Energy Transfer
By
Airhammer,
Posted on: 2010-09-04 10:23 in Archetypes and Powers General Discussion
Quote:
I would define king as highest DPS solo with SOs.|
Originally Posted by Talen Lee
How do you define king, though?
|
Right now EM isn't king at anything in any circumstances.
Quote:
Considering significant portion of energy melee's damage is coming from an attack that damages the user, as well as energy melee having arguably the worst AE damage of any melee set, there are a lot of people in these forums that have expressed exactly that in therms of single target damage. Even then, fiery melee would have significantly better AE damage and overall more efficient damage per endurance. I deliberately ignore the crackpots asking for large sums of AE damage.|
Originally Posted by Talen Lee
So Energy should outdamage fire?
|
While it's all nice and wonderful to simply place the attack set with the least mitigation as the set deserving the highest single target damage, one must weigh energy melee's damage it inflicts upon its own user against the benefit of disorients which, like most controls, don't always work.
Quote:
Might not be the job of your tank, but my tanks do damage also, thanks.
|
Originally Posted by Ultimo_
As a Tanker on a team, your job isn't to do damage.
|
Quote:
As do mine. However, I also don't expect the Blaster or Scrapper to hold back so I can get that KO Blow off. Their job is to do damage. My job is to let them do it safely. If I get to KO Blow a bad guy, it's gravy, not necessary. Again, on a team, I rarely even TRY to use it, because I know it takes time to animate. It's a waste of a high power attack on a weak foe. It's the same thing as using AOE attacks on one foe, or Nova on a foe with 3 health left. You have to be smart about how you use your powers. That's part of the game.
|
Originally Posted by Jetpack
Might not be the job of your tank, but my tanks do damage also, thanks.
|
Quote:
We argued about Energy Transfer before, and I still think ET needed the nerf it got... but, the point you make here is 100% correct all the same. Energy Melee as a set now *does* suck - I'm pretty sure I said otherwise to you previously, and I'm gonna admit being wrong. :P That said, I think Energy Transfer is not where we should be looking to fix the set.|
Originally Posted by Cyber_naut
The problem with EM is that it was balanced around the glorious power that was ET. Then they nerfed ET, and the overall weakness of the set became ridiculously apparent.
Now you have a set that has only one strength, single target damage. And that would be fine, except for two problems. One, there are other sets that have similar single target capabilities, and most, if not all, deliver that damage better in team environments. Two, these same sets that are on par with EM for single target capabilities, are far, far better than EM in terms of aoe capabilities. That is why EM is a badly underperforming set, and that is why the vast majority of knowledgeable players dislike the set and call for reforms. My biggest problem with the situation was why EM was nerfed. The dev responsible flat out posted in the discussion thread that a big reason for nerfing it was because in thread after thread, he saw players mocking other players for taking any other set except for EM. I recall this very clearly because it shocked me to think that a dev did not realize these thread reactions were only due to the fact EM was the only viable melee set for PVP, not because the set was a top performing PVE powerset. In PVE, even with the old ET, EM was subpar due to it's feeble aoe capabilities. Then to add insult to injury, they changed pvp (same dev responsible, same HORRIBLE results) to remove the advantages EM had in PVP in the first place. As far as fixing EM and making it a more competitive powerset, the devs could go one of two routes. If they want to have EM be the best single target type set, thats fine, but then it needs to be heads and shoulders above the competition, when the competition is already heads and shoulders above EM in terms of aoe ability. Simply returning ET to its former state would accomplish this, and EM would still be supbar in PVE because aoe ability is almost always more valuable in PVE due to the fact you are almost always fighting multiple enemies, and the value of aoe only grows with teaming. Or they could buff other powers to improve its single target output, preferable the faster hitting attacks. The other option is to boost EM's aoe capabilities. I would suggest some of the following. Make stun a more useful power by making it an aoe stun, maybe even add some damage. Or justify ET and TF's horribly slow animations and make them small cones or aoe's so that at least some of the targets they hit on teams are not dead before they land. It's a shame such a nice looking, and formerly popular powerset, is left in such a state of disarray where only a few players are left that still enjoy it, especially when it would not take much to restore the powerset to more competitive levels and satisfy a lot of disgruntled customers concerns. |
Given that you're partial to the set, I thought I'd run a couple ideas by you for input, since an in-game conversation about the set made me think about it. As a preface, I continue to think that Energy Transfer should remain exactly as it currently is.
What I do think should change is one or more of the following.
- Either Total Focus' animation time should be lowered to a level comparable to Knockout Blow (2.23s) since it does the same amount of damage, or it should be given AoE splash damage in the same fashion as Thunder Strike, as suggested by Techbot Alpha in this thread.
