Blasters surpurflous?
By
Adeon Hawkwood,
Posted on: 2011-07-11 23:09 in Archetypes and Powers General Discussion
Quote:
What neither of you seem to get is that this is true of any AT other than controllers. The ONLY ATs "worth using" are corruptors and controllers if your standard is "what brings the absolute most to any team in any circumstances." Do you speed TF? I'm guessing you don't, but it will not surprise you to know that virtually all people use for that is corruptors and controllers. At the same time, nobody will turn down other ATs because any AT played well can still help, and if the team is already half corruptors and controllers it doesn't really matter what else is brought. Interestingly, in these most extreme of circumstances, a blaster is better than a meleer because it can kill more targets at once and survival is an utter non-issue.
|
Originally Posted by Shubbie
Also even post multipurple, guess what, a Corruptor is STILL a better choice.
|
There are 3 ranged damage AT's in the game not counting Soa.
Corruptor
Dominator
Blaster
Its funny, even with the changes, dominators are rather weak before 30, and rocking after...for the entire game after.
Dominators in 99% of the circumstances is a better choice than a blaster.
Though this might even up a bit if they make nukes crashless, but that would bring defenders up into serious consideration for ranged damage and make corruptors even further out ahead unless they make nukes crashless for only blasters.
Last point, which of these is the weakest post 30?
Boycott Ncsoft if they close down Coh.
Quote:
O'Rly ? I can't speak for everyone else, but it gets tiring dealing with people whose argument boils down to, "I AM THE GOD OF BLASTING IF YOU THINK THERE IS A PROBLEM YOU JUST DON'T KNOW HOW TO PLAY". But just a suggestion, before you challenge people to count the house, learn how to count.
|
Originally Posted by Infernus_Hades
The Shubbie and Fan show is still going on?
Look through this thread and the same 2 people are making the arguement and everyone else says - I am having fun - blasting. A blaster is not a tank, scrapper or brute. Keep saying that and you will live longer and happier. |
By what measure exactly are dominators better than blasters? They get mez protection, which if we're speaking of the "average dominator" by your own standard isn't permanent so it is in many ways less useful than defiance. Their attacks are universally lower DPA than blaster equivalents and they don't get access to the really huge aoes that allow blasters to destroy full spawns at once. Control powers are all right but largely irrelevant in the late game. The one real advantage doms get is sleet in their epic pool and that's a big advantage, but does the average dom always take that specific pool? Surely not.
Sorry to keep harping on it but it really does seem like you guys just don't know what you're talking about.
Oh right, and dominators as a "ranged AT?" lol
Quote:
Crashless blizzard on a defender or a corruptor. Have to smile at that, especially for the rads, and kins.
|
Originally Posted by Shubbie
There are 3 ranged damage AT's in the game not counting Soa.
Corruptor Dominator Blaster Its funny, even with the changes, dominators are rather weak before 30, and rocking after...for the entire game after. Dominators in 99% of the circumstances is a better choice than a blaster. Though this might even up a bit if they make nukes crashless, but that would bring defenders up into serious consideration for ranged damage and make corruptors even further out ahead unless they make nukes crashless for only blasters. Last point, which of these is the weakest post 30? |
Quote:
I recently rolled a mind/psi specifically to use a costume I had created. Its been a while since I've leveled a dominator from level one. Is the offense lower than a blaster, or even a brute or scrapper? Yes. Is she weak? Hard to tell so far because nothing is ever shooting at her. For all I know two shots will put her down, but no one has gotten two shots at her yet.|
Originally Posted by Shubbie
Its funny, even with the changes, dominators are rather weak before 30, and rocking after...for the entire game after.
|
Its kind of like playing a blaster, if I took out all my damage enhancements and was able to attack while in PFF all the time. And all the while I'm actually thinking to myself this is as bad as it gets for dominators.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
To me, Dominators don't play like Blasters. Solo, they play like tankers.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I recently rolled a mind/psi specifically to use a costume I had created. Its been a while since I've leveled a dominator from level one. Is the offense lower than a blaster, or even a brute or scrapper? Yes. Is she weak? Hard to tell so far because nothing is ever shooting at her. For all I know two shots will put her down, but no one has gotten two shots at her yet.
|
Relatively low damage, but never gets really hurt = slow, safe leveling.
Just instead of using high DEF / resist / heal for damage mitigation, Dominators use they fact that they get XP from beating up all these immobile statues that seem to populate their missions.
