Judgement and blasters

Agreed that judgment is only good, this statement however does not perfectly apply.

What I do when MY Judgment recharges is watch the next guy use judgement, and then when that's recharging I watch the next guy use judgement, and when that's recharging, etc...

Usually when I join a mission team (not a trial where most people have them) we have on average 4 with the basic judgment now. That means 90/4, about every 22.5 seconds someone on your team has a chance to wreck a spawn (or 2!) with judgment. This is a GOOD thing, but it also means nobodies gonna go WOW anymore when you break a spawn with your t9 and crash, they'll probably just think you used judgment.

This means a shift towards people who can put out ST DPS is rising, since much of the time only bosses/lt's stand. This is also in many ways a good thing because it inspires change in an old AoE is King game. However, it also upsets people who specialize purely in AoE to define them.

Overall, the generalization allowing EVERYONE power, makes the game far better for concept characters as you can achieve power without being limited to AoE powerhouse sets.

Based on the post you referenced, the highest-tier recharge bonus Umbral used was +250%, or 350% total, which isn't that difficult to reach:

100% base + 70% Hasten + Enhancement + IO bonuses. At the ED cap for recharge enhancement (~95%), we're looking at +95% or so in IO bonuses. With Spiritual Alpha, that number drops by at least 33%, down to 62%ish.

+300% (400% total, which is still 100% shy of the cap, btw) would be difficult to reach. That's what you need to make Drain Psyche close to permanent (ignoring activation time).

Oddly enough, I think IOs help Blasters as much or more than they help everyone else. Even before IOs, Blasters at higher levels were disadvantaged. Their offensive advantages (when applicable) were clearer, but that was never a particularly high priority. Buff/debuff always overshadowed damage, and other ATs (notably Scrappers) were capable of similar-to-Blaster offense without having to sacrifice survivability.

IOs give more to Blasters (really everyone) in terms of defense than they tend to give to everyone else in terms of offense. That's a win, but it doesn't change the fact that Blasters were working at a disadvantage to begin with. The design paradigm that values ranged damage so much more than melee damage, even when the former is numerically inferior to the latter, has been out-dated from about Issue 2 onward.

Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze Nice build

The scrapper/brute who got buffed by the kin before the small stuff died ?

That's fine and dandy for you, but I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that you're more the exception than the rule. I generally do rather well on my 50 blaster, but she's energy/dev and I don't believe I'd even think about trying to solo an AV let alone a pylon.

This is patently untrue. buff/debuff is a synergy of damage. You're obviously a number cruncher. Wouldn't the higher max damage on a blaster, pegged from damage buffs and self buffs, combined with either added survivability and debuffed damage resistance mean you're even MORE of a damage power house than you were without those AT's? 8 slots on a team leaves a lot of room for a good blaster, a good buffer, a good debuffer, a tank, a scrapper, etc. Yeah you can take two debuffers, or two buffers, a tank, or something else but an added blaster with those things in place is a wonder to behold and you know it.

I wasn't aware that melee damage had suddenly become un-lol and reached blaster levels of output. Which set did you roll, because I want to win the game too. Also, didn't you just admit that blasters with IO builds bypass some of your doom and gloom by giving them exactly what you keep saying you want? More mitigation? More mez? More damage? There are proc's for these things. My point is it's a style thing. How do you defeat AV's, because there are plenty of methods. Point blank debuff/DPS is one of the easier methods, which blasters shine at.

Try a Fire/Shield scrapper or brute. SS/FA brute. Shield/Elec tanker. Among many, many others. Your lack of awareness does not make these sets non-existent.

Blasters don't unreservedly have the highest offense in the game. That's kinda the point here. Even if they did clearly edge out every single other build in the game, it's a question of extent: If Blasters were obviously better at offense, by let's say 5%, then would that justify a 200% survivability and/or utility advantage for (nearly) everyone else?

I'm talking about this: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showt...67#post3485867

There is an element of skill to the game, but there's only so much skill or experience can improve your damage output. This game is about numbers. 244 DPS is an impressive number even among Blasters. And before you rush to create a justification for your frankly ignorant pre-conceptions about the game's mechanics here, keep in mind that those numbers were posted before Issue 20 brought us Lore pets that can basically kill the Pylon alone.

