Stalkers coming up short

Aww. Typhoon's Edge aesthetically breaks immersion for me. I don't play non-Stalker Dual Blades because of it.

Dual Blades waits until 32 to get an attack chain already. Raise a power to 12 seconds could make it worse.

Sigh, this was not made up, just way behind the times. If you've ever bothered to notice, the Defender's PFF is 75, while the Troller's PFF is 67.5. There was a reason for this at one time. Anyways I decided to get myself up to speed, and really understand what was meant by the Def softcap.

I built a FF Defender, and ran their PFF, which is at 75 Def. This is what I found out

0 Minion = 5%
0 Lt = 5.75%
0 Boss = 6.5 & 7.8%

+1 Minion = 5.5%
+1 Lt = 6.33%
+1 Boss = 7.15 & 8.58%

+2 Boss 7.8 & 9.38%
+4 Boss 9.1 & 10.92%

The + 4 Boss was confusing me, so I then built a FF Troller and ran the same test, and found the results to be the same. I finally understand what is meant by the 45% Def softcap. It's a bullcrap mechanic that essentially turns a +4 Boss into an 0 level minion. No wonder everybody and their dog, is trying to build to this, and no wonder there are more and more def debuffs showing up.

Despite my opinion of the Def Softcap, this means that yes with one SO in Hide you can reach this softcap.

My enlightenment of the Def softcap does not change the fact that to attain it you need to slot at least 1 SO's worth of Def Buff into Hide, and that the enhancement provides no real benefit beyond keeping you from being knocked out of hide. It also does not change the fact that you can loose a primary function with one roll of the RNG, no matter how you slot it.

• In my experience I always drowned in splash damage anyway, and there were a couple of Freaks headed my way.
  
  My experience was before the big Stalker buff, on a Essar that never got the passives...
  
• I've got one other Stalker to roll; Kinetic Melee, because I don't like Power Siphon.
  
  Premise: Tankers are the other archetype that requires absolute battle awareness.
  
  Therefore, I cannot team on a Tanker. I don't like to solo on Tankers, the damage is too low.
  
  Good for me that Stalkers solo well.
  
• I think new Defiance says "you don't have to be a railgod to play".
  
  1. A soloing Blaster could get away with it if they knew exactly what to do and did it quickly.
  2. Not everyone could do this, so Blasters were unpopular.
  3. New Defiance told Blasters to execute their best attacks in a chain, and gave them a margin of error against mezzers.
  I thought I saw a parallel:
  1. A teamed Stalker could, say, AS in a crowd if they knew exactly what to do and did it quickly.
  2. Not everyone can do this.
  3. ? (I need to get back into teamed Stalkering before speculating here.)

I guess you're right. It is a crutch if you're dumb enough to lean on it like a Brute would its fury.
And if you look back to old defiance, it only did 1 thing; give you a damage boost when you were low on HP while fighting.

Hide is *one* part of the AT's inherent and we recently got a change that made the issue of using AS in a crowd easier: Don't. Why do you think we've got scalable critical hit rate on teams and 50% crit rate on AoEs from hide in the first place?

Actually, it is a crutch because it can be kicked out from underneath you. I don't find it dumb to use the tools that I have been given, but I won't pretend that the tools work perfectly when they don't.

Is a semantic argument the best you can do? I still don't understand your position beyond "poo poo I don't agree".

But not as soon as you start your Stalker, and never down to 0.

Show me a Stalker secondary that has a caped AOE def at level 1. Or are you saying they get the power at lvl 1, which is irrelevant, being you cannot attain cap without enhancing the power with a SO level buff. Also that large AOE def drops off as soon as you perform a function. It's not there to keep a Stalker from taking AOE damage, it's there to help keep them in Hide during a MOB AOE attack. It has no real power once your actually in the fight.

The real question is whether the hide function serves the same functions as the fury function does for a Brute. I say it does, that it defines the Stalker just as fury defines the Brute, thus it should never be lost to a RNG, anymore than a Brute should loose all of their built up fury to a RNG.

