Quote:
Mez defense?
|
Originally Posted by Miladys_Knight
mez defense
|
Quote:
As Miladys is describing it, "mez defense" in her post is effectively a mez saving throw. If an attack hits, you roll against this new mez defense to see if the mez actually takes effect.|
Originally Posted by Hatred666
Mez defense?
|
Its a way to gain mez avoidance without automatically getting damage avoidance simultaneously, presumably to allow for granting significant amounts of it to squishies without having to automatically add significant amounts of damage avoidance (i.e. conventional defense).
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
I see.
Quote:
I think you're being a little misunderstood, in the heat of this thread/topic... partly because of the way you worded a few of your comments, but mostly because I think you are mainly responding/reacting to some of the extreme (even over the top) suggestions that people who are not enjoying the current Blaster have offered.|
Originally Posted by Alekhine
I'll admit, there could be some tweaks made to the AT. But, some of what I read on this forum are ideas for a complete AT overhaul. A complete revamp of the AT, is just unnecessary. |
And I think you made it clear that you were responding to the extremes... and extreme overhaul of how and what the Blaster is today is obviously unattractive to those of us who do enjoy the Blaster today.
An overhaul of the likes of completely altering their Secondaries concerns those of us who enjoy them today.
Many of us, who love Blasters, are here, agreeing and helping and contributing to the discussion of how to improve Blasters.
So, we have respect for those who aren't enjoying them. Have some respect for us and don't suggest that they scrap what we love so that you can love it.
Plenty of reasonable suggestions are being offered to keep Blasters what they are and improve them for more people to love them.
Anyway, I get what you were saying, Alekhine, and I feel the same way.
I'm not the only one who has been saying that a number of things including increased damage modifiers, improved damage for chains through Snipe and Nuke changes and possibly some more power alterations (just to provide a bit more damage from them, nothing that'll change them drastically), maybe some mez effects added in where can be and then add in some further survivability as needed to balance it out nicely (and how to accomplish that is the main question, really).
Anyway, Arcanaville is on the same page... as are many people who are otherwise disagreeing with each other, hehe.
As someone who does enjoy Blasters and loves the playstyle they have today... I do also believe they can be improved.
I'm a little more convinced of that since upping my difficulty, to see what it was like, as well.
I usually play at +0 x1 or 2... And I enjoy that very much (so, no, I'm not really some uber gamer that enjoys playing the "gimp").
mini-ramble:
People putting their difficulty up and soloing as Blaster and complaining about how much they die... Look, I get it that they should be able to handle the same group sizes as other ATs. I agree with that. However, I just take issue when people say the Blaster is a complete joke and CANNOT be played successfully. Only if you insist on upping the difficulty beyond what they (with you controlling them) can currently handle. While I agree that balance should exist (on an easier playing scale), that's not going to change by making your difficulty as high as your Scrappers can handle when you solo your Blaster.
I mean, it's just a bit thick, to me, to continue to keep your difficulty higher than you can handle, just because they SHOULD be able to handle it.
I have no problem with asking the Devs to improve them, but until they do, keep your difficulty at a setting that won't get you defeated and make you throw your arms up and proclaim that Blasters are useless.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Alekhine
Hop and pop, move and groove! Positioning goes a long way. If you want to be stationary and slug it out, perhaps blaster is the wrong AT choice.
|
It is just a matter of finding the design balance to keep this and make the AT attractive to those that aren't quite as interested in this playstyle.
I mean, they could drastically alter the Blaster so that we no longer have that same feel... I seriously hope not and I will test and give whatever feedback I can to help avoid that while making it fun for more people at the same time.
I'm all for more people enjoying the Blaster, but I certainly hope it doesn't come at the cost of the AT and playstyle that led me to stick with this game for all these years. I honestly do not think it will come to that. The designers are not going to have the same attitude as some of the extreme Blaster bashing forum posters.
However, I do hope that those same posters enjoy the improved Blaster if/when it comes.
@Zethustra
"Now at midnight all the agents and the superhuman crew come out
and round up everyone that knows more than they do"-Dylan
and round up everyone that knows more than they do"-Dylan
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Alekhine
I have never had a problem in getting a blaster to 50. There were and still are plenty of ways to survive long before the incarnate system. Hmm, and slot up for mad defense? I guess that is popular. But, I can tell you my favorite blaster has negligible defensive numbers. Hop and pop, move and groove! Positioning goes a long way. If you want to be stationary and slug it out, perhaps blaster is the wrong AT choice.
|
Every time you fire an offensive Power, you get rooted for the span of the animation. Being 'stationary' while activating powers isn't a choice, it's required.