Balance discussions interest me. I'm quite happy with the game the way it is, enjoying the hell out of my Dominator in fact. But it has always been true that the devs' place undue weight on the ability to attack from range.

There's nothing to counter. You have pre-conceived ideas about the game that you are unwilling even to try to substantiate. You just keep repeating the same tired platitudes that are either outright and obviously false, or heavily over-simplified.

Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze Nice build

Heh, which part is patently untrue? That buff/debuff characters rule in a teaming environment? Castle himself would support me there.

Yes, a buffed Blaster will deal more damage than a buffed Defender. That's true. The problem is that there comes a point after which the Blaster is superfluous. A buff/debuff that increases the whole team's damage output tends to trivialize any advantage Blaster's have over the next highest damage dealer within that team. And on the subject of Scrappers, they're usually in a better position to receive the best damage buff in the game (Fulcrum Shift) because they live in melee range.

The point isn't that Blasters suck on teams. The point is that they're not very good at soloing or teaming. Most ATs/builds are at least very good at one or the other. Some excel at both. (Edit -- Bottom Line: Blasters have the same if not more team-reliance that buff/debuff ATs do, but without the enormous upside on teams. They need support to perform at their peak, but support doesn't need them.)

*shakes head* Dude, I don't even know where to start. If you honestly believe that melee damage is intrinsically less impressive than ranged damage, then you're even less well-acquainted with how the game works than I thought. Hell, Blasters themselves do much more damage in melee than they do at range.

Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze Nice build

It's not that you're wrong, it's that you're selective. Buff/debuff is awesome, but a buff/debuff defender is not a blaster and it's the best when paired with a DPS class. (Such as the Blaster.) There are always outliers, but most of the ones I can think of are, shockingly, corruptors such as a fire/dark for instance. You even say as much here...

Yes, scrappers sure are easier to get that buff with and debuffing makes defender damage almost ok as opposed to terrible or awful. (outside of archery/dual pistols/AR, which starts at ok.) I'm not talking about ease of play though since Blaster is an advanced class as most glass cannons are. Saying a buff/debuff team doesn't need blasters is stupid. What they don't need are scrappers. I'm talking about effectiveness when you know what you're doing. (Especially since I think we all agree that City of Heroes is, by definition, easy mode.) Also, saying that the increase causes blasters to become superfluous isn't true either. As you point out, buff/debuff increases the output of the whole team, including the top end damage dealer. That being the blaster. Yeah, anyone can wipe a load of minions off the map. They're friggin' minions. A blaster can wipe the mob period.

Blasters are superb for teaming, and I completely disagree with you on this point. In a team situation they are ideal as ALL their holes are plugged by a team (or should be) while still maintaining their higher damage limits. A scrapper just gets more of the same junk they already have. So they may start off as being more durable than a blaster but in a team situation that concern is removed, put on a shelf, and forgotten unless you are consistantly playing with terrible teams. If anything the scrapper is more of a head scratcher as to why they keep getting invited to teams. I'm guessing it's a lack of bubble/sonics, but either of those sets turns a blaster into a better version of a scrapper.

It's not that it's less impressive, it's that it doesn't matter either way. It's a non-issue to me. Getting up close and personal on a blaster is modus operandi for me. So is juking either up, down, or side-to-side and switching to build up+aim and throwing some AoE death. Or staying in the middle and doing the same. I won't argue that blasters can solo, you're right there. I'm sure there are some outlier blaster sets that I haven't played yet that can kind of solo but I wouldn't expect them to be scrapper-good at solo play.

I think the disagreement comes from the fact that there isn't anything HARD enough in the game to warrant taking a Blaster, who has better damage, over a scrapper. That and every mouth-breathing retard has a regen scrapper. If anything I'd take a blaster because there's at least a chance they know how to play. I just assume a scrapper is an AE n00b unless they have a laundry list of sets in their description. Either way, it's going to be dead in under two minutes.

It would be interesting to see how many blasters truly do better damage than scrappers. It is not self-evident as you seem to think.

And that doesn't even take into consideration the extra time most blasters will need to take in order to survive (things like juking or mezzing).

