Dispari
-
Posts
3400 -
Joined
-
Quote:I'll restate to say that I think taking away Stalker AoEs was a mistake and part of the reason they're unpopular. Probably if I was to work on Stalkers I'd work on improving their ST potential so that it's the undisputed champ.Originally Posted by Arcanaville
This probably doesn't solve the "problem" of stalkers being perceived as not contributing enough AoE damage, but that's part of the AoE problem itself: once you give AoE to anyone, everyone else is judged relative to not having it, and every offensive fix is judged based on its ability to match it. AoE is a virus that eventually infects everything you design, because its just a tiny bit too obvious that hitting eight things is nearly always better than hitting one, when there's no penalty for hitting eight (and in teams with any semblence of aggro control, there's no penalty for hitting eight rather than one).
Really, considering Stalkers are the squishiest of the melees, I feel they should just be the highest damage dealers, period. As it is they tend to compete with Scrappers and Brutes, in addition to be being weak at AoE. In order to leverage that, I'd make them exceptionally good at ST damage (including DPS, outside of the initial hide crits and AS). I would want Stalkers to be able to sustain their damage advantage even past the first bursts. I don't think it would be something that would be unbalancing considering their lack of AoE, except...
It would have to be something that only applies to ST, and not AoE, somehow. The lower rate crit is a good start. But if they were balanced poorly, the whole ST-oriented aspect would be totally lost when people just started playing exclusively Elec/, which is already the most popular Stalker primary that I've seen. -
In general, building for status effects through IOs is going to be a waste of your time, influence, and slots.
For status protection (the kind that reduces the mag of a mez until it's low enough that it doesn't work), you won't be able to get any outside of knockback. Simply put, none exists.
For status resistance (the kind that reduces the duration of mezzes), you're never going to be able to get a meaningful amount through IOs. I think the formula is 1 / ((RES / 100) + 1). Meaning even if you had 100%, it would only halve the duration. 200% would make it 1/3. But seeing as the IO bonuses tend to hover around 1-2%, you'd never get enough to even halve the duration of mezzes.
Your best bet is to simply build for defense so that, more often than not, you simply dodge the effects. -
Quote:Aren't they still? Most people tend to pick Controllers over Defenders from what I see of average teams. And those of us used to redside would definitely rather have a Corruptor most of the time.Originally Posted by Sailboat
Even Defenders?
My memory of those days was that defenders were regarded as largely superfluous. -
Arc, I'm kind of curious what you might suggest be done to Stalkers, if anything, to make them more popular as an AT and more welcome in groups. I think the biggest mistake was taking away all their AoEs to the point that some are strictly limited to ST damage.
As ST specialists, I feel they'd have to be exceedingly good at it to be welcome on a team. As it is, even on a team of 8 where they get full bonuses, their ST DPS and even burst damage just isn't high enough to warrant taking one over a straight damage dealer like a Scrapper who does nearly as much ST DPS, but also gets AoEs and higher survival. Although the benefits of Placate and AS are hard to work into a performance formula, I don't think they contribute enough for the average player to view Stalkers as as useful as an average Scrapper or Brute.
Not long ago I would've proposed a straight base damage boost of +12.5% (making their base damage identical to Scrappers). This would mean that even solo the Stalker does more damage than a Scrapper, before even considering hide, placate, and AS. The tradeoff to this is of course their reduced defenses through HP/regen and occasional straight power loss, as well as the fact that basically all the sets have reduced AoE potential.
The problem with that though is that it highlights much the same issue Arc is talking about with Blasters. If Stalkers were given a flat out damage boost, that would mean Elec/ would be king because it has all of its AoEs (4 to be specific). No other Stalker set can even come close to matching that. And a general damage boost would mean that the AoEs do more damage too. So in the process of balancing the "ST specialist" AT, the damage boost would only highlight the AoE set, because there's really no comparing the contributes of powers like Lightning Rod to sets like MA that can only plink away at targets one by one. It would really only drive people away from ST sets even more. -
Quote:I always carry one awake just so I can revive while on a team if need be.Originally Posted by mousedroid
Got my 24 month Vet Badge on Saturday and I never knew this. In fact, it got to the point that I didn't even want Awakens in my tray if I was soloing because I could rarely get far enough away to use one without immediately getting defeated again.
