Moridin_

[ QUOTE ]

This game was marketed as solo friendly. People bought the game thinking the goal and direction of the game was a solo friendly MMO.


[/ QUOTE ]

It was marketed as a team game that was solo friendly. Notice the emphasis was still on team play. There is FAR to much emphasis on solo play to live up to this prior to issue 3 and even post issue 3 due to peoples ability to solo most or all of the team content.

Let’s face facts here. In the long run a subscription based MMO cannot survive catering to a solo audience because it offers nothing that you can’t have in a standalone game. This means team play needs to come first and have greater scope then solo play. This isn’t to say a degree, even a large degree of solo play is not a nice addition, but it cannot outweigh team play.

[ QUOTE ]
Those powers sound like something you'd use when you know its gonna send them all to the grave, maybe you need to lay down another AE first then the big one that lvls them out?

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that the damage is not consistent. Even when you hit with Nova for example there is a 25% chance that it will do half its potential damage, and 39% chance it will do 2/3 it’s maximum damage. This means that even preceded with some other AoE it isn’t going to kill more then three out of four Lt’s and may only kill half of them, and it will never kill bosses. Unless you are dealing with all minions you cannot ever guarantee you will kill everything.

Also, if you attack with some other AoE first two things are likely to happen. First everything will shoot at you killing you before you can even activate Nova, second even if you survive this the mobs will scatter and you are less likely to hit them all meaning there will be more survivors not less.

[ QUOTE ]

if you read the AT descriptions a blaster was never meant to solo


[/ QUOTE ]

Which is of course why the description contains the phrase “Blasters can solo successfully”.

[ QUOTE ]


It seems to me AI that favors certain targets over others could help greatly in this situation. A tank smasher prefering to fight a tank (scrappers being ranked #2) may treat damage from another class as being lesser because their hated foe is in the group. Other enemies could realize a vulnerability to status attacks, and mostly ignore damage dealers in the pursuit of the "real threat". The aggro system with artificial provok/taunts and degree of damage certainly makes a situation for aoe damage dealers in general, and frail blasters in particular, where they will be singled out for counter blows. Perhaps more unique AI that would require more tactics and group dynamism could help.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting idea. It probably gets too far into the game mechanics for it to be implemented and comes with a whole range of balancing issues, but at least it would not be as arbitrary as taunt/provoke. If it could be made to work it would be superior for that reason alone, and it could introduce a whole range or tactical options on top of that.

[ QUOTE ]

Agreed. Which is why I have a problem with aoe in general as it is in the game. And also why I included spines/inv/reg scrappers and fire tankers. Defenses becoming less needed in the high level game is another issue that needs to be considered, and mob adjustments may change much of that. However, only two sets ever tank. Inv and Reg. Nerfing scrapper defense sets broadly would be a poor idea.


[/ QUOTE ]

With the possible exception of SR, and even that is only “possible” no scrapper def set is challenged by even minions. For 3 whites = 1 hero to be a reality 10 white minions have to pose a real threat to even a solo combat oriented hero. Even the weak scrapper secondary sets are up to this.

Just because there are a couple of sets that go far beyond what the other scrapper def sets can do does not mean that all of then are not to powerful to meet the difficulty goals set out by the devs. I will certainly agree that more balancing between the def sets is still required, but it probably makes sense to have an idea of what the mob difficulty fix will consist of before attempting this.

This is really no different then blaster AoE’s where it’s only 2 primary sets (and maybe trip mine in /Dev) that are noticeably breaking game balance, but all sets are likely to need a hit in order to meet the goals for difficulty.

[ QUOTE ]

Yet, unless mob numbers are adjusted as well, all it takes is an aoe to hit 3 mobs doing 1/3 of a single target attack to equal the damage. Most aoe's that I've witnessed do more than 1/3 of single target, and they certainly hit more than 3 mobs.