- Stun could get the same treatment as Clobber in War Mace and Cobra Strike in Martial Arts did. Clobber used to be a Stun clone, doing minimal damage with a 100% chance to stun; since War Mace was buffed, Clobber is now the highest ST damage attack in War Mace, and still has the 100% chance to stun. I think making Energy Melee's Stun a Clobber clone would be too much in light of the set also having Energy Transfer and Total Focus, but I think it probably should be brought up to Cobra Strike's level.
- Whirling Hands should probably be brought up to the level of Kinetic Melee's Burst if Total Focus doesn't get AoE splash.
Honestly, I think just making Stun into an actual damaging attack like Cobra Strike and making Whirling Hands more like Kinetic Melee's Burst would solve most of Energy Melee's viability problems. The set was designed as an ST champion, and it should retain this theme, IMHO. The Brute version honestly could stand to have its powers reordered alongside this, but this would likely violate the cottage rule. Nonetheless, I think an order like this would greatly improve the viability of the set through the leveling process:
- Barrage
- Energy Punch
- Bone Smasher
- Build Up
- Stun (changed to be like Cobra Strike)
- Taunt
- Whirling Hands (changed to be like Kinetic Melee Burst)
- Total Focus
- Energy Transfer
Quote:
I find your argument somewhat specious; energy is not only about attacks that do self-damage. One could just as easily say that ET pays HP to get a power to recharge faster, not to do more damage. |
Originally Posted by Dersk
Considering significant portion of energy melee's damage is coming from an attack that damages the user, as well as energy melee having arguably the worst AE damage of any melee set, there are a lot of people in these forums that have expressed exactly that in therms of single target damage. Even then, fiery melee would have significantly better AE damage and overall more efficient damage per endurance. I deliberately ignore the crackpots asking for large sums of AE damage.
While it's all nice and wonderful to simply place the attack set with the least mitigation as the set deserving the highest single target damage, one must weigh energy melee's damage it inflicts upon its own user against the benefit of disorients which, like most controls, don't always work. |
And 'it doesn't sometimes work' is not a great argument against the stuns as a design element. Fire's DoTs are random in their duration and damage, and even if they're not, sometimes fire gets resisted.
Quote:
Beyond the semantic point here, I'm not so sure what the value of this distinction is. It's 'more damage' in the form of a larger base damage, faster recharge, less endurance, or whatever metrics you wish to use... in exchange for hitpoints. In any situation where energy melee could or can outdamage any other melee attack set, it's doing so by sacrificing hitpoints. Take that out, and energy melee cannot outdamage fiery melee, and any changes to the activation or damage of energy transfer cannot change that.|
Originally Posted by Talen Lee
One could just as easily say that ET pays HP to get a power to recharge faster, not to do more damage.
|
Also, that's not so much my argument as it is the argument of "a lot of people in these forums" which I recall you seeing before. I try to avoid quoting that portion of the player in my attempts to remain free of rabies, but I know you know that stance.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Talen Lee
And 'it doesn't sometimes work' is not a great argument against the stuns as a design element. Fire's DoTs are random in their duration and damage, and even if they're not, sometimes fire gets resisted.
|
So, if the lack of mitigation is the explanation for insisting on giving fiery melee the 'best' damage, any single target damage advantage energy melee obtains over fiery melee while making use of energy melee shouldn't be viewed as a 'balance' problem or uncalled for per se. Sacrificing survivability for extra damage is not something that is monopolized by fire.
What would be clearly unbalacing is for energy melee to outperform fiery melee without energy transfer, and that isn't what's been offered.
I like to think that if the drawbacks of energy transfer are acceptable for the strengths of the power, any damage advantage obtained by its excessive use should inherently be acceptable because doing so also causes excessive penalties to be applied at the same time. If that's not true, then energy transfer needed a change to something other than the animation time, and still needs it.
I consider resists a red herring that continuously distract scrapper lovers who have never played a non smashing/lethal set. That should be an issue of content design, not powerset balance.
The issue I have is that there's an attitude that Energy Melee has to be the best at some form of damage to be seen as acceptable. It doesn't.
On the other hand, stunning is one of those mezzes that's rarely resisted. There's the forcefield drones produced by Hollow Point and Sky Raider Engineers, but beyond those guys, stuns are going to do the job against anyone (stuns are the hole for some 'hard to mez' types like high-level Fortunata, for example). Furthermore, EM can stack them up quickly (relatively so). I've seen bosses under those force fields stunned, thanks to an EM stalker - so it's hard for me to consider the stuns as 'bad.' Especially when considering my bias towards dominators and control archetypes.
