Surely your 3 (at least) blaster threads could have been rolled into one..since, you know..they are ALL about Blasters. Not too mention, there were other threads answering these very questions just recently..
Quote:
This.
|
Originally Posted by MisterD
Surely your 3 (at least) blaster threads could have been rolled into one..since, you know..they are ALL about Blasters. Not too mention, there were other threads answering these very questions just recently..
|
So you think a thread that meanders all over the place covering 4 different issues is easier for the Devs to read?
Have you got access to Beta?
Quote:
I'm gonna weigh in, because I agree with Infernus that the unique facets to the each problem make them worth their own discussion. It also gives more stage time to the less controversial topics, some chance for lesser issues to get the focus they deserve.|
Originally Posted by Infernus_Hades
Should we lower the damage - increase control from a nuke in exchange for less of an endurance penalty?
|
I'm also weighing in on THIS thread because I was about to make it, just with the title "Crashing Nukes?".
The crashing nukes, blasters' "Ultimate", do a very unique thing. It's not sustainable AOE damage, even stinkers like Short Circuit will do more total damage than Thunderous Blast, over time. Instead, they stop the show. Everything falls down, and the blaster pays a hefty price in convenience. Using the nuke with regularity will demolish your inspiration tray on a team. Using it solo will feel like a waste, as you wait interminably between spawns for the crash to end. But on an as-needed basis, the crashing nukes are unparalelled.
But I would argue, not good enough. Not in the context of Judgement nukes, Shield Charges and Lightning Rods. Not when stacked up to the power of Overcharges, Rains of Arrows, and Hails of Bullets. Their edge is eroding, and their enourmous penalties and massive recharge times are making "Second Best" arguably better.
So what do we do? We have a couple directions the sliding scale runs in, and despite what one may think, it's not black and white. We can go both directions to varying degrees.
Direction 1: Buff the nukes.
There are 3 defining aspects to a crashing nuke. They deal massive damage. They cause their set's "signature" secondary effect in high magnitude. And they do so in a wide radius to large numbers of targets.
All 3 of these elements can be increased. More damage. More or Better secondary effects. And a wider radius or higher target cap.
Direction 2: Nerf the penalties.
Crashing nukes come with a number of "Penalties" that make them "Worse" than a "Normal AOE attack" of their strength would be. They have an enourmously large recharge time. 6 minutes between attacks is an eternity. Even with +100% recharge slotting and +100% global recharge bonuses, that's still 2 minutes, but even if you manage that, you run into the other penalty. The endurance crash tries to take you out of action for 20 seconds. Mind you: The bosses are still alive. And if you're fighting above +2 (Say for instance, on an Incarnate Trial), the Leutennants are also. You can mitigate this with blue inspirations, but trying to do so on a team large enough to make your crashing nuke "worth it" will run your insp supply ragged.
Both of these aspects could be reined in or completely eliminated, each to varying degrees. Shorter recharge, less severe crash, or completely eliminated.
But again, the beauty is: Arguably, you could do some of both! Increase the benefits, while still eliminating some penalties. Remove the penalties, while still making the powers slightly better.
So what do we do to nukes? I'm not sure what would make them the best and most useful, but there is a guiding principle to be considered when contemplating how to buff them. The Cottage rule. Which is to say: The people who currently have, use, and enjoy crashing nukes, do so because they like what they can do. I think that, above all else, we should not reduce that. I'm kind of against nerfs to the damage of nukes because of this. You're hurting the people who like them, and merely widening the target audience at best, if not merely shifting it. I think there's a lot of room for improvement without making nukes "So good that they need to be nerfed."
But what kind of improvements?
In my opinion, a quick and dirty fix would be:
Remove the Crash, Keep the damage and effects the same, Reduce the recharge to 4 minutes, increase the radii to 35 feet, and the target cap to 24. Add a stun to nova and a moderate To-Hit debuff to Inferno.
But if we're willing to keep the crash, there's the possibility of doing even MORE. And who doesn't like more?
Mission Arc: Metatronic Mayhem (Id 1750): A tale of robots gone wrong, rogue robots gone right, and madmen gone every which way but loose.
Let the blaster choose. Have the tier 9 give 2 options and you choose one when you select the power.
Option 1) All other things remain exactly as they are now for blaster tier 9s but the endurance crash is removed.