[/ QUOTE ]

This sounds good on paper, but in practice the only time it’s easy to hit large numbers of mobs is on the opening strike. After that the number hit with each attack is not nearly as high. The mob AI actually deals with AoE’s quite well, a few attempt to melee, while the remainder spread out and attack from range unless the spawn is filled only with mobs that have a strong preference for melee.

Again herding can skew this a lot, so can having a controller hold the mobs in place, but IMO that (the hold) is getting into things that should be highly rewarded since a tank (or defensively built scrapper) is still required to take the initial salvo, but the hold has to be in place before the mobs scatter. This takes timing teamwork and co-operation, all things that should be well rewarded.


[ QUOTE ]

I wondered when I first made my blaster why they didn't have powers that increased their def/res to ranged attacks.


[/ QUOTE ]
This is actually something I thought they should have done with smoke grenades. It describes the mobs as not being able to see beyond melee range, it seems natural to me to make it a fairly high debuff against ranged attacks but small or nothing against melee.

[ QUOTE ]


Why should scrappers get single target attacks when aoe is clearly so much better?



[/ QUOTE ]

Other then alpha strikes, blasters need to use skill and/or teamwork to make their AoE’s effective. If you add strong defensive capabilities into the mix this goes out the window.

The mix of AoE’s and overpowered defense is at least as disruptive as alpha strike AoE combinations that can wipe out whole groups of mobs every 20 seconds. Personally I would rather see this fixed by adjusting the defensive capabilities, but ultimately the strength of AoE’s is going to have to be balanced against weaker defense in order to keep the risk reward equation balanced..

BTW my contention has always been that the problem isn’t AOE’s, it’s the front loaded nature of some of the high damage but slightly slower attack rate AoE’s (As opposed to AoE’s with a very very slow attack rate. If you can only use a power every 6 min it should be very good when you do use it.) This allows mobs to be killed before they can mount an effective counterattack, negating the need for defenses, but if you can survive the counterattack that is every bit as good.

If you look at the AoE’s the difference between an “AOE” blaster and a “single target” blaster is not all that dependent on the DPS of their AoE’s it’s how big the initial hit is. Slow heavy AoE’s make an AoE blaster; light fast AoE’s make a single target blaster even if their overall damage output is comparable.

The solution to the current problems with AoE’s should be to A) remove their ability to first strike kill. Either make them do less damage with shorter animations and recharge, or increase mob hit points. AND B) remove the ability of any AT to survive the aggro of massive numbers of mobs, or even smaller numbers (in the 20 range) without support.

[ QUOTE ]

Such a construct is often advanced in a form that fits false dichotomy but you were the ones laying out the possibilities. If it is a false dichotomy then it is one of your making.


[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm on top of being mathematically challenged you seem to have a short memory combined with reading comprehension problems. Unless are trying to create strawmen from my previous statements you laid out the delema not I. I merely pointed out they were not mutually exclusive as you so foolishly claimed.

So, what is it, strawmen, false dilemma, outright desperation?

[ QUOTE ]

If by screwing up you mean things like failing to buff before hand, then you may have a point, but that gets back to the competency of the group.


[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]

Such a construct is often advanced in a form that fits false dichotomy but you were the ones laying out the possibilities. If it is a false dichotomy then it is one of your making.


[/ QUOTE ]

Unless are trying to create strawmen from my previous statements you laid out the delema not I. I merely pointed out they were not mutually exclusive as you so foolishly claimed.

So, what is it, strawmen, false dilemma, outright desperation?

[ QUOTE ]

If by screwing up you mean things like failing to buff before hand, then you may have a point, but that gets back to the competency of the group.


[/ QUOTE ]


Hmm you do seem to like strawmen don’t you. Sorry, but you are not in a position to define what type of mistakes I am referring to on my behalf. If you have ever been part of a well played team however you will understand what types of mistakes I am referring to, but perhaps you simply have not been part of a really good team where subtle things make the difference rather then gross errors. From your posts I would say probably not, and that you consider “good play” simply no making L2 noob mistakes.

In any case my point remains perfectly clear, since it seems you are the only one who doesn’t get it I will repeat it succinctly for others who don’t want to want to dig back through this thread to see what I’m talking about.