You know what, I wanted to start another Snipe thread (I've started discussion on Snipes before) and I agree that Snipe shouldn't have that interruption. 1. Snipe's damage is nowhere as good as AS. Good luck sniping a lieut to death even as Blaster. 2. Some Snipes have knockback/knockdown. This is a big NO because once a target is knocked, the whole group is "alerted". There is no point in "pulling". 3. If the point of using snipe is to pull, many sets can achieve by putting just one +range or hell, most range attacks can pull even with 60' range vet staff attack.


So yeah, I think they should get rid of interruptable in AS and Snipe. The 4s activation time is already long enough for such fast-pace game.

Then you can just not like what I have to say and move on. And point to where I said I disagree. Wait, I'll save you the work. I didn't.

Nothing should be guaranteed in a game except what is stated in the rules. There is no rule that says Stalkers need not take any risks to gain their reward.

It also mitigates 95% of damage not directed at you while you're ambushing a target. What it's meant to do and what it actually does should both be considered when altering things.

If you're going to rely on Hide (part of your inherent and not all of it) like a Brute relies on fury, then build for it. Cap your defense so *any* attack will have trouble knocking you out of hide. That'd one-up the proposed change in that, even attacks directed at you will come across extreme resistance.

...or is this really about caltrops?

You disagreed with the notion that a fix to Hide was necessary. You cited the existing AoE Defense as the reason it wasn't needed. As far as moving on, I'll do so when I've exhausted all chances of meaningful communication. Of course, this is the internet, so I'm probably damned there already.

No, I argued the point that the changes suggested to Hide wouldn't solve the problems of the AT.

I pointed out the AoE defense because the suggestion wanted a way to circumvent attacks not directed at the Stalker...which capped defense to AoE does.

Yeah, you do that...

He was expanding on the metaphor. You can't consider Hide (or even AS) a crutch, because Stalkers are still a viable and valuable team member if they fail. If you do not believe that to be the case, then you simply have not played a Stalker well.

So your argument is uncertainty? That's all this whole post boils down to. So, let me guess. You never play defense based characters, and you never attack. After all, the RNG "could" make that just awful. Just absolutely awful. If you are considering an AT, a power, or a circumstance based on a "what if the worst" rather than actually playing it out, you are using horrendously flawed reasoning. You have to consider averages, over time, real world cases, etc. The fact of the matter is any Stalker worth his salt is not sitting there kicking the dirt because the RNG came and got him. Because one out of 15 battles broke Hide and he had to scrap, or possibly pull back long enough to hide or placate who followed him. Again, if you really believe this you have not played a Stalker well.

Okay, I'm guessing you just haven't gotten the Nemesis Staff yet. It has 100' range and it has knockback. It can be used to pull. Knockback does not just pull the whole group. If you have gotten that impression, it's because you were too close. I have pulled 1 or 2 from a full mob using the staff literally hundreds of times.

It really is. That and imaginary and worst-case-RNG scenarios where the Stalker is "gimped." I quote this remark because of course that whole idea is just lunacy.

No risks, are we actually talking about the same thing, team play. I'm opening up in the middle of a large group of critters that want to stomp my butt, as soon as I become visible. Hells, sooner. I'll often get hit before I get the attack of, even using my AS. Of course it used to be a lot worse before the changes to AS. But No risk, what type of team play do you do?

It only does this as long as you have not done your job. If your just going to dance around in the middle of the MOBs, playing tourist, then it's going to continue to prevent damage (Until you finally get knocked out of hide by an AOE.). That surely does make you a valuable member of the team.

Also I have no issues with taking the damage, just loosing a function that is important to me, to a RNG. So I would have no issues with the large AOE def being removed (Which it would.), if the being knocked out of hide was removed. This would give you the risk that you say the class needs, and would give me the Hide I say I want.

To me it sound's like you value the AOE def more than Hide, which leads to my next part.

If Hide is not important, then why take a Stalker, why not a Scrapper? Now there's not even the "I like the redside better, but I don’t like Brutes", reason.
If Hide isn't the primary part of a Stalkers inherent, what is? If you say criticals, then how does that not make the Stalker, a Scrapper with less hps?

