Rumored Scrapper "Rebalancing?"

I would say no, rather both the mental rules the devs have for blasters and the text descriptions for the archetype come from the same root source of a general discomfort with giving the canonical "DPS" archetype significant survivability tools. I honestly believe they know that aggro control and damage mitigation and heals have to be there for *someone* and everyone else was buffed into self-sufficiency. Blasters are the only things left that need ally support, and making them too powerful would nullify the purpose of ally support. You don't need Tankers and Controllers and Defenders if Blasters can solo everything. But contrawise, as long as Blasters exist Tankers and Controllers and Defenders will always have a job.

I can understand that sentiment, but I believe that a) it can be mitigated and b) Blasters ultimately shouldn't be the sole archetype to have to suffer for it anyway.


Grenades were not overpowered, dammit!

I like this post.

Stealing this little tidbit, if AI were ever adjusted, then besides special cases like Storm (and Force Field I think should be buffed with it), -range should be the general secondary effect for *ALL* blaster blasts. In fact, of all the ATs, -range should be of the realm of Blasters and Tankers, rebalanced to be the ATs that force battlefield formations, Tankers by sheer presence and Blasters by concept of literally blasting the foe's attacks down with sheer power.

As now, it's annoying and simple to exploit dumb AI and farm maps with a Brute or Scrapper. Fighting tons of guys should be in the realm of possibility for them, yes, but it shouldn't be *so darned fast*...faster than any AT...even the damage specialist ATs!! It makes no sense and it all steams from that exploitable AI.

The way I see it, if you want to get the foes to huddle for your Scrapper/Brute's PBAoE, you need to take *extra* time to herd them and even then, their AI would kick in and they'd spread out after a while if you didn't use some means to keep them in place (a control power...haha, that would mean now a Brute/Scrap would be reliant on others for something for a change! just like everyone else is for something). On the other hand, a Tanker or Blaster would be able to force foes into close range or suffer the inability to sufficiently attack back. And Stalkers fit in there because they don't truly rely on AoE but instead ST for much of their burst dmg (nor rely on buff auras) so mob proximity isn't really a concern.

Yet some people regularly argue on the forum that scrapper secondaries should all have taunt auras, presumably because life is just so hard without them. Those people are wrong and you adeptly explained why.

The ones with damage auras probably should be taunt auras as well, but the ones that have no damage aura don't really need one in my opinion. Which I think is just SR and Regen at this point. I actually appreciate my ability to disengage from combat on my regen and get some breathing room to heal without the whole group following me.

Not a big enough deal to me to argue about it though.

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.

Taunt auras provide relief from an AI issue that not only substantially reduces kill speed, but makes the game more annoying. It's a very real advantage in everyday, non-farm content. If just tanks had taunt auras that would be fine. They pay for that with less damage. If the devs balanced Brutes with taunt auras in mind I'd be fine with it. If some sets had taunt auras and were balanced around that fact that would be fine. I actually have no issue, for example, if Energy Aura doesn't have a taunt aura *if* the devs have consciously balanced the set with that in mind.

What I have an issue with is blinding providing the advantage to Brutes when they are already threatening to eclipse scrappers in the game. I find it tips the balance between scrappers and brutes too much in the Brute's favor, especially in a balance battle that scrappers are already losing.

This is my stance. I don't want more taunt auras. Taunt in something like that should serve a specific purpose either in a powerset (such as Invincibility, AOO, or RTTC's buffs that depend on nearby enemies) or an AT (such as Brutes and Tankers having aggro sponge roles). It should not be requested specifically to solve an issue with AI.

And I do contend it's an issue at some level. I'm not like some folks around here who refuse to play something that lacks such an aura, but I feel that something is wrong that anyone feels significantly compelled to make that choice on the grounds that it affects the AI behavior the degree that it does.