When people make a mistake in a group, no matter who that person is, blasters are by far the most likely to pay the price. When blasters group at all they need to be at or near the highest levels in the group in order to contribute to that group.

Both these points have been widely accepted by everyone in this thread, but you. Since you remain incapable of building an argument to refute them I will ignore your continued attempts to sidetrack, derail and otherwise draw attention away from them until such a time as you come up with an argument that has at least a little merit.

[ QUOTE ]
The issue isn't that they do too much damage, its that the alpha strike aoe elemenates the fight all together. no need for crowd controll, no fight realy, just BAM XP!

even if minion HP doubled (not saying it should just giving you a worse case scenerio) then blasters would be even MORE important to get through all that HP (plus the xp would go up, as statesman already said they're happy with present xp progression).

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, in fact I think it will make the game a lot better for everyone, but there can be no denying this creates difficulties for blasters. Currently many of the flaws in the AT are hidden by the ability to kill with alpha strikes, take that away and all these flaws come to the forefront.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'll have to agree that if they dial down the damage, they better dial down the agro.

[/ QUOTE ]

I keep seing how people bring up the subject of agro as the reason why area effects must insta kill or not exist at all.

I am a fire tanker, and in my groups NO ONE gets agro unless I die.

For now, i depend greately on provoke to achieve this, but remember that every tanker hit has taunt asociated with it. This is not EverQuest or Final Fantasy XI where only healing or damage angers an enemy, here provoke and taunt do, and all tanker attacks have taunt now and will be provokes soon.

As a fire tanker i do have an edge over other tankers as i have quiet a few area attacks to draw agro between provoke refreshes, soon that will change, i hope.

You will NEVER get the agro in a group with a tanker, and while solo you should NEVER get involved with enough enemies to be that dangerous.

Talk about agro is nonsence. Not even the most trigger happy of scrappers (maybe one with invinsibility, and then for only a few secs) can take agro from me.

[/ QUOTE ]

While I appreciate what a good tank can do, this is simply never going to be the case. Provoke has a finite area of effect, it you provoke the mobs that are in the back shooting the ones near you will aggro if damage. If you provoke the ones near you the ones shooting will certainly aggro if damage and may simply change targets at random.

Mob behavior makes it impossible for you to provoke everything, and whatever is not provoked can and will aggro on your team mates.

[ QUOTE ]

Herding requires a group of at least two, one of which CANNOT be a blaster, and adding members to any herding group scales much better than adding members to a traditional group in terms of both xp gain AND skill utilization


[/ QUOTE ]

Many scrappers and tanks do it just fine all on their own, and the only teammates they need are the afk train sitters to get larger spawns in their missions. Other then map knowledge there is no real skill involved at any point.

[ QUOTE ]


I've called for a Blaster nerf somewhere?

[/ QUOTE ]

The just what are you doing here? Did you say to yourself “hey blasters want to call attention to the legitimate problems they have in this game, as someone who doesn’t know how to play a blaster I feel I am obligated to crap in their thread”?

[ QUOTE ]
I realize this is a major p1ssing match between Moridin and Erratic, but I wanted to mention something, or rather ask about something that doesn't make sense to me.

If a SR scrapper is on a team with 2 defenders and they hit the def cap (probably quite quickly) why is it they would live so much longer than a blaster on the team, who probably is hitting the same cap? The HP difference isn't that vast, and SR has no res. Melee hits harder, and they can be hit by range while being hit by melee. I just ask because I've been on a team with a spines/sr and a Fire/Dev, with 2 defs and a controller, and I didn't ever see the Blaster fall to a volley one shot madness, nor did either of us SR. For the *most* part the team was pretty much blazing through mobs.

Is there some mechanic I'm overlooking? It would seem that on teams SR scrappers would be almost as frail as blasters, but if this were the case, nobody would play with them as they need to be in melee.

