Concerned about Scrappers.
By
Acemace,
Posted on: 2012-03-21 05:04 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ad Astra
So - 2004? 2005? Isn't it time to let that one go?
|
Nope.
Types of Swords
My Portfolio
Which again technically wasn't a Scrapper (the AT) nerf.
it was a nerf to a powerset, not an AT. Granted that powerset was only available on the Scrapper AT but you can't call a change to a single powerset a nerf to an entire AT. Unless of course that's the only set available to said AT like with Peacebringers and Warshades.
Quote:
When they did that, I had three Scrappers (more than any other AT at the time). A Kat/SR who was already collecting dust, a BS/Invul who I loved but for Unyielding Stance (hey, self-stacking Invincibility was pretty hot), and a DM/Regen, who I created because, at the time, Regen was the only Scrapper secondary with unconditional, toggle mez protection that protected against all standard mez types. The fact that IH was pretty much god mode didn't factor in for me until later.|
Originally Posted by Zyphoid
This is a fair question, the AT as a whole has never been nerfed that I can remember. However do you remember this "Regen may be too good, it is going to see some small tweaks." At the time only scrappers had regen, my main and namesake was spines/regen made two weeks after live. I guess I am still bitter about that, where the heck was the Cottage Rule when Jack pulled that one?
|
I think Regen did need to change, because (especially once Invincibility was fixed) I think it stood head and shoulders above most of its peer powersets. I also think it was over-nerfed. That was, frankly, SoP for Cryptic at the time - the standing joke among my playing friends was that Cryptic would think of three ways to nerf something and then implement them all.
That said, I have actually come to enjoy click-happy Regen's play style. I do think it could use a couple of small buffs. I'd like Integration to be fully enhanceable, and I'd like click Instant Healing to have an up front heal to make it usable reactively. I'd love resistance to recharge debuffs, but I don't see Regen getting it.
I understand why some people prefer a "toggle-and-go" playstyle, and I sympathize that they might very much dislike modern Regen. I just don't share that dislike. And I definitely don't count the changes as a nerf against the AT as a whole.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
Quote:
I said that. :/
|
Originally Posted by DMystic
Which again technically wasn't a Scrapper (the AT) nerf.
it was a nerf to a powerset, not an AT. Granted that powerset was only available on the Scrapper AT but you can't call a change to a single powerset a nerf to an entire AT. Unless of course that's the only set available to said AT like with Peacebringers and Warshades. |
Types of Swords
My Portfolio
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zyphoid
I said that. :/
|
Whoops sorry, overlooked it.
I remember those days too, I had a DM/SR that only used the passives.
Although I think with Io's and especially with Incarnate we're a lot more powerful than we were back then.
Quote:
Its power creep because you said yourself they don't need a buff. Scrappers have been high-performance for years now. So they no longer have the high perch over brutes and stalkers or incarnate defenders, why do they need to reclaim that edge again?|
Originally Posted by Zyphoid
I still feel IO's and Incarnate powers threw that out the window. The fact is the devs will always be able to make the game more challenging. There are an endless amount of mobs for us to fight.
I took my first every blaster to 50 over the weekend. I was able to soft cap (and then some) him to ranged damage. On a team where almost everyone has maneuvers it is WAY beyond the soft cap. I can hover, attack, and never get hit outside of streak breaker. When that can be done with a blaster, how can anyone argue power creep? When a defender can use incarnate powers to get a pylon time of under a minute and a half how can giving scrappers something be power creep? |
Also, IOs and Incarnates shouldn't be the standard to set by when freems don't even have access to either. There's a lot of SO builds out there, the goal shouldn't be to make players like Sam feel like they have to learn Mids-jitsu just to keep up with everyone else.
Blood Widow Ricki * Tide Shifter * T-34 * Opposite Reaction * Shaolin Midnight * ChernobylCheerleader
Quote:
I actually agree with this, even though I made the suggestions. |
Originally Posted by UberGuy
I really think a Scourge mechanic that anyone could notice is too much. And if we couldn't notice it, I think people would complain it should be stronger. I definitely think any such a mechanism on top of the flat crit rate and the DR increase would be very much too much buffing.
|
I definitely don't think ALL of those things should happen. If anything, pick one and do that and change nothing else.
And if none of them happen? No big deal.
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:
You already admitted earlier in this thread that you want tankers to outdamage brutes, while retaining their survivability advantage. |
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane
I know EXACTLY what the Tanker is SUPPOSED to be doing. Even if the developers have forgotten and sold them out.
|
Or was that not what you meant when you said they should have the same damage cap, while saying nothing about defense values or base damage?