There are flight behaviors I have little problem with, even though they technically affect my reward rates. Mobs that run away when at low health, or after they fail to hit me for some time that's meaningful relative to their rank makes sense to me. Mobs that run away so far they lose aggro the instant I happen to damage them with a DoT effect is preposterous and should not happen. Same with Giant Monsters who run from me when I am alone and not actually successfully affecting their health.

Castle maintained that he could not see an issue with fleeing NPCs. I can't reconcile that with the number of people I know who comment on it. Here's hoping that perhaps the new guard are more open to the idea that the game is actually doing something noticeable.

Fixing the AI would work fine. It is also in my mind the least likely solution to the problem, not only because it's more difficult to do but because the devs have said that it wasn't an issue.

Annoying or not, melee may rue the day they asked for, and then got, widespread taunt auras. Taunt auras negate a significant, in my opinion majority of the advantage inherent in range. And not to put too fine a point on it, but that makes me think Blasters should retake that advantage either by gaining an ability which neutralizes it, or gaining an even better advantage than that.

The only reason why things like Scrappers and Brutes overshadow Blasters by such a large margin is because Blasters didn't even show up to the race. No one really champions them anymore, and no one really tries to protect their interests from the "buff not nerf" people who have buffed everything else to the point of marginalizing what Blasters were supposed to be, without buffing Blasters to eliminate their need for everyone else at least concomitantly if not concurrently.

But while I'm soloing my x8 missions on my MA/SR scrapper, who has barely any AoE and no taunt aura, and has about as much problems with runners as she has with remembering to cycle Practiced Brawler, and I'm hearing that Scrappers are being screwed by Brutes I'm thinking its time to level the playing field. My MA/SR scrapper will understand.

MA/SR is just a bad example. Since it has no debuff built in to all of its attacks, and since it has no damage aura, and since its AoE does knockdown, and since it has a lot of built in control it doesn't suffer nearly as much from runners. While runners are occasionally annoying on MA/SR, that combination simply doesn't see the large scale scatter that Katana or Broadsword see when they PBAoE and lay a defense debuff on 10 foes who all run in different directions as a result.

It may seem strange to some, but I'd rather have an AT that is weaker but still provides an alternate playstyle (such as blaster versus Brute) than a situation where an AT is superfluous because although the playstyle is the same one is vastly superior in survivability and quality of life (such as scrapper versus brute.) In other words, I have an answer when someone says "Why do you play your blasters over your Brutes?" One the other hand, I am having a hard time answering "Why do you play your scrapper over a Brute with the same sets." My stock answer of "hate chasing fury" just isn't cutting it anymore. Fury is easy to maintain, it makes the lower levels much easier by providing much more benefit to pre-slotted characters, and the survivability and taunt aura of Brutes completely overwhelms the small advantage scrappers are seeing in pylon runs.

I agree that blasters don't really have a champion. This not only causes blasters in general to fall behind, but blasters are wildly imbalanced from set to set. One thing I like is that the scrapper sets are very well balanced from set to set, and that is IMO largely due to a high level of good discussion and math from this forum. Blasters sets vary so much in effectiveness that you can really choose some lackluster set combos. The good sets for blasters are far superior to the bad sets - something that the scrapper forums have kicked to death long ago.

You have a good point about taunt auras and blaster advantages. The big advantage to ranged sets should be a large damage zone where they can threaten and damage foes in a huge area without wasting time traveling. Taunt auras do serve to negate this advantage by collapsing the enemy group into a small area. I recognize that point.

Personally I don't find chasing runners to be compelling, and have no desire to "balance" Brutes versus Blasters or Scrappers by removing taunts. I think that would make melee far more annoying to play, which I don't want to do, and also do nothing to address blasters versus other sets. But I have never been a fan of the "make them pay for their power by making their gameplay less fun" philosophy in balancing.

Plus, in the greater scheme of things people often act like Scrappers and even Brutes are on top of the food chain. But honestly those ATs are middle of the pack in effectiveness. Crabs and Widows, Doms and some Controllers, well built Masterminds, and some corruptors and defenders can all eclipse scrappers and even brute in raw effectiveness over a wide range of tasks. There's nothing wrong with Scrappers and Brutes, and I'm not saying they needs buffs, but what I am saying is that knocking down scrappers and brutes by getting rid of taunt aura or anything else will not make blasters balanced.