Scenario: I 'hop' out and 'pop' off my main attack at a Boss target who is accompanied by a Minion. After 2 attacks at the Boss he returns fire, along with his sidekick. If those attacks Mez then I'm done. Not every set can easily stack Boss-level Magnitude Holds.
Now if they took the Root component off of powers that's a whole different issue...
"Comics, you're not a Mastermind...you're an Overlord!"
Quote:
As Arcanaville is female, Miladys_Knight is male. (As in I am My Lady's Knight, I am @grandpa squeak on line. My wife is @grandma squeak)|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
As Miladys is describing it, "mez defense" in her post is effectively a mez saving throw. If an attack hits, you roll against this new mez defense to see if the mez actually takes effect.
Its a way to gain mez avoidance without automatically getting damage avoidance simultaneously, presumably to allow for granting significant amounts of it to squishies without having to automatically add significant amounts of damage avoidance (i.e. conventional defense). |
Kind of the idea. I may have not stated it well but it does that, and it gives the devs tools to balance how much mez (and how long) it affects each arch type based on how the devs wish to do it. It gives tools to balance being mezzed much like defense and resistance do for incoming damage.
The other beauty of this system is that many defenders would feel useful again as EVERYONE, regardless of AT, would be at least slightly vulnerable to mez and no one would be entirely immune making mez a real threat to all arch types and making mez mitigation buffs valuable for everyone. (That break free that has sat in the lower right corner of the tank's inspiration tray for 6+ weeks might actually get used.)
It would make mez more of a curve on a global graph instead of a line.
-Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein.
-I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo Galilei
-When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty. - Thomas Jefferson
Quote:
Alright, maybe having some of the attacks not root would be something to look into. But, even with them rooting, it still allows for plenty of movement after the animation. The powers don't take that long to animate. As far as getting mezzed means you are 'done' I have not had that experience. Sure it happens sometimes, but nothing to worry about. Are you talking soloing here or teaming? Either way, getting mezzed does not = insta-death.
|
Originally Posted by Comicsluvr
Every time you fire an offensive Power, you get rooted for the span of the animation. Being 'stationary' while activating powers isn't a choice, it's required.
Scenario: I 'hop' out and 'pop' off my main attack at a Boss target who is accompanied by a Minion. After 2 attacks at the Boss he returns fire, along with his sidekick. If those attacks Mez then I'm done. Not every set can easily stack Boss-level Magnitude Holds. Now if they took the Root component off of powers that's a whole different issue... |
Quote:
It does on -1/x8
|
Originally Posted by Alekhine
Alright, maybe having some of the attacks not root would be something to look into. But, even with them rooting, it still allows for plenty of movement after the animation. The powers don't take that long to animate. As far as getting mezzed means you are 'done' I have not had that experience. Sure it happens sometimes, but nothing to worry about. Are you talking soloing here or teaming? Either way, getting mezzed does not = insta-death.
|
Quote:
I sort of like the idea of the T1/T2 being themselves producers of the mez resistance/protection. Or give them, say, a stacking chance to create a break-free-like effect when used while mezzed. So you're never simply immune to mez, but if you do get mezzed, you have a way out.
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Stacking mez resistance that builds with attacking, so it shortens mez, was an idea I liked better (and it is fully compatible with both D2.0 and my separate idea of counter-mez).
|
Quote:
Really? What level are you when you are playing at -1/x8?|
Originally Posted by Tater Todd
It does on -1/x8
|
If this is solo, and you playing at x8. Inspirations should be dropping quite frequently.
If you have teammates, it shouldn't be a problem at all.
Either way, once again, it is certainly not insta-death.
Quote:
Everyone else is scared to discuss this because they are afraid to be pointed at and laughed at but I'm going to throw myself on the tracks lol.|
Originally Posted by Alekhine
Really? What level are you when you are playing at -1/x8?
If this is solo, and you playing at x8. Inspirations should be dropping quite frequently. If you have teammates, it shouldn't be a problem at all. Either way, once again, it is certainly not insta-death. |
Please Imagine this being read to you by William Shatner.
Start scene. Action!
Level 50 Rad/Fire Blaster. Fighting Council. I normally chew on some Lucks or Break Frees but lets just say that I'm out of both. I have Frozen Armor going. I hit Aim and Build Up. I jump into melee with Hot Feet running and then I start my PBAOE Combo of doom. I get hit by mezz and an attack from one or two Vampyri. Hot Feet Toggles off...for a a second or two I'm helpless. I finally wake up and try to chew on a green...but Now every warwolf in the group is more than ticked off and I get bombarded with 4+ Hurls all flying towards me at the same time. I Crumple over.
