What can you do with a problem like a Blaster?

Absolutely not! Basing the game on farming is absurd.

This sounds to me more like you are advocating a nerf to those melee types. Too many things in this game have gotten too easy as it is.

Read above comment.

But, if you are smart, no it doesn't

And this here explains so much. You are missing something very important.

This is what being proactive is about. Plan ahead, burn some inspirations you don't need. The ones you may need will be there.

Once again, think ahead of the game.

So, perhaps those other toons are more suited to your style of play?
There is no reason that all ATs should have the same learning curve.

Unlike real life, break frees are pretty darn cheap.

I would agree with that: the fact that different archetypes have different situational capabilities is the only reason we have different archetypes. Because we happen to have an awful lot of melee archetypes that fact gets blurry sometimes.

But within a certain margin - and its unclear what that margin should be in the modern game: it used to be three even minions, then at one point it was revised upwards to three +3 minions or equivalent above level 25 - Blasters should be able to kill and survive the same threat as all other archetypes, even if they do it in a completely different way.

This game concedes the outer limits of gameplay: its part of the appeal of this game which is about superheroes that every archetype can in theory be built to vastly exceed its original design intentions (even Blasters with enough effort). So the fact that Blasters can't herd +4x8 as well as Brutes can is not a design failure to me. No one is supposed to be able to do that anyway: the fact that some can is a marginal issue the devs do not want to be forced to curtail and I appreciate the fact they don't (I play Brutes also).

But within some narrower range of performance, say +2x4 or +1x5 (given a high enough level of character), something in the general area, I believe it is fair to say that if the average Blaster folds and the average everything else succeeds, it does suggest a problem.

Would you accept the fact that this suggests one of two possibilities: the difference doesn't exist, or you aren't able to detect it?

If so, would you concede that a reasonable test of your ability to detect significant archetype problems would be to ask if you ever detected a massive difference in reasonable ability for Blasters at any time between I5 and I11? Because blasters were buffed twice in that period, both times having been datamined to be underperforming. The last time, in the period before the I11 Defiance 2.0 buffs, the level of performance lag was considered high enough for *all* blaster powerset combinations that action was essentially mandatory for the devs.

Did you detect that problem in I6-I11 for blasters, and did you judge it to be as bad as the actual performance of the playerbase measured it to be?

I'm not going to say for certain anything about how I felt issues upon issues ago, at least with specific issues, other than (a) feeling Defiance 1.0 - especially how it was presented (remember Statesman's "Tell them not to heal you!") - was silly and counterproductive and *was* a problem for blasters, and (2) feeling 2.0 was, frankly, right.

1.0 encouraged gameplay that was either too aggressive for what the AT was by people that really shouldn't have been trying to play that way - leading to far more defeats than should have been around - or far too *cautious* of gameplay because mezzing actually was still an issue - and a damage buff for getting low on health when you cannot use it (after all, we didn't have insp combining for a while) really isn't useful in the least.

I'm going to *generally* say that yes, I felt Blasters needed "something else" at that point instead of essentially "here, go die for your buffs."

Defiance 2.0 I feel is, for the most part, right. There are historic complaints about mezzes being too binary - and though it takes away some of the uniqueness of my Electric blasters (being able to "attack" via voltaic sentinel regardless of mez,) retaining some capability while mezzed - to me - is a step toward eroding that binary-ness overall. It gives you two attacks and a utility power which in most instances will keep a melee attacker out of the (typically higher damage) melee attack range, keeping you alive longer. (The ones that *don't* have that immob, IIRC, have something to push the attacker away.)

The only things I see needing tweaking aren't really specific to blasters - things like agreeing Snipes need a buff, and nukes need looking at (and I will still say along with it that Judgement powers need to be toned down in non-Incarnate content at the same time.) The first, to be blaster specific, to *encourage* starting at range and working your way in. I hear so many say "I don't take snipes" and, even with current time and damage, still can't help but go "why?" The second to make sure that crash and (for most non weapon nukes) risk of being in melee range is worth it.