Oh you so nailed it my friend, lol. That's why I can only laugh when I see people complaining about scrappers or brutes as being overpowered, or seeing people cry about melee sets like SS being overpowered. Forget about comparative effectiveness, these classes and powersets can't even do some of the things these other ats and their powersets can do. I can solo gm's on one of my defenders and one of my corruptors. You've got corruptor/defender/controller/dominator duos taking down the stf and recluse sf. The only things that is truly overpowered (relatively speaking) in this game are buffs/debuffs, and more importantly, stacking buffs and debuffs. Nerfing ANYTHING while leaving that situation intact is simply laughable and ridiculous.

Now the previous paragraph might seem like I'm calling for nerfs. I'm not. I'm saying there are several situations where the devs can take things that are clearly underpowered, and buff them. This would make the poeple aready utilizing these items happier, and create new opportunities for players who have not utilized said items, to enjoy them and thereby increase their satisfaction with the game. They don't even have to be large buffs, just small buffs here and there until said items become more competitive. It's literally a win win situation for everyone. Instead all I ever seem to see are players calling for nerfs to sets they don't like, which does nothing but create ill will and pissed off players, which does nothing more than hurt the game. And as far as the idea anything is 'overpowered', if you can't create a challenge for yourself in this game, you're doing it wrong, plain and simple.

I never hated chasing Fury, even when it was "harder" (I never had a problem with getting it up there). I like playing a Scrapper over a Brute because they do not play the same and I like playing a Scrapper better. I like having damage that's not a low base and a high bonus, diluting other bonuses. I prefer the balance of damage to HP that Scrappers have. I like not having Gauntlet.

There's more to the differences in Brute and Scrapper than just that one has to "chase" Fury to get damage.

It sounds to me like you want to prefer the Scrapper play, but you can't overlook how much you value what you see as the benefits of taunt, so you can't justify it to yourself any more. That's fine, but don't try to turn that into a claim of wholly objective superiority. That just does not exist outside of getting stuff to hug you for AoEs, and that "superiority" is just not universally applicable across Scrapper powersets.

The majority of players of the game desire a balance of reward vs time, and the Dev's also seem to follow that direction most of the time. Since soloing GMs and soloing/duoing high level TFs and GMs gives practically no reward and takes many times longer then the normal method for the same reward, asking for the Dev's to make changes and balance shifts in order to allow all (or no) ATs to complete those tasks is "laughable and ridiculous."

Dev's should be concerned about making sure different ATs can contribute equally to the rate of completion of reward granting content. That's what 99.9% of the players really mean when they talk about balance.

I agree with this. The problem is the AI, not the lack of taunt. Taunt aura's should be an advantage tanks and brutes bring to a team because it helps them draw attention off of the squishies. Scrappers are supposed to lack that ability. The fact that taunt prevents runners is only an advantage because the AI as implemented is so annoying (broken or not, it's annoying).

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 run up and hit something for 1500 damage, and it won't run, but I can hit it for about 100 damage and five ticks of 12 DoT and it will run away.

They don't run away because you slaughtered their buddies. Until they get low on health, they don't run away because you hurt them. They will often run away unconditionally with respect to their current health when you hit them with a DoT or a debuff.

Hell yeah! Bring back the AI from 2004 when entire zones of enemies would willingly flock to a single flaming dumpster only to be burned alive!

If the fleeing was from situations they can't win, it would be less annoying. (Arguably that's most of the situations in the game, but...) But the fleeing has very little to do with their chances in the fight, and very much to do with certain effects being arbitrarily scarier than others. Your buddies getting eviscerated next to you: not scary. Somebody carrying a lighter: Very scary.