I'm a published amateur comic book author: www.ericjohnsoncomics.com
******MA Arcs****
Arc 5909: "Amazon-Avatars"
Arc 6143: "Escalation" (Nominee: Architect Awards, Nominee: Player Awards, and Dev's Choice!)
Quote:
Well, mind/ is a special case, because in my missions one foe is a statue, another foe is beating up on the statue, the third foe is bouncing off the ceiling over and over, and I'm doing my nails.|
Originally Posted by Shagster
To me, Dominators don't play like Blasters. Solo, they play like tankers.
Relatively low damage, but never gets really hurt = slow, safe leveling. Just instead of using high DEF / resist / heal for damage mitigation, Dominators use they fact that they get XP from beating up all these immobile statues that seem to populate their missions. |
If I was playing a blaster, the fight would have been over in half the time. But I wouldn't necessarily have been the winner every time.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
mmmms statues lots of vitamins and minerals in statues
"...well I have wrestled with reality for thirty-five years, Doctor and I am happy to state I finally won out over it." Elwood P Dowd (from the movie Harvey)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I recently rolled a mind/psi specifically to use a costume I had created. Its been a while since I've leveled a dominator from level one. Is the offense lower than a blaster, or even a brute or scrapper? Yes. Is she weak? Hard to tell so far because nothing is ever shooting at her. For all I know two shots will put her down, but no one has gotten two shots at her yet.
Its kind of like playing a blaster, if I took out all my damage enhancements and was able to attack while in PFF all the time. And all the while I'm actually thinking to myself this is as bad as it gets for dominators. |
Funny observation, with the exception of psi dart and mental blast all the dominator powers in psionic assault do more base damage than their blaster equivalents.
Edit: And thinking about it, the one that doesn't do damage also works better.
The dominator attacks also cost radically more endurance, up to nearly twice as much in case of psi shockwave, in exchange for a furious base damage increase of two.
My main problem with dominators, one that has thus far left my highest level dom my now-deleted issue 6 ice/ice who made it to 40, is that unlike blasters there is no apparent rhyme or reason to their attacks. One thing all of the sets share is absurd endurance costs, but beyond that anything goes. Power bolt 53 DPA, stone spears 23, why not! What's really appalling is their aoe, though. If you want to do any aoe at all on a dom, you're going to be doing it with plant/, fire/ or epics. That's essentially the antithesis of the blaster.
Quote:
True, although that's a pretty big if from a ranged perspective. It probably says more about /Mental blasters than /psi dominators though: they ended up with the lower damage melee attacks and not the standard 1/1.96/2.6 attacks most manipulation sets (that focus on melee attacks) have.|
Originally Posted by Another_Fan
Funny observation, with the exception of psi dart and mental blast all the dominator powers in psionic assault do more base damage than their blaster equivalents.
|
The psionic assault attacks are sometimes higher in intrinsic DPA than psi/mental blaster attacks, but they are nothing special compared to most blaster combinations with melee-attack secondaries, at least in terms of base damage.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
I think there's some kind of a cultural gap here. Both here and in my other MMO, I see a lot of people who are totally focused on THE BEST BUILD, and insist that once the best build is identified, no one will ever play anything else.
But when I actually play the game, I see a ton of characters that are pretty clearly "this is my character concept, here is how I could best do it within the rules".
It seems to me that the underlying problem is that people are really not even talking about related concepts. Most of us simply don't care what's the Absolute Most Efficient. We care what fits our character concepts. We care what looked fun or interesting to play. People build characters around concepts like "solo AVs" or "farm AE at level 33", but they also build characters around concepts like "amazing combat archer" or a funny tag line. My invuln/dual-blades tanker concept is purely "I want something that looks completely unpowered as much of the time as possible", because I came up with the idea of a character named Aunt Millie, with the superhero tag line "Putting the AUNT back in TAUNT AURA." ... So there she is, in a sweater with no visible effects except a pair of swords.
Do you seriously think I care whether she's "superfluous" or not? My primary contribution to mission teams is rants about how "when I was a little girl, the half-human cybernetic freaks had DECENT HAIRCUTS because they had some RESPECT." And frankly, that's a lot more useful than anything else, because the point of the game is to have fun.
This is a game in which I have built a character with the specific goal of being as useless and disruptive of his own team as possible. And you know what? If I advertise for teams on "Helpy McHelperson", specifically warning people that he's grav/storm, built for and played for laughs... THEY JOIN. So they can pop Group Fly and say "I'm Helping!"
... And we cleared that mission, too.