Though what bugs me is on the opposite end of the spectrum, where people will use an awake+break free even if there's no need to. Why do you need to avoid the stun if there are no enemies nearby?
-
Quote:This is kind of how Stalkers worked out in the end. There's only one primary that didn't lose a damage AoE. A couple sets lost 2 AoEs or suffered even more. Some sets have zero AoEs and can never hit more than one target. As a result, they're pretty much focused on single target damage output.Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I have wondered, for almost as long as I've played the game, if the general assumption about AoE is exactly reversed. It makes a lot more sense for Blasters to be the *single-target* specialists and everyone else to be the AoE specialists. After all, if you have nothing but very strong single target attacks, no single target (below Bosses) is going to be a threat to you, because you'll be able to take them out immediately. Its only if you face too much that you'll be in trouble. Isn't that how the Blaster archetype is intended to play? Conversely, Defenders, Controllers, and Tankers are intended primarily to provide a team role. Isn't it more obvious that they should have more AoE that is weaker per target, but able to affect more targets?
Single target specialist is a sort of strange thing though. I can't quite figure out if it's just never needed or if Stalkers just aren't good enough at it. If either one of those were true, Stalkers would be in a lot higher demand. As it is, the role that a Stalker fills as someone who can quickly dispatch a couple targets just isn't something people seek out.
Considering that Stalkers have very poor AoE potential (outside of Elec), I feel as though they should be capable of doing far more ST damage than they do now. I feel that they should flat out outdamage Scrappers in ALL situations, not just when teamed -- in fact, that creates a problem in my head because the only time a Stalker does more damage than a Scrapper is in a situation where the Scrapper pulls ahead anyway because he has more AoEs. -
Okay, so...
-
Quote:Yeah, but what would that say of me if I spent all my time in a virtual world, pretending to get justice and fight crime instead of actually doing it?Originally Posted by Golden Girl
The AE will let you teach him a lesson
-
Quote:Cheat how? Aside from hacking the servers.Originally Posted by Eva Destruction
The final mission is "if you can't do this, cheat or ragequit." Temps, inspirations, accolades and stuff are all fair game. There's no content that says "if you use a shivan here, you're a cheater." And really, if you don't even use that stuff for the hardest mission in the game, what are you saving it for?
-
Quote:Most of the redside missions don't bother me. They tend to be petty things like robbing banks or beating up some guys nobody likes. Being a villain is pretty weak in the isles most of the time.Originally Posted by ebon3
I didn't like my choice but it seemed prudent given the circumstances, and honestly I sorta feel like a ****** for doing it
There are a couple arcs that bug me though. One is the one where you trick and then destroy a hero girl who eventually becomes devoured because of you and you pretty much kill her to put her out of her misery. The other is that guy in GV who's a jerkhole just because he can be. He makes you beat up Freaks and has you destroy buildings and kidnap that teacher for no reason whatsoever. I don't like doing either of those.
So I definitely know what you mean about feeling bad. I don't mind beating up rival factions, but killing innocent people for no reason is sort of over the line for me! -
Quote:You know, this reminds me of a fun story from recent.Originally Posted by Smurphy
2) One person says we need a Tank and eventually brings up the name of a Tank to invite. The dcons returned and we were kicking butt during the time between saying "maybe Tank" and finding a name. I say "I'm going to do something else" and quit the team. A person asks me if I don't like the Tank. I say I don't like the person who wanted the Tank. "Why?" I simply responded with "We need X" in quotes and wish them a good day. I get "oo demanding? haha least you don't have to sleep with her".
I was on my DB/WP Scrapper. Just over 32 or so, so I had all my toggles and combos. I join a team that has no Tanker but is INSANELY FOCUSED on getting one. For the first whole mission, they keep arguing over who's going to tank. There's another WP Scrapper, 26, who doesn't yet have all his toggles. There's also a WS who has Dwarf mode. They buff the WS and let him tank for mission one. Mission one goes perfectly fine.
