Why A Blaster?

[quote]

Okay, I keep going back and forth on posting in this thread, as it seriously depresses me to read through it. But I'll give it a go again.

Some of the concern is nonsense, as it falls much more under the "grass is greener" and "x AT is better than me!" feeling, than an actual real issue. The pylon numbers quoting is part of the problem, as this is not City of Pylons, it's City of Heroes. It's interesting to see what people can do, and certainly can point out where people can build to, however, it's not how the game works (and thank goodness... I can't imagine anything more boring... I know some people like to do it to show what they do, but I can't imagine something more boring than standing and whacking the same target for minutes at a time).

Most teams and regular players aren't necessarily going to be pumping out those numbers, as not everyone has the time, money, or inclination to make builds like that (or the ability to play some of the high end builds and things they do).

Ranged damage still makes a difference that people are skipping by, as well. A team with decent amounts of ranged damage to it are going to kill most of a mob before that uber Scrapper build can even bring more than 1-2 attacks to bear. Ranged damage is also more safe: Master of runs are not what the game is all about either, but I'd rather have Blasters on for damage than Scrappers (or even most Brutes). When Blasters die on a team, it's usually because they did something they shouldn't have. When Scrappers and Brutes do, it's often because they're where they should be: in melee.

And Blasters can go into melee just fine. Ranged is their primary and where they're best, but they can also hit things hard up close. When it came to finishing off bosses, my AR/EM preferred getting in close with bosses, actually. He could keep them stunned and his melee attacks would make short work of them (especially lethal resistant mobs). If you build for S/L, you're probably going to be pretty safe up close, too.

Even if you look at all that and it's not enough, look at things from Castle's perspective (and the rest of the devs). If certain other builds are doing that much DPS and that's a problem, do you really think the best option is to blatantly create power creep, and up Blaster's damage (when you can really do a lot of damage as a Blaster and solo or team quite well through all of the game's content)? If you're smart and concerned about balance, you look at those outliers and see if they need to be trimmed back, not add to all the damage Blasters can already do. And part of looking at those outliers is seeing how easy or typical those builds are: the game is based around SOs still, though they still take into account what IOs can do.

So if anything, people need to start talking about the builds that actually need trimming back and argue for that. If those uber DPS builds merit that, however. I somehow doubt people are going to do it, though, as it's far easier to sit in here and be negative about Blasters than go out to the various forums and tell those players of those ATs why they need a reduction in their powers. Buffs are nice, so people focus on that... even if it unbalances the game.

To really put this all in perspective, I knew we were heading into ridiculous territory when people started complaining about Tanker damage compared to Blasters. Oy. I have offensively minded Tankers and like what they can do, but they're not going to compare to Blasters going all out.

It really does come down to the grass is greener for some people. Blasters play differently from other ATs, so they're not necessarily threatened by other people doing good damage, even damage on the same scale. It's interesting to see what kind of DPS a few MM builds can put out, but I'm never playing an MM again. I hate that playstyle. Not every powerset has to be equally good, and every AT just has to bring something different and decent to the playing table. They don't have to be the absolute numbers best to do so. Do you have to look at the numbers for balance? Yes. But that's about it. There have to be ranges of performance across an AT and between ATs, or else everything will need the exact same numbers and performance, no matter how the graphics show the powers.

I think one thing to take into account that many dont, is blasters inherent now makes up some difference in a long attack chain. Something that is not as apparent in early game play due to long recharges with no hasten or slotting. No stamina to maintain an attack chain etc.

I find it pretty easy on my blasters to maintain a steady 35 or so percent damage buff from the inherent power. I think also something to take into account is how many blaster sets offer damage types that benefit the player more then alot of scrapper or brute damage types.

When you figure that katana, claws, Dual blades, martial arts etc all offer basicly smashing or leathal damage, the most resisted damage type in the game, where most blaster sets offer energy, fire, ice etc, that will do more damage to NPCs due to the specialized damage type.

Simply put in most cases i find my scrappers might be stronger at keeping upright in the game, but that my blasters DO infact dispense enemies faster. So where i have the ability to cast more attacks and mitagate the damage with a scrapper they feel stronger attack wise where i feel my blasters actually do more damage but the longer i take to put something down the worse it is for me.

As to the OPs comments about dominators. Blasters are similar in the play style but they are different creatures. Blasters will kill slightly quicker but i would say leaving IOs out of the equations, that a dominator is comparable like a scraper, the status effects create a situation where your safer then simply casting damage damage damage.

FWIW here is my 2 cent anecdote.

I have 2 level locked tip runners. A level 32 Arch/Energy blaster, and a level 32 Dual Blades/WP scrapper, neither has any sets but both are frankenslotted.

They both run +0x1. They both finish their tip missions in about the same time 30 minutes +- 5 minutes, for five tip missions. I do see that the blaster is faster getting the tips, but slower at finishing the missions. The scrapper at that difficulty setting doesn't break a sweat, but the blaster has a close call or two.

People that solo pylons generally don't ONLY solo pylons with the toon. What it is is a stress test of build ability that is extremely quantifiable and even for most combat configurations*

*Equal resistance to all but psy. Has a high degree of aoe damage that can be a bit unfair to some pet centric builds. Otherwise a very standardized test.

Being able to survive the onslaught of a pylon with just the power of your build is a solid accomplishment and a testament to the fortitude of your toon. If you can withstand that punishment you can be pretty confident handling most mob types. Being able to kill one is a testament of your ability to deliver single target damage. If you can kill one you can be confident you will be able to rapidly complete most solo content.

A toon that can rapidly defeat a pylon is able to rapidly defeat most pve content. Unless anyone wants to contest that the top 10 unique (ie non-repeating) builds absolutely decimate most content? I mean bots/dark (/storm, or /traps), fire (or ill)/rad, ill/cold, fire (or dark)/shield are all combos that are noted for their ability to crush content regardless of the difficulty setting.

So no it isn't necessarily true to state that a toon that can rapidly take down a pylon is great in most other pve content, but at the same time I've yet to see anyone show evidence that it isn't categorically true. About the only conclusion that can't be taken is that some toons that don't excel at pylon killing can still be great at plowing through content (like a traps/arch defender for instance, but that is more a result of pylons being a bit tougher on the traps summons than most pve content due to the aoe spam, which I noted in the *exceptions* section)

*I of course am strictly speaking about 'damage' oriented toons as that is what this discussion is focused around. We all know an Emp is great at what they specialize in even if they aren't a damage dealer in most situations. It may be worth noting that a number of the top contenders are also powerful team forcemultipliers, so not only are they capable of delivering very high damage themselves, they also make the rest of the team look better.

If we had some sort of easily quantifiable and repeatable aoe damage stress test I'm sure a number of blaster combos would score better. Although I think some people might be surprised at how well many other combos perform, while also retaining significant survivability and/or team multiplying advantages. If the test involved more difficulty than the equivalent of surviving against a pack of green mobs then I doubt blasters would actually dominate such a test.

IMO if a blaster can stay upright there should be no question that they are delivering the most damage in the game. Handwaving away situations where that isn't true doesn't actually make it all right.

ie. There should be no situation ever where a MM can outdamage a blaster that is attacking aggressively because in that situation the MM will 100% of the time be more survivable. Because this scenario not only exists, it is actually very easy to produce with SO's that clearly indicates that something is wrong with the inter AT balancing