If I *had* to make a change to blasters, specifically - yes, put a gun to my head and say "Do something that will probably be seen as an overall positive," I'd probably revisit the "Range is defense" bit and make it true. Your attacks give four seconds of some percent of defense (overall, ranged, melee, somewhat depending on type.) Up to a max of... oh, 15-17.5%.

For instance, you snipe - you get ranged defense. You use your T1 and T2 blasts, hold, etc. The defense builds up. As you get to the 40' blasts, you're getting less ranged defense, more melee defense. Start using the immobilize and your melee attacks, you get more melee defense, less ranged (though still a little.) Nuke? "The air still hums with the energy you released, making you hard to target and making attacks do less damage if they do hit." Bit of a spike in defense (past that 15-17% I mentioned, maybe a 20%, but further attacks won't buff it) for 5-6 seconds... enough to combine and take some blues and keep going.

Do I think it's needed? Absolutely not. But it would, among other things, change attitudes toward the secondaries (to varying amounts, admittedly) as far as their usefulness and maybe get some of those who dismiss them offhand to actually reexamine them.

See my Guides and Tutorials

Bill. Bill Bill. Sadly this is no longer Issue 5 its Issue 23 and in issue 23 only new players use a +0/x1 setting. For long time players there is absolutely no challenge in that setting for any AT let alone the dev ignored blaster. Any arguments based on that setting are essentially specious.

Saying that YOU can do X with Y doesn't mean that the rest of the player base or even a large portion of it can do what you can do with an AT. The devs need to look at, and adjust to, what the majority of the player base does with the AT it is not a Memphis Bill-centric design.

Blasters are basic ATs available to all players, even Freems. They should work as well as any other basic AT (albeit differently from the other ATs). They do not, and most of your arguments actually prove that assertion.

When the Developers themselves decided that every AT should be able to solo effectively and be able to do damage like a blaster can.

As I paraphrase Arcanaville, Blasters never got weaker or nerfed. It is every other AT that got bumped up to be equal with Blasters.

The moment they ( The Developers ) decided that everyone had to be equal DPS wise they failed to look towards blasters for bumping up their survivability.

I would like to see what controllers would say the moment they went back to controller holds not doing damage.

Tell me what you are basing it on then. Blaster design in the current game is all ready absurd. I'm not hearing any arguments from you that prove that they are not.

Naughty naughty, trying to put words in my mouth to prove your point. No other AT has these issues. I'm an advocate of making blasters work the way they ought to rather than the way that they do. There are no real issues with any other AT the do not need buffed or nerfed. The blaster needs to be rebalanced to accommodate the environment something no other AT needs at this point in time.

My, my, aren't we snarky. Lets turn it around a but in the same vein shall we. That's what I had 2/3rds the way through the last Carnie tip mission I ran. I started with a tray full of break frees and a setting of +0/x4, a setting I might add, that is essentially a breeze for any other AT if you have 5+ years of experience.

I'll also add that no other AT needs to start with a full tray of break frees. I can easily start with 4 on all my other squishies and none on my mez protected toons. The blaster is the only one that still needs to waste time going to buy insps between missions.

If I wished to be snarky and make inferences to your play style I would say that you should try running your blasters against things other than Cimerorans, Council, and Family.

I'll once again ignore the implied snark.

All the other ATs have different learning curves but they take about the same amount of skill and time to master. The blaster has a learning crater.

Well if we are talking about real life the comparison really breaks down quickly.

Would you go to a construction job with just a hammer? The blaster does.

Would you design an automobile with out seat belts?
A house without a fire alarm/sprinklers?
A ship without life boats?
A boat without life vests?

A blaster enters every combat without the tools needed to survive.

Alright, if you are basing this blaster broken theory on not being able to farm +4/x8, or that they do it slower. I have to ask, where will this end? There are certain powersets that may also have issues with this. Is everything in the game supposed to be capable of farming +4/x8 with absolute ease?


Putting words in your mouth? Yes, I am guilty of that.
But, there certainly has been power creep and the ceiling has been raised rather recently.
This has already been noted on these very forums.
Heck, I even see it on teams now! People are talking about how overpowered they are.