Mission two, everyone completely forgets what was going on. The WS stops tanking, and they start arguing again. I get tired of listening to them argue, and start tanking and alphaing myself. I get into full Scrapperlock mode and start forcing them into spawns while they stand around talking about getting a tank, while I'm already tanking. Mission two goes perfectly fine.
Mission three, they continue arguing over who should tank, even though I just did it all last mission with no problems, and we still have a WS who did fine for the first mission. The other WP Scrapper, who is statistically inferior to me in every way, offers to do it, and the Emp actually gives him Fort and lets him go ahead. Mission three is a bit rocky.
Mission four, they recruit a Tanker, and then argue over which of us is going to tank. I say "Thanks for the team guys, but I need to run." -
Quote:Personally I don't bother. They expire in just a few minutes, and you get Beginner's Luck below 20. BL should be enough to get you to 12, when you can buy DOs.Originally Posted by Ironblade
And, as I said, I strongly disagree. I think they are worth buying - accuracy only.
-
Quote:Neither Walk nor Ninja Run alter your model in any way, just your pose. You can still fluidly animate from walking (although it's disabled currently, BABs said they might allow powers while walking) or ninja run. You don't have to have new attack animations for ninja run, just new MOVE animations.Originally Posted by Ironblade
Ah yes, one of the EXACT arguments against our ever having a Walk power. It's not worth the effort for what is basically an RP tool.
So unless your vehicle disappears every time you use a power, and reappears when you start to move (within the blink of an eye), vehicles would require hundreds, possibly thousands of new animations. -
1) It's around the holidays. Lots of people are visiting family and still away on vacation. Lots of people are also still shooting of fireworks or getting drunk.
2) Friday and Saturday nights are usually sort of light. I noticed this when I started to plan weekly events. Sunday nights yielded the best results. Friday and Saturday, people tend to go do stuff outside of CoH. Like go get drunk.
3) The Winter event is only going on for another 3 days and people are trying to finish off whatever they have planned.
4) Subs always dip off a bit during the Winter months.
5) We're between issues and waiting on a major expansion. I know a number of people who are on vacation until GR. I myself often fall victim to pre-issue blues once something lands on beta.
6) "People in Atlas" is a terrible way to judge population. Especially because of #3; most people are hanging out in the D right now. -
Quote:It kind of went both ways.Originally Posted by Prof_Backfire
I joined long after ED went through, as did a lot of players. From all the talk it sounds like it was a necessary evil.
Used to be you could 6-slot for damage and get +200% damage or 6-slot Stamina for +200% bonus. Or perma Hasten by itself. Not only was everyone really powerful, but it sort of meant there was only one way to slot things. In attacks pretty much everyone did 1x ACC and 5x DMG. Hasten in every build (perma) and Stamina 6-slotted. Enhancement Diversification was a sort of way to "force" players to use different slotting setups.
Now that we have IOs, there are billions of slotting combinations that a player can choose to achieve results. You can't get +200% damage or Hasten perma as easy as before, but you can do things you couldn't do before, like build defense, global accuracy, higher than perma-Hasten recharge. Stuff like that.
The real kick to the crotch was having all those super-powerful toons reduced to be significantly weaker, and then the very long stretch of time before IOs were introduced. Sort of a big roller coaster dip where powerful toons had to be comparatively weak during the wait for IOs where they could become powerful again. ED+IOs > pre-ED. Just that length of time inbetween them is what caused people to ragequit. -
Quote:So you're saying you want to drive a motorcycle that has superpowers?Originally Posted by The_Larker
I play a superhero game to fly,teleport,run fast and jump real high.
NOT to do something that feasibly I could do in rl.
-
Quote:Beta's supposed to be "early 2010," with expected release Q2 2010. My expectation is that loyalty people should be expecting to get into beta around March, with release around May. That's all estimation though.Originally Posted by bAss_ackwards
Second quarter, actually.