Option 2) Triple the damage, double the secondary effects (both duration and magnitude), double the recharge, leave the crash in.
The blaster gets to choose which way they want it when they level up.
This would apply to all the currently crashless tier 9s too. Leave every thing as is but add a crashing version that does triple the damage, double the secondary effects (both duration and magnitude), and double the recharge as the other option.
-Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein.
-I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo Galilei
-When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty. - Thomas Jefferson
Here's a thought. Quite possibly an overpowered one, but you know, just spitballing.
Combine some of the funcitonality of the crashing T9 armor powers with the nukes. They do their initial blast of damage but then the crash is delayed for some amount of time. Make the power work like a break-free and during the time the power is 'up' give them mez resistance, some small amount of unenhanceable mitigation(def, res, or regen) and a chance to proc extra damage on attacks along the lines of firey embrace. At the very least this would require a recharge increase, but at least the powers wouldn't be debatably useful.
It'd work partly as that 'get out of mez free' power people keep wanting to show up in at least some blaster powersets and partly as a viable alpha strike on a group of difficult enemies.
Of course, as I said it's probably horribly overpowered and will never happen. I still kind of like the idea of it though.
MA Arcs: Yarmouth 1509 and 58812
I wouldn't mind the recharge if the crash time was reduced and the damage got a boost.
CoH
Cathodian (50 Rad/Rad)
Archanix (50 Ill/FF)
Dr. Deadface (Current: 40 Rad/MM)
Well first of all the devs have to agree that blaster's crash nukes need a rebalance. Keeping in mind that Defenders and Corruptors will probably get some of the collateral damage as well.
So, until there is a "fix" on beta, I will simply NOT take any crashing nukes and just use the judgement "nuke" instead. That way when they do data mining they will see that most level 50 blasters DO NOT TAKE crashing nukes.
Then I will always make comments about the real blaster nuke being used by scrappers, brutes and tanks. aka LR + SC. 
H: Blaster 50, Defender 50, Tank 50, Scrapper 50, Controller 50, PB 50, WS 50
V: Brute 50, Corruptor 50, MM 50, Dominator 50, Stalker 50, AW 50, AS 50
Top 4: Controller, Brute, Scrapper, Corruptor
Bottom 4: (Peacebringer) way below everything else, Mastermind, Dominator, Blaster
CoH in WQHD
Quote:
I seem to recall a comment by Synapse that crashing nukes would be looked at. Or at least him putting out feelers to that effect.|
Originally Posted by newchemicals
Well first of all the devs have to agree that blaster's crash nukes need a rebalance. Keeping in mind that Defenders and Corruptors will probably get some of the collateral damage as well.
So, until there is a "fix" on beta, I will simply NOT take any crashing nukes and just use the judgement "nuke" instead. That way when they do data mining they will see that most level 50 blasters DO NOT TAKE crashing nukes. |
I might be misremembering though.
MA Arcs: Yarmouth 1509 and 58812
Crashless tier 9s is an issue that needs attention, but it is bigger than blaster nukes.
City of Heroes was my first MMO, & my favorite computer game.
R.I.P.
Chyll - Bydand - Violynce - Enyrgos - Rylle - Nephryte - Solyd - Fettyr - Hyposhock - Styrling - Beryllos - Rosyc
Horryd - Myriam - Dysquiet - Ghyr
Vanysh - Eldrytch
Inflyct - Mysron - Orphyn - Dysmay - Reapyr - - Wyldeman - Hydeous
Quote:
It's a nice idea. It would give blasters time to kill anything that may have survived the nuke without dropping toggles/draining the inspiration tray.|
Originally Posted by Oliin
Here's a thought. Quite possibly an overpowered one, but you know, just spitballing.
Combine some of the funcitonality of the crashing T9 armor powers with the nukes. They do their initial blast of damage but then the crash is delayed for some amount of time. Make the power work like a break-free and during the time the power is 'up' give them mez resistance, some small amount of unenhanceable mitigation(def, res, or regen) and a chance to proc extra damage on attacks along the lines of firey embrace. At the very least this would require a recharge increase, but at least the powers wouldn't be debatably useful. It'd work partly as that 'get out of mez free' power people keep wanting to show up in at least some blaster powersets and partly as a viable alpha strike on a group of difficult enemies. Of course, as I said it's probably horribly overpowered and will never happen. I still kind of like the idea of it though. |
I normally avoid nukes, but this would actually make them usable for me. *thumbs up*
Some will never take a snipe. I never take a Crashing Nuke, and have been very pleased with the results of that decision.