End Scene. Cut!
Now most of the time when this happens I have a green or an orange I can chew on to keep me barely alive but I have to be quick because Warwolves are fast and they are INFAMOUS for interrupting you when you're trying to activate hibernoate. I find that he best solution is to run for the hills so you can rest and reengage.
Now this scenario BARELY happens if my blaster is built for defense. With high defense and purples handy the Mezzes never touch you so there's not much to worry about (unless you run out of inspirations or up the diff level)...but if you can't slot IO's or afford a decent Defense build...you're stuck.
I've only have this problem with Blappers. My range blasters have a better chance of survival since they can Blast from afar, retreat, wait and then finish the rest off.
__________
On teams a blapper is walking on thin ice because a destructive Blapper can easily out Tank a Tanker or Brute due to AOE damage output. That's a problem because at -1/x8 you had a chance of somehow surviving an alpha but most teams play on +1 or higher so you're going to faceplant A LOT unless you have a good Tabker and you're really skilled at jumping in, Nuking and running around the corner before they get a hit or mezz in.
Some would say "Well Todd why Play a Blapper at all?" Well, because I like the carnage and the destruction but I don't think that a Blapper has enough trade off compared to a ranged Blaster. Also almost all of the Blaster Secondaries are Melee oriented so you're forced to do some Blapping if you want to use those powers.
Quote:
I think we can all agree that blasters can be improved in some way that doesn't make them more similar to another archetype. I've thought of a lot of rather extreme measures (that I've been hesitant to share on the forums because of how extreme they are) that nevertheless wouldn't remove any playstyle options and would incorporate no elements currently being used by another archetype.
|
Originally Posted by Alekhine
Like I said, I probably agree with you on some of the tweaks that could be made. But, a complete overhaul on what a blaster currently has both primary and secondary. I could never be in favor of that. Just because, there are already options, other ATs, that can give you more of what you may be looking for.
|
Quote:
The only time you can steal aggro from a brute or tank is when they don't even bother trying to get aggro because they are used to the whole team not needing anyone to tank for them. Even then I can't see it (And never have), unless you are talking about the adds over the aggro cap or when you get to a mob first, but that isn't aggro to steal, just there to claim.|
Originally Posted by Tater Todd
On teams a blapper is walking on thin ice because a destructive Blapper can easily out Tank a Tanker or Brute due to AOE damage output. That's a problem because at -1/x8 you had a chance of somehow surviving an alpha but most teams play on +1 or higher so you're going to faceplant A LOT unless you have a good Tabker and you're really skilled at jumping in, Nuking and running around the corner before they get a hit or mezz in.
|
This really seems like one of those 'blasters already do lots of damage' claims, but they actually don't (The brute you can't steal aggro from for example will likely be out damaging you) even if you don't have to worry about death.
Princess Darkstar - Proud Member of the Handprints of Union, the #1 ranked SG in Europe!
British by act of union, English by grace of God, Northern by pure good fortune!
British by act of union, English by grace of God, Northern by pure good fortune!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Aggelakis
PrincessDarkstar: "RAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGHHHHHHHHHH SOMEONE IS *WRONG* ON THE INTERNET!"
|
I disagree. It's very easy to get aggro off of a tank or brute if you're using the right blaster combination and they have the right attack set. Taunting maxes at 5 targets per use, and it isn't an absolute, it's just a factor in the aggro calculations that also include number of times affected by your powers and damage done. As an extreme example, if the blaster has a lot of attacks that can hit 16 targets while the tanker/brute only has taunt and PBAoEs that cap at 5 targets, the blaster will need to watch what they do.
Quote:
Not trying to force or shoehorn the idea, if it does not work it does not work, but my idea is not make blasters "pay" for it, my goal is just to make mez less binary without eliminating it. (If I was able to do that for the entire game I would, specially for big raid/boss content)|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
The main problem I have with this suggestion is that it seems to be making the concession that blasters shouldn't really have mez protection, and so the penalty is intended to try to balance the scales by making the blaster pay for it.
|
I do agree with a more active approach, that’s why I recommended a click instead of a passive that automatically did the job, blaster survivability is usually the result of actions (other than secondary effects a result of their secondary set utility powers.)
