Why not give Defenders/Corruptor melee powersets?


Aett_Thorn

 

Posted

Is there any reason defenders and corruptors, or even dominators could not have the mellee sets like martial arts, claws; etc...?

I can see how it might be troublesome to give scrappers/tankers;etc..a ranged powerset, but mellee for defenders seems harmless.

Or am I missing something obvious?


 

Posted

Because they have ranged primary/secondary damage powersets, and have REALLY poor melee damage mods.

Now, making a new AT that is buff/debuff and melee damage would be okay (and I would honestly like this a lot). But just giving Defenders and Corruptors a melee damage set isn't as easy as you think.


Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

"I was just the one with the most unsolicited sombrero." - Traegus

 

Posted

This is weird. I woke up this morning thinking about the exact same thing.

For some strange reason, I really wanted a Martial Arts/Time whatever. It seems to me like it could actually be a new archetype: Scrapper-esque primary, Corruptor-esque secondary. (although simply giving melee sets to existing ranged AT's would probably be less complicated?)

edit: Aett_Thorn typed over me ... didn't mean to seem argumentative about giving existing sets melee power sets. sorry.


 

Posted

Defenders can get melee powers through Epic powersets; Thunderstrike, Total Focus.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hatred666 View Post
Defenders can get melee powers through Epic powersets; Thunderstrike, Total Focus.
But each one gets only one, maybe two melee attacks. And they're about 75% as effective as Tanker attacks. Except for Thunderstrike, which for some reason does more damage than the Tanker version.


Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

"I was just the one with the most unsolicited sombrero." - Traegus

 

Posted

To clarify; I was suggesting the option to take, for example, Martial arts instead of Electric Blast as an offensive powerset.

If the main issue is ranged vs mellee damage settings, I would think you could change that fairly easily.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aett_Thorn View Post
Because they have ranged primary/secondary damage powersets, and have REALLY poor melee damage mods.
End thread. Those ATs are ranged/support or support/ranged. I don't think they need this.


Words to the wise aren't necessary- it's the stupid ones that need them.

"You're right...I forgot...being constantly at or the near the damage cap is a big turn off. Definitely not worth it."
- Vitality

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by magikwand View Post
End thread. Those ATs are ranged/support or support/ranged. I don't think they need this.
The thread didn't end.

Just sayin'.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by magikwand View Post
End thread. Those ATs are ranged/support or support/ranged. I don't think they need this.

It is not about need, it is about having as many powersets to choose from as possible.

I would like to see more powerset proliferation.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Umbra View Post
It is not about need, it is about having as many powersets to choose from as possible.

I would like to see more powerset proliferation.
i like power proliferation too but you cant put melee sets on ranged ATs, it just doesnt work that way


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Umbra View Post
It is not about need, it is about having as many powersets to choose from as possible.

I would like to see more powerset proliferation.
But you're asking for powersets to be proliferated to an AT that doesn't get those sets. And it's not so simple to just change the AT mods to port these sets in. This would affect all of the melee attacks that these ATs already get. Also, this can create some REALLY gimped characters.

Take Storm Summoning, where your best hope of staying alive in melee range is Hurricane - which would knock enemies away from you meaning that you'd have to chase them to hit them with your attacks.

Or how about Thermal, which has no sort of PBAoE debuff to keep you alive in melee range?



Basically, there are some sets that work well for this type of character, and others where it would be horrible. Which is why it makes more sense to make this a new AT, and only bring over the sets where you'd have some sort of synergy.


Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

"I was just the one with the most unsolicited sombrero." - Traegus

 

Posted

What you are "actually" asking for is "another" AT. That is why.


The development team and this community deserved better than this from NC Soft. Best wishes on your search.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Necrotech_Master View Post
i like power proliferation too but you cant put melee sets on ranged ATs, it just doesnt work that way
/Disagree. Some sets like /kin and /time work best in melee range. Some melee sets have nice ranged attacks like Throw Rock, Spines, Focus. There is a strike team working on proliferations and they said they have a long list.


 

Posted

1) Existing support sets are meant to work at range. They are full of powers, some that corruptors are forced to take, which are extended knockbacks, repulsion auras and fields, huge areas of fear (rain), or that require the user move to the center of their team mates to stand between the melee and ranged users, etc. Some sets like Storm Summoning are completely backwards for pairing melee, with non-self heals, self stealth, and tons of knock back.

2) Comic book supporty type heros and villains don't LIKE melee combat. Name five melee support characters, hero or villain. I'm sure you could wedge one square peg into the round hole and argue for one or two characters being 'melee support' because you saw them throw a brawl out one time, but give me five and I won't call it nitpicking.

