What can you do with a problem like a Blaster?
By
Adeon Hawkwood,
Posted on: 2012-06-05 15:04 in Archetypes and Powers General Discussion
Quote:
Ignoring the word best, I would love to see arguements (With numbers and facts) that ANY secondary aside from a high recharge /mental build can get comparible survivability to a scrapper.|
Originally Posted by Airhammer
See this is opinion and conjecture because I can make arguments for Electric and Energy and many would argue that Ice is the best secondary as well.
|
'I don't have many problems' is not an arguement.
Princess Darkstar - Proud Member of the Handprints of Union, the #1 ranked SG in Europe!
British by act of union, English by grace of God, Northern by pure good fortune!
British by act of union, English by grace of God, Northern by pure good fortune!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Aggelakis
PrincessDarkstar: "RAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGHHHHHHHHHH SOMEONE IS *WRONG* ON THE INTERNET!"
|
Quote:
I would like to see more secondary choices for Blasters:|
Originally Posted by Tsuji
From my perspective, the main issue with blasters is that they have no secondaries...
|
Kinetic Manipulation
Stone (Earth) Manipulation
Spines
Martial Arts
Street Justice
Claws
Thorns
Apparently, I play "City of Shakespeare"
*Arc #95278-Gathering the Four Winds -3 step arc; challenging - 5 Ratings/3 Stars (still working out the kinks)
*Arc #177826-Lights, Camera, Scream! - 3 step arc, camp horror; try out in 1st person POV - 35 Ratings/4 Stars
Quote:
I think he meant that the secondaries were ****, rather than non-existant.
|
Originally Posted by Yogi_Bare
I would like to see more secondary choices for Blasters:
Kinetic Manipulation Stone (Earth) Manipulation Spines Martial Arts Street Justice Claws Thorns |
Princess Darkstar - Proud Member of the Handprints of Union, the #1 ranked SG in Europe!
British by act of union, English by grace of God, Northern by pure good fortune!
British by act of union, English by grace of God, Northern by pure good fortune!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Aggelakis
PrincessDarkstar: "RAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGHHHHHHHHHH SOMEONE IS *WRONG* ON THE INTERNET!"
|
Quote:
so basically you want to play a scrapper with blasts..
|
Originally Posted by Yogi_Bare
I would like to see more secondary choices for Blasters:
Kinetic Manipulation Stone (Earth) Manipulation Spines Martial Arts Street Justice Claws Thorns |
The hard things I can do--- The impossible just take a little bit longer.
If numbers are so much more important than a teammate who is fun to play with, forget about the game altogether and go play with a calculator instead. -Claws and Effect-
Quote:
see thats the problem.. I dont play with a calculator.. I play the GAME.. I can tell you that all my blasters can survive well and thats a function of me knowing how I have built them.. how to play them, knowing their advantages and limitations and utilizing my build optimally.. |
Originally Posted by PrincessDarkstar
Ignoring the word best, I would love to see arguements (With numbers and facts) that ANY secondary aside from a high recharge /mental build can get comparible survivability to a scrapper.
'I don't have many problems' is not an arguement. |
Now I dont try to play blasters like scrappers ( one I hate scrappers ) and I believe this is 50&% of the issue.. It doesnt play like X so its not good.. if X is better then Y sucks..
So if you want number crunching I cant help you with that.. nor will I try to convince you otherwise.. Ive been playing blasters since day one.. no IO's No Epic pool, no defiance.. NO BREAK FREE's and I have never felt totally gimped or broken..
again I think Blasters need some tweaks.. not a major revision or a rewriting of all secondaries..
The hard things I can do--- The impossible just take a little bit longer.
If numbers are so much more important than a teammate who is fun to play with, forget about the game altogether and go play with a calculator instead. -Claws and Effect-
Quote:
You might not play the game that way, but it is a giant spreadsheet and things like survivability can be fairly easily interpretted by numbers.|
Originally Posted by Airhammer
see thats the problem.. I dont play with a calculator.. I play the GAME.. I can tell you that all my blasters can survive well and thats a function of me knowing how I have built them.. how to play them, knowing their advantages and limitations and utilizing my build optimally..
|
If a scrapper is 100 survivability and a blaster is 90 then you could say it is close enough and the different situations may make the way we worked that out wrong, but when a scrapper is 100 and a blaster is 5 there is definitely a problem.
