Attention Blasters!

Bah! So much for me following up after Arcana...I will just set my Derp right here and be on my way lol.

Arcanaville said:

Your opinion is that they need fixing (and I am sure its all nice and backed up by data, good for you). And then you say..'not to convince the world they NEEDED fixing'. Which is it, they are or are not in need, you cant have it both ways. If you are trying to convince the Devs to fix them, clearly you think they DO need it, regardless of what anyone else thinks.

I don't think they need anything..a conclusion I came to after the crazy notion of playing blasters.

Yeah, whether or not you feel the changes are necessary we know that changes are indeed being made.

And it's pretty much a certainty that any changes will improve performance, so even if you don't think they -need- the boost, it just means they'll be that much better than how you feel they already are.

it's a win-win either way, some people just like to be spoilsports :P

The thing is, Arcana, nore anyone else for that matter, doesn't need to convince you, or anyone else who is happy with the status quo, that blasters need fixing. The fact of the matter is, the Dev's have done their own testing and found that thier performance is sub optimal for the task at hand and have decided to do something about it.

It doesn't matter that a preportion of the player base have learned to work around the qwirks of blasters. All that matters is that they take conciderably more investmant(time energy and thought as well as inf) to get them to perform at the same level as all other AT's. I play blasters, and I enjoy them and do well with them, just like I played stalkers and enjoyed them and did well with them, and have enjoyed and done just as well with after their changes.

Basicly, the dev's aren't gonna make big changes to an AT based on a few 'greedy' whining players on the forums and their cries of "I wnt moar powah!" They will if THEY see a problem.

Quote:

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.

She's not the only one who bugs the living snot out of Synapse as well as a few other Devs.

I'm just glad that they have yet to block me lol.

A Model T can still drive down today's roads and it still works as well as it ever did and by it's design standard it's not "broken". You might even enjoy the quirks and familiar bumps and rattles. You might also be very very good using the universal transmission.

BUT it doesn't compare to the Mercedes, Lincolns, Rolls, BMWs (or even YUGOs) that drive up and down today's highways.

Sure Defiance 2.0 may have turned it into a Model A but fact of the matter is (whether you see it or not, or agree with it or not) the blaster still does not stand up to close scrutiny (or even not so close scrutiny) with the rest of today's ATs.

I'll wait for the pertinent information to filter onto the boards in a far more consumable text-like fashion.

The devs opinion matters more than anyone else. Its the only opinion that matters at all. My opinion doesn't matter, and neither does yours. And your opinion of my opinion matters less than zero.

The best that I can do, the absolute best that anyone can do, on a really good day, is get the devs to look. But what they do will be based on what they see, not on what I tell them to see. At my very best, I can get them to look in interesting places.


It should be noted that I don't think the devs necessarily made blaster changes because of the line of reasoning I've presented, and in fact the line of reasoning I've been presenting all this time has included that caveat. The point is to bring to light the *whole* situation to the devs, and get them to look. I was, and am, convinced that when they look, they might not see what I see, but there's no way what they see won't be a problem that needs solving. Blasters have enough problems that I believed all they needed to do was think about them for a while. If I've accelerated that process even a tiny bit, fantastic.


But I'm not speaking for the devs when I state *my* rationale for why blasters need to be changed. What Arbiter Hawk will likely say is something more along the lines of they had the opportunity to look at blasters, and based on what they saw there were a number of design issues with blasters that they didn't agree with at the present time, design issues which impaired the archetype from being as fun as it could be, and should be. And just like stalkers, they will make the changes they feel bring the archetype more into line with the other archetypes while doing so in a manner that gives them the tools to be more fun to play.

Everyone's definition of "fun to play" is different, of course. So the devs have to take their best shot at attempting to satisfy one based on their own opinion, the opinion of their peers, and their best guestimate of the opinion of the average player, filtered through their own judgment.

Which is all I expect them to do.