With unlimited resources and development time and unknown engine capabilities (I know a lot has changed since I last poked under the hood) how would this sound:
Mez "don't affect blasters" inherent.
Passive power.
Give blasters a "fury bar" that goes up only based off offense (like doms).
The higher the fury bar is, the higher the magnitude of mez you can ignore, with, let’s say a max of 12 mag.
However, if you are affected by a percentage of that mag hold, you will be penalized with a damage debuff. The debuff will be fixed and a percentage of the current max.
Example: Furry bar at 8mag stun protection and you get stunned mag 4, you get 50% of the damage debuf. If you are at mag 12, that same 4 mag stun will result only in 33% of the max mez damage debuff. (not sure if I'm explaining this clearly enough.)
Perhaps up to a max of -60% damage debuff (although should you hit that max you likely also get mezzed since the prot will be overwhelm.)
Goal is that your mez protections are feed by your offensive actions, but mez is not entirely ignored.
Why I insist on not entirely ignoring mez? It has come up many times over this thread. Mez is becoming more and more often a bypassable thing. Eventually this may either lead to making mez useless or the devs may feel forced to ramp up mez to a point where we back to the start.
Quote:
| Paying for it by paying a damage penalty would present this question: what if the penalty caused blasters to underperform? |
Quote:
| You have an archetype that is strongly suspected of underperforming. So you give it something, and penalize it in another way. What's the rationale of penalizing an underperforming archetype? |
Quote:
| The secondary problem I have is that the damage debuff cost works in the opposite way I would want it to work in terms of who it affects. Lower level players, and players that do not build strongly, will tend to eat that penalty more than aggressive |
Quote:
In my experience, I die on my blasters more often than not because I can't act. Mainly: because I can't move.|
Originally Posted by Another_Fan
Never really been away from it. The question is how much does lack of status protection hurt blasters vs how much lack of X* hurts blasters vs how much does improperly designed powersets hurt blasters.
It's really important to get this right because having it wrong will mean all that happens is the Devs get a good laugh out of it. *X = lack of secondary effects , controls, heals, hitpoints any of the other theories that aren't "THE ONLY THEORY THAT EXPLAINS IT ALL" |
With a melee character, If I find myself in a bind, I can run around easily and use the world to my advantage, block line of sight to rest (more possible mostly in teams) or simply be able to take an inspiration.
With a blaster, if I'm in a bind I tend to be darn too binded (mezed) not even able to swallow an inspiration other than a break-free one (and it is too slow to use that just so you can take a heal.)
I think I agree with Arcana that Mez is a huge issue for blasters, not because she says so but because it correlates with my experience with blasters. (BTW there may also be a HUGE issue with Nova-type powers too, they are irresistible to use, and may as well come with a self-destruct label.)
Even with limited damage, if I was able to maneuver and use attacks secondary effects while affected by mez (up to certain realistic point) I would die way less (maybe I personally would die less often than I do with a scrapper.)
I think your hope is about redesigning every secondary or primary to have more useful effects. Although some sets may need help, I dont think that [redesigning every power set to accommodate these tools] would be a realistic project.
With regard to your 'Damage output = Mez protection' idea Starsman, what about movement? As you stated above it's not just not being able to attack while mezzed but also being rooted to the spot that often deals Blasters in. I like your idea but I wonder if you intend to include any sort of 'move while mezzed' capability?
"Comics, you're not a Mastermind...you're an Overlord!"
Quote:
All the versions of what I brainstorm above would grant the blaster up to Mag 12 protection to all control effects but knockback. This would include immob.|
Originally Posted by Comicsluvr
With regard to your 'Damage output = Mez protection' idea Starsman, what about movement? As you stated above it's not just not being able to attack while mezzed but also being rooted to the spot that often deals Blasters in. I like your idea but I wonder if you intend to include any sort of 'move while mezzed' capability?
|
As for knockback... I sort of would love it personally if we were able to amplify the knockback instead of reduce it. It would never be an option because most people would hate it (it also may mess with Acrobatics low protection) but should I be knocked back, I personally rather be sent far than fall on the toes of my foe. Too many would see it as a nerf so it is not an option.
BTW: I been on and off (with bigger offs than ons) for almost/over 2 years now. The forums seem to have gotten worse instead than better at keeping me logged in. I am constantly having to re-log-in while browsing this place. What gives???
Quote:
I can also steal aggro with my Dominator, Corr and Controller. I assure you that it is possible.
|
Originally Posted by PrincessDarkstar
The only time you can steal aggro from a brute or tank is when they don't even bother trying to get aggro because they are used to the whole team not needing anyone to tank for them. Even then I can't see it (And never have), unless you are talking about the adds over the aggro cap or when you get to a mob first, but that isn't aggro to steal, just there to claim.