Simple fact: An AT that is simultaneously the most survivable AND among the highest damaging is brokenly overpowered and has no place in a game that even attempts to have any kind of balance between character classes.
Brutes can approach tanker survivability, but they have to make extensive use of IOs to reach the level tankers are at with just SOs. And at the end of the day, the tanker will STILL live longer.
The part you don't seem to get is that THIS. IS. NOT. A. COMIC. BOOK. You cannot have a Superman-level powerful character in a video game played by thousands of people, because it isn't fair to anyone who doesn't want to play that class.
Oh, and your comment about not wanting to buff your teammates' damage? Why the hell not? They're your TEAMMATES, when the team succeeds, YOU succeed. When you're on a team it is not about your own personal glory. Unless of course you want spectators instead of teammates.
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:
This part of your post makes it sound like you are happy that scrappers have been kicked down the latter. You may not mean it that way, but that sure is how I read it. |
Originally Posted by SpyralPegacyon
Its power creep because you said yourself they don't need a buff. Scrappers have been high-performance for years now. So they no longer have the high perch over brutes and stalkers or incarnate defenders, why do they need to reclaim that edge again?
|
If you note my suggestion about end, all it does is let scrappers fight more. It reduces their down time. It will be awesome at lower levels, and not as awesome at higher levels. It is a reflection of the kind of conditioning an MMA champion, or a College wrestler, goes through to win. Both of which would be scrappers, because getting pissed off is a fast way to loose your cool, and end up on the mat...in a bad way.
At one point in time End recovery powers (QR) were the soul domain of the scrapper. Now that has been shared with brutes. Maintaining 75% fury is nothing when I never have to stop because I never run out of end. Add to that with accolades, and superior conditioning brutes can end up with a higher end total than scrappers to go along with inherent stam, QR ( some sets), superior conditioning, and physical perfection. I don't see how adding superior conditioning as an extra inherent to scrappers would break anything.
Talk about power creep all you want, but as far as I can tell (I may be mistaken) every AT (even the Kheldian) has seen some form of buff, where the scrapper has not. Perhaps that is an issue of need, but if I am handing out suckers I am not going to skip the pudgy kid just because he doesn't need one.
Types of Swords
My Portfolio
Quote:
I read it over a couple times just to make sure I didn't come off as too snarky. That said...|
Originally Posted by Zyphoid
This part of your post makes it sound like you are happy that scrappers have been kicked down the latter. You may not mean it that way, but that sure is how I read it.
|
Quote:
| If you note my suggestion about end, all it does is let scrappers fight more. It reduces their down time. It will be awesome at lower levels, and not as awesome at higher levels. It is a reflection of the kind of conditioning an MMA champion, or a College wrestler, goes through to win. Both of which would be scrappers, because getting pissed off is a fast way to loose your cool, and end up on the mat...in a bad way. |
Quote:
| Talk about power creep all you want, but as far as I can tell (I may be mistaken) every AT (even the Kheldian) has seen some form of buff, where the scrapper has not. Perhaps that is an issue of need, but if I am handing out suckers I am not going to skip the pudgy kid just because he doesn't need one. |
Blood Widow Ricki * Tide Shifter * T-34 * Opposite Reaction * Shaolin Midnight * ChernobylCheerleader
Quote:
This right here is at the heart of why some of us are disagreeing with you. No one has been kicked down the ladder. Uplifting one AT cannot be viewed as lowering another. Viewing it this way is the very essence of what perpetuates power creep.|
Originally Posted by Zyphoid
This part of your post makes it sound like you are happy that scrappers have been kicked down the latter.
|
Scrappers lost nothing. Nothing was changed. That other ATs might be viewed as viable alternatives to playing Scrappers is a good thing. There is a difference in providing players with other ATs they might like to play (which "steals" away players) and having an AT that people stop playing because there is something wrong with it. Your position comes across as if you view the two things as equivalent, and they are not. Nothing is wrong with Scrappers. If more people play Stalkers now, it's because they now view Stalkers as more viable/enjoyable as alternatives to Scrappers than they used to be.
In an ideal world, all the CoH ATs would be equally popular. We should not strive for one AT to continue to "out do" the others if the others are actually made more comparatively popular.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
Quote:
Brutes have the SAME resistance, defense and regen caps as Tankers, and only a 10% lower HP cap.|
Originally Posted by ClawsandEffect
Or was that not what you meant when you said they should have the same damage cap, while saying nothing about defense values or base damage?
|
But even with a lower damage modifier, their damage at their cap is way beyond Tankers who get kneecapped by their cap. Shouldn't the damage a Brute does at their damage cap only be 10% higher instead of the 80% higher it is?