What attacks knock the Stalker out of hide, when their truly hidden, besides AOEs? If your talking about, being hit while using Placate, and getting knocked back out of Hide, that is a broken mechanic. Or do you consider that to be just one of the "risk", that a Stalker must put up with?
What power sets besides the def ones can even attempt caping all, without using IOs? Remember IOs are not needed for the game. Or do you consider the non-def powersets unimportant to the Stalker community, along with lowbs and newbs.

How about you step down off of that Elitist soapbox, and join this conversation with the rest of us mortals, or just move on. Either would be of benefit to this conversation.

I'm not an elitist, I really am not. I've only got 2 lvl 50s, neither of which are stalkers, I don't have the dozens of characters others have (I probably only have about 26 that I can count off the top of my head), I don't have billions of inf to spend on stupid-powerful builds and I don't play the game all that often (actually, I've been playing quite a bit more when GR came out but still probably still less than 10 hours a week).

But the complaints you guys make...it just makes me seem like the super amazing player...which I'm not >_>

So either I'm amazing or you guys are just exaggerating your complaint to give it false merit. For example:

"I'm opening up in the middle of a large group of critters that want to stomp my butt, as soon as I become visible. Hells, sooner. I'll often get hit before I get the attack of, even using my AS. Of course it used to be a lot worse before the changes to AS. But No risk, what type of team play do you do?"

I just got off a team with 2 brutes and 2 MMs on my Spines/DA stalker. Vs foes with energy damage, he can do some serious evading, but against Longbow (what we were facing), he might as well not have defense. And yet, I could still pull off AS after the group was engaged. How?

Well, the Brute had a bad habit of running up to a group, taunting and then running around a corner. Of course, the Longbow will retaliate with their grenades, flame throwers and buckshots. I'd totally get knocked out of hide on more than a few occasions...if I were standing next to the Brute, that is. Does it take a rocket scientist to think "Oh, the Brute is about to get AoE'ed, I should step over here so I'm not hit"? This is common sense survival 101 I figured out on my Blasters. You don't stand next to the guy getting shot at unless you want to get shot at too.

As the Longbow paraded to get line of sight back, I was moved in their path and queue'ing up AS on a boss/Lt that was going to walk past me. By the time they got near the corner, the Assassin's Strike message pops up and I'm not even standing near the enemy. Placate > Throw Spines combined with his Lightning Rod and you're looking at a bunch of dead stuff.

Even if he wasn't pulling back behind a corner, just don't stand next to the guy getting shot. It's that simple. Longbow don't have PBAoEs they're spamming (nor Arachnos or Freaks or lots of other groups) so just standing next to the enemy doesn't mean you're a target. If you happen to wade into the hot-zone, you've got a defense cushion.

I'll be signing off on the discussion unless you actually have something to talk about but one final thing:

It only needs to protect you when you're trying to use AS. This was your complaint at the top of your post, after all...that you couldn't use AS in a mob...well that's what Hide helps do.

I'll also just say it right now: You don't know what you're asking for. If the AoE defense were removed, my Elec/Regen stalker (who isn't spected for high defense) would *consistently* have trouble using AS because damage interrupts it. Far more trouble than a non-def set should. That has nothing to do with being knocked out of hide, it has to do with damage interrupting AS.

So you're going to suggest removing the interrupt on AS now too? So damage doesn't break hide and AS will always go off? Might as well make it auto-hit while you're at it...

It's a slippery slope. If you don't have a focus for what you're trying to solve, you're just gonna have to pile on more changes to make the others viable/attractive. Then we're left with something that doesn't resemble Stalkers at all.

Thank you for illuminating Leo's position, as he has yet to do it himself.

Outside of Hide, I run the risk of being two-shotted. I can understand if this were a rare occurrence, but it is not. Hard-hitting bosses and AV's punch my ticket as fast as a squishy. I would like better compensation for having low health. High opening burst damage doesn't cut it, and it isn't even guaranteed to work. AS misses, I can deal with it, I can even deal with the occasional AoE that randomly knocks me out of Hide, but it would be nice if a single RNG roll didn't remove one of my advantages to damage.

