Defense-based toons pretty much useless?
By
Arcanaville,
Posted on: 2010-08-14 08:57 in Player Questions
In this whole "OMG Blasters are tanking as good as Tankers!!1!" discussion, there's a couple of things being missed. First off, and I believe this was brought up, Blasters have far, far less hit points than Tankers and therefore aren't as able to soak those few hits that do come through the softcapped defense. Hits that a Tanker with his high HP and therefore higher regen can shrug off could faceplant the Blaster handily.
Secondly, there's the issue of Defense Debuffs. I think granting a bit more of this across the board to Tankers might solve some of the inequities here, and while it is possible to protect yourself from Defense Debuffs a bit by chewing on purple inspirations to exceed the soft cap and give yourself a buffer, it's still noticeably less effective than real DDR and additionally requires a substantial inspiration cache to maintain.
Finally, there's the tradeoffs that these Blasters make in their builds just to acheive softcap defense. It's not as if they just choose the SoftcapDefenseNao power and they're good to go. In the aftermath of the changes to Blessing there are even more compromises that must be made to get a Blaster build to softcapped defense to just one position.
In summary, while I think this issue could stand a bit of tweaking especially on the Tanker end, I really don't think it's the crisis that some in this thread make it out to be.
Aaaaannd Call Me Awesome beat me to it while I was typing this out. Good post, CMA.
Iscariot's Guide to the Tri-Form Warshade, version 2.1
I'm sorry that math > your paranoid delusions, but them's the breaks -- Nethergoat
P.E.R.C. Rep for Liberty server
Quote:
Castle has stated that he wished he had done something about defense softcaps being equal for all ATs back when he could have (I think he said about I8 or so, but this is from memory, sorry), but that he is going to have to live with it now. The outcry over BotZ's having their defense benefits reduced was huge, even if it was warranted. If some ATs had their ability to softcap removed... I don't even want to imagine how that would be received. Do note that I think not every AT should be able to hit the softcap, however, I can completely understand why it's seen as not worth making the adjustment.|
Originally Posted by Vel_Overload
It's good to know that a blaster /w softcapped defenses is a better damage soaker than my Elec/Elec tank (rolls eyes). Game is broken in this regard.
Can we PLEASE get a fix to this? Seriously. |
So no, you are not going to get a fix to the ability for any AT to softcap.
However, your Tanker is far more survivable than your Blaster... suggesting a Blaster can be on par with a Tank just because they're both at the softcap ignores other things that the ATs have going for them. Resists, mez protection, an HP make a huge difference in survivability. Blasters trade off for their offense with survivability. And a def-capped Blaster trades off even more offense for that defense. You can't make these comparisons without looking at the whole picture.
Justaris, I tossed out the idea that Tanks and perhaps Brutes should get some inherent DDR protection on the Tank forums recently. Hopefully Castle saw it, as that is a good way for more "defensive" minded ATs to get more benefit from defense than ATs that are supposed to be more offensive. It's worth thinking about, I think.
Guide: Tanking, Wall of Fire Style (Updated for I19!), and the Four Rules of Tanking
Story Arc: Belated Justice, #88003
Synopsis: Explore the fine line between justice and vengeance as you help a hero of Talos Island bring his friend's murderer to justice.
Grey Pilgrim: Fire/Fire Tanker (50), Victory
Quote:
Pulling one at a time is for wimps.
|
Originally Posted by Fleeting Whisper
I can't vouch for all 4 patrons at once (and few tankers are able to do that anyway), but I was on a team with a Blaster acting as our tank when we took the patrons on one at a time.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Grey Pilgrim
Justaris, I tossed out the idea that Tanks and perhaps Brutes should get some inherent DDR protection on the Tank forums recently. Hopefully Castle saw it, as that is a good way for more "defensive" minded ATs to get more benefit from defense than ATs that are supposed to be more offensive. It's worth thinking about, I think. |
That increases the gap between the ATs, but those toons don't really need more survivability. In fact, I would suspect going forward that all ATs will have less overall power in relation to new content simply because the IO system has created the opportunity to make a lot of it fairly irrelevant.
I agree completely that anything smelling like a "nerf" will draw more ire than it is worth. However, the only way to solve these problems efficiently is by doing such. To do it any other way only transfers the problem to another area and you really never get anywhere.