I could never "reconcile" Castle's claim he could not see what everyone else was seeing. Very disingenuous on his part IMHO.

That's fair.

Wait, what point are we discussing here? I am responding to the suggestion that at least part of the problem with blasters is melee with taunt auras, because the logical next step to that suggestion is that removing taunt auras would help balance blasters. I don't believe it would, I don't believe it's necessary, and I do believe that doing that would make other top builds pull away from melee without improving Blaster's lot in virtual like. Blasters would still need help against the other top builds, and melee would dip slightly from middle of the pack.

You seem to be arguing that the lack of taunt auras do not make scrappers useless and that, if I read this response right, blindly adding taunt auras to scrappers is a solution you would rather avoid.

If that's your point I don't entirely disagree.

I am not advocating blindly adding taunt auras to scrappers. I do believe that the AI's sensitivity to low grade debuffs is currently a problem which Brutes do not need to face. I also believe that I should be able to overcome the lack of a taunt aura on a scrapper in a high end build using the Incarnate system or the IO set bonus system. I would even support having a taunt aura power in the power pools. My current favorite suggestion is having a Reactive alternate that adds a taunt aura.

Making the AI less sensitive to inherit low grade debuffs could also help the situation.

That said, the taunt aura issue is only one small factor in the question "Why make this a scrapper?"

In my opinion the health difference between the two is substantial enough to warrant the small damage difference. The Brute's extra health is not only a buffer to incoming damage, but it makes heals bigger and regen better. That's great, that's their thing, and I fully support this. In my mind if Brutes had only this advantage things would be roughly balanced. Brutes have better health, heals, and regen. Scrappers have better burst damage and DPS over time.

But Brutes get two "freebie" benefits that really make scrappers fall behind. Setting the taunt aura aside for a second, the 90% resistance cap is really a big deal. It wouldn't be an issue if Brutes and Scrappers couldn't exceed 75% without outside buffs or inspirations. The advantage is exaggerated because some secondaries can exceed scrapper resists by themselves, and the game is structured in a way to allow characters to leverage those resists. Specifically, the fact that Brutes can with no outside buffs hit 90% Fire resist (for Fire) or 90% Energy resist (for Elec) is a big advantage. Because the game has an end game that is heavy in Energy and a way to manipulate content that has only Fire damage this side benefit is exaggerated to a large degree. I have as big of an issue giving up 90% Energy resistance to play a /Electric scrapper as I do giving up a taunt aura for a Katana character.

As for taunt auras, I think one reason I see this as a bigger deal is I have different definitions of offense. My definition of "offense" is time based, not statistic based. In other words, offense translates in my mind to "How much time will it take me to complete this combat oriented content." I am looking at survivability versus time to complete content. Because of the taunt aura and weird AI idiosyncrasies, my Brutes take less time to complete combat oriented content than my scrappers, at least once I pump up the number of enemies. To me, that means Brutes have better offense.

You can argue with that definition, and that's cool, but the ultimate resource for me as a professional is time so time to complete is the most real definition of offense I can use. It's a personal definition.

With that in mind, when I look at the balance here I see scrapper falling behind in offense (since on higher difficulty killing off the runners makes the entire task take longer than Brutes with a taunt aura) and in defense by a set percent because of lower health, *and* a Brute can seek out content where they are also taking 2/5 incoming damage when resists are capped at 90%.

Still, all these discussion points are meant to support two things:

1.) Removing the taunt aura from melee is not a good way to balance blasters. Blasters have bigger balance issues.

2.) Having a way to add a taunt aura to high end scrappers through Incarnate powers, IO sets, or power pools would be a desire of mine and would not overpower scrappers.

The problem with dumpster diving wasn't an AI issue. It was the game allowing enemies to stack / overlap each other combined with no real AoE caps. A character with a taunt aura can still get enemies to clump, and no one is suggesting a change to the agro cap.

Let's be reasonable here, I think if we are talking AI tweaks we are looking for the AI to be somewhat less sensitive to low grade debuffs.