Perhaps it was snarky, but that wasn't really the intent. I dissected you post and gave point blank answers much the same way you did to my post.
Also, I do not fight just those enemies. Just today, I was on a team that went against carnies in quite a few missions, set at +4x8. I believe during that, we had one death. And it wasn't even a blaster.


No, that comment was definitely not snark.
The point of that is, if you want a sturdier type character. There are plenty of ATs already in the game that would have that already built in. As much that has been said that blasters should be for everyone, I agree! But, there should also be AT choices for everyone. I know I am not the only person that enjoys the blaster playstyle. To make blasters into some kind of ranged scrapper, how is that for everyone? I have more level 50 scrappers and brutes than anything else. But, I prefer to play my blasters and defenders.

I hope that is an exaggeration. Blasters are not that difficult to play. Look, I don't die very often. But, I do enjoy having to at least keep an eye on my health bar. Staring off into space and thumping buttons is not for me. That is the reason I don't play many of my melee characters anymore. My first 50 was a tank, and it is just not fun anymore. There should be choices for everyone! Sure, some enjoy being all powerful and rarely facing death. But, there are some that don't mind the occasional death, and would rather play by the seat of their pants.

So you have no actual argument, and have to drop to rather pitiful personal snipes, huh.

Except, of course, that that's part of their baseline. Not 4x8. If they were using 4/8 as their baseline... they'd bump up spawns to be that by default.

I do nothing particularly special except pay attention. No billion inf builds, IO'd to the hilt. If *I* can do it, anyone should be able to, quite frankly. WIthout relying on IOs, only fighting certain enemies, etc.

However, there's no reason to read you any longer. You have no argument, just poor assumptions. Ta ta.

See my Guides and Tutorials

Fortunately, it won't come to that.

Putting words in my mouth again I see. Extrapolating from 0 to infinity does nothing for your case. I am not basing it on a setting of +4/x8 at all. I merely mentioned once that a blaster with more is still less than a brute (or a scrapper for that matter) with less. What I am basing blasters being broken on is the following:

1) Blasters are mezzed significantly more often than any other AT. My own data shows that they spend 2-3 times more time mezzed than any of my other squishies and 10 times more time than my mez protected toons and that is considering the mountain of break frees munched through by my blasters that are rarely if ever used by my other toons.
2) Blasters spend more time mezzed than any other AT because they have no built in tools to avoid mez in the first place. (defense, to hit debuffs, AoE controls, mez protection)
3) Blasters spend more time mezzed than any other AT because they have no built in way to break out of a mez once they are mezzed.
4) Mez is extremely common in I23 (much more so than I5) it begins as early as level 8 and gets more and more prevalent the higher level the content is.
5) By design a blaster must enter combat. All they bring to the table is damage. This means that a blaster will be exposed to and affected by more mez than any other AT.
6) The few survival tools blasters have are eliminated completely when they are mezzed. (Defensive toggles suppress, offensive toggles that also provide mitigation are detoggled, the blaster's ability to remove threat by eliminating the target is drastically reduced, and the blaster's ability to utilize terrain and break line of sight is eliminated.)

This is a game. Playing is fun. Sitting at the keyboard waiting for mez to wear off so you can use more that 3 powers is not fun. Providing a fun experience should be the devs first priority.

There is also environment creep too. That means that power sets that lack tools to start with are worse off in comparison. Some times its fun to be over powered. It is a super hero game after all. The one thing it shouldn't do is put you entirely at the mercy of the RNG. There should be tools available to give you a chance to recover from the occasional bad streak.

You should PUG a bit more then. When I play my buffing defenders I am rarely needed by anyone other than blasters and other buffing defenders. When there are deaths it is always the blasters first unless they are played by highly experienced players. The blaster has earned the name "vengeance bait" for good reason.

I wouldn't need a sturdier character if I could keep the tools that I have by using the tools that I have.

I can and do play blasters well. I have blasters built for survival that perform all most as well as my scrappers and brutes. Building for any thing else (damage, recharge, secondary effects) results in a distinct reduction of performance especially in comparison. A full half of my 50s are blasters of one stripe or another the various power sets all provide unique playstyle opportunities. The one universal issue with them all is the proliferation of mez in the environment since I5 and a complete lack of tools to compensate.