A basic SO level /SR scrapper that knows what he is doing gets 95% damage reduction against most mobs at 50, that is without factoring in resists and regen etc, a blaster might get 60% (Taking into account a base 50% chance to hit) and no amount of skill can change that, the only thing you can do is play in a way that you don't get shot at as often, which means you spend time not doing damage (Even if you find that fun most don't), or take on lesser challenges, or even just have lower expectations. If an average power takes a second to animate then you spending just a single second to move between every attack (Say ducking behind that wall, or clicking that inspiration) cuts your damage output in half, even though it may not seem it.
Edit: I don't even need to see number crunching, just give me an actual example of how a specific blaster will stay alive in a certain scenario (IE: What powers will you use and what will they do), and I will show you a scrapper doing it easier (Low level doesn't really count because blasters are great until mid levels).
Princess Darkstar - Proud Member of the Handprints of Union, the #1 ranked SG in Europe!
British by act of union, English by grace of God, Northern by pure good fortune!
British by act of union, English by grace of God, Northern by pure good fortune!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Aggelakis
PrincessDarkstar: "RAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGHHHHHHHHHH SOMEONE IS *WRONG* ON THE INTERNET!"
|
Quote:
Outside the distinction of having Armors, Blasters are essentially (insert Melee AT here) with blasts, but:|
Originally Posted by Airhammer
so basically you want to play a scrapper with blasts..
|
1. No. Neither am I asking to play Stalkers, Brutes or Tankers with blasts.
2. No. I'm not asking for Armor sets. Not trying to be a Kheld or SoA (which would be a more apt description).
3. No. I want more offensive options for my secondaries. Ports are easier to score than building sets from the ground up; so that's what my suggestions are based on.
Apparently, I play "City of Shakespeare"
*Arc #95278-Gathering the Four Winds -3 step arc; challenging - 5 Ratings/3 Stars (still working out the kinks)
*Arc #177826-Lights, Camera, Scream! - 3 step arc, camp horror; try out in 1st person POV - 35 Ratings/4 Stars
Quote:
I know what he meant. I'm just using a portion of his thoughts as a springboard for a suggestion that may alleviate that complaint (directly or otherwise). More choice goes a long way.|
Originally Posted by PrincessDarkstar
I think he meant that the secondaries were ****, rather than non-existant.
|
I omitted the rest because I don't share his sentiment.
Apparently, I play "City of Shakespeare"
*Arc #95278-Gathering the Four Winds -3 step arc; challenging - 5 Ratings/3 Stars (still working out the kinks)
*Arc #177826-Lights, Camera, Scream! - 3 step arc, camp horror; try out in 1st person POV - 35 Ratings/4 Stars
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PrincessDarkstar
Edit: I don't even need to see number crunching, just give me an actual example of how a specific blaster will stay alive in a certain scenario (IE: What powers will you use and what will they do), and I will show you a scrapper doing it easier (Low level doesn't really count because blasters are great until mid levels). |
And there we go again. "X at vs Y AT." It's not a competition.
I don't care if a Scrapper "does it easier." Scrappers do pretty much *everything* easier. It's why I rarely play them - boring as hell. With a blaster, YES I need to pay attention to what's in the spawn. A mezzer? Gee, what am I attacking first, probably with my snipe? Or with the holds I have available, or whatever other tools I have to neutralize that threat instead of just ignore it and faceroll on the keyboard again?
And the comments about blasters having useless secondaries is just foolishness at its highest. (I know it wasn't yours. Commenting here.) If you're not taking advantage of your secondary, guess what, you're going to have trouble. That goes from the T1 immobilize (remember, managing the spawn - and hey, use it while mezzed to keep something with harder hitting melee attacks from being able to close and use them) to the utilities and attacks. Again, do some have problems? Sure. (See time bomb.) But that's not the same as "having no secondaries" or "the secondaries are useless."
Quote:
Which is basically where Blaster secondaries fail.|
Originally Posted by Airhammer
so basically you want to play a scrapper with blasts..
|
You really don't need those extra attacks when there are more than enough attack powers to put together a good chain in the primary. In particular, melee attacks are pointless unless you make them more damaging than ranged attacks and scrapper attacks. Return of the City Of Blappers anyone?
Replacing those melee attacks with defensive powers and improved CC seems like the only solution to me. Cottage Rule be dammed.