Quote:
I agree completely. It's really only on a few sets where it is a problem, mostly because IOs have wrecked the damage/recharge ratio in sets that have their damage concentrated in one or two powers.|
Originally Posted by Justaris
Finally, there's the tradeoffs that these Blasters make in their builds just to acheive softcap defense. It's not as if they just choose the SoftcapDefenseNao power and they're good to go. In the aftermath of the changes to Blessing there are even more compromises that must be made to get a Blaster build to softcapped defense to just one position. |
Archery is the perfect example here: Blazing Arrow accounts for a far larger percent of the ST damage than the tier 3 does in most of the other sets, even though collectively Archery's 3 ST attacks are roughly equivalent in single use to most other sets. ROA is similar due to being a crashless nuke.
The power concentration of those two powers means that with enough recharge you have the vast majority of the rest of the power slots to make those compromises. Something like Archery/MM is perfectly capable of being fully effective and have soft capped defense without making those compromises.
It is global recharge more than defense that is responsible for some of these things, because as noted the compromises for most sets are high enough that it isn't always worth pursuing soft capped defense. Sets that may have been designed in a certain way originally more as a novelty can now be skewed to the point the overall balancing mechanisms just don't work.
If you're going to hold firm as s developer to the Cottage Rule, these things in concert create a significant balancing problem.
Quote:
Yeah really... I just did an STF on my soft-capped Shield/DM tanker, and we pulled all 4 AVs and they never got my health below 3/4 a bar*. I was laughing in Ghost Widow's face. It was teh lulz.|
Originally Posted by Silverado
Pulling one at a time is for wimps.
|
*NOTE: We had an emp, a thermal, and a force-fielder on the team, not to mention a rad, all to help keep me alive.
Quote:
Like it or not, the ability for anyone to softcap isn't going away. However, Castle has been willing to make adjustments when doing so was too easy: hence the lowering of BotZ's defense bonuses. |
Originally Posted by brophog02
That increases the gap between the ATs, but those toons don't really need more survivability. In fact, I would suspect going forward that all ATs will have less overall power in relation to new content simply because the IO system has created the opportunity to make a lot of it fairly irrelevant.
I agree completely that anything smelling like a "nerf" will draw more ire than it is worth. However, the only way to solve these problems efficiently is by doing such. To do it any other way only transfers the problem to another area and you really never get anywhere. |
An adding of slight resistance to defense debuffing isn't really going to shift problems, either... it's addressing a problem that does exist and allows ATs that are supposed to excel at survivability to do so more than other ATs that excel at offense. Currently, there is a lot of defense debuffing in game, and I doubt the devs are going to hold back in that regard, given how many people go for defense.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by brophog02
If you're going to hold firm as s developer to the Cottage Rule, these things in concert create a significant balancing problem.
|
I also don't think you understand the Cottage rule. This means that you can't make a power do something it didn't before, like making Temperature Protection into an attack, or something. The developers can adjust damage, recharge, etc., on a power that has those attributes.
Guide: Tanking, Wall of Fire Style (Updated for I19!), and the Four Rules of Tanking
Story Arc: Belated Justice, #88003
Synopsis: Explore the fine line between justice and vengeance as you help a hero of Talos Island bring his friend's murderer to justice.
Grey Pilgrim: Fire/Fire Tanker (50), Victory
Quote:
... without good reason. In effect, the cottage rule says that the threshold for mucking with the mechanics of a power in a way that makes it impossible to use it like it was before in at least broad terms is to declare a situation essentially broken in a way that only changing it can fix.|
Originally Posted by Grey Pilgrim
I also don't think you understand the Cottage rule. This means that you can't make a power do something it didn't before, like making Temperature Protection into an attack, or something. The developers can adjust damage, recharge, etc., on a power that has those attributes.
|
The devs didn't ignore the cottage rule when they made Singularities, for example: they simply decided the need for them outweighed the need to preserve the cottage rule for Gravity Control at the time.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
I've tried to softcap a regen scrapper. It can't be done, but you can come very close. And it's very expensive and... well, I won't say a terrible build, but it's far from the best way to build your regen scrapper.
I looked at softcapping defenses for an electric armor brute, and I gave up. It was also not worth trying, and not a good build once you got there.
I've softcapped smashing/lethal for both an invul scrapper and an invul tank. Against many enemies you're untouchable. But, of course, you're hardly untouchable against non-S/L enemies. You wouldn't want to try to softcap positional defense on an invul, I think.
I've also softcapped an SR scrapper and two shield scrappers. They're nearly untouchable in most situations.
I have 3 willpower scrappers at 50, and I didn't try to softcap them because it would have been gimping. But they have very good (30%ish) defense, and with everything else they're incredibly tough.