I'm all for the edge of the chair, seat of the pants experience, that's why I focus on blasters and mez and not blasters and moar defense, resistance, hit points etc. I don't mind going to the inspiration tray for a break free once or twice a mission but I really dislike having to go to the tray for a break free once a spawn.

Being mezzed occasionally is thematic. (I think brutes, tankers, scrappers, etc should try it some times) being mezzed every spawn is immersion breaking.

Mez is much like lag to me. The occasional lag spike is no big issue. Lagging once a minute for 10-30 seconds is going to make me log off and call my cable company.

Not at all. Are you telling me that with 7+ years of CoH experience that +0/x1 provides ANY kind of a challenge to any of your toons. It certainly doesn't for me. That kind of setting means I spend more time traveling to the mission than fighting inside it (at least on blue side where it can take 2 minutes to travel from one side of the map to the other.)

It is part of the baseline for NEW players. I remember when I first started playing. It wasn't easy. Now it's mindless. The 3 minion standard went out the window long before risk vs reward did. You also skip over the entire middle ground and jump to the pinnacle of performance incorrectly assuming that I think that should be the standard.

The highlighted portion is your false assumption. I occasionally PUG with new and inexperienced players that CAN'T. Depending on how much time you can devote to the game it can take a year or 2 to get to the point where you can rely on skill. This game has lots of casual players that never invest the time or feel that it isn't worth the time to invest and leave in just a short time. Time taken to accumulate IOs was the most often complained about thing by new comers to the market forums.

Comic book blasters are some of the most favorite comic heroes. CoH blasters are nothing like the ones you see in the comics (all the other ATs are a very close approximation though). People download the game, make a character like their favorite comic book hero, a Johnny Storm, a Hawkeye, a Cyclops, an Iron Man etc., go splat a dozen times in as many minutes and abandon the game never to return.

I was actually thinking the same thing. Your only argument is to tell me I can't use X comparison to Y as an argument. The only thing I am picking up from your posts is that you have trouble with paradigm shifts and want to maintain a status quo that went out the window in I9.

So I guess.... cya

By strange coincidence this is almost word for word exactly what I told a client last month. And in both cases, this statement is sort of true, but not in a useful way to most people attempting to emulate that form of paying attention.

No, I did not put words in your mouth that time. Reread my post again, I said 'if' that was what is was based on, and then I asked a question everything was supposed to farm at +4/x8
But, I'll rephrase my question.
You are basing this off of mez, and your data to how much a blaster gets mezzed.
Alright, someone has to be at the bottom of that list. Right now your data shows blasters are, by 2-3 times. You add mez protection to blasters. Where does this stop? What AT is the 2nd on that list? Then they move to the bottom of the list! HEY! They want mez protection too! Mez has always been a part of this game.

Eh, I mostly disagree with the environment creep. There have been a lot of additions to this game that have made it easier over the years. Yup, it is fun to be overpowered 'sometimes'. I'm going to ask you specifically. Is your 'fix' for blasters just adding a form of mez protection?

Pssst, I'm not sure you know my teaming tendencies. And before you come back with that was too snarky, you are assuming something you can't know. If you don't like me putting words in your mouth, then please don't assume who or how often I team. I can say for a fact, I was a lot of PUG teams today. Matter of fact I just now got off of one. Plus, I've seen more than a few scrappers die first on teams, trying to bite off more than they are capable of.

Wait, you have blasters built for survival that perform almost as well as your scrappers and brutes? Then what are you asking for here? With that statement, I don't even understand where you are coming from anymore. You say they are built for survival, they perform almost at the level of your scrappers and brute, but yet, the universal issue with all of them, is the mez. What should their weakness be then? You already have then surviving by your own words.


Getting mezzed every mob? You are really leaning here! You have stats and data showing blasters get mezzed the most of all ATs. But you exaggerate by saying every spawn? C'mon, that is way overstating the 'issue'. If this is not an exaggeration, is it based of off primarily solo play? And if you are surviving anyways, as stated above. What's the big deal with mez? If 'you' view mez so harshly as a lag spike, you still have the option to play an AT, that has built in mez protection.