This. People are seemingly taking it as self-evident that blasters do more dmg than any other AT, not just scrappers. I'm not convinced this is the case. When I started playing CoH, I rolled blasters precisely because this is how they were described. And my second blaster was actually a very high-damaging combo (fire/nrg). This is the first combo of any AT I got past 40, and honestly, while it's dmg is great, I don't think it really outshines my fire/kin, ill/rad, or even my new elec/wp. Is there a difference? Perhaps, but I'd hardly say the difference is significant enough to bestow the "cannon" moniker upon blasters, and my scrapper is just middle-of-the-road in regards to scrapper dmg (certainly not a fire, shield, or even electric or dark). I can still walk that scrapper into a 54 x8 ambush farm and complete it in about 20 minutes, 5 or so more if I don't swallow reds. And at no time am I in danger of death. There are lots of other scrapper builds that would put me to shame.

And sure, blasters can be made tougher and can unleash on teams, but so can any other AT who are also being buffed with dmg, either directly (FS) or by extension (-res). On a team of 8 50s (or a league of 16 or 24), I've never found damage lacking. If anything, the awesome power of buffs have made purely dmg-oriented ATs obsolete, but at least scrappers still have the ability to solo just about any content in the game.

I think when people say that blasters give up too much for not really being the cannon that people who love blasters are insulted. There's no need to be. It's a valid point that's not an attack on your skill in fighting or design. It's simply recognizing that, say, a fire/fire blaster doesn't really do much more dmg than an elec/shield scrapper, and the scrapper gets def, def debuff resistance, dmg resistance, mez protection, +health, a temp God mode power, and the ability to slightly buff the team.

And then you compare an Elec/shield scrapper to an elec/dev blasters and fall off your chair laughing ^_^

Anyway, nothing to see here. If you haven't learned that blasters are crap by now, chances are you never will

Is there any scrapper setup that would be that terrible, that a random blaster setup would do considerable more? I've played quite some scrappers and blasters, where blasters have a huge range in survivability and damage output throughout the sets, yet scrapper seem to be very consistant on damage output (as in, high, higher, highest).

Sets like energy/ice, Arch/elec (wich also rely heavy on melee dmg) or rad/dev (yeah stupid set i know), they feel very 'weak' compared to the big boys as Sonic, fire and elec. Where scrapper, i cant really find a real weak set, only dark perhaps on AoE strength.

I think scrappers can only be classified as ST vs AoE. The devs have done a pretty good job managing those two. And really, even DM has access to nice AoEs in the epics and now a crashless nuke on 90s timer. So a DM is ok in AoE (especially when paired with secondaries that have some attacks as well) but a God in ST who's best attack chain includes a self-heal. I've seen DM/Shields do stupidly powerful things against hard targets.

I think the issue with blasters (and tankers) is that these are basically still teaming builds that have had their wings clipped. These ATs really are designed to complement each other. The tanker can stand in close while the blasters blast without fear of reprisal. Without the caps we have now, blasters really were easily the king of damage and the tanks the king of... well, tanking. I think the nerf bat really hit these ATs. Scrappers could still solo, but tanks and blasters were now a lot closer to scrappers in terms of survivability and damage. And because devs believe that everyone should be able to solo, you saw damage buffs for controllers bringing them closer to blasters. IOs certainly eroded the need for a tank as nearly everyone was running around with softcapped defense. They also increased the dmg by way of direct buffs and recharge buffs. With the right build, people can reach their absolute best attack chain, maintaining their highest possible DPS. I think after these developments, we're realizing that the absolute best DPS of a blaster is just not much higher, if at all, than scrappers, dominators, corruptors, and controllers. Granted, three of those ATs can have lousy damage builds, but all of those three bring something to the entire team, not just themselves. The devs threw tankers a bone with the new content somewhat reducing the effectiveness of def builds, but I'm not sure if it's possible to do that with blasters. Even if i21 has enemies that are just bags of HPs, it would probably still be better to have the SS/FA brute or DM/Shield scrapper or the Fire/Dark Corruptor or....

This really doesn't reflect my in-game experience-- or at the very least, it doesn't hold any more true for my Blaster, than it does another AT.

