Energy Transfer
By
Airhammer,
Posted on: 2010-09-04 10:23 in Archetypes and Powers General Discussion
Quote:
I'm down with the stun and extra damage, animation changes.|
Originally Posted by dave_p
I play neither EM stalkers or brutes, but my 2nd 50 ever was a Fire/EM tank, so this is all from a tanker's perspective.
First some tanker DPA numbers (base damage at 50 w/Arcanatime): Old ET: 170.77 New ET: 69.86 TF: 46.15 Some other heavy hitters as a comparison: Incinerate: 60.17 KO Blow: 66.66 Clobber: 89.47 Seismic Smash: 92.30 And for the hell of it, the rest of EM: Barrage: 37.07 EP: 42.13 BS: 42.52 WH: 16.85 Barrage, EP & BS are more or less normal. Barrage used to be worse than Brawl, but thankfully, it's merely a typical sucky T1 tanker attack. EP & BS are nothing to write home about, but are adequate filler attacks. Whirling Hands is a joke. All the "Whirling" attacks are terrible, but the weapon sets have cones to supplement their AoEs. But fine, EM is a ST "specialist", right? TF's DPA of 46.15 is also pretty disgraceful, even w/the mag 3 stun. Look at Clobber. ET's DPA of 69.86 is actually pretty damn good for a tanker, but no longer warrants the self damage. Consider Clobber again or Seismic Smash. Clobber also recharges faster (16 vs. 20). Incinerate is lower DPA, but recharges in 10 sec and no self damage. In fairness, ET's DPE is fantastic, which I guess is the rationale behind the continuing self-damage, but I'd at least trade for some higher end cost for a faster animation. EM is not the ST king and hasn't been for a while. Both Fire & Stone outdamage EM, and let's not even talk about AoE damage. Control through stuns are also shaky, since Stone Melee will have better controls while outputting better ST damage (admittedly, Stone may have even worse AoE damage than EM). Again, no other set does self-damage. So what exactly is EM's attraction again? If it's going to be stuns, I like the idea of making Stun a minor AoE. Giving it Clobber damage would also help overall ST DPS while increasing the stun quotient. If it's going to be ST damage, we need to return to ET's original animation, or closer to it. That's prolly never going to happen (the old DPA was kinda ridiculous), but keeping the self damage is just an insult. TF getting a new animation to bump its DPA over 55 would be another solution. In fact, giving TF ET's current animation would bump its DPA to 54.54, which would be respectable and the animatino would be more fitting IMO. Then lower ET's animation to about 2s to get its DPS up to Seismic Smash territory and EM's back to being king of ST damage. If we're going to address the AoE damage, giving TF Thunderstrike's splash damage (but w/stuns instead of KB) sounds like a pretty good option. Whatever the solution is, EM needs help. I've been playing my Fire/EM for the first time in years because of the recent buffs to Fiery Aura. I lead off most fights w/Burn now and rely on Fireball & Fire Blast from my epics and use EP to beat on single things. I cringe when I have to go into my ET/TF animations, even though they offer superior DPA to EP or Fire Blast. |
I'm not down with the turning of a single target attack into an AOE, as I fear that would cut the attack's damage down.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
Quote:
The thing here is all the powers you listed as comparable to Total Focus' animation time are AoEs, while Total Focus is single-target. That automatically puts Total Focus at a disadvantage because you're only going to be doing damage to one target each time you use the power. The animation may be long on the other powers you listed, but at least you can be fairly sure you'll be hitting multiple targets.
|
Originally Posted by StratoNexus
Total Focus is on the long end, but other sets have their own long animations (Tremor, Thunderstrike, OTC, Combustion,etc.).
|
@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."
I assume 'concentrated strike' is going to get ignored 'cos it's new?
Quote:
I thought I'd already made it clear that I don't think your opinion in this discussion holds any weight; you think Energy was balanced before the change, which obviously means this change is a flat-out downpowering of something you think was acceptable. I on the other hand, look at the change, played the set after the change, and can both say with confidence in my own experience that the set is still very strong and compares well to other melee sets, and that if it was markedly better, it was probably overpowered, and viewing the development history that the set was downpowered with basically nothing to return for it, indicating that it was too good. |
Originally Posted by Cyber_naut
Well thats a specious argument...
|
These devs are not functionally retartded. They know how to make changes that are give-and-take, and they didn't make a give-and-take. They just took. Which indicates there had already been too much give.