I really should do something about this signature.
If I was starting this game from scratch, I think the major change I would make to Blasters is their secondary sets. Like others in this thread, I think they should have more crowd control abilities in their secondaries. Blasters in comics tend to use their various abilities to keep enemies away from them so that they can fight where they want to - at range.
Do I want them to be Dominators? No. I think that a full blast set as a primary would be different enough for that, and then the secondary should be (for most secondaries) 4 melee attacks, 4 crowd control, and Build Up. Obviously, different sets would have different options for different feel, but I think that if they had gone with that formula instead of what we have now, they'd be better off.
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
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bubblerella
I agree. Lucky for me the only defender I've rolled in the last few years has been a Traps/Sonic. I still bring something to a team. Other than that, I go corr all the way.
|
Gotta be kidding me... I can't even play a Corr because they under perform defs by so much... I really don't even get what y'all are talking about... Are you perhaps discussing debuff-less defs?
That said... If you wanna buff defs more than they are already? I'm game. I'll love me some god-mode. Just try not to break the whole game with the overwhelming power..
Quote:
Yes but if 2 AT's have massive differences in difficulty then something is wrong, especially as both AT's represent the most commonly picked AT's by new players.|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
And there we go again. "X at vs Y AT." It's not a competition.
|
Also I didn't mean easier on the player, I meant easier as in takes less damage, does it faster etc. And I only use scrappers as the point of comparison because they effectively have the same role imho.
Princess Darkstar - Proud Member of the Handprints of Union, the #1 ranked SG in Europe!
British by act of union, English by grace of God, Northern by pure good fortune!
British by act of union, English by grace of God, Northern by pure good fortune!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Aggelakis
PrincessDarkstar: "RAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGHHHHHHHHHH SOMEONE IS *WRONG* ON THE INTERNET!"
|
Quote:
This still has the problem that if the melee attacks are good people will want to get close and use them, and if they aren't good then they have no use.|
Originally Posted by Aett_Thorn
Do I want them to be Dominators? No. I think that a full blast set as a primary would be different enough for that, and then the secondary should be (for most secondaries) 4 melee attacks, 4 crowd control, and Build Up. Obviously, different sets would have different options for different feel, but I think that if they had gone with that formula instead of what we have now, they'd be better off.
|
If blasters are to be good in melee range then the primaries also need something to help with that, but then we are suddenly without a proper range damage AT.
Princess Darkstar - Proud Member of the Handprints of Union, the #1 ranked SG in Europe!
British by act of union, English by grace of God, Northern by pure good fortune!
British by act of union, English by grace of God, Northern by pure good fortune!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Aggelakis
PrincessDarkstar: "RAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGHHHHHHHHHH SOMEONE IS *WRONG* ON THE INTERNET!"
|
Quote:
There was never a "City of Blappers" - Blappers were once more popular, but never the majority. In any case, whatever your feelings about blappers, we shouldn't be making changes that destroy their game completely. That's why the cottage rule is there: to ensure the devs protect them from you.
|
Originally Posted by PRAF68_EU
Which is basically where Blaster secondaries fail.
You really don't need those extra attacks when there are more than enough attack powers to put together a good chain in the primary. In particular, melee attacks are pointless unless you make them more damaging than ranged attacks and scrapper attacks. Return of the City Of Blappers anyone? Replacing those melee attacks with defensive powers and improved CC seems like the only solution to me. Cottage Rule be dammed. |
[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:
If parachuting was worth doing everyone would do it, and if its not then no one would do it.|
Originally Posted by PrincessDarkstar
This still has the problem that if the melee attacks are good people will want to get close and use them, and if they aren't good then they have no use.
|
I was a blapper for six years. I know how melee works for blasters. I've been converted to a ranged blaster for almost two years. I still have melee attacks. I don't deliberately close into melee, but I still use them, because critters often have feet. While I'm shooting at them from range, some often manage to walk right up to me and punch me in the head. When that happens I bonesmasher or total focus them, and then power thrust them back out to range for good measure. I would rather retain the ability to do that without having people tell me that it doesn't work.
[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:
You might not wish to be a Developer which is okay cos ya would of probably killed any chances right there.|
Originally Posted by PRAF68_EU
Replacing those melee attacks with defensive powers and improved CC seems like the only solution to me. Cottage Rule be dammed.
|
I've never Blapped. That's what PBs are for.
