Hmmm, nukes are looking less attractive.
By
Aett_Thorn,
Posted on: 2011-04-08 11:07 in Suggestions and Ideas
Nukes are one of the things that I take and cherish, but never "feel" like I want to use. Every time I look at a situation which could be theoretically appropriate for a nuke, I opt to nuke with apprehension, rather than the glee such a power should invoke.
That's always a bad sign.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
It's not just a silly limitation nowadays. It's always been a silly limitation, and it used to be even sillier when your own nukes would super-stun you for 5-10 seconds. Happy happy joy joy happy happy joy!
I've rarely argued for the removal of the crash from nukes, mostly because I didn't think anyone would agree with me, what with the strong status quo we have here, but I still firmly believe that these powers are unduly hamstrung by irritating limitations. Here's what bugs me about nukes so much - they're good powers in some circumstances, but frikkin' let me use 'em! There's nothing quite as frustrating as having a good power on your roster and being unable to use it, even when it's right there, recharged and taunting you. I'm all for removing the 100 end crash from nukes, yes. Can we kill the interruptibility on snipes while we're at it? |
I'd possibly keep the -recovery in nukes, so they act like EMP or EMP Arrow where there is still a bit of a penalty for using them but drop the crash.
As for snipes I've detailed before what I'd do with them, they really need to become more useful by removing the interrupt and also adding a secondary effect to each (stun, fear etc) as a small AOE.
Quote:
Agreeying on this. It seems the best solution. 75% crash instead of 100%
|
Originally Posted by HardRider
i say leave the crash. but make it so it only kills half of your end or at least 75% of it. as nukes can be buffed etc they do need a downside tbh and killing 50-75% sounds fine, you can still continue on.
|
- The Italian Job: The Godfather Returns #1151
Beginner - Encounter a renewed age for the Mook and the Family when Emile Marcone escapes from the Zig!
- Along Came a... Bug!? #528482
Average - A new race of aliens arrives on Earth. And Vanguard has you investigate them!
- The Court of the Blood Countess: The Rise of the Blood Countess #3805
Advanced - Go back in time and witness the birth of a vampire. Follow her to key moments in her life in order to stop her! A story of intrigue, drama and horror! Blood & Violence... not recommend to solo!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Liz Bathory
Agreeying on this. It seems the best solution. 75% crash instead of 100%
|
Given that nukes cost 15-20 End to cast anyway a 75% crash would be pretty much the same thing as a 100% crash for them even if you had full End when firing it.
Our side:
.) Make the nukes NOT have a crash or give them a lot more damage! Otherwise it just makes sense to not use them and use judgement instead.
Their side:
.) WTF, we just gave you judgement, it's like an additional Mini-Nuke, and you're ********?
Our Side:
.) But we have to work for judgement, we should get it because we run crazy number of trials and work to unlock it
Their side:
.) So what, now you want us to give you MORE just when we just gave you thiis?
..and so on.
Guess who wins? The guys who write the code.
Live with it or quit. The only two real options.
Virtue Speed Junkie
A Simplified Guide to Attack and Defense
I don't agree with the premises here. That Judgment powers are really good and have no drawbacks isn't a compelling reason to buff nukes.
This is a false dichotomy. Nukes and Judgment Powers aren't an either/or kind of thing. You can take both, and you can even use both at the same time.
Nukes also have a few significant advantages over Judgment that are worth mentioning. First, you get them at 32 and have access to them so long as you don't exemplar below 27. They are also enhanceable. Yes, Judgment powers do more damage than many nukes, but only if you don't slot them. Most importantly, Nukes are affected by Aim/Build Up and other player buffs. If you're at the damage cap, Nukes do silly damage, but Judgment always puts out the same amount of (admittedly high) pain unless debuffs are applied.
You could argue that Judgment is better and generally more useful. You might even be right. After all, it's an 'every time it's up' sort of power because it doesn't have a crash, and its 90 second recharge seems lightning fast compared to classical nukes like Inferno. In a lot of situations, it is better. But it doesn't make classical nukes obsolete, IMO.
That Judgment allows everyone to step on a Blaster's toes a bit might be the case and could be cause for concern, but I'm not sure this is a good reason to give in to power creep. Personally, I like having two powers that do nuke-level damage and couldn't imagine dropping Inferno on my Blaster.
Now, I wouldn't necessarily oppose removing the full crash from the Blaster nukes, but I don't see what this has to do with Judgment being incredibly good. Especially since you can take both.