(I actually, a long time ago, argued that EM, because of its long animations, should have its powers start recharging before the animations were done. I was argued down from that point, but it's closer to the 'recharge bonus' idea than other stuff.)
I think ET is a great power, even now. The fact it used to be greater is frustrating, sure, but that doesn't mean it deserves something because of the change. When I hear people saying things like 'EM was balanced around,' it seems a specious argument, because the set... wasn't. That's why it was changed.
Ah well. Some wounds run deep.
(I am a little sad that my genuinely helpful post to Ultimo was completely ignored. :\ )
Quote:
I don't think EM necessarily needs to be the best, but to me EM's biggest frustration is that it barely manages to put together even a functioning attack chain without heavy recharge slotting, since it only has 5 "regular" attacks (I'm not counting Whirling Hands here, but if I did, it wouldn't improve this comparison) and two of them are on 20 second recharges. Analysis shows the set's DPS with fairly standard slotting is higher than most sets, so DPS (at least on a single target) is not really a weakness of the set. I think it's mostly that other sets are more flexible in attack availability. Using Brute sets as a comparison:|
Originally Posted by Talen Lee
The issue I have is that there's an attitude that Energy Melee has to be the best at some form of damage to be seen as acceptable. It doesn't.
On the other hand, stunning is one of those mezzes that's rarely resisted. There's the forcefield drones produced by Hollow Point and Sky Raider Engineers, but beyond those guys, stuns are going to do the job against anyone (stuns are the hole for some 'hard to mez' types like high-level Fortunata, for example). Furthermore, EM can stack them up quickly (relatively so). I've seen bosses under those force fields stunned, thanks to an EM stalker - so it's hard for me to consider the stuns as 'bad.' Especially when considering my bias towards dominators and control archetypes. (I actually, a long time ago, argued that EM, because of its long animations, should have its powers start recharging before the animations were done. I was argued down from that point, but it's closer to the 'recharge bonus' idea than other stuff.) I think ET is a great power, even now. The fact it used to be greater is frustrating, sure, but that doesn't mean it deserves something because of the change. When I hear people saying things like 'EM was balanced around,' it seems a specious argument, because the set... wasn't. That's why it was changed. Ah well. Some wounds run deep. (I am a little sad that my genuinely helpful post to Ultimo was completely ignored. :\ ) |
Average recharges (all attacks): Dark Melee 8.4, Dual Blades 8.57, Claws 8.86, Kinetic Melee 9.67, Electric Melee 9.8 (no LR), Fiery Melee 9.86, Super Strength 10.33, War Mace 10.86, Battle Axe 11.14, Stone Melee 11, Energy Melee 12
Average recharges (ST only): Claws 5.4, Dual Blades 5.5, Fiery Melee 6.5, Super Strength 8.4, Battle Axe 8.5, Dark Melee 8.5, Kinetic Melee 8.6, Electric Melee 9, War Mace 9.5, Stone Melee 10.4, Energy Melee 11.6
Average animations (all attacks): Claws 1.48, Electric Melee 1.66 (no LR), Dark Melee 1.77, Kinetic Melee 1.77, Super Strength 1.77, Dual Blades 1.81, War Mace 1.84, Battle Axe 1.86, Fiery Melee 1.88, Stone Melee 1.9, Energy Melee 2.05
Average animations (ST only): Claws 1.13, Dark Melee 1.45, Dual Blades 1.47, War Mace 1.47, Battle Axe 1.5, Fiery Melee 1.57, Kinetic Melee 1.59, Stone Melee 1.61, Super Strength 1.7, Electric Melee 1.88, Energy Melee 1.93
Notice how Energy Melee is dead last in all four categories. THAT is what's wrong with Energy Melee - the set "feels" slow because most of the attacks take forever to recharge and are slow-animating so you feel like you're spending more time watching than playing. Unlike Kinetic Melee, this isn't a psychological effect.
Yes, but preferably not a set that used to be fast.
Part of the perception of Energy Melee is that ET used to be a really good attack, and part of it is that the set's not really good at anything except semi-reliably stacking mez, and that won't kill anything.
@macskull, @Not Mac | XBL: macskull | Steam: macskull | Skype: macskull
"One day we all may see each other elsewhere. In Tyria, in Azeroth. We may pass each other and never know it. And that's sad. But if nothing else, we'll still have Rhode Island."
"One day we all may see each other elsewhere. In Tyria, in Azeroth. We may pass each other and never know it. And that's sad. But if nothing else, we'll still have Rhode Island."