WHY SHOULD BRUTES GET NEARLY THE SAME SURVIVABILITY POTENTIAL AS TANKERS BUT MUCH MORE DAMAGE POTENTIAL?
And before you say the damage caps are far off things that don't matter, ONE Kin will ram a Tanker into their damage cap, and Brutes, who aren't exactly fragile to begin with, now have Barrier and Rebirth and way more things that improve their survivability and make them more tough than ever before, and they still have plenty of room to grow defensively and offensively. Four of my Tankers already hit the damage cap on their own, have NO real capability for any offensive growth and no real need to be tougher.
The caps very much matter, as does potential, especially when they're giving everyone ever more ways to approach theirs. And make no mistake, they WILL keep adding more buffs to the game. More IOs. More Incarnate powers. More temps.
It will keep getting easier to have tougher and tougher Brutes further and further into the range of Tankers, but the Tanker damage cap hasn't changed.
Quote:
| Simple fact: An AT that is simultaneously the most survivable AND among the highest damaging is brokenly overpowered and has no place in a game that even attempts to have any kind of balance between character classes. |
Brutes are tougher than ever on their own, still have the potential to be as tough as Tankers (sorry, minus 10% HP, which really isn't that meaningful), can still receive buffs and heal to increase their toughness, don't exactly have survivability problems yet have much more damage potential.
A Brute at their caps only has 10% less HP than the toughest AT yet has 80% MORE damage, so how is THAT balanced?
.
Lurking around the edges of this thread, it seems that (some) Tanker players and the Devs have contradictory, irreconcilable visions of the AT and/or its role in Trials.
Tanker players: Tankers should be able to resist/survive everything the game throws at us.
Devs: There should be things that no one, not even tankers, can resist/survive.
Can't both be right.
My characters at Virtueverse
Faces of the City
Quote:
No, they can't.|
Originally Posted by Megajoule
Lurking around the edges of this thread, it seems that (some) Tanker players and the Devs have contradictory, irreconcilable visions of the AT and/or its role in Trials.
Tanker players: Tankers should be able to resist/survive everything the game throws at us. Devs: There should be things that no one, not even tankers, can resist/survive. Can't both be right. |
I side with the devs; there needs to be danger for all ATs.
But, to the devs, you need to stop balancing Tanker damage against their survivability so strictly when you're more than willing to circumvent that survivability in too many situations and strip them of their advantage. Nor should you when far too often you render it superfluous and not really advantageous and also have the gall to hand out softcapping IOs, Barrier and Rebirth to Brutes and Scrappers.
.
Quick thought before I run off to put my nose back to the grindstone:
Damage set bonuses in IOs. Empirically, how well are they balanced versus other set bonuses right now?
/em dangles a free hat for a red name's thoughts, then heads back to work
Blood Widow Ricki * Tide Shifter * T-34 * Opposite Reaction * Shaolin Midnight * ChernobylCheerleader
Quote:
I want to disagree, but I can't. You are right, Scrappers lost nothing, which is why I continually say they don't really need anything. I want to be as clear as possible, I want them to get something. |
Originally Posted by UberGuy
This right here is at the heart of why some of us are disagreeing with you. No one has been kicked down the ladder. Uplifting one AT cannot be viewed as lowering another. Viewing it this way is the very essence of what perpetuates power creep.
Scrappers lost nothing. Nothing was changed. That other ATs might be viewed as viable alternatives to playing Scrappers is a good thing. There is a difference in providing players with other ATs they might like to play (which "steals" away players) and having an AT that people stop playing because there is something wrong with it. Your position comes across as if you view the two things as equivalent, and they are not. Nothing is wrong with Scrappers. If more people play Stalkers now, it's because they now view Stalkers as more viable/enjoyable as alternatives to Scrappers than they used to be. |
It can be done w/o power creep.
Quote:
| What you're describing all sounds like Willpower and Body EPP to me. |
I don't mind if we disagree, we can agree to disagree. That is not going to change that I would like to see scrappers get some love. I will fight for it every time I get the chance, just as I am sure many of you will fight against it.
Types of Swords
My Portfolio
Quote:
Honestly, I am having a bad week and you may not have been as snarky as it seemed to me.
|
Originally Posted by SpyralPegacyon
I read it over a couple times just to make sure I didn't come off as too snarky. That said...
|
Types of Swords
My Portfolio
Quote:
Gotta ask, you don't see how I can say blasters aren't supposed to have survivability seing Sarrate's numbers, or that Tanks may not have a level of survivability above all other ATs that actually provides them benefit (Meaning being gainfully more survivable) when looking at her(?) numbers, about blasters?|
Originally Posted by UberGuy
Given the numbers Sarrate just posted, I honestly don't see how you can say that seriously.
|
I guess a good question to start with is, how long have scrappers been soloing Pylons, doing the RWZ Challenge, and soloing AVs? If it was since before inventions, then that's it. If you can survive an AV long enough to kill it by yourself, the margin only improves on a team.