The Ballad of Iron Percy
Quote:
Normally, I'd post some "Yeah, because the developers NEVER listen to their player base!" snark, but with both BABs and Castle gone and seeing what's being introduced recently... I don't feel up to it any more.
|
Originally Posted by slainsteel
Live with it or quit. The only two real options.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
I'm thinking they should revisit this and make the power more archtype appropriate:
Blaster = Ranged Nuke
Melee = PBAE
Defender = Major Debuff (perhaps combined with DOT)
Controller = High Level AE Hold (same)
etc.
131430 Starfare: First Contact
178774 Tales of Croatoa: A Rose By Any Other Name ( 2009 MA Best In-Canon Arc ) ( 2009 Player Awards - Best Serious Arc )
Quote:
This isn't really the argument. Judgement powers are, in my eyes, Nukes done right, and it's not hard to imagine why people would feel that after using one for the first time.|
Originally Posted by The_Hegemon
I don't agree with the premises here. That Judgment powers are really good and have no drawbacks isn't a compelling reason to buff nukes.
|
I, personally, don't base my argument against nuke crashes on Judgement powers at all. I base my argument on the fact that that kind of crash sucks for what these powers do, and it means an otherwise cool power becomes dreck because I never "want" to use it. Truth be told, almost 90% of the times when I've used Nukes, it's been because I felt guilty for taking and slotting the power yet never using it, figuring it had to be good for SOMETHING. And it very rarely is.
I've never been a fan of balance by annoyance, and this is pretty much it. The idea that a power can be so good that using it must be made to suck is foreign to me, because it seems to ruin all the fun of said power. To the point, in fact, that I've far more fun with Full Auto - a power which does comparatively little damage - than I do with Inferno, simply because it isn't a pain to use.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
I definitely agree with this - AT-specific Incarnate powers should have been the way to go, in my opinion. However, it would also have meant more work, and... Well...
|
Originally Posted by Hercules
I'm thinking they should revisit this and make the power more archtype appropriate:
Blaster = Ranged Nuke Melee = PBAE Defender = Major Debuff (perhaps combined with DOT) Controller = High Level AE Hold (same) etc. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Hercules
I'm thinking they should revisit this and make the power more archtype appropriate:
Blaster = Ranged Nuke Melee = PBAE Defender = Major Debuff (perhaps combined with DOT) Controller = High Level AE Hold (same) etc. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I definitely agree with this - AT-specific Incarnate powers should have been the way to go, in my opinion. However, it would also have meant more work, and... Well...
|
So, no, I'm damn glad they didn't go with that idea. Because it sounds far inferior to what we got.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zwillinger
GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Captain_Photon
NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.
 |
Quote:
It is in this thread. Specifically, in the OP: "Now that Judgement exists, nukes are quickly becoming all downside with very little upside." My point is that classical Nukes and Judgment aren't mutually exclusive things, so this argument doesn't sway me. The addition of the Judgment slot to the game doesn't change Nuke powers at all.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
This isn't really the argument.
|
It might allow you to drop your Nuke if you feel that you can compensate for it with the Judgment slot, sure. It does not follow that because this is true, Nukes should be buffed.
Quote:
|
I, personally, don't base my argument against nuke crashes on Judgement powers at all. I base my argument on the fact that that kind of crash sucks for what these powers do, and it means an otherwise cool power becomes dreck because I never "want" to use it. Truth be told, almost 90% of the times when I've used Nukes, it's been because I felt guilty for taking and slotting the power yet never using it, figuring it had to be good for SOMETHING. And it very rarely is. I've never been a fan of balance by annoyance, and this is pretty much it. The idea that a power can be so good that using it must be made to suck is foreign to me, because it seems to ruin all the fun of said power. To the point, in fact, that I've far more fun with Full Auto - a power which does comparatively little damage - than I do with Inferno, simply because it isn't a pain to use. |
I don't find the crash to be crippling at all. It's a major tactical consideration and the power does come with a serious drawback, but it's not something that can't be planned around or compensated for. I don't find that it kills the power at all. Sure, it makes it more situational than say, Full Auto, but I don't find the situations that call for it are all that rare.