That along with all the "well you not doing it right, try this" style posts is infuriating. Just because YOU have no problem and have learned to manage doesn't mean everyone has. I mostly play blasters, but I do have at least one of every AT, and in most cases more than one. Of my 5 50's, 3 are blasters. But each of my blasters take much more effort to get them to perform at the same level as my other AT's. I have an L42 scrapper that far outperforms my incarnate blasters. That is a problem. No blasters should do everything just like those other AT's, but should be able to be at the same level with the same ammount of effort.

And as for the Just coz brutes can solo on +4X8 doesn't mean blasters should be able to. well, why the hell not? Controllers can, corruptors can, defenders can. why shouldn't blasters be able, at peak performance levels, be able to perform to the same peak as every single other AT in the game?

Are blasters unplayable? No
Are blasters un soloable? No
Do blasters have a harder time and have to rely on tools outside of that AT far more than all other AT's? Yes, and that is the problem.

Just because there are ways to overcome those problems doesn't mean the problems don't exist. It's no suprise to me that those people who are saying that blasters don't have a problem are also saying they play/like blasters because thay are no "easy mode" or because the "like a challenge". Well, if Blasters are the only AT that provides a challenge, does that, in itself, not show that blasters have a problem compared to all other AT's in game?

Originally Posted by Forbin_Project Then it's time for them to get off the cross, use the wood to build a bridge, and get over it.

This is a slippery slope that doesn't exist. There is no justification to buff blasters in any way just because they lack something others have. There is a justification to buff blasters if they underperform, and that underperformance can be traced back to something they lack and everyone else has.

As a disclaimer I'm compelled to include, I do not advocate direct mez protection for blasters. However, the notion that buffing blasters just means someone else can ask for a buff under the exact same logic is false, because no archetype has ever been proven to underperform as badly as blasters. So long as that is true, blasters have a justification for buffs no other archetype has, and no other archetype will have after blasters are buffed. There is no slippery slope there at all.

What exactly being traced back, that all other ATs have, and blasters do not?




I'd say that the ability to farm at +4/x8, is a very poor way to think of 'balance'.
It's not always those ATs that can do such a thing, but it comes down to their primary and secondary. Also, are you sure there are not already blasters that are capable of such thing? (For the record, it's not me)

I'm not so sure that is a problem. I see it as more of an option. Even if all ATs could be created equal, should they?



I am not totally against certain buffs being applied to blasters. But, I am not in favor of redefining the AT, from what is has been since this game began. And some of what has been mentioned in this thread and other 'broken blaster' threads is asking for just that.

I have to say that this is rubbish. Ive played the game for a fair few years (6ish I think) and almost all of my toons play at +0/x1. Its only very recently with powersets like Street Justice and Staff melee that ive been tempted to raise the rep to +1/x2. On some of my defenders / controllers ive even had to LOWER the rep to -1/x1 so that I stand a chance.

If I enter a mission and see that the mobs are Orange or higher, I know its going to be bloody hard if not impossible to complete the mission without a season pass to the hospital.

Its probably just me, but I dont farm or min/max my toon with IO's. I dont even bother IO'ing a toon untill 50 anyway.

The ability to mitigate incoming damage and/or status effects. The trade-off was supposed to be that Blasters have overwhelming firepower, but they don't have that either.

To me, Blasters are like a relic from the early design period of this game, one which never really worked out very well, sort of the like the original enhancement system with TOs and DOs.

The AT is plagued by secondaries that, with rare exception, don't do anything to bolster the AT's alleged strength - ranged damage. This is exacerbated by the fact that range, in this game, is not a particularly strong advantage. Oh sure, in the early game when the enemies you face have little more than thrown rocks, range can mitigate a lot of damage. However that all changes when you run into groups that suddenly have devastating ranged attacks, and potent ranged mezzes. In the case of some enemy groups, every mob with a spawn is capable of mezzing a player, completely removing the "take out the mezzer first" strategy.