3) Thematically it's an awkward thing to play a support role from melee range. Melee combat is engaging and in-your-face, usually when heros and villains fight in hand to hand combat they're not doing much else. Maybe two melees going on next to eachother will have a combatant in one toss a weapon to his ally or take a shot at the enemy engaged in the other fight, but that's about it. Many melee sets have a single ranged attack for this like hurl or impale.

4) The previous experiment to see how many players actually would go support/melee largely flopped. Peacebringers get melee attacks with built in KD, adjust to support the team rather than exaggerate it, and have a melee hold plus a heal. Everyone plays WS's for other reasons. Granted this is a subjective point that could be argued forever, so I will punctuate with IMHO. This is just IMHO.

5) Redraw. The community at large has developed an aversion to drawing weapons, and drawing them seems to be cemented into the games programming. Once we get staff fighting I think scrappers sets with weapons will outnumber non-weapon sets something like 10-6. Brutes and tankers do a bit better.
In fairness if you pooled all the non-weapon sets across all three melee AT's and finally added Radiation Melee that would be around twice as many primary options as MM's have even with Beast Mastery, so I guess I just argued myself out of #5... >.>

6) Melee sets all include taunts, or placate/assassin strikes. They would need all-new powers made and balanced specifically for the AT's they were ported to. This doesn't rule out giving them melee power sets on it's own, but it takes it down from 'just give it to them' down to 'we need to design all new powers for that'.















But it would still be totally sweet if they did this.
I would roll a Radiation / Axe for sure! XD


 

Posted

I will always be nostagic for the 'what could have been'

If my memory is any good, the Alpha version of CoH had no Archetypes, and you just picked any two powersets as primary secondary.

I assume that was changed because everyone would have taken Fireblast and Invulnerabilty

But the idea was awesome.




That being said, I love how much proliferation has been done.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by VKhaun View Post
4) The previous experiment to see how many players actually would go support/melee largely flopped. Peacebringers get melee attacks with built in KD, adjust to support the team rather than exaggerate it, and have a melee hold plus a heal. Everyone plays WS's for other reasons. Granted this is a subjective point that could be argued forever, so I will punctuate with IMHO. This is just IMHO.
Woah woah woah. Peacebringers are NOT support/melee in any regard. Why you would use them to argue against this is beyond me. Peacebringers have a mix of ranged/melee in their primary (with a single heal), and their secondary is self buffs/heals/armors. What part of them is support?

Now, you could say that the VEATs tried this, and those are fairly popular because of how good they can make a team. Not as popular as Brutes and Scrappers, but I still see them fairly often.


Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

"I was just the one with the most unsolicited sombrero." - Traegus

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Umbra View Post
I will always be nostagic for the 'what could have been'

If my memory is any good, the Alpha version of CoH had no Archetypes, and you just picked any two powersets as primary secondary.

I assume that was changed because everyone would have taken Fireblast and Invulnerabilty

But the idea was awesome.




That being said, I love how much proliferation has been done.
Yes, that was how the Alpha was, and they discovered that it was incredibly easy yo create either a complete Tankmage (high damage, high survivability) or a completely gimped character (support/armor). There was a reason it was changed.


Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

"I was just the one with the most unsolicited sombrero." - Traegus

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Umbra View Post
It is not about need, it is about having as many powersets to choose from as possible.

I would like to see more powerset proliferation.
I like powerset proliferation, but this scenario goes well outside of the definition of that. I consider proliferation as taking a powerset like Force Fields and porting it to an AT that doesn't have it like Corruptors. Anything else doesn't really fit the bill of proliferation, as it has been demonstrated up to this point.


Words to the wise aren't necessary- it's the stupid ones that need them.

"You're right...I forgot...being constantly at or the near the damage cap is a big turn off. Definitely not worth it."
- Vitality

 

Posted

This one is off the rails.


The development team and this community deserved better than this from NC Soft. Best wishes on your search.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by magikwand View Post
I like powerset proliferation, but this scenario goes well outside of the definition of that. I consider proliferation as taking a powerset like Force Fields and porting it to an AT that doesn't have it like Corruptors. Anything else doesn't really fit the bill of proliferation, as it has been demonstrated up to this point.

I see your point.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aett_Thorn View Post
Woah woah woah. Peacebringers are NOT support/melee in any regard. Why you would use them to argue against this is beyond me. Peacebringers have a mix of ranged/melee in their primary (with a single heal), and their secondary is self buffs/heals/armors. What part of them is support?