The Ballad of Iron Percy
Quote:
I'm not saying the choices presented are what I'd have picked for each AT, but it doesn't change the fact that I'd have preferred AT-specific Incarnate powers. Not just judgement, either. This blurring of the ATs is decidedly not something I enjoy, lest we give up on having ATs in general. And I don't even have a problem with ATs sharing powers, just not entire powersets, which is what we'll likely end up with by the time this is over.
|
Originally Posted by Techbot Alpha
More work? No, it woulda just sucked, in my opinion anyway. Who says I (or anyone else) would want a PbAoE Judgement, just because I'm playing a scrapper? And the hell with 'major debuff' for defenders? My Emp/Psi doesn't want that. She wants a freaking JUDGEMENT power! My Scrapper, for one, will be loving the 'throwing giant fireballs' option.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
I read it more as "Now that I've seen how nukes can be done RIGHT, I no longer care for the nukes we already have." Or maybe I'm biassed in that this is how I, personally, feel.|
Originally Posted by The_Hegemon
It is in this thread. Specifically, in the OP: "Now that Judgement exists, nukes are quickly becoming all downside with very little upside." My point is that classical Nukes and Judgment aren't mutually exclusive things, so this argument doesn't sway me. The addition of the Judgment slot to the game doesn't change Nuke powers at all.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The_Hegemon
I guess I'm just going to have to disagree. This doesn't match my experience at all. I love my Nuke and use it all the time (Inferno, specifically).
I don't find the crash to be crippling at all. It's a major tactical consideration and the power does come with a serious drawback, but it's not something that can't be planned around or compensated for. I don't find that it kills the power at all. Sure, it makes it more situational than say, Full Auto, but I don't find the situations that call for it are all that rare. |
Not only are there really no situations which call for a nuke which can't be handled about as well via other powers, but even when you opt to use it, you do so at great risk to yourself. It kills the power for me, because it constitutes an entire extra level of consideration that I don't have to go through with most other powers. There are very few situations where using Blaze is a bad idea, and in every situation where it's a good idea, I use the power. Because it has no downside. Not so with nukes. Even in situations which should technically be ideal for nukes, they still come with a downside and still constitute tactical decision, even in the most obvious, one-sided circumstances.
I don't like powers that I'm afraid to use, that's a lot of what it comes down to.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
I'd be fine with them just lowering the recharge on the nukes. In fact here is my suggestion: Make it a 30-45 sec recharge that's unenhancable. The crash I can deal with, waiting an eternity when Judgement recharges faster, no.
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:
If my controller missed out on judgement pyronic just cause she is a controller, I'd be pissed right now.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I'm not saying the choices presented are what I'd have picked for each AT, but it doesn't change the fact that I'd have preferred AT-specific Incarnate powers. Not just judgement, either. This blurring of the ATs is decidedly not something I enjoy, lest we give up on having ATs in general. And I don't even have a problem with ATs sharing powers, just not entire powersets, which is what we'll likely end up with by the time this is over.
|
I'm glad they are NOT at-specific. If they want to do something specific, do it for one of the later slots or genesis.
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!
I could live with it leaving you with 10 end and 0 recovery for a bit and lock you so you can keep your toggles running if you pop a blue.
I love nukes but I hate running out of endurance more.
Quote:
But Nuke powers are very good.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I don't know why, but I've always seen arguments in defence of situational powers to read a lot like "Well, I know the power isn't very good, but I have uses for it, so don't touch my power, please." And I've never agreed with this sort of approach to balancing.
Not only are there really no situations which call for a nuke which can't be handled about as well via other powers, but even when you opt to use it, you do so at great risk to yourself. It kills the power for me, because it constitutes an entire extra level of consideration that I don't have to go through with most other powers. There are very few situations where using Blaze is a bad idea, and in every situation where it's a good idea, I use the power. Because it has no downside. Not so with nukes. Even in situations which should technically be ideal for nukes, they still come with a downside and still constitute tactical decision, even in the most obvious, one-sided circumstances. I don't like powers that I'm afraid to use, that's a lot of what it comes down to. |
I find it very hard to see where you're coming from here. You don't think any power should have drawbacks, tradeoffs, or 'extra levels of consideration?' Ever? What about Defensive Tier 9 powers like Elude and Unstoppable? What about Absorb Pain? Do you think these are bad powers, too?
I find it perfectly acceptable that the power requires some sort of meaningful sacrifice. I like having to think about when and how I use my powers.
Quote:
| Even in situations which should technically be ideal for nukes, they still come with a downside and still constitute tactical decision, even in the most obvious, one-sided circumstances. |
Inferno, Nova, Blizzard and the like are good powers. Even if using them is sometimes scary.
The Ballad of Iron Percy
Signed. I started a Judgment & Blasters thread over on the blaster boards that discusses blasters as a whole after everyone has access to Judgment nukes. Removing the total crash would be a good solution, though it does nothing (as a net positive) for Arch, AR & DP.
And I agree w/those who think total crashes for nukes was outdated even before Judgment.