I'm also fully prepared to deal with the backlash from the people who think they needed nothing, and what they now get is too much. You call me a Drama Queen. I would say I'm a Drama Smartbomb. I wanted blasters to get attention, so I bugged the devs. I wanted to spark discussion, so I tried to be as interesting and thought-provoking as possible with my blaster posts, always trying less to be the final answer of anything, and more trying to draw out as many participants as possible. Because everyone who thinks Blasters need help is a potential source of good ideas. And everyone else who thinks Blasters need nothing I would rather see their hands early, long before their arguments have to be countered within the context of actual changes. Everyone who presented good ideas: thanks. Everyone who stated their reasons why blasters need no help at all: thanks also. Both groups, most helpful, to myself and everyone else who believes blasters need help.

In any event, if you would like to spend all your time between now and I24 discussing my failings, I would have no problem with that. As that line of inquiry does not affect blasters in any way, it is not in any way counter to my objectives.

Ha! Such obsequious magnanimosity.

As a player of a blaster since May 22, 2004, and 4 other blasters since then in my stable, I have one design intent when I go in.

To Blast. Not "Blap". This is my personal choice in play style. I think Blasters should excel at range beyond all else, despite early design decisions to the contrary. I LIKE being able to target enemies I can barely see and snipe them into oblivion before they get close.

It is time consuming, but effective. Granted, the enemies tend to shoot back and can hit me even though I have 3 Centrioles, Boost Range and anything I could find to increase my Range.

I am hoping that the news is that Blasters at Range will get increased defenses. But that is my dream.

We will see what the developers dream.

Belated response but:

First!


As for Energy Aura, I feel there was a cottage rule violation in that, Repulse was replaced with Disrupt. It took the effects of the power, disposed of it and gave it another with, arguably, completely unrelated applications. You use Repulse as a quick 'go away!' type attack or possibly a 'just stay down!' effect, all of which can ramp up to affect bosses on its own. Disrupt cannot get foes off you (at the most, you can force some minions to wobble away slowly), it cannot affect bosses on its own and it's been changed to an effect meant to be persistent in combat therefore it is another power one balances around using constantly vs short burst.

Just by the animation, I can tell you it was probably meant to be a 'just some of the times' toggle. Beyond that, it changes the entire concept of the set. That repellant energy can be used to stop and deflect things away. One could say Repulse was just a different application of your own shields of energy. Disrupt is...completely out of left field. The only similar effect to that is energy melee which could honestly just be hitting someone really hard...which isn't what Disrupt does.

So yeah, there's the point where the cottage rule didn't do jack.

I don't see why you're taking things so seriously, D. No ones blaming you or poking fun of your opinion. No ones insulting your playstyle or your characters. You just decided to take the stance that blasters are fine. I'd actually agree with you, *my* blasters are fine too, but I usually build them with a contingency plan of some nature not inherent to the AT.

But when it all comes down to it, I ask "are blasters getting a fair deal?" I can't say they do considering all the little extras other ATs get. If blasters get anything, I hope it's either compensation for or something to overcome one of their plethora of weaknesses that I am often forced to build around.

I preferred old defiance, but the devs changed blasters on me anyway! So, yes, once the devs change blasters again, we will have to learn to play with the new set of tools.

The devs aren't changing blasters because Arcanaville bugged them (as she clearly explained, all she could do was convince them to look and it is highly possible they were planning on looking anyway). They are changing blasters because they must SEE something that they feel needs to change. The fact that you or I may not agree is not very relevant at this point and neither of us needs to be convinced because just as happened in I11, change is coming.

Re: Blasters are fine the way they are now!

Let me ask you: Did you think they were fine before Defiance 2.0? Because the Devs stated several times that datamining showed that Blasters were the slowest levelers in the game because they were dying the most and all that debt was slowing their leveling. This despite the fact that *some players* were able to play them well without all that dying. But among *all players*, the AT was underperforming.

That is objective proof that, compared to other ATs, Blasters were the weakest link. That's why they got Defiance 2.0 to address their inherent which encouraged them to die (get low HP to get more damage!) and to address mezzed-death (can still use low tier powers while mezzed).

Did that work? I don't know. The Devs have not revealed that info. But I'm willing to guess that any benefit from Defiance 2.0 was minimal and Blasters are still the slowest levelers. The Devs don't grant AT-wide buffs to ATs at the top of the performance list. That would be crazy and create City-of-That-One-Best-AT.

Despite the fact that some find they play *well,* datamining is probably telling the Devs all the other ATs play *better*. And that's why you buff them.