Add to that, the Brute AT has been the exclusive aggro management AT redside from it's introduction to the addition of side switching, so it's ability is demonstrated not theoretical. Brutes can fill the role of a tank, theres no if, and it can do it with SOs.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by UberGuy
Brutes are the AT designed explicitly to have the next closest survivability after Tankers. I see the point in debating whether they are too close in survivability, but it's to be expected that the AT designed to be the next closest in survivability be, well, close in survivability.
|
And with all my talk of iTrials and Hami, I do mean all Unresistable/autohit damage. Sewer kill patches, Hydra damage, Crystal titan damage, Caltrops, PPD acid mortars. From 1 to 50, make it part of the inherent that damage can't bypass Tanker mitigation. If enemies can overcome tanker mitigation, cool it happens, but things shouldn't simply bypass the survivability tools.
Murphys Military Law
#23. Teamwork is essential; it gives the enemy other people to shoot at.
#46. If you can't remember, the Claymore is pointed towards you.
#54. Killing for peace is like screwing for virginity.
Quote:
IIRC Inventions were i8, and the RWZ update with pylons was in i11.
| I guess a good question to start with is, how long have scrappers been soloing Pylons, doing the RWZ Challenge, and soloing AVs? If it was since before inventions, then that's it. If you can survive an AV long enough to kill it by yourself, the margin only improves on a team. |
Types of Swords
My Portfolio
Quote:
Inventions were i9, I never did the Crash site stuff, due to being redside exclusive at that time so I guess there may not have been Crash site challenges prior to it's change to a Co-Op. |
Originally Posted by Zyphoid
IIRC Inventions were i8, and the RWZ update with pylons was in i11.
|
And being primarily a MM, I wasn't too concerned with Scrapper challenges, so I don't know if they had any in the SO era or not, or if they were tearing down AVs then. That's kinda what I'm asking; what were they able to do back when?
I know the answer for Brutes, I've seen them since I started Playing, I don't know so much about the "early" days for scrappers (Post ED, Pre IO)
Murphys Military Law
#23. Teamwork is essential; it gives the enemy other people to shoot at.
#46. If you can't remember, the Claymore is pointed towards you.
#54. Killing for peace is like screwing for virginity.
I do believe Scrapper challenges did exist before Inventions. Primarily they took the form of diving into level 52 Rularuu around the Storm Palace.
However, long before Inventions and before anyone was talking about Scrapper challenges in anything like the format they talk about them today, people used to solo AVs with Scrappers. It wasn't nearly so common as it is today, and only a few powersets were known to pull it off with what passed for regularity.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
Okay, in the interest of squashing the "Tankers don't deal enough damage" argument once and for all, I did some math.
The results were....interesting. For the record, all of my calculations are assuming the AT in question is solo.
Scrappers have 75% of the Tanker base value for resistance and defense powers. This is inarguable fact. I'm just putting it here for posterity and because it supports my point.
When I did the math to find out what percentage of the Scrapper damage scale te Tanker damage scale falls at, I discovered to my slight surprise that Johnny is technically correct in that tankers are shortchanged on their damage scale. But not really.
I'll explain.
Scrapper damage scale is 1.125 and Tanker damage scale is 0.8.
That works out to Tankers having exactly 71.12% of Scrapper damage scalar. So, on the surface it would appear that Tankers need 4% more damage to equal 75% of Scrapper damage, which is where it should be if Scrappers get 75% of the base defense values of Tankers. So, if you increased Tanker damage scale to 0.844 you would be at exactly 75% of Scrapper damage. This would probably get rounded to 0.85 just to make it easier.
But then you have to look at the variables: Critical Hits and Bruising.
Bruising adds a flat 20% damage to any target it is applied to, and this is independent of Tanker damage cap. In damage scalar terms, that would make that Tanker's damage scale against that particular target 0.96 (because 20% of 0.8 is 0.16, which you'd simply add to it). For the record, that would be almost exactly 85% of Scrapper damage. (85% of 1.125 is 0.95625, which rounds up to 0.96%)
Now, I did not calculate what effect Critical Hits has on Scrapper damage, mostly because I do not know the formula to determine exactly how much average damage the chance of Critical Hits adds. But, with that said, I very much doubt a 5% Critical Hit chance adds more than 10% to a Scrapper's damage over time. I strongly suspect that 0.96 is very close to 75% of Scrapper damage when you factor Criticals into the equation.
