hepheastus

[ QUOTE ]
I've sent PMs as well, but I have never received a response either. Lighthouse has been on a sort of roll lately with answering questions, I was thinking he might see this and let us know what's up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey man..... Here's my best Kanye West impression.

"Jack Emmert don't care about blaster people." Lighthouse dosen't even know there is a blaster forum.... he might scan it for nasty language.... but he's not going to address anything. THat dosen't happen in blasterland.

[ QUOTE ]
A while back, the Devs were discussing examining the Blaster Secondaries to try to make them more effective. I know that Electric, Energy, and Devices get a lot of use from Blappers or mine + TP-foe'rs, but you don't see that many /Ice or /Fire. I believe that was mainly why they were checking out the Secondaries.

Just curious, but was this dropped, put further back on the schedule, still working on it, but not mentioned much?

[/ QUOTE ]

they lied to shut us up. worked too.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Or perhaps there is a core group of a dozen or so players the Devs should always 'listen to'-- even when those players disagree with each other?

[/ QUOTE ]


When in doubt, they should always listen to me and do whatever I say. Its not always the best thing, but its a good rule of thumb. And not just for the devs, either.

[/ QUOTE ]

let me know if they buy that. I have some Ideas about defiance that I'd like to funnel through you.

Ever notice how right after some releases some people complained about accuracy.... and were blown off?

Makes you wonder now don't it?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Although I cannot say she was the first to put it this way, it was Kali's multiple reports of lucks "not working until enough of them were used" that got me thinking that they might not have been broken, just weaker than advertised. Which caused me to run specific tests looking for the ramp up/ramp down behavior, which I was able to reproduce consistently in at least one instance.

[/ QUOTE ]

The best I could really come up with, when reporting these things, was "this is really weird behavior." The number of times I'd pop three lucks and have a boss chain multiple hits on me was higher than it felt like it should have been if I was flooring those bosses. Of all the reasons that this would happen, I would say that "these are about half as effective as the text says they are" was not on my list.

And it's true, I never set out to test it because I assumed the 25% number was accurate, and because it's a pain to test accuracy and defense inspirations due to the short duration. I also got annoyed with the people telling me I was imagining things and telling me to get 10,000 hit samples when the issue was with boss fights.

[/ QUOTE ]

One things for sure. If you start popping lucks after combat has begun... there's a damned good chance that you're going to get floored or hurt real bad. ALways seemed like the effect wasn't instantaneous.

This also explains the last battle I fought with my rad defender. I was 49 fighting a level 52 malta titan. With 4 lucks and RI running that thing was hitting me like crazy. The combination of debuff and lucks should have had him whistlin dixie. Instead I was getting hammered like a drunken fratboy. The only reason I won was Enverating field, temp invul and a couple large resistance inspires. THe lucks didn't even seem to be there.

[ QUOTE ]
This is astonishing. Truly astonishing. The one set of statistics modification numbers that the devs haven't hidden behind the veil of "Aaah! No 'City of Math'!"...has turned out to be half wrong, and apparently they've been wrong since the beginning of the game two years ago.

Why on earth did this take so long to come out? Why wasn't, say, the fact that the oranges were "so much weaker" than purples when they were introduced, sufficient to get the devs to say, "Oh, and by the way, purples are really not 25/33/50 after all..."? It seems clear that the oranges' numbers were being scaled against the actual values of the other Inspirations rather than their described values. Why didn't anyone correct it at that point?

I mean...wrong for two whole years?

This makes me wonder what other "facts" that we take for granted aren't true.

With this level of QA, Cryptic is really squandering the first-mover advantage in the superhero MMORPG genre. If they don't get their act together, and Marvel or DC come out with something better, they're going to eat Cryptic's lunch but good.

[/ QUOTE ]

like I said robo. those 25/33/50 numbers used to be accurate.

and really they were broken. You shouldn't be able to pop 4 lucks and out tank an ice tanker. I don't mind the "re-balance".

I just don't appreciate the stealth nerf.

[ QUOTE ]
A lot of people have reported oddities with inspirations, especially lucks, and occasionally insights. I finally had a chance to test those out. Wasn't easy, let me tell you, and the tests were nowhere near the level of precision I would like to have, but I was able to see pretty conclusively variations in the behavior of the insps over what we all assumed was their behavior, based on their textual descriptions. So I had something of positive proof to take to the devs for enlightenment.


The textual descriptions are wrong: very very wrong.


Here is what the insps actually do, according to pohsyb:


DEF
S - 12.5%
M - 25%
L - 33%

ACC
S - 7.5%
M - 18.75%
L - 37.5%

RES
S - 10%
M - 15%
L - 20%

DMG
S -25%
M - 33%
L - 50%

Well, at least they got the damage and resistance ones right. But lucks are half the strength you think they are, and insights were created with a random number generator.