No, his argument is how the Hide mechanic interacts with uncertainty. The fact that "some things just happen" isn't being disputed, it's the fact that the "big alpha strike"--upon which the AT depends--may be neutralized by a single lucky hit. This may not be fatal, though it may very well be, but simply serves to highlight the weak points of the AT while negating one of its strengths.

You may as well call everyone who disagrees with you a noob. Player skill is not a game mechanic, and shouldn't be used to balance an AT.

I have to say that it is you, and perhaps the fact that we cannot judge your tone because of the internet, that makes you seem elitist. You describe a number of ideas as "dumb" or "unnecessary" then you move on without suggesting an alternative. I've asked you more than once to state your concerns for the AT, you ignored the statement and moved on. You suggest that people "move on" when they disagree with you, as if you are somehow in charge of the conversation.

Or one of the myriad of "other" options is true. Perhaps you haven't understood the argument, I think you have, but there you go. Perhaps your tone and greater than average self-assurance suggest that you have skills you do not possess. Perhaps you don't even play the game and are only posting on your father's forum account to make waves. I don't know, but your either/or doesn't explore all the options.
I note that even the terms of your either/or statement are couched in terms that could be considered elitist. Your first option is self-aggrandizing and your second option approaches condescending toward your opponents. (I am still unsure of your actual intent, so it may be unintentional. I also have to assume that some of it was tongue-in-cheek.)

Wait, why would we need both?

A slippery slope is also a form of argument as well. It's the sort of thing you just did, suggesting that making a stalker unable to be knocked out of Hide would suggest, for some reason, that the interrupt from AS be removed.

I am, however, going to back off this particular topic, I have decided that the AoE defense is as close as the devs will let us get to the condition that we are discussing. I've also decided that damage really is the point of a Stalker, so I'd like more of that, however it may be rolled into the AT as it stands.

I did not mean to call anyone a newb, and the condescending tone is unintentional. The fact is this has never been a serious issue for me. Every AT has pro's and con's within certain confines, and operates best when the player is willing to play in those same confines. If an occasional AoE is knocking you out of hide, the solution isn't to change hide, it's to ask "why am I having this problem when others don't?" For starters, if you're talking about the alpha, don't wait for someone else to aggro. Begin the AS animation BEFORE the Brute hops in. Aim for the big guy, so you can demoralize if they don't make it in. If you really think that possibility that both mechanics will fail you is enough to discredit or change the AT, you would have to say that most of the ATs in this game need to be changed.
If you're talking about breaking hide after a placate, you're not placating from the right place or the right enemy. For example, I prefer to placate nullifiers more than flamethrowers when fighting LB, because the flamethrower is probably going to fire a cone AoE, which would have a low chance of hitting anyway and probably won't be directed at me. That's just how to handle LB, but experience would teach how to handle placate for various mobs.
If you're fighting so large a group that it can't be so easily dissected, ask that any buffers please keep you well defended and just scrap. The HP difference is not enough to claim that a well buffed Stalker can't do what a Scrapper can at base. That'd be lunacy.

So it's not that you (or anyone else) is a newb, it's simply that your experience is not yet adequate for this one particular situation. If everyone were a "newb" for such a thing, well then everyone would be.

Bolded what exactly I'm pointing out. "Somethings just happen" is being lifted up as if THAT were what needs to be changed. You can't argue that a few lucky hits is the downside of an AT when defense based Scrappers and Brutes have that worry and *drum roll* every AT besides Tankers does as well. The aggro will not always be well managed. The group will not always be tightly packed. Occasionally a Blaster will get pegged by two bosses and ripped apart. Does that mean we buff Blasters so they can be as tough as Scrappers? By no means!

The chance of death is baked into every AT to a certain degree. Demanding that one has it changed to the same as another implies that they should ALL be changed to that degree. The fact of the matter is Stalkers are the glass cannons of melee. They are SUPPOSED to be at risk in exchange for the damage they do. Kick and scream all we want, AS is the single highest non-crashing ST attack in the game, and datamining will never say otherwise.