Quote:
This. |
Originally Posted by seebs
I think there's some kind of a cultural gap here. Both here and in my other MMO, I see a lot of people who are totally focused on THE BEST BUILD, and insist that once the best build is identified, no one will ever play anything else.
But when I actually play the game, I see a ton of characters that are pretty clearly "this is my character concept, here is how I could best do it within the rules". It seems to me that the underlying problem is that people are really not even talking about related concepts. Most of us simply don't care what's the Absolute Most Efficient. We care what fits our character concepts. We care what looked fun or interesting to play. People build characters around concepts like "solo AVs" or "farm AE at level 33", but they also build characters around concepts like "amazing combat archer" or a funny tag line. My invuln/dual-blades tanker concept is purely "I want something that looks completely unpowered as much of the time as possible", because I came up with the idea of a character named Aunt Millie, with the superhero tag line "Putting the AUNT back in TAUNT AURA." ... So there she is, in a sweater with no visible effects except a pair of swords. Do you seriously think I care whether she's "superfluous" or not? My primary contribution to mission teams is rants about how "when I was a little girl, the half-human cybernetic freaks had DECENT HAIRCUTS because they had some RESPECT." And frankly, that's a lot more useful than anything else, because the point of the game is to have fun. This is a game in which I have built a character with the specific goal of being as useless and disruptive of his own team as possible. And you know what? If I advertise for teams on "Helpy McHelperson", specifically warning people that he's grav/storm, built for and played for laughs... THEY JOIN. So they can pop Group Fly and say "I'm Helping!" ... And we cleared that mission, too. |
A remarkable number of players that are actually in the game couldn't give a gold plated crap less if people on the forums think their character is useless or redundant.
They play their characters because they are fun to play, not because they are what forumites tell them they should be playing.
And that's really the bottom line to it. You can tell me whatever you like about the AT and power sets I chose to play, if I'm having fun playing that character I'm going to completely ignore you and keep on playing it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison See, it's gems like these that make me check Claws' post history every once in a while to make sure I haven't missed anything good lately. |
Quote:
I second that! |
Originally Posted by ClawsandEffect
This.
A remarkable number of players that are actually in the game couldn't give a gold plated crap less if people on the forums think their character is useless or redundant. They play their characters because they are fun to play, not because they are what forumites tell them they should be playing. And that's really the bottom line to it. You can tell me whatever you like about the AT and power sets I chose to play, if I'm having fun playing that character I'm going to completely ignore you and keep on playing it. |
The way I see it, no build is 100% better than the other. When it comes to base values, yes the numbers can be uneven but in the long run, who is playing their level 50 with base values on their attacks?! No one! In the endgame it all comes down to play style. Granted, some powers obviously have benefits over others (like with doms and blasters) but they also have their weaknesses!
Personally, I will always be an advocate of blasters. Don't get me wrong, doms have their ups and downs but Because of my play style i will always love blasters. If you have fun on your AT, then nothing else matters!
...besides, it's always fun to brag when your energy/energy blaster was able to tank jurassic for about 2 minutes solo and not die (note: i made no attempt to kill him, i just held aggro to see how long i would survive for)
Quote:
Well, I never addressed the question of whether blasters are "superfluous" because I think they aren't really to any significantly higher degree than any other archetype in this game. My main is a blaster and I've got literally thousands of hours of fun on blasters, so that's not a specific problem for me.|
Originally Posted by seebs
I think there's some kind of a cultural gap here. Both here and in my other MMO, I see a lot of people who are totally focused on THE BEST BUILD, and insist that once the best build is identified, no one will ever play anything else.