An Offensive Guide to Ice Melee
Quote:
in some respects, the choice of which judgement power you get and which branch you take allows for some diversity. now maybe it'd be nice to have some adjustments taking into account AT, but the debuffs and extras are already pretty powerful (really, a chance of a mag 4 hold?!).|
Originally Posted by Hercules
I'm thinking they should revisit this and make the power more archtype appropriate:
Blaster = Ranged Nuke Melee = PBAE Defender = Major Debuff (perhaps combined with DOT) Controller = High Level AE Hold (same) etc. |
don't just assume everyone will take pyronic for the extra damage. i'm taking ion on my main and i still haven't decided if i want to get the +dam proc or the +hold/debuff branch.
50: Ill/Kin(A+,R,J)-1047 badges RE/Dark(A) Fire/Elec Warshade BS/Regen Necro/Poison Ice/Fiery(A+) Son/Son Bane(A) FM/DA(A) DM/Nin Grav/Icy
lvling: Inv/EM DM/Sheild Arch/MM Bane NW Elec/Earth Grav/Elec Elec/FA Rad/Ice
Paragon Elite/Rogue Elite Joined Oct 2004
Quote:
Powers already have drawbacks and tradeofs. They have costs, they have recharge times, they need slotting. That is more than enough. And, yes, I find the crashes on T9 "god mode" powers just as annoying, but at least in their case the merit of the power is far greater. A Blaster nuke skips a spawn. That's about the extent of its contribution. And, no. That's not enough.|
Originally Posted by The_Hegemon
I find it very hard to see where you're coming from here. You don't think any power should have drawbacks, tradeoffs, or 'extra levels of consideration?' Ever? What about Defensive Tier 9 powers like Elude and Unstoppable? What about Absorb Pain? Do you think these are bad powers, too?
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The_Hegemon
This in particular baffles me. What exactly is wrong with a power 'constituting a tactical decision?' Choosing to use the right abilities at the right moments is the whole point of combat in this game.
|
If Enemy: Clustered >= 3 then Use skill: Fireball.
There, that's your tactical consideration. What about Blaze? Because I'd script Blaze as "If Self: Any." Really, in what situation would you NOT fire off Blaze? If the enemy is too low on health? Meh, even then, it's not that inefficient.
See, most of the "tactical consideration" in City of Heroes comes into play once you start optimising for efficiency, or once you start bumbing the difficulty slider up, and even then, it's more a question of rehearsed playback. However, under normal circumstances, powers with severe drawbacks present mostly drawbacks and considerably less use, turning what should be great powers into gimmicks.
This is a lot like asking the player to type in the name of a power before it can fire, when none of the rest of the game requires it. Sure, it's not that much of a problem, but it IS an out-of-scale bother, and if I had the choice, I'd stick to my simpler attacks that work just fine.
Nukes should not be gimmicks, and they pretty much are right now.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
Thing is, we will likely get more trees to the powers (according to the Devs), so we hopefully won't always be limited.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I'm not saying the choices presented are what I'd have picked for each AT, but it doesn't change the fact that I'd have preferred AT-specific Incarnate powers. Not just judgement, either. This blurring of the ATs is decidedly not something I enjoy, lest we give up on having ATs in general. And I don't even have a problem with ATs sharing powers, just not entire powersets, which is what we'll likely end up with by the time this is over.
|
And, really, we have ATs sharing powersets. It's called power proliferation.
I, for one, would be incredibly knarked if my Defender/MM/Scrapper got told "NO! You may NOT have the giant shiny blast! You are going to have DEBUFFS/PbAoEs/SOMETHING ELSE and you will LIKE IT!"
And I'd tell them exactly where to shove that load of buggery
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zwillinger
GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Captain_Photon
NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.
|
Quote:
When your scrapper gets the energy blast primary, then you'd have an argument.
|
Originally Posted by Techbot Alpha
And, really, we have ATs sharing powersets. It's called power proliferation.
|
Quote:
A lot of those aren't equal trades, however. For instance, when Brutes got Fiery Melee, they traded Combustion for Cremate, for reasons I don't remember any more. And even when sets are identical, AT mods and their other powers aren't always.|
Originally Posted by Techbot Alpha
Thing is, we will likely get more trees to the powers (according to the Devs), so we hopefully won't always be limited.
|
And even then, we have ATs which are, to some extent, equivalent of each other, and so they share powers, but nevertheless we have ATs which are very different from each other and they get completely different powers, instead.
I don't like cross-class Incarnate powers any more than I like Champions Online's "open archetype" character creation system. While I'm unhappy with the restrictions posed by an AT more often than not, I still believe that a game designer is better at creating diverse and balanced classes than players are, when given the freedom to do so. If that meant my Scrappers would get a very strong single-target attack instead of an AoE from Judgement, then I would accept that.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Lets not give them a reason to nerf judgement.
Friends don't let friends buy an ncsoft controlled project.