The option, suggested above by M K, to have a crashing or non-crashing T9 (but with not quite so much steriod infusion ) fits my Idea, that I never got around to starting a Thread about, that every power set, for every AT should have 12 powers with three mutually exclusive choices, at various Tiers. That would add some new vitality and uniqueness to what has become a world of cookie cutter builds.
Anyway, in lieu of choice, I would favor non-crashing all around, and take whatever recharge increase or power nerf they imposed gladly.
Jak
I would prefer to have the option of choosing the type of nuke that I wanted, which has been outlined by a few people in this thread already.
If I had to choose one, I would go with "higher damage modifications and keep the crash." When I fire off a T9 with a crash, everything should be dead, plain and simple. MAYBE that one boss of the faction that happens to have high resistance to my character's main damage type is still standing, but everything else should be on the ground. That amount of power is what separates it from any other powers in the game, and we will probably only get to use that type of power if there is a massive crash.
Long story short: I vote keep the crash, boost the damage.
@Winter. Because I'm Winter. Period.
I am a blaster first, and an alt-oholic second.
I'm in the same camp when it comes to Nukes.
As my main and still favorite after all these years is Energy/Energy, I've always viewed Nova as the ultimate in desperation by my character.
Pulling forth all his power to unleash a tremendous burst of Energy should thematically leave you winded/drained. This makes sense.
What doesn't make sense is that, after summoning all my power into this ultimate blast, I'm left helpless as the numerous minions and Lts with slivers of health plink me to death.
Crashing Nukes can stay, just make them true Nukes again.
Maestro Mavius - Infinity
Capt. Biohazrd - PCSAR
Talsor Tech - Talsorian Guard
Keep Calm & Chive On!
Take a comparison to the melee T9s
The melee T9/God modes are long duration, usually more than enough to last entirely through an AV fight and are strong enough to make sure the character survives the fight.
Blaster nukes compared to melee god modes, allow blasters to barely den't the top end enemies, almost certainly leave blaster dead after casting.
Quote:
No, we shouldn't. The crash should be removed altogether, all nukes should be made ranged, the target cap should be increased, and the damage on most of them should be increased, not decreased. Because at the moment, the traditional blaster nukes are badly overshadowed by the crashless nukes in some of the sets (Rain of Arrows, Full Auto, Hail of Bullets, Overcharge) and even more so by the new judgment nukes. |
Originally Posted by Infernus_Hades
Should we lower the damage - increase control from a nuke in exchange for less of an endurance penalty?
|
Just removing the crash and leaving them alone beyond that would be a good start though.
/signed
Back in the day you could have someone taunt the whole map into one spot, fire off a Nova and they were all dead. Back in the day..a crash afterward was worth the cost of being able to kill so many targets.
Fast forward to today and you're capped at 10 targets. Now the crash isn't looking so hot. Many of my respec's are now removing Nova, Inferno choices because its just a waste of slots. Not to mention the addition of Judgment powers.
I like the idea of crashless Nukes, it'll help put blasters back on the market as a desired AT for any team.
Not every power in a set has to be good.
That said, powers in a set that aren't good should at least have some fun factor, and shouldn't become a detriment when you decide to have some fun and use it.
For those reasons, I'd propose the following changes to all crashing nukes for all ATs (corruptors and defenders too):
1) Increase the fun factor by reintroducing a form of the Defiance 1.0 mechanic; the smaller your health bar, the bigger the nuke. A comic book hero firing off his final desperation attack at 1% health should leave a freakin' crater.
2) Decrease the punitive factor by softening the crash. You're already at a disadvantage, as a player, for taking, slotting, and using a suboptimal power just for fun. The game shouldn't punish you even more.
Arguably, they should be looked at on a per set basis since different crash nukes have different properties. Blizzard is a rain patch with slow, KD, and the ability to cast around corners. Thunderous Blast is ranged and the crash is based off number of targets hit so you can actually use it mid combat against 1-2 targets. These are going to have different needs than Inferno/Nova/etc. I actually wonder if most nukes should have a soft or hard control in order to help survivability. Also, I've always wished you could directly slot down the size of the crash.