This really seems like one of those 'blasters already do lots of damage' claims, but they actually don't (The brute you can't steal aggro from for example will likely be out damaging you) even if you don't have to worry about death. |
Quote:
In discussions about aggro, it seems one thing not everyone fully appreciates is that in a sense tankers don't just "get aggro." There are actually three "classes" of aggro that a tanker can acquire. The first are "strongly aggroed" targets. These are targets that are taunted and damaged by the tanker - targets the tanker is directly attacking. These targets are extremely difficult to yank aggro away from; virtually impossible with someone that doesn't have taunt themselves. However, there is a second class of targets that a tanker can have aggroed, "loosely aggroed" targets. These are targets that the tanker has taunted but has not directly attacked with significant damage. Because taunt is a multiplier on hate generated by damage (and other effects) even though these things are taunted it is possible to yank aggro away from them, although its still not easy.|
Originally Posted by PrincessDarkstar
The only time you can steal aggro from a brute or tank is when they don't even bother trying to get aggro because they are used to the whole team not needing anyone to tank for them. Even then I can't see it (And never have), unless you are talking about the adds over the aggro cap or when you get to a mob first, but that isn't aggro to steal, just there to claim.
This really seems like one of those 'blasters already do lots of damage' claims, but they actually don't (The brute you can't steal aggro from for example will likely be out damaging you) even if you don't have to worry about death. |
And there is actually a third class of critter besides these two: targets that happen to be aggred on the tanker because the tanker just happens to be nearby, but are otherwise not affected by any effect that deliberately locks aggro to the tanker. If a tanker jumps into the middle of a wide spawn and attacks something, they will aggro the spawn itself: an alarm will go off and everything will want to attack the group. Most of them will attack the tanker because the tanker just happens to be the closest target (up to the aggro cap). Some of them will be taunted, but not damaged by the tanker. And some will be taunted and damaged by the tanker.
Yanking aggro from that last group will be essentially impossible. Yanking aggro from the second group will be almost impossible, but possible for things with taunt (like brutes or other tankers). Yanking aggro from the first group will be trivially easy, and involve basically shooting at them in any way.
Because of this, its entirely possible to see a critter shooting at a tanker, and then switch to another player when that player shoots at the critter. But whether this is correctly described as "stealing aggro" or not is a questionable matter. Its more correct to say that just because you see it shooting at the tanker, doesn't mean the tanker has established a lock on aggro on that critter yet.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
To the people who are commenting on playing "higher than the Blaster can handle" and suggesting -1/x8 and things like that:
* If it's not your team, you don't get to set the difficulty.
* If it IS your team, and the rest of the team is underchallenged, they will get bored and leave.
* I haven't checked this for years, but +1 gives [or gave] twice the XP/inf of -1 . Level -1 slows you down- and everyone else down- just as much as permadebt, compared to a "fairly normal" +1 difficulty. You're punishing people for teaming with you.
* x8 will not increase the "virtual team size" beyond 8, so for a 6-person team x8 looks just like x3 .
In short, -1/x8 is not much of a solution in most cases.
Last, I would like to make a point that may come out more hostile than I wanted. I have played and enjoyed several "understrength" characters- I am a huge fan of Force Fields, for pity's sake. That does not mean I require everyone else to share my enjoyment. That does not mean I pretend my characters are NOT understrength.
The worst of the original five AT's, eight years later, is now the worst of fourteen AT's. By a large amount. Not "one or two powersets"- all sets. A few combinations of primary and secondary are much more survivable than other Blasters. Still worse than other AT's, but closer to acceptable.
One powerset had a moment of bugged excellence in issue 1, when Smoke Grenade was self-stacking and gave -50% To Hit, but after that it's never been the same. ("City of Blasters"- yeah, it was, for about four months. SS/Inv tanks lasted longer than that.)
Mini-guides: Force Field Defenders, Blasters, Market Self-Defense, Frankenslotting.
So you think you're a hero, huh.
@Boltcutter in game.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
If a tanker jumps into the middle of a wide spawn and attacks something, they will aggro the spawn itself: an alarm will go off and everything will want to attack the group. Most of them will attack the tanker because the tanker just happens to be the closest target (up to the aggro cap). Some of them will be taunted, but not damaged by the tanker. And some will be taunted and damaged by the tanker.