The 'I don't like it' arguments hold a lot more weight to me than the 'the set was fine, wtf were they doing?' arguments. The former I can see reasons to help, with things like power customization, or maybe even exploring niche ways to improve the feel of Energy - but to act as if the change was unreasonable, and as if Energy Transfer represents the whole set ('fast set' 'theme of self-damage' 'unreliable stuns') strikes me as incorrect on the facts at best.
Furthermore, Leo consistantly raises a good point; changes to Whirling Hands completely fails to address stalkers. If you feel the set is underpowered, you should be looking for fixes to the set. Not fixes to your brute or your tank. And of the three archetypes, stalkers are definitely the one who needs the most help.
Quote:
Then what is Rage and Footstomp for SS?
|
Originally Posted by Talen Lee
I assume 'concentrated strike' is going to get ignored 'cos it's new?
I thought I'd already made it clear that I don't think your opinion in this discussion holds any weight; you think Energy was balanced before the change, which obviously means this change is a flat-out downpowering of something you think was acceptable. I on the other hand, look at the change, played the set after the change, and can both say with confidence in my own experience that the set is still very strong and compares well to other melee sets, and that if it was markedly better, it was probably overpowered, and viewing the development history that the set was downpowered with basically nothing to return for it, indicating that it was too good. These devs are not functionally retartded. They know how to make changes that are give-and-take, and they didn't make a give-and-take. They just took. Which indicates there had already been too much give. The 'I don't like it' arguments hold a lot more weight to me than the 'the set was fine, wtf were they doing?' arguments. The former I can see reasons to help, with things like power customization, or maybe even exploring niche ways to improve the feel of Energy - but to act as if the change was unreasonable, and as if Energy Transfer represents the whole set ('fast set' 'theme of self-damage' 'unreliable stuns') strikes me as incorrect on the facts at best. |
"An army is a team. It lives, eats, sleeps, fights as a team. This individuality stuff is a bunch of BS." -General George Patton
-Lord Azazel
I'm sorry, I don't understand what you're asking. Can you be more clear?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by RabidBrian
Superstrength is the melee AT AoE damage king because of one attack. It has 3 aoe's, but 2 dont do damage. So while I get what you are saying, it doesnt hold much weight. One power can definitely define the set. In fact, most sets are defined by one or two powers.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lord_Thanatos
Then what is Rage and Footstomp for SS?
|
*tries to hide Psychic Shockwave*
Quote:
*Tries to hide Rain of Arrows below Archery's mediocrity*
|
Originally Posted by Leo_G
Funny you mention that....
*tries to hide Psychic Shockwave* |
"An army is a team. It lives, eats, sleeps, fights as a team. This individuality stuff is a bunch of BS." -General George Patton
-Lord Azazel
Quote:
The premise of a control power sacrificing damage for that control has been apparently thrown out the window in most cases (at least when it comes to armored melee attack sets). Only Stun and Touch of Fear remain now that MA had its control power changed. |
Originally Posted by dave_p
TF's DPA of 46.15 is also pretty disgraceful, even w/the mag 3 stun. Look at Clobber.
|
That being said, you are being unfair. You attempt to demonstrate that most sets get 1 extreme damage power, Clobber, KoB, ET, SS. Yet you then try to point at TF and say, "Look how badly it compares to Clobber." Except EM is the only set to even get two extreme attacks. The fact that one of those attacks has merely average DPA instead of above average DPA is not in and of itself evidence of any problem. It is also improtant to remember that DPA is indeed a very good metric to look at, but it is not the only metric to consider, especially when we start talking about the really high powered attacks. As much as we (rightfully) downplay its importance on the forums, sometimes, the fact that a power puts out a big orange number needs to be considered. ET deals 1.82 times the damage of Incinerate (which is not really Fiery's big hitter, but it is the power you listed, so I stuck with it), 1.56 times the damage of Clobber, and 1.28 times that of Seismic Smash.
OTOH, in about the same time it takes to animate ET, Mace can activate Clobber + Pulverize, dealing the same damage as ET, with a guaranteed mag 3 stun and a chance for a mag 5 (but it should be noted that the stun duration of ET is significantly greater than either Clobber to Pulverize). Mace will also have spent twice the endurance, and of course EM will have taken damage.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dave_p
If it's going to be stuns, I like the idea of making Stun a minor AoE. Giving it Clobber damage would also help overall ST DPS while increasing the stun quotient.
|
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.
Quote:
Aw, and here I thought if I used your favorite new word I'd get on your good side...|
Originally Posted by Talen Lee
I assume 'concentrated strike' is going to get ignored 'cos it's new?