(Please don't reply that the insights aren't actually random, I know that.)

The good news is that SR isn't a little more than one small luck, its a little less than three. At least I think that's good news: all of you that were wondering why you sometimes needed to chomp four or five of these little guys now know why: it takes five of these guys to floor an even level boss in I6 (four in I7).

The bad news is that lucks and insights aren't actually balanced. In lower level zones where drops are often the smaller variety, lucks are a little stronger than insights. Not too much, but some. In RV, where drops are more often of the larger variety, insights are stronger than lucks.

So as tohit buffs become more common, from the BB to SC to WB to RV, insights also become more powerful than lucks. That's probably not a good thing either.


You would think by now we wouldn't trust the text descriptions for anything, and here's yet more proof that you shouldn't believe everything you read. Unless it comes from me, of course.


And this is worth noting: because lucks are defense, and therefore probabilistic in nature, not everyone will tend to see "average" performance. Some people will see behavior close to what they really do, and extrapolate their performance correctly, and some people will see bursty behavior that is out of line with their true behavior, and extrapolate their behavior incorrectly.

But in this case, it was the people who complained about seeing oddities that were right, and the people who thought they were working correctly that were wrong. Including me: sorry guys and gals, it took me a while to eventually come around and devote testing time to this.


The question, of course, is whether anyone else but me will know this, after this thread gets pushed down into page 42 with all the Issue 7 threads.

[/ QUOTE ]

this wasn't always the case. I've noticed lucks diminishing in effectiveness after i4. I used to be able to pop 4 lucks as a blaster and go to town without fear. Now I pop 2 with my brute who's EA and a lot get's through.

Am I upset? Sort of. See the amount of protection lucks provide is still "enough" Especially now with the defense changes. Heck it actually put's them in balance really.

but..... it's another [censored] stealth nerf from the people you can trust.....

Take mog

Heh..... ask any fire/fire blaster. you'd be suprised what you can do without a secondary.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, you left out defiance.

[/ QUOTE ]

muwghahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahah ahahahahah *gasp* bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah*wheeze*ha hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...

man that's a good one. I wish the dev's had left it out.

No... it was gimped back then too. I keep hearing people go "it's great when you have a tank.... a controller.... a blah blah."

If a set's effectiveness Is predicated on having another PATICULAR AT around...and then one must assume that said archetyoe is slotted well and knows what the [censored] they're doing...(rarer than you think) then it's gimped. Sure you might go empaths and forcers need blah blah.... but those AT's are team focused and bring a lot to any team. I've never seen a PuG go wait.... we gotta get a fire/fire blaster before we start.

Not paticularly needed on teams..... and relegated to none boss targets untill level 43 or so when you can get a decent hold slotted up.... gimp. If there was ever a time when it wasn't gimped it was that small sliver of time where the blaster version of burn had status protection. DECIDELY not gimped.

Oh and by the way... those travel powers.

superjump is miles better than that kinetics power that mimics it.

and siphon speed.... see here's the problem with it. it can miss, draws aggro.... and while it gives you comparable speed to superspeed it gives you none of the stealth. making it potentially dangerous to the user. Don't get me wrong... nice powers... but not real replacements for travel powers.

I'm not even going to question you math.... because Simply put... I don't care. But if I were you I'd avoid public displays of how "geat" a power combo is. You're attracting the nerf happy goons who run this game. Now scrap all this talk of defenders almost reaching blaster damage levels and get back to bashing vigilance.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Are we finally going to see some Blaster fixes after I7?

[/ QUOTE ]

Fixes, yes. Complete redesigns of several powers and/or powersets, no. Unfortunately, what a lot of you are looking for is the later.

I'm (ever so slowly) going through the list you guys put up a while ago. I've referred a couple things to animation for bug fixes. Many things, I'm still scratching my head of how to fix in such a way that they are useful -- snipes are a good example of this. Simply increasing the base damage is dangerous, and we can't make it exempt from ED. So, I'm thinking of workarounds, which I will toss upstairs once fleshed out. Then, if it is approved, I'll be able to make the changes.

That process happens with each and every change (read: not a bug fix) I do.

EDIT: Adding a couple things.
I put in a fix for Endurance Drain that I think you guys will like. It is in I7, because it was a huge amount of data changes.

As for changing secondaries, when I was interviewing for this position over a year ago, this was the thing I mentioned I wanted to 'fix.' It's still something I want to do, but there are a couple technical and design philosophy problems to overcome. The design philosphy isn't easy to change, but it's hardly in the realm of impossibility. The tech side, though, is very much non-trivial. Since I've no control over programming schedules (for good reason, I might add) it is something I cannot do much of anything about.