But when I actually play the game, I see a ton of characters that are pretty clearly "this is my character concept, here is how I could best do it within the rules". It seems to me that the underlying problem is that people are really not even talking about related concepts. Most of us simply don't care what's the Absolute Most Efficient. We care what fits our character concepts. We care what looked fun or interesting to play. People build characters around concepts like "solo AVs" or "farm AE at level 33", but they also build characters around concepts like "amazing combat archer" or a funny tag line. My invuln/dual-blades tanker concept is purely "I want something that looks completely unpowered as much of the time as possible", because I came up with the idea of a character named Aunt Millie, with the superhero tag line "Putting the AUNT back in TAUNT AURA." ... So there she is, in a sweater with no visible effects except a pair of swords. Do you seriously think I care whether she's "superfluous" or not? My primary contribution to mission teams is rants about how "when I was a little girl, the half-human cybernetic freaks had DECENT HAIRCUTS because they had some RESPECT." And frankly, that's a lot more useful than anything else, because the point of the game is to have fun. This is a game in which I have built a character with the specific goal of being as useless and disruptive of his own team as possible. And you know what? If I advertise for teams on "Helpy McHelperson", specifically warning people that he's grav/storm, built for and played for laughs... THEY JOIN. So they can pop Group Fly and say "I'm Helping!" ... And we cleared that mission, too. |
The only area I addressed after being referenced was the fact, and it is an objective fact, that by the metrics the devs balance this game, very specifically the metrics tied to the average progressional rates of the various archetypes and powerset combinations across the entire playerbase, blasters have always been measured to underperform. There are lots of possible contributing factors to them, and this has sometimes been attempted to be explained away by suggesting either that the statistic is flawed (due to unusual shifts in how players play different archetypes or even that maybe people who play blasters deliberately play them slowly**) or that the devs can't be measuring correctly because the data doesn't match their experience (which is possible, but not only extremely unlikely in this case but also far more likely to be correct than any one player's anecdotal experience) but the bottom line is that none of those factors is likely to override the most logical explanation that fits all the facts, which is simply that blasters are far harder to play, for the people who play City of Heroes, than all other archetypes and all other powerset combinations within those archetypes.
That makes them unbalanced by the devs' own definitions. Beyond that, whether blasters are playable depends on player skill and playstyle preference. I've been playing them since day one, so I don't know any better. To me, that's just the way it is.
As to what the best build is, I care in a for-fun hypothetical sense, but I rarely play such builds. In fact, my money-is-no-object blaster build that cost umpteen billions to put together isn't even a ranged-capped build. Its an energy blaster build for recharge. The min/maxers out there know how silly that actually is given energy's DPA distribution, but I didn't build it for performance reasons. I built it because I ran the infinite freem mission, and fell in love with cycling power bolt and power blast really really fast. The build attempts to replicate that experience, even if it means my damage mitigation is still wet tissue paper. Its *fun*. The Force Feedback procs in every single energy blast attack is just piling on extra freem. To me, that's worth a few billion inf. Of course, my SR scrapper build is a multibillion build that focuses on performance, but that's only because that's what I wanted to get out of that character: flip out scrapper blitzkrieg. If I was concerned about performance, I would have rerolled out of MA. But MA's just too cool looking. And outside of four builds, most of what I play is running on SOs or very cheap frankenbuilds constructed from whatever fortune drops my way. And not because I lack the billions to optimize them.
People should play what they enjoy playing. The devs can screw up many things, and sometimes do, but they can't make me play something unfun. If I'm playing, its only because I'm having fun, whether its a blaster, controller, or scrapper I'm playing.
** The notion that maybe blasters look slower because, for some weird reason, players actually *deliberately* play them slower is contradicted by the fact that the devs datamined blasters to be in debt far more often, and dying far more often.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bionut911
I second that!
The way I see it, no build is 100% better than the other. When it comes to base values, yes the numbers can be uneven but in the long run, who is playing their level 50 with base values on their attacks?! No one! In the endgame it all comes down to play style. Granted, some powers obviously have benefits over others (like with doms and blasters) but they also have their weaknesses! Personally, I will always be an advocate of blasters. Don't get me wrong, doms have their ups and downs but Because of my play style i will always love blasters. If you have fun on your AT, then nothing else matters! ...besides, it's always fun to brag when your energy/energy blaster was able to tank jurassic for about 2 minutes solo and not die (note: i made no attempt to kill him, i just held aggro to see how long i would survive for) |
Whats upsetting from the opposite end of the spectrum:
Your character is fun but is still mechanically bad. Would it make your character unFUN for it to perform better?
No?
Then why the hell are you arguing?
Elec Blast is horrid for Blasters but I see people arguing its fun and this and that constantly.
Thats fine, but the argument is if your mechanically inferior or not, not if youre fun. My fun is powergaming, your fun is RPing. My fun doesnt make you have less fun, it just makes your fun fun for all because I don't have to deal with yoru subpar concept character while I'm having fun powergaming
Seriously, do you RP being a weaker mechanical set?