I thought I'd already made it clear that I don't think your opinion in this discussion holds any weight; you think Energy was balanced before the change, which obviously means this change is a flat-out downpowering of something you think was acceptable. I on the other hand, look at the change, played the set after the change, and can both say with confidence in my own experience that the set is still very strong and compares well to other melee sets, and that if it was markedly better, it was probably overpowered, and viewing the development history that the set was downpowered with basically nothing to return for it, indicating that it was too good. These devs are not functionally retartded. They know how to make changes that are give-and-take, and they didn't make a give-and-take. They just took. Which indicates there had already been too much give. The 'I don't like it' arguments hold a lot more weight to me than the 'the set was fine, wtf were they doing?' arguments. The former I can see reasons to help, with things like power customization, or maybe even exploring niche ways to improve the feel of Energy - but to act as if the change was unreasonable, and as if Energy Transfer represents the whole set ('fast set' 'theme of self-damage' 'unreliable stuns') strikes me as incorrect on the facts at best. Furthermore, Leo consistantly raises a good point; changes to Whirling Hands completely fails to address stalkers. If you feel the set is underpowered, you should be looking for fixes to the set. Not fixes to your brute or your tank. And of the three archetypes, stalkers are definitely the one who needs the most help. |
I keep hearing you say energy melee as a set is fine now, and that it was overpowered before. But you never seem to address the fact that it is only on par with several other sets in terms of single target damage and mitigation (and even in this case, due to its slow delivery, this competitiveness weakens as the size of your team grows), while falling far, far behind the same competing sets in terms of aoe damage and mitigation. It's like claiming two athletes are on par because they both run the same 40 while ignoring one is physically twice as strong as the other (and the weaker one becomes confused during races and runs off into the crowd...).
So I'm not sure how one could make a real argument that a set that was only competitive solo and fighting single targets is competitive with the other available powersets that have similar solo/single target ability, but eat EM's lunch in terms of aoe and team play. I guess that's why you haven't.
Of course you did try to justify your argument with the ridiculous reasoning of 'if it wasn't overpowered the devs wouldn't have nerfed ET and added nothing in return'. I guess you missed where they overnerfed FA, made it an undepowered mess for ages, then recently buffed it when they realized their mistake. The devs aren't infallible, take a look at the pvp revamp.
Then you finish up by complaining that my suggested improvements don't address stalkers, when in fact they do, since my suggested changes include improvements to stun, ET and TF.
I'd use your favorite word again to describe your argument, but it doesn't really fit, because your arguments are just flat out illogical and factually incorrect, but you are consistent in that technique.
Quote:
Yes, but the problem is that it's the same set in all 4 categories. The others tend to be a pretty good spread across the spectrum.
|
Originally Posted by Talen Lee
Doesn't someone have to be the slowest set, though?
|
Quote:
Claws?|
Originally Posted by RabidBrian
Superstrength is the melee AT AoE damage king because of one attack. It has 3 aoe's, but 2 dont do damage. So while I get what you are saying, it doesnt hold much weight. One power can definitely define the set. In fact, most sets are defined by one or two powers.
And taking that set defining power and taking away its most beneficial part changes the whole sets play. Unless you dont use the power... |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dave_p
EM is not the ST king and hasn't been for a while. Both Fire & Stone outdamage EM, and let's not even talk about AoE damage.
|
Powerset DPS EPS
Brute Energy 157.5 3.3
Brute Stone 137.5 3.5
?_?
Quote:
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=132369|
Originally Posted by Reiska
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showt...results+are+in
Powerset DPS EPS Brute Energy 157.5 3.3 Brute Stone 137.5 3.5 ?_? |
Brute Stone 218
Brute Energy 207.4
?_?
See, I can do it too.
Quote:
Well, I figured I was being particularly polite on the matter - I don't agree with your presupposed premise, and that's pretty much it, so there's no real point us arguing past one another.|
Originally Posted by Cyber_naut
Aw, and here I thought if I used your favorite new word I'd get on your good side...
|
Quote:
| Then you finish up by complaining that my suggested improvements don't address stalkers, when in fact they do, since my suggested changes include improvements to stun, ET and TF. |
Quote:
| I'd use your favorite word again to describe your argument, but it doesn't really fit, because your arguments are just flat out illogical and factually incorrect, but you are consistent in that technique. |
You presume that Energy was fine; you assert that Energy, now, is insufficient for the balance range of play. But you can't prove that, and to be fair, I can't disprove that, because neither of us have anything remotely like provable samples of data. Your assertions satisfy you, my caution satisfies me.