The set was only fast because of one attack, which was too fast. The set wasn't fast - one bugged power was fast.
Quote:
Now THAT is an interesting point. If that power had been the way it is when COH first introduced EM, would anyone have considered EM to be fast?|
Originally Posted by Talen Lee
The set was only fast because of one attack, which was too fast. The set wasn't fast - one bugged power was fast.
|
Meaning if the nerf to it had happened when the set was being made, or when Castle pointed it out during Statesman's time (and not left the set alone like that for 2 years) would anyone have considered that EM is the fastest set?
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
Quote:
The issue I have is the rare attitude that EM is ok because it is competitive in one area, single target ability, so it's ok that it vastly underperforms in other areas vs. the same competition. |
Originally Posted by Talen Lee
The issue I have is that there's an attitude that Energy Melee has to be the best at some form of damage to be seen as acceptable. It doesn't.
On the other hand, stunning is one of those mezzes that's rarely resisted. There's the forcefield drones produced by Hollow Point and Sky Raider Engineers, but beyond those guys, stuns are going to do the job against anyone (stuns are the hole for some 'hard to mez' types like high-level Fortunata, for example). Furthermore, EM can stack them up quickly (relatively so). I've seen bosses under those force fields stunned, thanks to an EM stalker - so it's hard for me to consider the stuns as 'bad.' Especially when considering my bias towards dominators and control archetypes. (I actually, a long time ago, argued that EM, because of its long animations, should have its powers start recharging before the animations were done. I was argued down from that point, but it's closer to the 'recharge bonus' idea than other stuff.) I think ET is a great power, even now. The fact it used to be greater is frustrating, sure, but that doesn't mean it deserves something because of the change. When I hear people saying things like 'EM was balanced around,' it seems a specious argument, because the set... wasn't. That's why it was changed. Ah well. Some wounds run deep. (I am a little sad that my genuinely helpful post to Ultimo was completely ignored. :\ ) |
There is no getting around the fact that a set that is on par with other sets in terms of single target ability, while being severely outclassed in aoe ability vs the same competing sets, is badly underpowered vs. this competition, and that is definitely not ok if you want a game with anything close to balance between competing powersets. That's why so many players complain about this powerset.
The reason people complain about ET specifically, is that it WAS a power that made up for the set's disadvantages, and allowed it to be the indisputed single target damage king, which made people ignore the fact that EM was still underperforming in almost every other way, including the more valuable aoe categories. It also gave EM users a power that was actually very effective on teams, due to the fact it was quick hitting, and hit like a truck. Now that the power strikes at the speed of a crippled slug, that effectiveness is severely lessened, as is the hard hitting aspect since, on teams, it's only really effective against bosses, eb's or av's, unless you enjoy mauling the recently deceased (and only hurting yourself, thanks to ET's 'overpowered' self damage...).
To touch on EM's mitigation, primarily single target stuns are decent if you primarily solo, but the more you team, and the bigger the team, the less valuable they become, and the more they are vastly overshadowed by sets with far superior aoe mitigation. I can't see any reasonable argument to support the idea that EM's mitigation is better than any competing powerset outside of fire melee, in fact I'd argue that only fire has worse overall mitigation than EM.
Which brings me to a question you posed in another post - should em do more single target damage than fire melee? Absolutely, due to the fact it is severely outclassed in aoe ability.
Quote:
Well, you said 'absolutely,' so I can't argue with that.
| Which brings me to a question you posed in another post - should em do more single target damage than fire melee? Absolutely, due to the fact it is severely outclassed in aoe ability. |
Quote:
Of course not, the perception would be that the set was pitifully slow, because it's best powers are... pitifully slow.|
Originally Posted by Aura_Familia
Now THAT is an interesting point. If that power had been the way it is when COH first introduced EM, would anyone have considered EM to be fast?
Meaning if the nerf to it had happened when the set was being made, or when Castle pointed it out during Statesman's time (and not left the set alone like that for 2 years) would anyone have considered that EM is the fastest set? |
The set was playable with one, fast, glorious power. Now that said power has been neutered, you're left with a set filled with mediocre to poor powers, which means it vastly underperforms vs the competition, which results in lots of players complaining about it, especially the ones who used to enjoy the set.
And even with a power that was certainly one of the best in the game, and on its OWN arguably 'overpowered', EM as a whole set did not overperform in overall pve performance (it did overperform in the old pvp format, but ironically, would not now with the new format, in fact old ET would do pitiful damage in pvp now...). Why? Because EM was more balanced then than it is now, because all of EM's mediocre to poor powers were balanced by one glorious power. Old ET would be 'too good' if you stuck it in another powerset that had more good to great powers than EM, but it worked in EM because EM as a whole was already underpowered.