Quote:
See, the thing is that I enjoy "powergaming" too. In fact it's the main thing I do in this game. So quoting one of the people who are saying "well you can't criticize blasters because they're having fun!" to prove the weakness of blasters is rather disingenuous. You are relying on their assumption that blasters do in fact have a performance deficit to assert that blasters do in fact have a performance deficit. I'm here to tell you that they do not, and I can and do prove it each time I smash the crap out of some impossible thing with my blaster. I'm not the only one, either.
|
Originally Posted by Diesel Punk
Thats fine, but the argument is if your mechanically inferior or not, not if youre fun. My fun is powergaming, your fun is RPing. My fun doesnt make you have less fun, it just makes your fun fun for all because I don't have to deal with yoru subpar concept character while I'm having fun powergaming
|
Quote:
Then the onus is on you to give a valid explanation as to why Blasters consistently underperform in the Dev metrics, given the fact that we're using Dev metrics to balance the game. Nobody is saying that it's impossible to make a Blaster do crazy things; we're saying that it requires a greater amount of effort, skill, and investment than it would on other ATs.|
Originally Posted by PleaseRecycle
See, the thing is that I enjoy "powergaming" too. In fact it's the main thing I do in this game. So quoting one of the people who are saying "well you can't criticize blasters because they're having fun!" to prove the weakness of blasters is rather disingenuous. You are relying on their assumption that blasters do in fact have a performance deficit to assert that blasters do in fact have a performance deficit. I'm here to tell you that they do not, and I can and do prove it each time I smash the crap out of some impossible thing with my blaster. I'm not the only one, either.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
As to what the best build is, I care in a for-fun hypothetical sense, but I rarely play such builds. In fact, my money-is-no-object blaster build that cost umpteen billions to put together isn't even a ranged-capped build. Its an energy blaster build for recharge. The min/maxers out there know how silly that actually is given energy's DPA distribution, but I didn't build it for performance reasons. I built it because I ran the infinite freem mission, and fell in love with cycling power bolt and power blast really really fast.
|
Global @Diellan - 5M2M
Mids' Hero/Villain Designer Lead
Virtue Server
Redside: Lorenzo Mondavi
Blueside: Alex Rabinovich
Got a Mids suggestion? Want to report a Mids bug?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by seebs
I think there's some kind of a cultural gap here. Both here and in my other MMO, I see a lot of people who are totally focused on THE BEST BUILD, and insist that once the best build is identified, no one will ever play anything else.
But when I actually play the game, I see a ton of characters that are pretty clearly "this is my character concept, here is how I could best do it within the rules". It seems to me that the underlying problem is that people are really not even talking about related concepts. Most of us simply don't care what's the Absolute Most Efficient. We care what fits our character concepts. We care what looked fun or interesting to play. People build characters around concepts like "solo AVs" or "farm AE at level 33", but they also build characters around concepts like "amazing combat archer" or a funny tag line. My invuln/dual-blades tanker concept is purely "I want something that looks completely unpowered as much of the time as possible", because I came up with the idea of a character named Aunt Millie, with the superhero tag line "Putting the AUNT back in TAUNT AURA." ... So there she is, in a sweater with no visible effects except a pair of swords. Do you seriously think I care whether she's "superfluous" or not? My primary contribution to mission teams is rants about how "when I was a little girl, the half-human cybernetic freaks had DECENT HAIRCUTS because they had some RESPECT." And frankly, that's a lot more useful than anything else, because the point of the game is to have fun. This is a game in which I have built a character with the specific goal of being as useless and disruptive of his own team as possible. And you know what? If I advertise for teams on "Helpy McHelperson", specifically warning people that he's grav/storm, built for and played for laughs... THEY JOIN. So they can pop Group Fly and say "I'm Helping!" ... And we cleared that mission, too. |
There definitely is some sort of gap here and I don't know what servers you play CoH on or why my experience is so radically different than yours.
Lets assume you're right. I belong 6 global channels with 2000 or more members why haven't I seen the following.
BaF forming could use more punsters.
STF forming need someone that can do standup for Recluce.
BAF forming short of observational humor for escape phase.
ITF forming looking for people with knockback powers to scatter everything all over the place.
Khan forming, looking for ethnic humor to make fun of the Nazis.
I will tell you what I have seen.
STF forming need a tank for LR.
BAF forming looking for control.
Khan forming could use debuff.
Speed ITF forming need more damage.
So when you say most of us, you mean most of who ?
Now here is a little observational food for thought, Paragon Studios with freedom, is releasing costume pieces, IO boosters, and improved IOs, IO sets, and temp costumes. The least expensive item by far are individual costume pieces and the most expensive by far are IO boosters for a full build. What does that tell you about what the developers think is important to the players ?