Personally, I'd like to see the secondaries get an overhaul. I know that's a pipe-dream now, after seeing what the "Gravity overhaul" looked like. Still, imagine secondaries which improve or augment a Blaster's ranged attacks, like a Build-Up that grants a stun effect to your next few attacks, for example. I'm almost envisioning something like Swap Ammo, but actually useful.

For now, Blasters will remain the one AT that I simply refuse to play. My first character, back in 2004, was a Blaster. After my first encounter with Tsoo, I re-rolled as a Defender and haven't looked back.

"There's villainy ... and then there's supervillainy. The difference is performance."
-Doc_Reverend

Yes, agreed, not all Brutes can, not all Bontrollers, or any other AT, at least without some uber build. But as far as I know, no Blaster combination can do it.


Well all AT's, except blasters, have been in some fashion been buffed, over the years, to be equal. so why not?



I'm not asking for a complete re-design, like some, But I am opposed to this notion that there is no problem at all, or if there is it is very minor.

The option, as you put it, is simple. If you don't want 'hard mode', don't take a Blaster. Why should Blasters be saddled with this burden? Why should Blasters have to face a harder time in game? Why should blasters level slower? Just because some people want "More of a challenge" or a toon that they "Have to pay attention to their health bar" with?

Blasters are a Basic AT. They should be able to perform at the same level as all other AT's. Not in the same way. As said, Brutes and Controlers cand ramp the challenge up to the highest and deal with exactly the same threats in different ways without too much of a headache. Blasters should, in thier own way, be able to do the same. No, I don't solo at +4X8 on anything. Some AT's, like my elec/elec/body scrapper I can push up to +0X4/X5. The best I can hope for on my main, who shas sacrificed damage output for survivability manage +0X3, maybe X4, depening on the group, but it would be a slow struggle, where I would need to push my Scrapper up to X6/7 for the same challenge. Every AT is supposed to have their "Thing". Tankers have uber armour and can take any pounding, Controllers have thier Uber Mezz powers and can shut down most anything. Brutes get more damage the longer they fight, Defenders get superior buffs/debuffs etc. What is blasters "thing"? Well, aparently it's dealing damage, so why isn't their damage dealing the best in the game? Well, part of that reason is they are either mezzed or dead. Which is why so many people focus on those things.

The rest is thier damage. If damage is thier thing, they should be the best at it, not second or 3rd or 4th best, but THE best. That isn't the case. They pay the ultimate price for thier damage output, but if others can match, or better that damage output and still remain more survivable then that is a design flaw.

Originally Posted by Forbin_Project Then it's time for them to get off the cross, use the wood to build a bridge, and get over it.

Mitigation.

More specifically mitigation comparable to other ATs even including damage output as part of the equation. This has been covered in many, many other threads, even including data from the Devs and detailed statistical analysis by other players. Fortunately there will not be a test. Per se.

I'll take a step back a bit to answer this. At the beginning of time, the devs created five different power "classes" - Damage, Control, Defense, Buff/Debuff. Every powerset focuses on one of these, and every archetype has two of these.

Because Damage was split into Melee and Ranged Damage, Blasters became the only archetype that only received one of these. But more importantly, three of the four contain significant damage mitigation and survival tools. Every archetype gets at least one powerset that contains a lot of mitigation. Except Blasters.

This was a fundamental difference, but at the beginning of time it was thought that this would be balanced by the fact that Blasters had so much more offense than all other archetypes that it would make up for that deficit. This wasn't true, but you could almost believe it until the devs made another fundamental change to the way they balanced the game. They decided that everyone must have the capability to solo effectively. And that meant everyone had to have at least some minimum amount of damage. Tanker damage went up. Controller damage went up. Meanwhile, there was no serious effort to address the fact that soloing requires *two* things: enough offense and enough survivability.

In the current game, everyone needs to be able to kill, and everyone needs to be able to survive. And every archetype without exception has at least one powerset that is EXPLICITLY designed to kill, and one powerset EXPLICITLY designed to keep the player alive. *Except* Blasters.

That's what they lack. And its not just a trivial difference: its the largest fundamental difference between any archetype and all other archetypes in the game.

Doesn't Dark/, /Dark or /Mental qualify? [Or are you referring to Primaries/Secondaries as sets?]