I play with super-teams pretty regularly, and it's usually a matter of who fires the first to third AoE, depending on the attack, as the burst damage does the job. In my specific case, that's happening every 4ish seconds, before buffs, from ~80+ ft out, with staggered usage of Aim and BU (5 sec. downtime between the two, when used this way). Any hard(er) targets are usually dropped in a barrage of ST spike damage, but its less likely anyone is repeating a chain, unless it's an EB or AV.

Either way, it's not abnormal to force the pace of any melee AT(s) who are present, who typically have to close to melee distance for PBAoE, excluding patron AoEs. In this same scenario, FS usage is actually trivialized, as the mobs are usually dead before it can be cast for full effect-- the same holds true for longer animating rad debuffs, for example. In other words, it's not making or breaking the teams speed, as again, 2-3 AoEs clear most mobs, while a combined damage spike drops bosses as the team is on it's way to the next group. Range and the first strike ability of blasters, doms, defenders, SoA, etc. usually take precedence. Being more sturdy from the get-go doesn't mean much, if I'm also able to hit the soft cap for defense, etc. and kill fast enough to decrease the rate of return fire.

Nonetheless, I can't say blasters are bad at teaming, nor will I say it requires any special dedication that a good player doesn't already exercise. Playing to your strengths, it's more a matter of force multipliers acting in unison with a ranged AT, that has a good amount of AoE and ST burst potential.

So on the one hand, you're saying that Blasters' damage advantage isn't marginalized by buff/debuff in high-end teams, and on the other hand, you're saying that Blasters' damage is marginalized, but no more than than the damage of other ATs? Isn't that precisely the point? Blasters' schtick is damage. Other ATs have other things going for them, after all.

If everything's dying that fast, then the Blaster is superfluous. If things aren't dying that fast, then Fulcrum Shift becomes far more important than the Blaster. The problem here is that people are assuming that their Blaster's offensive contribution is not just superior to everyone else's (which isn't necessarily true) -- but rather, that Blaster damage dwarfs the damage output of everyone else. That, I'm afraid, isn't even close to true, except perhaps when you're fighting trash spawns that'd die promptly regardless.

And the second you do run up against something that's tough enough to warrant exhaustive DPS comparisons, the Blaster's best practical advantage is nullified -- that is, burst damage, especially AoE burst damage, provided you're not playing an AoE-light Blaster build, like Ice Blast. As demonstrated earlier in the thread, there comes a point, surprisingly quickly, where even excellent Blaster AoE burst damage begins to pale, even in situations where it does apply. To add insult to injury, Blaster AoE becomes less efficient against tough spawns, unless the team has a way of dealing reliably with scatter. Sure, I can take Web Envelope (the most wide-area AoE immobilize available) on my Blaster, but it has a glacial animation time, with a bonus redraw penalty. Oops, there goes my ranged first-strike advantage.

You know what melts tough spawns, because you skirted around the issue yourself: bursts of damage from everyone, preferably debuff-enhanced burst of damage by everyone. Even relatively anemic Patron/Epic AoE powers get really strong, really quick, when multiplied by 8 teammates and enhanced by buff/debuff support. Notice I haven't even mentioned Judgement.

Are Blasters generally better suited for high-end teams than Scrappers? Sure, I'll buy that. I never said that Scrappers are especially good at teaming. What I said is that Scrappers are great at soloing, which just happens to mean that Scrappers don't care particularly about team composition. In situations like the one you posted above, for instance, I frequently see Scrappers go off and solo whole spawns by themselves as an indirect help to the team.

By contrast, Blasters are not great at teaming, and they're not really even good at soloing, relative to the alternatives. What was your list for ranged first-strike ability again? Oh yeah -- Blasters, Doms, Defenders, Soldiers of Arachnos, etc. The two bolded ATs are better at soloing than Blasters by a wide margin, and they have more general team utility. Defenders, needless to say, are tops when it comes to teaming.

Blasters can be fun to play, and I think there's even some room to argue that their mechanical weakness actually makes them more fun to play, for a lot of people. But there's no good reason that they couldn't be thrown a bone or two. Sorry for the ranty ramble, which wasn't entirely directed at Krouget.

Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze Nice build

I don't even think Obitus or myself are saying blasters aren't very good... they still bring tons of damage. It's just that the damage they bring doesn't really outshine other ATs, which sucks because damage is supposed to be THE thing that differentiates blasters from every other AT. If I was forming a team and needed damage, yes, I'd take a blaster. But I also wouldn't bat an eye replacing that blaster with a scrapper, brute, dom, VEAT, HEAT, or some powerset combinations of corrs, controllers, or defenders. And that's if I was looking specifically for damage, which I never really do. Most of the time I'd rather add more buff/debuff to the team as generally that really helps get the steamroll going (if we're talking all lvl 50s).

It's not just damage, but consistent ranged burst damage. At the point we consider a team’s performance to be strong enough to invalidate a good blasters ability, that same team wouldn't miss a scrapper, brute, tank, dom, etc. for the respective added survivability.

However, in my specific example, I alluded to the added benefit of ranged high burst potential, giving blasters and other key ranged ATs, first strike ability, in addition to the AoE potential previously praised, and buff caps high enough to make most content a negligible threat. Keeping within the realm of reason, I touched on this not being absolutely critical for a team to steamroll content, but it’s a valid counter-argument to the idea that blasters aren't good on teams.

From my perspective, your point reinforces the dominance of force multipliers in the game, not so much that blasters need tweaking-- much less to levels which would make them stand out on a team that dominant.

This overlooks the point that in the initial barrage of AoE, that it's my blaster commonly landing in the initial salvo, killing mobs, because of high burst damage, with ranged priority. It also neglects the fact that there are many preemptive buffs which enable that potential, which don't rely on a specific enemy target.

This isn't to say FS isn't helpful, but I'll say there can be a synergy between the two-- if it's in my interest to get the damage boost, then I'll make it a point to close to the appropriate range to get the boost. Unless we're just being unreasonable, it's no more an automatic death sentence for my blaster, than it is for the Kin alerting the mobs with FS (or if it's coming after a mez, then I'm near guaranteed safety). If the consideration is that the Kin is at least surviving reliably, then I'll also assume there are enough factors at play which will let me operate closer to potential, both in theory and actual practice.

I'd agree. Extremes in any argument tend to miss the root of the problem.

I think you're being a bit selective in the emphasis you're placing on the performance depreciation here, but I'm not going to argue it, so much as I'm going to ask for clarification:

Are you stating that for their lack of survivability when solo, that any combination of blaster power set(s) should clearly outdo all other ATs in damage (ST, Ranged, and AoE)?

Or are you saying we should have something more subtle, like increased solo viability?

In either case, to what degree are you advocating, and how will that translate to teaming (if at all)?

It can't become less efficient than the next AoE dealer, unless something specifically counteracts just the blaster AoE contribution, and nobody else's. If the difficulty is affecting everyone equally, then the blaster is no more or less efficient in the hierarchy, than they were before. If you're highlighting the fact that as difficulty rises, you want more force multipliers filling the rank of teams, then that much still holds true...but blasters aren't unique in that respect. If you're inferring they should be the first to go among non-buff ATs, I think that's very debatable and situational.

Lastly, if you want to make sure mobs stay within the radius of the AoEs, there are multiple ways to accomplish or approach that. I just can't say I'm interested at this time, but you're not wrong in that it’s a concern.

Not just scrappers, but a few other ATs, up until the point where content becomes difficult enough to warrant replacing them, in favor of more force multipliers. Most content, however, isn't that difficult, meaning blasters still remain valuable on these capable/high end teams.

Certainly true. I'll add that on these same teams, they can be carried by 2-4 players, comfortably.

But again, it highlights established facts. Force multiplying ATs are strongest when they stick together. Scrappers and other melee ATs are equipped to be self-sustainable, albeit at a slower pace.

You've created an amalgam of points here, which don't necessarily get argument from me because I previously stated them. Most other ATs are better soloist, though I'll say on many buff-centric teams, control also goes out the window.

I'm 100% in agreement, on this specific point. We're just in disagreement as to which qualities, or lack thereof, support a reason for a buff.