FYI: my first COH character on Live was (is) a Fire/Fire Blaster.

[/ QUOTE ]


*falls over*

*reads it again still in shock*

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't get too excited. in fact.... I don't see any reason to get excited at all.

sometime after i7. could mean sometime after i8
i9
i10
ii11
1i2

[censored] never.

believe it when you see it.

Pft.... they'll NEVER get tankers right. might as well give it up. Of all the AT's tankers have been tweaked the most. All they really need is an upward adjustment of the defense/resist numbers they got handed in i5. In fact they should just roll the damn things back, ED was enough of a gutting.

but they won't....

Oh and by the way..... not to sound ungrateful.

We've been made to put up with your endurance adjustments for weeks now... and you got a fix coming in i7.... that's nice. would it have been too much to ask you guys to roll back those changes untill i7 instead of making us put up with this garbage for so long?

Always looking out for the players. That's what I love about you guys.

Oh and btw.... I don't believe for one second that the sideways NERF to energy drain was "an unintended consequence." I can live with the changes but once again this sounds like you guys "spinning" when most players would have accepted a much simpler explanation. Personally knocking a boss down to nil endurance with 2 powers was a bit much.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Are we finally going to see some Blaster fixes after I7?

[/ QUOTE ]

Fixes, yes. Complete redesigns of several powers and/or powersets, no. Unfortunately, what a lot of you are looking for is the later.

I'm (ever so slowly) going through the list you guys put up a while ago. I've referred a couple things to animation for bug fixes. Many things, I'm still scratching my head of how to fix in such a way that they are useful -- snipes are a good example of this. Simply increasing the base damage is dangerous, and we can't make it exempt from ED. So, I'm thinking of workarounds, which I will toss upstairs once fleshed out. Then, if it is approved, I'll be able to make the changes.

That process happens with each and every change (read: not a bug fix) I do.

EDIT: Adding a couple things.
I put in a fix for Endurance Drain that I think you guys will like. It is in I7, because it was a huge amount of data changes.

As for changing secondaries, when I was interviewing for this position over a year ago, this was the thing I mentioned I wanted to 'fix.' It's still something I want to do, but there are a couple technical and design philosophy problems to overcome. The design philosphy isn't easy to change, but it's hardly in the realm of impossibility. The tech side, though, is very much non-trivial. Since I've no control over programming schedules (for good reason, I might add) it is something I cannot do much of anything about.

FYI: my first COH character on Live was (is) a Fire/Fire Blaster.

[/ QUOTE ]

then you know that /fire is [censored] garbage. It's the absolute worst pile of garbage to ever grace the game. No disrespect.... but how you guys can give so much attention to claws.... which is used by classes with mitagation options beyond anything a blaster can manage while leaving /fire alone is beyond me. You get right down to it and concern for melee AT's trumps blasters every time. In fact..... we've been getting back burnered behind EVERYTHING. Some sets might get by with "tweaks" but /fire won't. for that matter devices has been largely neutered.

yeah. my regen scrapper NEVER get's mezzed. of course he's a lowbie.

As for my Invul scrapper I can pop unstoppable.... and wear unyielding... most Av's can't mez me then. It takes stacked mezzes from Malaise to even come close. that's AFTER the recent nerf. My blasters carry break frees into every mission or they simply die. Dosen't matter how much damage out put.... by the late game if a mezzer survives your alpha strike and you are at RANGE.... you either have a break-free or you're [censored] dead. It's actually safer to close with mezzers in the hope that they melee you instead of mezzing you. If you're lucky you got some stat effects of your own......

Melee types? I got 3 scrappers and a brute. turn on toggles... kill [censored] dead. carry inspires "just in case" not BECAUSE YOU'D BETTER. In fact blasters are the most vulnerable class in the game. They should out-damage every thing. And like Ohms said... it shouldn't even be [censored] close.

And i can hardly see how a blaster-defender team would fare any better than a scrapper/* team. Scrappers are simply a better investment for buffs. they already have defense, can't be shut down by simple mezzes have way more hit points and higher defense caps. They have the same damage caps, greater base damage and criticals. If I were a defender I know who' I'd fortify.... the freaking tank. The blaster would be in the back hoping for an occasional heal. As for overcoming weakenesses we do that all the damned time. All were asking is for low damaging sets to be brought up. AR-Elec_Archery...... they're [censored] sub-par especially with the risk that comes with using them. Claws is getting buffed and it's used by a class with defenses that are magnitudes higher than anything a blaster can manage.... Is that fair?

[censored] no.

[ QUOTE ]
Holy Redname-Post Necromancy, Batman! We're delving into this again?