I haven't figured out how you would softcap a blaster or most defenders to all three positions, I usually go for ranged defense only. The exception being my bubble defender, of course. ^_^
Ultimately, you can say "there's lots of defensive bonuses and very few resist bonuses, it's not fair to the defense-based ATs!" But the truth is that very few non-defense ATs can reach softcap to all three positions without really gimping themselves elsewhere. Having played multiple tanks/scrappers/brutes to 50 (and built excellent builds for most of them), I don't find that resist-based toons are remarkably tougher than defense-based toons, or easier to produce a good build with. In fact I've yet to find a non-defense toon that I could softcap defense to all 3 positions (or all types) without seriously gimping them.
my lil RWZ Challenge vid
Quote:
Nor have I stated they balance things in a vaccuum. However, when they implement new systems, like IOs, they do not go back and change all of the pre-existing systems, but instead attempt to balance around them. |
Originally Posted by Grey Pilgrim
The devs do not balance things in a vacuum. Castle has noted that while they did not make the game harder to accommodate IOs, he doesn't ignore their effects when balancing, either. So they're hardly covering their ears and ignoring things. Once again, there's that BotZ reduction to show this, among other things (like Tier 9 powers that can't have their recharge lowered). |
In effect, they get trapped in their own continuity. They want to make as few changes as possible to the established powers, with good reason, but by attempting to do so it can create unforeseen issues as one system gets implemented onto another. As unpopular as they are, there is a reason for "Retcons".
I understand the Cottage Rule just fine, thank you.
Quote:
Not if you think the cottage rule can create balancing problems. By its definition, balancing problems trump the cottage rule. No balance problem of material importance is allowed to exist by virtue of the cottage rule itself.|
Originally Posted by brophog02
I understand the Cottage Rule just fine, thank you.
|
If I can prove a balance problem exists, the cottage rule only states that I must reasonably prove no other options which preserve it will fix the problem, and the cottage rule would be waived for that specific situation.
The problem is that most people think their problems are critical balance problems when they are not, and they assume its the cottage rule that is in the way when it is the fact their critical balance problem isn't seen as one by the devs.
Also, as a rule the cottage rule doesn't apply to things like magnitude changes in a power's effects, endurance, or recharge. Even with all of the changes made to MA in Going Rogue, not one of them even triggers the cottage rule, much less is forced to break it. At best, Cobra Strike grazes the cottage rule, but doesn't trip over it. Rebalancing around recharge wouldn't be governed by the cottage rule in general. Its a non-factor.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
That's the issue. Thank you for your clarity.
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
The problem is that most people think their problems are critical balance problems when they are not, and they assume its the cottage rule that is in the way when it is the fact their critical balance problem isn't seen as one by the devs.
|
Quote:
Last time I poked at it, it looked like hitting softcap on all three positionals was impossible on a solo blaster. Yes, you can get a single position (Ranged is also my preference), but I'm not even certain I could manage two positionals. It might be possible on a specific powerset combination, but it's certainly not possible on any arbitrary pairing.
|
Originally Posted by Organica
I haven't figured out how you would softcap a blaster or most defenders to all three positions, I usually go for ranged defense only. The exception being my bubble defender, of course. ^_^
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Softcapping an Invuln is fantastic. Softcapping a Willpower is amazing. Softcapping SR is kissing your sister.
|
If you got a blaster and have softcapped defense, I don't envy you. But do you think it's fair that you, as a blaster, are a better tanker than a tanker?
It's magetanking. There is no simpler way to put it. Hopefully CoH2 won't be so horribly unbalanced in it's endgame content. From 1-49 the game is fun and fairly balanced. Once you hit 50 and start IOing your chracters out, you start to see that many archetypes are unnecessary on some of the toughest 'challenges' in the game.
Yes you can significantly increase a character's survivability via set bonuses, but you're REALLY stretching things to compare a blaster, however buffed, with a tanker. Oh, and that "magetanking" blaster of yours? Guess what, IO bonuses are available to everyone in the game, and believe it or not melee characters get more benefit out of it! Whodathunkit?
In addition do you really think everyone on every team will have that level of durability? Somehow I doubt that there's 100 blasters in the entire game with that much durability... while the vast majority of all tankers DO have that much survivability or more. With Mez protection, MUCH more HP and considerably more resistance of course a tank is more durable.
Also, the whole premise of the game is that you don't NEED any particular AT for any particular challenge. You can create a perfectly viable team out of any combination of AT's you'd care to name. Take the STF, one of the toughest TF's in the game. It's been done with virtually any combination you can imagine... and the fastest run was done with 8 Fire/Rad controllers in something around 25 minutes. I've done it with many teams, with tanks, without tanks, with defenders, without defenders... all you need are competent players.
COH has just been murdered by NCSoft. http://www.change.org/petitions/ncso...city-of-heroes