Yanking aggro from that last group will be essentially impossible. Yanking aggro from the second group will be almost impossible, but possible for things with taunt (like brutes or other tankers). Yanking aggro from the first group will be trivially easy, and involve basically shooting at them in any way. Because of this, its entirely possible to see a critter shooting at a tanker, and then switch to another player when that player shoots at the critter. But whether this is correctly described as "stealing aggro" or not is a questionable matter. Its more correct to say that just because you see it shooting at the tanker, doesn't mean the tanker has established a lock on aggro on that critter yet. |
Well this explains a lot. I always take the damage shields on Brutes and Tanks. I often slot them for extra Taunt which (correct me if I'm wrong) affects the duration but not the magnitude. This explains how my Tank can get aggro-stripped even with all the extra Taunt: Not ALL of the critters are locked. 5 likely are (attacked AND Taunted), some others might be (hit with an AoE but not Taunted) and the rest are just milling around waiting get distracted.
"Comics, you're not a Mastermind...you're an Overlord!"
Like most people have mentioned, the main problem with Blasters are their secondaries. The powers just don't support a primary ranged AT. IMO, Blasters should be the opposite of Dominators. Dominators are a control primary with a mixed secondary of range and melee. Blasters, with their range primary, should have a secondary of control and melee. When I say control, I mean actual hard controls; holds, stuns. Not sleeps and fears.
Obviously the powers in Blaster secondaries cannot just be removed and replaced after how long they have been in the game. The so called "cottage rule". My idea would be to give Blasters multiple power options per tier in the secondaries. So if a /fire Blaster wants to switch out Blazing Aura for another power option within the same tier, he can. At the same time, another /fire Blaster with Blazing Aura who loves it is not forced to lose it. This would also ad a unique feature to Blasters, since no other AT has the option of different power picks within the same power tier.
I would leave the inherent the way it is, but also add an existing mechanic like domination. Instead of an increase to contol powers, the Blasters version would add a 50%-100% damage buff, endurancy recovery buff, and also adding temporary status protection just like the Dominators counterpart.
Quote:
The reason why I'm not currently advocating a rebalance of blaster secondaries specifically to address their current issues is because the secondaries are all dissimilar from each other and clearly aren't just missing some singular obvious thing that would help the entire archetype. Addressing the secondaries would require individually adjusting each powerset separately which would take a lot of time.|
Originally Posted by Hatred666
Like most people have mentioned, the main problem with Blasters are their secondaries. The powers just don't support a primary ranged AT. IMO, Blasters should be the opposite of Dominators. Dominators are a control primary with a mixed secondary of range and melee. Blasters, with their range primary, should have a secondary of control and melee. When I say control, I mean actual hard controls; holds, stuns. Not sleeps and fears.
Obviously the powers in Blaster secondaries cannot just be removed and replaced after how long they have been in the game. The so called "cottage rule". My idea would be to give Blasters multiple power options per tier in the secondaries. So if a /fire Blaster wants to switch out Blazing Aura for another power option within the same tier, he can. At the same time, another /fire Blaster with Blazing Aura who loves it is not forced to lose it. This would also ad a unique feature to Blasters, since no other AT has the option of different power picks within the same power tier. I would leave the inherent the way it is, but also add an existing mechanic like domination. Instead of an increase to contol powers, the Blasters version would add a 50%-100% damage buff, endurancy recovery buff, and also adding temporary status protection just like the Dominators counterpart. |
If you're going to add a global anything to the archetype, you could add it to either the primary or the secondary (or both) but a simply addition won't fix the problems the secondaries have intrinsically. And if global additions can go anywhere, it makes more sense to add them to the primaries, because blasters tend to have more primary than secondary powers on average, and they unlock earlier in level progression.
(Nothing about my counter-mez idea bars it from being added to single target secondary attacks as well as primary attacks, but adding any such effect globally wouldn't act to better balance the secondaries against each other or improve some of their more glaring flaws: you'd still have to eventually revisit secondaries anyway).
This is not to say that I don't think a review of secondaries isn't waranted, just that its neither necessary nor sufficient to address blaster global issues, and would delay any change to blasters for an indefinite amount of time.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Hey Arcanaville, another random thought.
What if the devs gave blasters mag 12 mez protection while not suppressed and for the first 4-5 seconds after suppression occurs?
That would allow the blaster to unload their full alpha before being mezzed and would also kick in if the blaster were mezzed long enough to unsuppress again.
-Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein.
-I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo Galilei
-When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty. - Thomas Jefferson