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.
Quote:
Why are you so obsessed with "doing it faster?" Do you win something more if you "do it faster?" No. So who effing cares if you "do it faster?" |
Originally Posted by PrincessDarkstar
Yes but if 2 AT's have massive differences in difficulty then something is wrong, especially as both AT's represent the most commonly picked AT's by new players.
Also I didn't mean easier on the player, I meant easier as in takes less damage, does it faster etc. And I only use scrappers as the point of comparison because they effectively have the same role imho. |
Takes less damage - again, learn to manage the mob.
There is no competition between ATs.
Quote:
| This still has the problem that if the melee attacks are good people will want to get close and use them... |
And who cares if someone does want to get in and use them? It's not "wrong." They should realize they're at a higher risk, depending on who, if anyone, they're working with at that point. They're not forced to use them. If all a blaster had (and I don't mean by choice) was melee attacks, with everything else the same, then yes, they'd need some serious work - work I'd expect to have seen done before the game was released, or at least LONG before issue 23. You'll note that isn't the case.
If you feel you need more defense on a blaster in melee - bring purples or IO yourself to do so. Don't insist the AT needs changing.
Quote:
True on one level, but iffy on another. Stalkers were updated in part because the devs agreed with the sentiment that they didn't bring a sufficiently unique set of tactical options to the table. That's a comparison judgment. If the archetypes were not judged against each other, I would say that 90% of all archetype-wide changes since release would not have occurred.|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
There is no competition between ATs.
|
There is a similar statement that there is no competition between powersets as well, which is also true to a degree and false to another degree. And 90% of all powerset changes would not have occurred as well if powersets were not in part judged on a relative basis.
There is no absolute standard for "normal" in this game that the devs use, or even accept. Normal is judged relative to everyone else for all but a few very high level global metrics. A powerset performs well and is well designed if it performs similar to its peers and is favored by the players to very roughly the same degree, within very wide but still well-defined margins. When the devs determined that Blasters underperformed, it wasn't because their performance was lower than some minimum mark, it was because they performed slower than everyone else by more than a critical margin. Blasters can actually underperform in two ways: they can be slow, or everyone else can be fast. In both cases, according to the design rules of this game, Blasters will be judged underperforming.
The only absolute anchor to all of this is the absolute leveling curve. If the set of all players blows that out of the water or drops below it a lot, then it can be said that everyone is overperforming or underperforming. But when that happens, we find out when the devs adjust the global leveling curves.
[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:
Tanks got a buff more recently.
|
Originally Posted by Madadh
Well, I'm gonna be the snarky one...
Oh, so today it's blasters that have the problem again? Are you sure it isn't the tanks day (cause Brutes to it better)? Or Scrappers (cause brutes do it better)? Or Brutes (cause tanks or scrappers do it better)? Or Defenders (cause Corrs do it better)? Or Khelds (because everyone does it better)? Oh, it is Blasters day? Yeah. They suck. Must be lame being about being able to softcap and push the highest pure DPS in the game..  OK. snark aside.. The problem is that the game is still, in some fictional alternate universe, based around SOs.. But a notable percentage of the games population don't rely on just SOs. And as long as comparisons are made between SOed alts, and IOed/Incarnated alts, you're going to have folks that feel seriously deficient, regardless of what alt you are playing. And I don't know what the solution is to try and bridge that gap. I think upping the baseline performance may be part of the solution, but I think that should be done with extreme caution... |
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:
While true - and stalkers are actually a fine example of when an AT as a whole DID need a change since they didn't really line up with gameplay (and I say that as someone who enjoys them - and enjoys them more now,) or Dominators with the major swing in gameplay on a non-permadom getting changed- I'm referring to direct competition. |
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
True on one level, but iffy on another. Stalkers were updated in part because the devs agreed with the sentiment that they didn't bring a sufficiently unique set of tactical options to the table. That's a comparison judgment. If the archetypes were not judged against each other, I would say that 90% of all archetype-wide changes since release would not have occurred.