That is why nerfing ET without proportionately buffing the rest of the set has left EM an underperforming MESS.
Quote:
Well thats a specious argument...
|
Originally Posted by Talen Lee
Well, you said 'absolutely,' so I can't argue with that.
|
While I'd like to see EM get something, I think you are overstating the animation drawback.
Quote:
Barrage, Energy Punch, and Bonesmasher are all fine attacks with respectable animations.|
Originally Posted by Cyber_naut
Of course not, the perception would be that the set was pitifully slow, because it's best powers are... pitifully slow.
|
Energy Transfer's animation time is well within reason compared to other similar attacks. Total Focus is on the long end, but other sets have their own long animations (Tremor, Thunderstrike, OTC, Combustion,etc.).
The ability to stun is pretty potent, IME. I know I get a lot of mileage out of it on my Stalker. The set was never great at AoE and its single target damage output is still spectacular. So relative to other sets, its still pretty much in the same place it always was. It was and is spectacular at single target damage. It was and is great at stunning foes. It was and is poor at AoE damage (although with Taunt and WH it is still decent at AoE aggro control).
It is interesting that Energy Melee and Dark Melee are the only two sets left with a single target control with low or no damage. Both sets lack AoE, both are good at single target damage, and both have gobs of control/utility.
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.
Quote:
Then the single target nature of the rest of the set needs to be brought up. I don't agree that it should be changed into something that's great at AOE, cause that was NEVER the point of the set.|
Originally Posted by Cyber_naut
Of course not, the perception would be that the set was pitifully slow, because it's best powers are... pitifully slow.
The set was playable with one, fast, glorious power. Now that said power has been neutered, you're left with a set filled with mediocre to poor powers, which means it vastly underperforms vs the competition, which results in lots of players complaining about it, especially the ones who used to enjoy the set. And even with a power that was certainly one of the best in the game, and on its OWN arguably 'overpowered', EM as a whole set did not overperform in overall pve performance (it did overperform in the old pvp format, but ironically, would not now with the new format, in fact old ET would do pitiful damage in pvp now...). Why? Because EM was more balanced then than it is now, because all of EM's mediocre to poor powers were balanced by one glorious power. Old ET would be 'too good' if you stuck it in another powerset that had more good to great powers than EM, but it worked in EM because EM as a whole was already underpowered. That is why nerfing ET without proportionately buffing the rest of the set has left EM an underperforming MESS. |
EDIT: I also don't agree that all of EM's powers are mediocre especially with it's secondary mitigation. Stun IS very potent as a mitigation factor.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
Quote:
And I think the utility/control of the set could be brought up instead because that's the other thing the set is good at. As is, the damage is nice already. That it isn't AoE is only a hindrance if that's what you've come to expect for every set you play.
|
Originally Posted by Aura_Familia
Then the single target nature of the rest of the set needs to be brought up. I don't agree that it should be changed into something that's great at AOE, cause that was NEVER the point of the set.
EDIT: I also don't agree that all of EM's powers are mediocre especially with it's secondary mitigation. Stun IS very potent as a mitigation factor. |
Quote:
I like your idea of making Stun a targeted AoE mag 2 disorient, with a very small radius of an additional 1 mag (so it can hit the "main" target with a mag 3). The idea also has the advantage that it seems like it would be appropriate for all the ATs that get Stun.
|
Originally Posted by Leo_G
And I think the utility/control of the set could be brought up instead because that's the other thing the set is good at. As is, the damage is nice already. That it isn't AoE is only a hindrance if that's what you've come to expect for every set you play.
|
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.
Quote:
Superstrength is the melee AT AoE damage king because of one attack. It has 3 aoe's, but 2 dont do damage. So while I get what you are saying, it doesnt hold much weight. One power can definitely define the set. In fact, most sets are defined by one or two powers. |
Originally Posted by Talen Lee
The set was only fast because of one attack, which was too fast. The set wasn't fast - one bugged power was fast.
|
And taking that set defining power and taking away its most beneficial part changes the whole sets play. Unless you dont use the power...
Boy, I kicked at a hornet's nest, didn't I?
How do you define king, though?
King in extreme IO circumstances?
King when buffed?
King solo?
King teamed?
For what it's worth, just a history note for people; the note that led to the fix on ET was submitted by Castle to GEKO. Ie, back when Statesman was around. It happened over two years after States left. the problem had nothing to do with proliferation, it had nothing to do with PVP, it was just that the individual power's DPA was completely out of whack with what the powers guy's rules said was reasonable.
(Dates rough)