Keep them as they are, maybe lower the Endurance time-out period, but not at the cost of lowering anything else in compensation.
Quixotik
"I did not say this. I am not here." -Guild Navigator
I had a silly idea. I don't think it's a particularly good idea. Just tossing it out there because it's amusing. Maybe it'll lead to a better idea.
What about making the nuke crashes different depending on each blast set's debuff theme? Thunderous Blast would continue to reduce the user's endurance and recovery, but only as much as the same debuffs applied to the targets. Dreadful Wail would reduce the user's damage resistance instead. Psychic Wail would reduce the user's recharge. Blizzard would reduce the user's recharge and movement speed. Blackstar would reduce the user's tohit. Atomic Blast would reduce the user's defense. Inferno would inflict the user with DoTs. Add hard mezzes to Thunderous Blast, Blizzard, Blackstar and Inferno to balance things out.
Quote:
I just consider Judgement to be my "blaster nuke" now. Its up and ready to fire more often, its ranged, hits more targets and has no crash. It does less damage so what? At least it doesn't have 10 seconds of no end + time to retoggle a bunch of stuff.
|
Originally Posted by firespray
No, we shouldn't. The crash should be removed altogether, all nukes should be made ranged, the target cap should be increased, and the damage on most of them should be increased, not decreased. Because at the moment, the traditional blaster nukes are badly overshadowed by the crashless nukes in some of the sets (Rain of Arrows, Full Auto, Hail of Bullets, Overcharge) and even more so by the new judgment nukes.
Just removing the crash and leaving them alone beyond that would be a good start though. |
H: Blaster 50, Defender 50, Tank 50, Scrapper 50, Controller 50, PB 50, WS 50
V: Brute 50, Corruptor 50, MM 50, Dominator 50, Stalker 50, AW 50, AS 50
Top 4: Controller, Brute, Scrapper, Corruptor
Bottom 4: (Peacebringer) way below everything else, Mastermind, Dominator, Blaster
CoH in WQHD
Where's the thread from August/this fall on this? Can't quite recall when it was, but we had a big one where we really hashed this out. I point that out because the posts and Arcanaville have all the math and logic in there for why the crashing nukes aren't doing enough for how much they punish the user. I would hazard to say that the current huge "Blasters in modern COH" thread over in the archetype forums has some on this as well.
Quote:
I mostly have the same issue with my Energy and Electric Blasters, and that's case in point for why the crashing nukes need help. I don't know if I'm 100% on board with the crashless nukes being fine in a world with Judgement, but the crashing nukes definitely need help.
|
Originally Posted by newchemicals
I just consider Judgement to be my "blaster nuke" now. Its up and ready to fire more often, its ranged, hits more targets and has no crash. It does less damage so what? At least it doesn't have 10 seconds of no end + time to retoggle a bunch of stuff.
|
Guide: Tanking, Wall of Fire Style (Updated for I19!), and the Four Rules of Tanking
Story Arc: Belated Justice, #88003
Synopsis: Explore the fine line between justice and vengeance as you help a hero of Talos Island bring his friend's murderer to justice.
Grey Pilgrim: Fire/Fire Tanker (50), Victory
I propose that all crashing Nukes do double their current damage but can not be buffed by Aim or Build Up in PvE. Having to Nuke without Aim and Build Up say, and then suffering a crash really takes the biscuit. It's not worth the crash and you might still have the mobs either still looking at you or now looking at you. With Aim and Build up the Nuke may well be almost double in damage. You however may need to use a Nuke at any time in a moment of crisis when Aim and Build up isn't available.
Originally I thought perhaps if no Aim or Build up is used then you lose 50% endurance. If one of the two is used then you either lose 20 more or 30 end more respectively. So the bigger the Nuke you give yourself the bigger the crash you concede but this idea maybe complicated.
Either way DPS is raised. Every 100-120s a typical energy blaster could add a Nuke to the end of a buffed attack chain. I don't see that as a bad thing as ranged damage versus travel speed of mobs seems a little light. Once a Mob is in melee you can make up for that slight lack.
He will honor his words; he will definitely carry out his actions. What he promises he will fulfill. He does not care about his bodily self, putting his life and death aside to come forward for another's troubled besiegement. He does not boast about his ability, or shamelessly extol his own virtues. - Sima Qian.
Should we lower the damage - increase control from a nuke in exchange for less of an endurance penalty?