Now, you could say that the VEATs tried this, and those are fairly popular because of how good they can make a team. Not as popular as Brutes and Scrappers, but I still see them fairly often.
I didn't mean to say they were melee/support, I just meant they put in Khelds and most people skip the heal and team balance passive, and go for the personal goodness in the WS.

I wouldn't put VEATs anywhere near a PB for this. The leadership toggles are attractive for personal and group gain. They are win-win. Their maneuvers toggle especially should probably be considered mandatory as a defense power. Choosing a support set/AT/version is more meaningful than taking a win-win power.

Yes, VEAT's 'help' the group, but it's not relevant to any decision process like the topic or the PB/WS point.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by VKhaun View Post
I didn't mean to say they were melee/support, I just meant they put in Khelds and most people skip the heal and team balance passive, and go for the personal goodness in the WS.

I wouldn't put VEATs anywhere near a PB for this. The leadership toggles are attractive for personal and group gain. They are win-win. Their maneuvers toggle especially should probably be considered mandatory as a defense power. Choosing a support set/AT/version is more meaningful than taking a win-win power.

Yes, VEAT's 'help' the group, but it's not relevant to any decision process like the topic or the PB/WS point.
But the point you were arguing was that a support/melee AT has been tried, and used Peacebringers as your evidence, when Peacebringers are explicitly NOT a support/melee AT.


If you were to create a true Melee/Support AT, you'd be using the sets that exist now for both of those (with some minor changes, as you present, in regards to Taunt powers). Meaning that you take the current buff/debuff powersets, and pair them with current melee powersets, meaning that they'd actually have support abilities, like buffs and debuffs, unlike a Peacebringer.


Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

"I was just the one with the most unsolicited sombrero." - Traegus

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by VKhaun View Post
I didn't mean to say they were melee/support, I just meant they put in Khelds and most people skip the heal and team balance passive, and go for the personal goodness in the WS.

I wouldn't put VEATs anywhere near a PB for this. The leadership toggles are attractive for personal and group gain. They are win-win. Their maneuvers toggle especially should probably be considered mandatory as a defense power. Choosing a support set/AT/version is more meaningful than taking a win-win power.

Yes, VEAT's 'help' the group, but it's not relevant to any decision process like the topic or the PB/WS point.

The point is that VEAT's are very relevant to the topic because they combine powersets that had not been combined before, much in the way the OP was asking, and do it very effectively. All VEATs are basically melee/ranged damage primaries and armor/buff secondaries with a few extra things depending on your specific VEAT and the tree they took.

Kheldians might have some abilities that qualify as group support but at best those are at a minimum. Heals are NOT the best group support ability you can have so trying to describe a PB as a support class is a huge stretch and the debuffs in PB or Warshade attacks are nice but some blasters can put out about the same amount of debuffs in their attacks (ice for recharge debuffs and radiation blast for -def). On the other hand, most VEATs can easily add 20%+ def, 15%+ to hit and 30% damage buffs to a team and soldiers can stack up to 35% resistance debuffs in an area with an extra 20% to a single target from surveillance.

What the OP is asking for is actually going to be a far cry from VEATS though and is certainly NOT going to be a tank mage. A tank mage would be a character with a blast set paired with an armor set - kinda like VEATs in fact, where a melee set combined with the existing support sets is going to play a lot more like a blapper - all though potentially with more support and a bit more survivability than current blasters, at least depending on the support set. A melee/kin for example is going to play VERY blapper like where a melee/radiation or melee/dark miasma would be a lot more defensively oriented, although extremely vulnerable to mez.

I really don't see how combining melee sets with existing support sets would produce overpowered characters in anything but a few rare edge cases - and most of those would require a lot of IO support. Traps might be a candidate, since being mezzed doesn't remove any of its support. The biggest obstacle I see to a new AT like this is the amount of time and energy that would have to be spent balancing it - both in watching out for those edge cases that might be overpowered and dealing with the cries from folks about the underpowered combinations.


Globals: @Midnight Mystique/@Magik13

 

Posted

Please just give us Dominator assault powers as a primary and Buffs/Debuffs secondary(or flip flop primary/secondary). I would love to play a Thorn Assault/Poison or a Cold/Icy Assault Character.


Proton Sentry Peacebringer:lvl 50+++ - Human Build / Triform Build
Quasar Sentry Warshade:lvl 50+- Human Build / Triform Build
Red Katipo Arachnos Soldier:lvl 50+++ - Crab Build / Bane Build
Black Katipo Arachnos Widowlvl 50+++ - Fortunata Build / Night Widow Build

 

Posted

I've always wanted to see a melee/support style AT. VEATs are along that vein and look at how awesome they are.


Currently on Virtue:
Jinrazuo - Crab Spider

RWZ All-Pylon Solo Run