End result: With the addition of Bruising, Tankers and Scrappers are very close to perfectly balanced against each other, receiving almost exactly 75% of each other's values for defense/resistance and damage when you factor in the variables.
Also, until Tanker Max HP was buffed, Scrappers got exactly 75% of that as well. It's more like 68% after the HP buff.
That pretty much proves that Tankers are right where they need to be damage-wise. Numbers do not lie, or make subjective assessments based on how they feel about something.
That leads me to the conclusion that it is Brutes that are broken and throwing the balance point between the 4 melee ATs off, not Tankers. I didn't do the math to back that up, but it's a strong hunch.
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:
What you seem to be missing is that doing that would neuter the threat against the characters its actually targeted at.|
Originally Posted by William_Valence
And with all my talk of iTrials and Hami, I do mean all Unresistable/autohit damage. Sewer kill patches, Hydra damage, Crystal titan damage, Caltrops, PPD acid mortars. From 1 to 50, make it part of the inherent that damage can't bypass Tanker mitigation. If enemies can overcome tanker mitigation, cool it happens, but things shouldn't simply bypass the survivability tools.
|
Irresistible damage isn't especially more scary than plain old everyday damage to most Blasters, Defenders, Dominators, Controllers or Corruptors, because, with the common exception of L/S damage after getting epic shields, most of them aren't used to resisting a lot of damage across the type spectrum anyway. Even if they have an epic shield with third or fourth resistance type, they are pretty used to having other damage types bypass them. They might not be used to being hit with autohit damage, depending on how good their inventions access is, but otherwise they're probably pretty used to being hit, and being hit hard when they are hit.
The whole point of irresistible damage is to hurt the people who are most used to shrugging it off. Yes, it hurts them a lot more than they're used to being hurt, by definition. But it doesn't hurt them worst, because they start from such a much stronger mitigation position. A well-built Tanker who has lost half his HP to irresistible damage is still far, far better off than a Blaster who has lost half of his HP. If you make a Tanker able to ignore irresistible damage, they establish pretty firmly that nothing is able to threaten them unless it blatantly takes them out of the fight a-la sequestration, Ghost Widow or Reichsman grade mezzes. And that is almost certainly the point of those irresistible damage types.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
Quote:
No, Bruising does NOT act like a flat 20% increase to Tanker damage for two reasons:|
Originally Posted by ClawsandEffect
Bruising adds a flat 20% damage to any target it is applied to, and this is independent of Tanker damage cap. In damage scalar terms, that would make that Tanker's damage scale against that particular target 0.96 (because 20% of 0.8 is 0.16, which you'd simply add to it). For the record, that would be almost exactly 85% of Scrapper damage. (85% of 1.125 is 0.95625, which rounds up to 0.96%)
|
1. It only effects 1 target. It doesn't affect AoE damage
2. You don't start a fight with Brusing in effect. In order for Bruising to work you must lead with your tier 1 and follow a very specific attack chain to refresh it (as opposed to being able to throw an attack with better damage per cast time) that may be far from optimal compared to a Scrapper with the same powers (who may not have to use their T1 attack ever).
And
3. In any team situation where ST damage matters, like fighting an AV or GM, Bruising is buffing the damage of any Scrappers around too. So they catch right back up to being too far ahead.
Not to mention, on a team, Tankers take the heat off of Scrappers if the Scrapper chooses, so the Scrapper doesn't feel ANY downside to having 75% of a Tanker's HP. It's almost a non-penalty for someone who gets superior damage. Tankers buff Scrapper survivability AND damage while the Tanker gets nothing from being next to a Scrapper, except to see smaller numbers compared to them. Which, is why I suggested that Scrappers take a 20% decrease in damage and gain -25% resistance debuffs on all their attacks.
Quote:
| That leads me to the conclusion that it is Brutes that are broken and throwing the balance point between the 4 melee ATs off, not Tankers. I didn't do the math to back that up, but it's a strong hunch. |
.
Don't get me wrong. If somehow, someone talks the devs into buffing Scrapper crit rates and (Scrapper and Stalker) resist caps, I will accept it with a smile.
I really think a Scourge mechanic that anyone could notice is too much. And if we couldn't notice it, I think people would complain it should be stronger. I definitely think any such a mechanism on top of the flat crit rate and the DR increase would be very much too much buffing.
Which is again why I like the end buff idea.
Types of Swords
My Portfolio