[/ QUOTE ]

In practical terms the only time 2 defenders will cap you def is when you have 2 force fielders. That isn’t common. There are far more ways to cap a SR scrappers def. There is also a lot of consensus that SR needs some form of resist despite this.

The other thing to remember is that most blaster builds need to come within 20 feet to cycle their 3 primary single target attacks, or use their most effective AoE’s. At this range you can be hit by a melee attack in the time it takes to finish even a short animation. Exposing them to nearly as much melee damage as the SR scrapper is. They are however far more likely to be hit in if something attacks them in most situations.

So if SR needs help for the very same reasons why I there no recognition of the fact that blasters have it even worse?

[ QUOTE ]

They are if you have to worry about dying to the extent that you're portraying. So which is it, are they incompetent or are you exaggerating?


[/ QUOTE ]

This is what’s known as a false dilemma. Neither of these things have to be the case, and in fact the real answer is that you are simply wrong in your assertion.
[ QUOTE ]

Which is it going to be Moridin_, that it is utterly unsafe and you're risking death as the Blaster or that you are perfectly safe? Allow me to remind you of your own words:


[/ QUOTE ]
It’s safe because everyone does their job properly, but the instant one person screws up, even me, I die. No one else, just me get it? No mater what tactics you use, this is how grouping works for blasters unless they are lazy leaches sitting back and making little or no contribution tom the team.

[ QUOTE ]
So I think it's one of the lamest arguements going that the low DEF class gets the most powerful ranged and melee simply because in melee they're vulnerable. They already DO impressive damage, give them something more unique.



[/ QUOTE ]

Risk vs reward. If you are taking greater risk, and a low def AT is taking a greater risk by entering into melee range, you need a correspondingly higher reward. This means if you are going to give a low def, offensive AT melee attacks they had bloody well better be the best attacks around. I will agree that it would be better all round to have useful skill that are not melee attacks in a blaster secondary.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Clearly you are not familiar with the concept of streak breakers…

[/ QUOTE ]

Streak breakers have essentially been disproven to make more than several points of a percentage diff in ACC. It's even lower the better your DEF. Because the streak breaker increase the number of misses before it activates. So at really high DEF, it might take 30 misses before something gets the streak breaker, most things don't live that long.


Sorry to butt in on your debate, but just wanted to throw that info out there.

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm what was your point there? Just to keep you up to date the discussion was about whether a defender can keep you alive by just increasing your def. When things can 1 hit you streak breakers mean you die once for every 20 times they attack you no matter how high your def is.

[ QUOTE ]

I'm wasn't talking about YOUR secondary. I said that Blaster secondaries are lame for them, thus they mostly ignore them, where as they are NEEDED for scrappers and the rest of the AT's.


[/ QUOTE ]

What he is telling you is that blasters need secondaries that work just as badly as scrappers do the only difference is that blasters don’t have such a secondary. This has been hidden to some extent by AoE alpha strikes and exploitable bugs. Neither of these will be around forever, neither is a substitute for a real secondary.

[ QUOTE ]

But that's not necessarily a reflection of the Blaster 2nds themselves as it is the blaster primes. e.g. Many scrappers would take blaster 2nds as 1sts.


[/ QUOTE ]

LOL that is still the lamest argument going. If you are going to give an AT with poor defenses a melee power it must, be far more powerful than any melee power you give an AT with strong defenses. What you are suggesting is equivalent to suggesting tankers be given access to scrapper melee powers at full effectiveness. Actually I take that back it isn’t equivalent, what you are suggesting is 10X more outrageous.

[ QUOTE ]

LOL, try playing with competent people


[/ QUOTE ]


Ha that’s a laugh. I was one of the first blasters to hit 50 on my server and I have teamed with most of the top players on my server at one time or another. Perhaps I should go tell them you think they are incompetent. Sorry to break this to you but if you played a blaster the way you are outlining how you “think” it should be done you would be kicked from any good team for being a leach.