Quote:
They just know those are the types of players who will spend more money on things like that to maximize their potential fast.
|
Originally Posted by Another_Fan
There definitely is some sort of gap here and I don't know what servers you play CoH on or why my experience is so radically different than yours.
Lets assume you're right. I belong 6 global channels with 2000 or more members why haven't I seen the following. BaF forming could use more punsters. STF forming need someone that can do standup for Recluce. BAF forming short of observational humor for escape phase. ITF forming looking for people with knockback powers to scatter everything all over the place. Khan forming, looking for ethnic humor to make fun of the Nazis. I will tell you what I have seen. STF forming need a tank for LR. BAF forming looking for control. Khan forming could use debuff. Speed ITF forming need more damage. So when you say most of us, you mean most of who ? Now here is a little observational food for thought, Paragon Studios with freedom, is releasing costume pieces, IO boosters, and improved IOs, IO sets, and temp costumes. The least expensive item by far are individual costume pieces and the most expensive by far are IO boosters for a full build. What does that tell you about what the developers think is important to the players ? |
Quote:
Sub-par?! Weaker mechanical set? So you're trying to say that a character must perform to a certain standard or it is an invalid character? |
Originally Posted by Diesel Punk
Whats upsetting from the opposite end of the spectrum:
Your character is fun but is still mechanically bad. Would it make your character unFUN for it to perform better? No? Then why the hell are you arguing? Elec Blast is horrid for Blasters but I see people arguing its fun and this and that constantly. Thats fine, but the argument is if your mechanically inferior or not, not if youre fun. My fun is powergaming, your fun is RPing. My fun doesnt make you have less fun, it just makes your fun fun for all because I don't have to deal with yoru subpar concept character while I'm having fun powergaming Seriously, do you RP being a weaker mechanical set? |
For the record, one of my CONCEPT CHARACTERS routinely solos AVs.
If I want something to be powerful, I look at what I can do to make the characters I enjoy playing more powerful. I have NEVER in the entire time I've played this game chosen a power set combination based on how powerful it will become if I min/max it. I choose them based on what sounds like fun, and what the concept for my character calls for.
I plan on rolling a Street Justice/Willpower/Weapons scrapper when the set is released. Sure, the first 2 are probably going to be good sets, but Weapons has been viewed as a horrible APP for a while now. Guess what? I don't care, and it's MY character. NOT yours.
That's the problem with the worst of the powergamers. They are absolutely convinced that the only correct way to play the game is to choose nothing but the most mechanically powerful ATs and power sets and then min/max them. And they aren't shy about telling you how wrong you are for playing a character that you enjoy regardless of how much mechanically weaker it is.
Characters have weaknesses and flaws. If you design something so it has none, you haven't created a character, you've programmed an algorithm designed to make a number get higher as fast as possible.
Airhammer quoted me in his sig a while back, and this calls for me to say it again. If numbers are more important than a story or other payers who are fun to play with, go play with a calculator instead.
Your stance here seems to be that if the devs make the game better for the powergamers, it will be more fun for everyone?
Bull****, plain and simple. The people who don't care that they could have killed that spawn 2 seconds faster if they min/maxed their powers outnumber you by a large margin.
Bottom line: I like my blasters just the way they are. I ENJOY the challenge inherent in playing one. I like using strategy to win fights instead of just bum rushing everything because my character is so overpowered and min/maxed that I can't be beaten. Making them mechanically stronger would suck out a lot of the fun of playing them for me. So, the idea that making them better automatically equals more fun for all is a load of crap.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison See, it's gems like these that make me check Claws' post history every once in a while to make sure I haven't missed anything good lately. |
I can't be the only one with a crazy OP Blaster that destroys mobs without blinking...
Two things:
Quote:
Great, then we're on the same page. Blasters are commonly valued by high end teams, as are all the other archetypes.
|
Originally Posted by Another_Fan
I will tell you what I have seen.
STF forming need a tank for LR. BAF forming looking for control. Khan forming could use debuff. Speed ITF forming need more damage. |
Quote:
| Now here is a little observational food for thought, Paragon Studios with freedom, is releasing costume pieces, IO boosters, and improved IOs, IO sets, and temp costumes. The least expensive item by far are individual costume pieces and the most expensive by far are IO boosters for a full build. What does that tell you about what the developers think is important to the players ? |
The Shubbie and Fan show is still going on?
Look through this thread and the same 2 people are making the arguement and everyone else says - I am having fun - blasting.
A blaster is not a tank, scrapper or brute. Keep saying that and you will live longer and happier.