StratoNexus

I was using 'hate' colloquially.

I disagree with your assessment of your behavior, and I think you may want to consider my view at least, because I am not the only one who has brought this to your attention now. If you just jumped in when people were comparing sets on performance alone, I'd have almost no problem. I think you shortchange some pistols benefits, but I also think you are generally fair and freely place the set in the middle (low middle, where I would likely go high middle).

You jump in and slam pistols outside of just performance discussions. You slam it when people are asking for a pistols build. People asking for how to build a pistols blaster are not looking for advice to roll a different blaster or a defender or corruptor instead, but you have jumped into threads and done just that. The very post I linked to, that you quoted, was a totally unnecessary post by you in a thread about preference, not performance.

It feels like you look for excuses to point out its flaws (and gloss over its advantages). That is my perspective, maybe I am just reading more into your posts because I disagree and I want everyone to love pistols (I do not think so, I generally prefer my Fire/Fire over my Pistols/Fire, but bias can be hard to see, especially when it is your own) or maybe I am seeing something you are not.

I am perfectly fine with occasional posts suggesting improvements to Pistols, just like I am fine with suggesting improvements to /Devices. Frankly, /Devices is in much worse shape than Pistols. Pistols falls right in the middle of the blaster pack, with advantages and disadvantages. /Devices advantages are meaningful, but only in a very small subset of play. Some of the Pistols disadvantages you list, while meaningful, are really only meaningful in a very small subset of play. That is a difference to me and that is why I'll champion buffing /devices, but I am meh on Pistols improvements.

Indeed. I am glad all your comparisons are not that unfair and ridiculous. You act like a Pistols user cannot have those things (and they really do not need all those things anyway). And I never even hinted that the orange statement you made was true. Are you arguing with yourself? Making up points you can easily counter that I never hinted or intended? I NEVER said or even implied, "* The 10% defense in HoB on a brand new, totally nekkid, Dual Pistoleer is = to a fully IO'd, been played as a blapper since I4 (man do I miss old defiance with this toon), been my main since I9, loaded for bear on accolades, Energy/Energy/Force blapper."

What I was implying was that if you can get your Nrg/Nrg "nuke chain" off, then it is very reasonable to believe that utilizing HoB can also be done and done well. That is all, nothing more.

I never said that. You seem to forget the 6 seconds (8.5 seconds if no stealth (and you did not name any in your extensive list) since you also Aim+BU) before Nova where you are standing in melee attacking just 1 target while the rest of the spawn is attacking you. That is what I was referring to when I was comparing the time in melee for HoB and your "nuke chain".

DO NOT make up an argument I never posited, please. It is annoying and I believe you are better than that.

Who are you arguing with? If you would like to make-up your own statements to argue with, maybe you should just PM yourself? I have not actually thought much about where I would rank those three in terms of sheer effectiveness. RoA seems a pretty clear number 1 to me. FA and HoB I'd have to think about.

I fully understand the advantages and drawbacks of all 3 of the tier 9s you post about. I firmly believe you do not. You have great difficulty seeing the drawbacks of RoA and Full Auto. You seem unable to see any of the advantages of HoB.

You are wrong. That is not what happens, at least not regularly. You do not suffer 2 Alphas, one ranged and one melee. I'd also say the situation is quite different teamed, making your comparisons irrelevant in that scenario.

In addition, it is not a clear drawback that one must be in/near melee range. Blasters are designed to function in/near melee. There are clear times where being in/near melee range is quite advantageous. Archery can, of course, choose to RoA from just about anywhere, including in/near melee, but Rifle is not so accommodating.

I generally consider the PBAoE nature of HoB to be an advantage, although I freely admit the choice to use RoA as a PBAoE or ranged death is very nice.

Hey, you are arguing with something I said! What a refreshing experience. Maybe I am wrong. A lot of blasters like to stay at range and do fear the melee. However, I have seen a lot of inexperienced blasters that seemed to do just fine with HoB. Sure, they were teamed, but I do not weigh powers or powersets in a vacuum.

I disagree. 3 purples to get to the cap instead of 4 (and that is without factoring in any other potential sources of defense). Stacked on top of Cold shields or FF shields it is massive. In isolation, on paper, you can laugh at it. In game and with use, it is helpful.

I guess I just get annoyed when you feel the need to post for no reason and spew the hate. I can understand not liking the set. I can understand you feel it under-performs (OK, I don't actually get that part, but I can sort of see it if I look a bit askew). I can even understand you posting when someone asks. But just posting to slam Pistols after you had already stated your preference? Nah, I have trouble getting it. Now, I understand power-hate, but Pistols is just not worthy of the level of venom you toss at it, especially when you do it uninvited.

It is my opinion that this highlights a neutral move for blasters. Blasters are range AND melee damage. That is their design premise and has been since before the game was released. 'Death from afar' is a corruptor/defender role and most of that is focused on AVs, which is where corruptors will obliterate a blasters damage output (and that is before any debuffs, I am just talking straight up damage, scourge is amazing against hard targets).