[ QUOTE ]

A goodly chunk of the time I lead off the attacks on my Defender because it is the safe thing to do


[/ QUOTE ]

Frankly it doesn’t matter who leads off. I have friends who almost insist that I lead off when we play our 50’s because I can get us around the maps far faster then anyone else. I am also perfectly safe leading off with an AoE because I know that by the time they pick themselves up off the ground they will be provoked and held, and if they miss I will get the heals I need. If someone is a little to slow however guess what happens?

The same thing plays out no matter who is leading, if everyone does their job everything dies fast. If someone screws up then someone will die, and the people most likely to are the blasters.

[ QUOTE ]

But if a moronic Blaster would prefer to toss a Fireball, no wonder he dies.


[/ QUOTE ]

As I indicated above your grasp of teamwork is, shall we say, incomplete.

It is becoming readily apparent what your problem is though. You think it is the job of other to watch with appreciation the wondrousness that is you, and praise you for making all things possible. Perhaps I should acquaint you with an old adage, “there is no I in team”. Learn it and perhaps you won’t have so much trouble breaking level 40.
[ QUOTE ]

Clearly never played with Force Field Defenders ramping defense so high that being touched requires an act of Congress.


[/ QUOTE ]

Clearly you are not familiar with the concept of streak breakers…

[ QUOTE ]

Again, interesting mythology.


[/ QUOTE ]

“You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

[ QUOTE ]

Interesting mythology. Dies faster than help can arrive? Most of the Defender primaries are designed to provide help before the first shot is fired. And Controllers are designed to prevent the mob from even getting a chance to strike back. This is group dynamic here and yet you continue to paint the matter as if the Blaster is the only one using his abilities. Let me suggest that you find better groups to join.


[/ QUOTE ]


Lol play a blaster to a meaningful level before you comment. If the tank is slow with a provoke, a controller misses a hold, a scrapper draws more aggro then they want and have to unload it, a defender uses a targeted debuff on something that isn’t held by a controller and the aggro is going to go somewhere it shouldn’t be. 90% of that comes down on the blasters in the group, and when it does they often die even before a heal can be activated.

The bottom line is that aggro management on a good team is everyone’s responsibility, but the blasters are always the first to pay the price when it goes wrong.

[ QUOTE ]

No, there is a difference between contributing and doing the lion's share of the work. Consider a team with 2 Scrappers, 2 Tankers, a Controller, a Defender, and 2 Blasters. If the Blasters are contributing 33% of the damage of the group they are pulling their weight and you're not going to kick them to the curb.


[/ QUOTE ]

Why on earth would you take 2 blasters that can contribute direct damage to increase the group’s damage output by 50% when you could take 2 defenders that provide that same direct ranged damage to the tune of 35% and have buffs that combine for a 50% increase across the board to everyone’s damage on top of that?

The second option gives the group significantly more damage output, so what is the point of having a “damage only” AT in the group if taking someone else gives the group an even higher damage output?

[ QUOTE ]

Is there a reason why the Defender in the team would be hogging the benefits of Accelerate Metabolism to just himself and not hitting every member on the team with it?


[/ QUOTE ]

Where on earth did I say that was occurring? In fact I think it is implicit that I was not. As a rule of thumb AM provides a 25% boost to total damage output to every person on the team. This means that with AM alone the defenders own damage output comes to within 13% of that of a blaster.

Now add a second person to the mix say a scrapper and the total team output is higher then that of what you would have with that scrapper and a blaster.

Now add a blaster and they receive the same benefit you say? Well yes they do, but if you add another defender with AM they receive it as well, and also grant the benefit of a second AM to everyone in the group. The result is the same again, adding the defender to the group increases damage more then adding the blaster would.

So, adding a blaster to the group isn’t the best way to increase group damage and damage is all blasters do why add them.

[ QUOTE ]

Anyone at lower level than the team average is less effective, that's the nature of the beast


[/ QUOTE ]

there is a big difference between les effective and ineffective.