Quote:
We aren't balancing anything here. Although, you're welcome to try.
|
Originally Posted by Talen Lee
We're balancing for IOs now?
|
Quote:
Well, yeah. I'm not honestly sure what impact those charts should be providing for balance discussions, since they are talking about situations that don't really happen in this game. Heck, DPS seems a really reckless thing to discuss in City, because this game is much more about punctuated bursts.
|
Originally Posted by Dersk
We aren't balancing anything here. Although, you're welcome to try.
|
My fix to EM is pretty simple. Just make Whirling Hands a respectable AoE.
Quote:
The '**** stalkers' solution.
|
Originally Posted by Candlestick
My fix to EM is pretty simple. Just make Whirling Hands a respectable AoE.
|
Quote:
No, no. You make Whirling Hands like Foot Stomp (except keep the stun and remove the KD) and replace Stun in the Stalker set with WH!|
Originally Posted by Talen Lee
The '**** stalkers' solution.
|
Everybody wins!
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.
Quote:
Stun is a power which stuns and deals Smashing/Energy damage. So is Whirling Hands! Cottage preserved.|
Originally Posted by Talen Lee
Cottage ruel
|
Everybody wins!
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.
Quote:
As Talen said, the results of that thread account for extremely high levels of global recharge not achievable without IOs. Since the Devs, as stated, balance for SOs, the content of that particular test of Bill Z Bubba's is pointless.|
Originally Posted by Dersk
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=132369
Brute Stone 218 Brute Energy 207.4 ?_? See, I can do it too. |
Stone markedly underperforms Energy Melee in the SO environment.
That all said, I still think the easiest "fix" for Energy Melee would be to give Stun the Cobra Strike treatment. It benefits all the ATs who have the set equally.
increase radius and target cap of whirling hands
Quote:
So, uh, yeah, we're just making it thoroughly clear you don't really care about the set, right?
|
Originally Posted by Terror1
increase radius and target cap of whirling hands
|
I play neither EM stalkers or brutes, but my 2nd 50 ever was a Fire/EM tank, so this is all from a tanker's perspective.
First some tanker DPA numbers (base damage at 50 w/Arcanatime):
Old ET: 170.77
New ET: 69.86
TF: 46.15
Some other heavy hitters as a comparison:
Incinerate: 60.17
KO Blow: 66.66
Clobber: 89.47
Seismic Smash: 92.30
And for the hell of it, the rest of EM:
Barrage: 37.07
EP: 42.13
BS: 42.52
WH: 16.85
Barrage, EP & BS are more or less normal. Barrage used to be worse than Brawl, but thankfully, it's merely a typical sucky T1 tanker attack. EP & BS are nothing to write home about, but are adequate filler attacks.
Whirling Hands is a joke. All the "Whirling" attacks are terrible, but the weapon sets have cones to supplement their AoEs. But fine, EM is a ST "specialist", right?
TF's DPA of 46.15 is also pretty disgraceful, even w/the mag 3 stun. Look at Clobber.
ET's DPA of 69.86 is actually pretty damn good for a tanker, but no longer warrants the self damage. Consider Clobber again or Seismic Smash. Clobber also recharges faster (16 vs. 20). Incinerate is lower DPA, but recharges in 10 sec and no self damage. In fairness, ET's DPE is fantastic, which I guess is the rationale behind the continuing self-damage, but I'd at least trade for some higher end cost for a faster animation.
EM is not the ST king and hasn't been for a while. Both Fire & Stone outdamage EM, and let's not even talk about AoE damage. Control through stuns are also shaky, since Stone Melee will have better controls while outputting better ST damage (admittedly, Stone may have even worse AoE damage than EM). Again, no other set does self-damage. So what exactly is EM's attraction again?
If it's going to be stuns, I like the idea of making Stun a minor AoE. Giving it Clobber damage would also help overall ST DPS while increasing the stun quotient.
If it's going to be ST damage, we need to return to ET's original animation, or closer to it. That's prolly never going to happen (the old DPA was kinda ridiculous), but keeping the self damage is just an insult. TF getting a new animation to bump its DPA over 55 would be another solution. In fact, giving TF ET's current animation would bump its DPA to 54.54, which would be respectable and the animatino would be more fitting IMO. Then lower ET's animation to about 2s to get its DPS up to Seismic Smash territory and EM's back to being king of ST damage.
If we're going to address the AoE damage, giving TF Thunderstrike's splash damage (but w/stuns instead of KB) sounds like a pretty good option.
Whatever the solution is, EM needs help. I've been playing my Fire/EM for the first time in years because of the recent buffs to Fiery Aura. I lead off most fights w/Burn now and rely on Fireball & Fire Blast from my epics and use EP to beat on single things. I cringe when I have to go into my ET/TF animations, even though they offer superior DPA to EP or Fire Blast.
An Offensive Guide to Ice Melee