While I am not opposed to blasters being able to leverage their range half, I also do not find it to be a "strength" that I MUST leverage it because I am too weak to engage the other half of my powers. That is not to say I am against those types of mechanics, I enjoy stuff that forces us to move and I am glad to see the game give the nod towards those with range attacks, which does include blasters, but blasters are a melee AT as well (and generally do their best damage if they can stay in melee range).

When you look at the other range/melee ATs, dominators, VEATs, and Khelds, it is not hard to see that they gave a lot of versatility to those other, later iterations of the range/melee ATs. This is especially true when you look at the current state of affairs, since doms and Khelds were previously not as potent with their damage output.

I am not claiming that fewer people will play blasters nor am I saying that fewer people will allow them to join their teams nor do I even believe that fewer people will look for them when doing searches.

I do believe that Blast set true nukes need to be rethought. I think Judgment simply highlights this fact even further (I think it has been pretty obvious they should be rethought for awhile now, but one more thing has been added to the pile of evidence). I think this is true for blasters, corruptors, and defenders. Would this solve the "blaster dilemma"? No, but it will be a step in the right direction for all three Blast set ATs, IMO.

As for the general "weakness" of the blaster, that is not my concern at this time. I'd rather see how these 5 levels of the incarnate system pan out before any kind of AT assessment is made. But majorly off things such as snipes and nukes, I think they can and should be addressed quickly.

The blaster (and scrapper) versions do not taunt.

Interesting. I am not sure what you intend by your use of meaningful. The challenge is designed to help you understand the limits of your build and to help you learn how to push those limits and how to play at the edge of those limits. It is intended to kill you more often than not, or at least put you near death quite a lot.

It is highly recommended to start fighting using a lot of resources. Drop some lucks and and a break free and start fighting. Use inspires as needed. Pop off an accolade buff. Use Force of Nature or Rise of the Phoenix. Use whatever you can. Then, start to eliminate. Do it without the accolade(s). Do not use FoN or RotP. Use fewer inspires. Use no inspires. Use fewer attacks. Turn off some armors.

It is all about finding how little you can get away with and still survive, what tactics can you use and how can you move with your build and your character and then even taking away some of those powers. That is the original meaning behind the RWZ challenge (which was the RCS challenge and the Storm Palace challenge pre-I10).

Weren't Khelds and the APPs released in the same issue (and of course, blasters were designed with controls in their primaries and secondaries to begin with anyway)?

Except nothing but Judgment blows the caps all to hell. The debuffs from Interface are so small, even stacked to the cap, that debuffers will still be incredibly potent. Sure we can resistance cap and defense cap blasters, but Brutes and Tankers have more cap room and more HPs.

Is Judgment similarly limited on low damage ATs the way the buffs are limited on low mitigation ATs?

Is Judgment similarly limited on buff/debuff ATs the way the debuffs are limited in Interface?

I'll give you Destiny. That has me concerned in a way similar to Judgement, and for the same reasons, but likely not for your reasons.

You say Destiny obviates the need for armored ATs, but the armored ATs can generally make better use of Destiny (higher caps or more hit points), plus getting all the benefits of high damage from the other Incarnate abilities.

Judgment lets ATs blow away the "damage cap". Destiny does not let me violate the HP or resistance cap. Interface does not let me bypass debuff caps, but it does help me add even more damage, so I see that ability more directly encroaching on damage ATs as opposed to buff/debuff ATs.

Lore has buffing and healing, but once again does not help me bypass my caps, but the damage dealing pets once again help us bypass our own damage limitations.

Yes, the Incarnate system causes encroachment everywhere (wait until the AoE Incarnate holds come out that are better than Controller/Dom controls ), but AT caps and the massive damage potential combine to make it likely that the "damage focused" ATs are the most encroached on.

Or having a build that makes those mezzes miss. Or having a hover build that makes one mez inconvenient, but not a death sentence. It is not just luck that can get you through this, although bad luck kills even tankers on the challenge, so luck can play a part.

How about 4? Because a four man team with no blasters can now do that.
How about 8? How about 16 in a league on a trial?

It is not one nuke every 90 seconds. It is one crashless nuke every 90/team size seconds.

That -25% is ten stacks of Interface and seems small. Do ten stacks of Judgment seem as small as -25% resistance?

Compare to Electricity Manipulation. They could add the 50% chance tag to the stun on Hand Clap if they needed to. AoE KD already exists for blasters, Ice Patch, Hail of Bullets, and Psionic Tornado.

You change it to Build Up. I know, the crying, but you just do it anyway. The people who will complain about it are not likely to want to play the blaster AT anyway.

I think Group Fly is a team only buff, which would mean you can't have more than 8.

Swords seem to be player spawn only, unless I am missing something. A team could theoretically stay at range of BM and have any pets remain in melee with her at all times. With good debuffs, and a bunch of MMs, that could work well, I imagine (if you can keep her from running away from the pets and at a player, of course).