[ QUOTE ]

.Build Up adds 100% of base damage, Aim 62.5%. Enervating Field adds 42%


[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize that a “100% increase of base damage” to a power slotted with 5 damage enh nets you about 35% more damage while at the same time actually using the buff costs you 20% of your attack rate. Aim actually works out to a decrease in total damage for many attack sequences.

Tanks can tank things well above their own level, bufs and heals are not touched by relative mob level and even scrappers can contribute by keeping mobs occupied, even if they don’t provide much offence. The only AT that contribute nothing at all if they are lower level then the team is blaster.

[ QUOTE ]

You presume the Blasters are doing the lion's share of the killing


[/ QUOTE ]

Of course I am. This is the only contribution a blaster can make to a team, and if they don’t, then they are simply leaching.

[ QUOTE ]

In point of fact a Blaster could be 2 levels lower than a Defender in a group and provide the same DPS (Defender deals 66.66% the damage of a Blaster and hits even cons 75% of the time for combined damage of 66.66%*75% = 50%, a Blaster hits a target at +2 level 61% of the time for 80% of normal yielding 61% * 80% = 48.8%)


[/ QUOTE ]

And how does that picture look if the team wants to take on red minions, that are at purple wall to a -2 level blaster?

I also note you conveniently ignore the fact that the defender has access to powers like accelerate metabolism that allow them to attack more often then the blaster. So even in your own example the blaster is considerably less effective at the only thing they bring to the team.

Sorry, but most people will not consider this a positive contribution to the team and will request the blaster take a higher sk if one is available.

[ QUOTE ]

in reality the Defender, even an offensively oriented one, is not likely to be as heavily spec'd for dealing damage until late game


[/ QUOTE ]

Any damage dealer has about 3 primary attacks give or take they use a lot and the rest are situational. If you are suggesting that a defender can’t spare enough slots to do this until late in the game I disagree.

[ QUOTE ]

ignoring the Defeender's lack of access to Build Up (and possibly Aim).


[/ QUOTE ]

and also conveniently ignoring their buffs/debuffs that are in fact superior to these.

[ QUOTE ]

In a typical group of character of mixed ranges, there is little reason for the Blaster to be the top


[/ QUOTE ]

Most people consider making a contribution to the team a reason. Blasters can’t do this unless the team is attacking easy targets or they are the highest level characters.

[ QUOTE ]
As someone stated earlier, blasters should have a control primary as there secondary (at 75% effectiveness as all others are), that would be fair and equitable and make sense with every other AT.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is never going to happen. One of the key goals of the whole AT system was to prevent certain power combinations, one of which was ranged damage with strong (AoE) crowd control. Perhaps we will see something like this in the epic AT's but it won't hapen in the blaster set.

[ QUOTE ]

While teamed everyone advances at the same rate, you all share the same incoming xp


[/ QUOTE ]

When you team, the higher levels advance more slowly in comparison to lower levels. Since the level of mobs the team can go after is the level of mobs the blasters can kill effectively, either the blasters are the highest levels on the team, sk’d to the highest level possible, of the team is of the lower xp variety. Unless you team with exactly the same characters every time this leads to blasters advancing more slowly then other AT’s when teamed.

[ QUOTE ]

You're suggesting a Defender can fill the shoes of a Blaster?

When I started my offensively built Defender (and it is one of the more offensive builds out there) I was flatly told I was insane by other Defenders and Blasters giggled.


[/ QUOTE ]
Unless you can find a post where I did that, it’s hardly relevant information.

Simple question, who is going to do more damage, 3 blasters or 2 rad/* defenders and a kin/* defender.

Let me see… 2 stacked enervating fields causing all damage to more then double, 2 X RI each giving a 90% defense debuff, nearly 100% bonus on end recovery, recharge reduction greater then hasten that stacks with hasten, no requirement to slot for acc even against deep purple mobs, and even damage only needs to be slotted for convenience.

The three defenders would be at the damage cap 100% of the time and then having their damage doubled on top of that, attacking at a much higher rate, Thats not even mentioning their end advantage or stacked anti status effects. Sorry, the defenders in this scenario are going to be doing vastly more damage then 3 similar blasters ever could.