There is a similar statement that there is no competition between powersets as well, which is also true to a degree and false to another degree. And 90% of all powerset changes would not have occurred as well if powersets were not in part judged on a relative basis. There is no absolute standard for "normal" in this game that the devs use, or even accept. Normal is judged relative to everyone else for all but a few very high level global metrics. A powerset performs well and is well designed if it performs similar to its peers and is favored by the players to very roughly the same degree, within very wide but still well-defined margins. When the devs determined that Blasters underperformed, it wasn't because their performance was lower than some minimum mark, it was because they performed slower than everyone else by more than a critical margin. Blasters can actually underperform in two ways: they can be slow, or everyone else can be fast. In both cases, according to the design rules of this game, Blasters will be judged underperforming. The only absolute anchor to all of this is the absolute leveling curve. If the set of all players blows that out of the water or drops below it a lot, then it can be said that everyone is overperforming or underperforming. But when that happens, we find out when the devs adjust the global leveling curves. |
In other words, it sounds to me like people are trying to say it's *bad* a Blaster (for instance) can't just rush into a spawn like a brute, like at the end of the quarter the Devs are going to say "Well, Brutes finished more missions in X time than Tanks, Controllers or Blasters - they get the next new power set!" Like there's something to *lose* by taking a little more time, or not being designed to have 50 enemies dogpiling you.
I'm being literal with that because, quite frankly, it's how some people act - that X AT is going to "lose" for taking a minute longer or something. I, with my massive altitis and running between pretty much every AT at every level, just don't see this massive difference in (reasonable) ability.
Quote:
No, you haven't. Which is why those melee attacks are simply filling space where more useful powers could be.|
Originally Posted by New Dawn
You might not wish to be a Developer which is okay cos ya would of probably killed any chances right there.
I've never Blapped. That's what PBs are for. |
To make those melee attacks worth while, they would have to be made the highest damaging attacks in the game. Which would mean the only worthwhile blaster would be one that focused on melee attacks.
As it is, possessing them gives Blasters no advantage relative to corruptors, since a corruptor can do similar damage, whilst still having a much bigger range of power picks available to them. Having more damage powers to choose from does not enable you to do more damage.
Obviously, removing them is not a realistic option, but that could be got round by adding more useful powers in parallel, increasing the total number of powers in blaster secondaries to 10 or 11. And there are already control powers which could be significantly buffed.
I really should do something about this signature.
The only way I can see Blasters getting the love they truly need is for the devs to expand our power selections within our primary and secondaries... have some things be mutually exclusive (like how widows have the choose between build up or follow-up). This allows the devs to add new stuff to every set (though we don't get more powers, just a bigger variety to choose from within the set) and still hold true to the cottage rule so those who like things as they are can stay as they are. I'm not saying double the number of powers withing every set but 2 to 3 new powers as alternate choices sounds like a win idea to me.
This would benefit quite a few AT's I think but Blasters the most because it sidesteps the biggest roadblock to addressing blaster issues (the cottage rule). Not to mention it would just be great for the game overall since we'd have even more variety within our respective primary/secondary sets allowing players to individualize themselves even more.
Jem - Ill/Rad Controller Lv 50+3 Nic - Mind/Psi Dominator Lv 50+3 Lady Liberation - Invuln/SS Tanker Lv 50+1 Invicitx - Demon/Pain Mastermind Lv 50+1 Celeste - Emp/Arch Defender Lv 50+1 Nightsilver - DB/WP Scrapper Lv 34 Dusk Howl - StJ/Regen Brute Lv 32 Kyriani - Time/Energy Defender Lv 41Psifire - FF/Psi Defender Lv 50
Star Lighter - LB/LA Peacebringer Lv 30
Ever see the movie Old Yeller?
PenanceжTriage
Maybe it sounds a bit extreme, but it's just how it is. Every other AT in the game has a secondary that supports its primary in some way, while blasters get a hodgepodge of crappy abilities mixed with one or two usable ones. The devs can try to fix blasters with more damage or weird inherent abilities all they want, but the truth is that there's nothing anyone can do to fix them without a more or less completely retool of every secondary.
I have to agree with Memphis Bill here. You would think that the blaster is horribly horribly broken and I dont get that feeling when I play my blasters at all whether solo or in team play.
Challenging at times yes.. Have to actually THINK about what I am doing.. yes.. Do blasters need tweaks.. yes..
Complete overhaul.. no..
The hard things I can do--- The impossible just take a little bit longer.
If numbers are so much more important than a teammate who is fun to play with, forget about the game altogether and go play with a calculator instead. -Claws and Effect-