Player skill is used to a point. The idea that it's not is just silly. We have beginner's luck and we have damage modifiers that start higher than they finish, for one. We have ATs that are more suited to new players, as well as powersets that are easier for getting to know the game. Moreover, I never called anyone a newb. Not being able to play a Stalker well is not the same as not being able to play the game well. I for one can solo most content as a Blaster about twice as fast as I could with any other AT. That doesn't mean Blasters are broken, it means they are well suited to my play style. I've never had a problem with survivability or the RNG as a Stalker. That's me, of course. I don't do nearly as well as a Defender, Corruptor, or Controller. I don't think that makes me a newb. The biggest difference in my thinking from yours is I don't think Defenders, Corruptors, or Controllers need to be changed. I see others play them well. I see other enjoy them. I see others are apologists for them on their threads. So what have I left to do? I play something else. I've played each of them to 50, and that was fine, but the fact is I didn't enjoy them as much, I wasn't as good at them, and it was just me.

Truth be told the part I find the worst about these debates on the forums is that it often comes down to two sides "I like it the way it is. Please don't change it." and "I don't like the way it is. It needs to be changed." With some rare and overwhelming exceptions, I don't think the latter is ever right. If a lot of people like it and you don't, play another AT. Don't pretend like Stalkers are unbalanced because YOU can't survive as one.

So you're okay with a fully loaded Stalker being roughly equivalent to a base Scrapper? That's lunacy right there. Remember, this is the situation you will face as a Stalker in every combat where you can't leverage Hide. If the Stalker does his or her job and delivers an AS, this is unavoidable. If the Stalker is knocked out of Hide, not only does he or she enter the fight without contributing much more in the way of damage than said Scrapper, the Stalker also won't last as long under most circumstances.

Blasters have the damage and can stay at range. The AT's are different and have different roles. If I am to accept that Stalkers are melee damage dealers, then I think we should be balanced against other AT's that have the same role, so we can specialize in some things while other AT's handle other roles.

But the devs can only balance around a theoretically defined average. That's what we're discussing here, right? Balancing around the player having more or less than that skill level is silly.

I've already dropped the Hide and AoE issue. I still find it tacky that a major damage advantage can be taken away by a single lucky hit, but I've already admitted that the fix would be problematic.

Don't make this conversation about me. I have used a Stalker in its intended role, as well as that of an off-tank, EVAC teleporter, and the person who keeps the spawn busy while the Pain is rezzing people/people use Wakeys and rest for a min. With the exception of my frustration at being two-shotted by BaBs, which I described earlier, my own survivability is fairly solid. However, at the beginning of this conversation, I merely stated that Jeraud had a convincing argument, and that I agreed with him for the most part. More than one person here has taken issue with my statement, and I have been assured several times that it must be a lack in my playstyle, or something else that is not inherent in the Archetype.

As far as elitism and condescending behavior go, you are doing it, but that's okay, since I feel as if you're doing it wrong. Here's how it works:

I will certainly read responses (from anyone that's not on ignore) to this thread and consider them. I have decided that this conversation will bear no further merit and will not post again in this thread. You may, however, now have the final word, rest assured it will be given the utmost consideration.

That isn't what I said. The difference isn't subtle either.

Thanks! :-D

I think most of us think Stalker needs just a bit more. Some believe more survivability, some believe just more damage and some like me believe Critical should happen in a more "planned" situation than "random" because Scrapper already has that randomness.

Stalker's critical should happen whenever I want. I want to have more control on which target receives the critical. It's pointless to critical a minion that is about to die. I know people overkill all the time but the problem with Stalker overkilling a target is that once I am un-hidden, it takes 8s of doing "nothing" to get back to hidden or I have to rely on Placate which only works on one target. In most situations after AS, I just keep on scraping like an "inferior" scrapper and I think that's where the gameplay problem lies. I do believe Stalker can scrap but it might not be the desired gameplay for an Assassin.