Want to add someone else? A controller or two would be handy, as would a tank to take the initial brunt of attacks. Some defensive defenders like FF or emp would surely benefit the team as well. A scrapper may even fit in if a tank wasn’t available, but the very last thing this team needs is a blaster.

[ QUOTE ]

It was repored by the Devs to be 100%


[/ QUOTE ]

It was reported as “could be 100%” with enh it could be 100% with a base as low as 35%. There was more then sufficient test result to show that it was not 100% with 1 SO because anything above a minion still hit more often then 5% of the time. IOW it could not have been a 100% base.

[ QUOTE ]

That isn't status protection in the sense you're likely thinking about.


[/ QUOTE ]
Your main character is only a couple levels above my fire/rad alt. I think I have a fairly good idea what the rad set can do.

[ QUOTE ]
Hmmm. . . Punisher.

RI is a 30% To-Hit debuff from what I hear. Each SO brings that up by 10% (33% of 30 is 10%), so I run at either 60% or 70% typically depending on how I've most recently slotted it. My Defender has no other +Def abilities. At 2 levels above me the power should be 80% effective, or a 48-56% To-Hit Debuff. From geko's comments on SG that means it is cutting their basic chance to hit in half.

Gotta be forgetting something as that isn't enough to allow anyone to stand in front of a Tank Smasher, let alone a Paragon Protectore, and I've done that too at +2 levels.

[/ QUOTE ]

SG was reported as a 50% acc debuff prior to the fix. Since most blasters didn’t slot it heavily your RI is providing you more defense then SG blasters were getting. On top of this you probably have an always on status protection from accelerate metabolism, have higher damage attacks then most single target blasters, and the elec recharge times are also nicely countered by AM as is the higher end requirements.

Of course you don’t see a problem with status effects, you are more resistant to them then blasters ever were and all you had to sacrifice for them was a little bit of damage output, and maybe not even that

[ QUOTE ]


Fact is that Statesman has stated he believes all ATs should be able to solo, even if they do not solo equally as well. It is hard to imagine that translates to Blasters being at the end of the list let alone unable to do so.

As to fairness, it is wholely fair to balance the game for the enjoyment of all over allowing some to have a cakewalk, and there is no way around that.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that if blasters are not near the top of the list for solo play the AT is hurting badly because blasters are at the bottom of the list for the rate at which they advance while teamed. It does not help to have people “want to team” with you if you do not gain the same benefits as they do from the relationship. “Team friendly” can’t just mean everyone benefits but you.

On top of that offensively built defenders can fill a blasters team role better then a blaster, the only advantage a blaster has is that the team knows what they are getting when the sign up a blaster while a defender is somewhat of a question mark.

If blasters are not the best choice for their role on a team, typically receive fewer benefits then everyone else on said team and don’t solo well what is the point in playing one?

Cut and paste failed, I will re write my response

[ QUOTE ]

And also takes a small eternity to drop anything by himself, unlike say a Blaster.


[/ QUOTE ]

Not with the right choices in powers. Whirring hands will make short work of 10 +2 minions. For that matter grab 90 more then jump in a dumpster and start spamming an AoE and all 100 will die pretty fast.

[ QUOTE ]

And risk being skewered in turn by melee attacks


[/ QUOTE ]

10 +2 minions pose no threat to a well built scrapper.

[ QUOTE ]

And risk being skewered in turn by melee attacks


[/ QUOTE ]

Against 10 2+ minions? I can guarantee you that my fire controller will go through groups like this like crazy with no risk to me whatsoever. The only problem is finding enough of them to satisfy my apatite. If I can find a second group I will likely have that dead before a blaster using TB is even up and hunting again after willing the first one.


[ QUOTE ]

There is a reason, oddly enough ignored by you, that there are a sea of level 50 Blasters in comparison to what else has made it to 50.


[/ QUOTE ]


If we discount people who were PL’d I know more controllers, tanks and scrappers then blasters.