Well, all I've got to say is that I expect them to get in some fixes to Blasters by I8. Issue 7 seems way too time-consuming for the devs even without adding extra fixes onto it, but I expect by Issue 8 they'll have enough time to fix stuff and add stuff COH side.

[/ QUOTE ]

keep dreaming arc. if we're lucky MAYBE they'll do soming about the reaming they gave energy drain. but then I'm not holding my breath on that either.

[ QUOTE ]
I went away from the computer to check on some CoV stuff and *wham* I received 5 or so PM's asking "what is the Blaster's role?"

Answer - Ranged damage. Now, the issue is more specifically - what does a Blaster do that a Scrapper can't already do? Or, even worse, is a Scrapper inherently "stronger" than a Blaster. We want each Archetype to have a well defined role, and part of our Scrapper testing is aimed directly at this.

Secondly, I have no intention of removing melee attacks - it's just a "perception" by some Blasters that some of the Secondary Sets aren't as useful as Devices or Energy Manipulation. This is a rather frequent refrain in PM's (and the occasional forum post). This is something that we should also explore...we want all the Secondary sets to be fun.

[/ QUOTE ]

A year later..... And meh. Let me guess... other priorites.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1. We're looking into the tweak to Endurance for mobs that's affected Endurance Drain abilities. Sorry about that!

[/ QUOTE ]

Gee. Thanks. Now unpimpslap my Electro-Blapper and the debt he's built up thanks to this "tweek" of yours.

[ QUOTE ]
2. We'll be putting in a check that prevents "one shotting"; if anything occurs within a fraction of second that brings a player from 100% Hit Points down to 0, we instead give the player 1% Hit Points.

[/ QUOTE ]

As an experianced Blaster, the difference between being one-shotted and one-volleyed isn't all that much. So I'm not exactly sure how much of a big whoop a 1% HP post-[censored]ing"bonus" will be. I guess that's to be seen.

[/ QUOTE ]Especially since most stalkers que up another attack as Assasin's strike activates. Honestly I don't know why people are [censored] about being one shotted. As a blaster I got used to it back i2. Don't like one shotting? don't pvp.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What kind of bizarro world do you live in? Did you read my post? Your own even intimates that you yourself are under the impression that he was aware that it was the wrong move and pushed it through anyway.


[/ QUOTE ]

No, it was a move that had to be made for other reasons that unfortunately affected endurance draining heroes and villains.

But, carry on. How would you like Statesman to rectify this situation? What would be better for you than a verbal apologize? 40 lashes?

[/ QUOTE ]

He can save his apologies. I reserve judgement until a fix is instituted. IF a fix is instituted. If one is I'll gladly clean and press Jack's cape.

After all he said he'd LOOK into the issue. He may very well say "working as inteded yadda yadda and get on with his life."

Love that new sig concern. Let me elucidate.

Fun is having your super-speed supressed everytime you attack. (just ask jack,)

Fun is watching your defiance meter max and then dying before you can even activate a power to take advantage of it (Just ask Jack.)

Fun is having powers that only accept on type of enhancement being gutted by ED (just ask Jack.)

Fun is having a secondary loaded with self rooting aggro monsters that only serve to make you light up real pretty before your puss is plastered all over the place. (just ask Jack.)

But mostly fun is having someone tell you that changes are coming as SOON AS MELEE IS FIXED. several releases later..... NADA. See cause they keep adding to that list of more important things to do.... like watching grass grow and releasing a CoV only i7 (and don't start. If you don't have cov installed you'll see no changes to your game with i7)

See it's all [censored] FUN FUN FUN.... because it's the world according to Jack and you DON'T KNOW JACK.

"We'll tell you when you're having fun" -Jack Emmert.

I'm not going to say anything negative to castle. He's new. My problem is with a certain bucket headed star spangled guy who posted here a year ago... promised changes, gave us so dismissable hit points, stripped our defenses, Slapped us with ED and Desperation to make up for it all.

You really can't blame people for being bitter.

I don't know what Castle CAN do. Look at i7.... all cov all the time. the dev's might consider coh a done deal with no need for changes. But at least someone with cryptic's ear will be reading our forum. Let's be considerate.

Fire blast issues.

Flares.

Activation and animation for a power that does so little damage isn't balanced. The long root often leads many fire blasters to skip this power altogether. this seriousl hinders the single target damage chain.

Fire secondary. I could write a damned book on what's wrong with it. Suffice to say that it's too loaded with DoT PBAoE's that have long root times and don't do enough front loaded damage considering where they work. NEAR MELEE. It's composed of mostly tanker powers and as far as I'm concerned they can have them.

Keep

Consume
Build up
FSC
Fire Sword

Relegate the rest of the set to the dung pile from whence it came.