-
Quote:They actually said "early 2010," and said that their launch estimate is Q2 2010. Meaning they want to launch by June. Beta should be at least 2 months if they really want to get things situated right. There's a lot riding on an expansion.Originally Posted by Cende
They've said "q1 2010" for some time now. Given that today is the START of "q1 2010", I don't quite see how you've got any particular leg to stand on.
It should be 2 waves before the loyalty people get to beta. Given about 2-3 weeks for friends and family, and 2-3 weeks for 60 monthers, even if they started today most of us wouldn't get to beta until early to mid Feb.
Realistically, most of us shouldn't expect to get into closed until March. -
Quote:You can be protected from an attack that's never made if you're the reason they can't make the attack, through your actions, preventing the attack from happening. Grabbing someone's hand to keep them from shooting you is the same as dodging or blocking. It's a pre-emptive and defensive maneuver. It's also the plot to a movie called Minority Report.Originally Posted by GuyPerfect
Incorrect. You can't be protected from an attack that is never made.
Building a wall is defensive. Taking away their weapons is offensive. But for the sake of argument, by your NEW definition, which I reckon you just made up:
* -ToHit and -DMG are defensive because the enemies are still making attacks at you.
* -recharge and fear are defensive on the assumption that they do eventually get to attack, but aren't defensive if they don't get to.
* Mezzes are defensive only if they exist long enough to only SLOW DOWN the attack rate, but are not defensive if you kill them before it wears off.
* Building a wall is not defensive because you prevent the enemy from being able to attack in the first place (your new definition says you can't be protected from attacks that can't be made) by preventing them from reaching you. -
Even some normal AVs change tactics at HP levels. Statesman for instance will start using Unstoppable, and start using his AoE lightning smash.
-
Quote:Defense doesn't have to apply in all situations. In fact, it never should. If it could, we'd be able to have 100% RES or 100% evasion.Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Having recently gone through a battle between my Blaster and the Madame of Mystery, I'm no longer convinced this argument holds true for the fights that really matter. That's actually THE problem I have with "offence as defence" - there's no way any game will allow you to insta-kill everything, including the end boss, which means you're bound to fight battles where offence just doesn't work as a form of defence. What do you do then?
Dead enemies do no damage. So do mezzed enemies. In literal terms, the most you can mitigate off regular living, non-mezzed enemies is something like 99.5%. Meaning 90% RES and 95% evasion. I suppose you could also count -400% recharge and -90% damage too. But for most purposes, you aren't going to get anywhere near that. Point is, no amount of RES, DEF, recharge, and -DMG will ever amount to 100% immunity to damage. But death and mez can. Mez is prone to resistances and immunity as well as duration. Death works on everything.
There's no better way to reduce incoming damage than to kill the enemy dealing it. True a Blaster can't rely on killing an AV to keep himself from dying. But no defense in this game is absolute. -
Just logging out doesn't work anymore. TFs spawn for how many people are on the TF, even if they aren't online. The only way to reduce the spawn is for people to actually QUIT the task force.
-
Quote:You know, now that I look closer, the resemblance is uncanny!Originally Posted by Siergen
Ya know, now that I think about it, in some poses he does sorta look like BABs. Perhaps a love-child from an affair with a Crey scientist?
-
Quote:My cats are named Spiffy and Spunky. And my last cat was named Tac.Originally Posted by Ironblade
I used to work with someone who had two cats named Bob and Fred.
Is it just me, or are those not 'cat names'?
-
Quote:If I recall correctly, the "level locked" badguys were being fudged by the level settings. And not just -1. -1 was causing them to spawn at 49. The settings would override things and spawn with the assumption of 50 being baseline. So -1 would be 49. +1 would be 51. +3 would be 53. And so on.Originally Posted by Eric Nelson
Yes, which is why my suggestion covered only RAISING the difficulty level of TFs, not LOWERING it.
This means that if you're doing a TF where the final fight spawns as level 54 (STF), -1, +0, +1, +2, and even +3 would all result in the fight being easier. So it wasn't just -1 being an issue. Some TFs would be easier, and some harder. ITF usually spawns the final fight at 51, so running on the average +2 setting would make the final fight HARDER.
There were a lot of contributions to the settings being pulled. It wasn't just one thing.