blaster secondaries were thrown together at the last minute from existing Tanker powers, and this is presumably one result.