test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

PTS Update 3/31 FC.16.20110330a.1

1246

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Regarding the whole Enrage/Focus thing. Their massive damage boost is also the reason a Guardian with AoPM passive can do nearly as much damage as a Brawler with WotW. They can take enrage, aspect of bestial, max their damage, and still have Dex SS for really big crits as well as great healing, not to mention the group support.

    I think a relatively easy way to deal with the whole offensive/defensive balance issues is to do the ole' switcheroo. Have Focus and Enrage stack up to 5 stacks max, meaning +75% base attack damage. Yes, this was already suggested, but not only that.

    On top of that, increase Offensive Passives' damage to reach +120% damage with really high SS. Say 275 in both.

    This will basically move a portion of damage from focus/enrage to the offensive passives. Brawlers will still do the same damage, Avengers will do better damage, as they should, and defensive and support characters that are built to stack up Enrage and Focus would do slightly less.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    The problem is not with Enrage/Focus.
    The problem is with offensive passives that are now lagging behind defensive passives.
    Enrage/Focus is fine as it is.

    You're focusing too much on raw numbers.
    Enrage requires that you have more than decent STR(an almost useless stat) and CON stats to be effective.
    Focus has a 20% chance to trigger in varying conditions.
    There's no need to nerf Enrage and Focus. While they give an advantage to builds that use them, the same builds need to sacrifice a lot of things to be able to use them effectively.
    Enrage requires powers, stats and advantages to maintain and stack it.
    Focus requires you to play a certain style. Building it up by dodge, crits or something else.
    You can't have it all, so you're forced to focus on one aspect to be effective, locking you to a certain playstyle(the same goes for Enrage in a way).


    A buff to offensive passives would be more than welcome. Bit without nerfing Focus/Enrage.
    It would encourage more variety in builds and playstyles.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    NikeOnline wrote:
    Then why is the "more skilled" player rewarded with tools that split the divide ever wider? ...

    Because without some sort of tangible reward the "more skilled" player will run the higher difficulty once or twice just to see if they can. After a run or two proving it's possible there is no reason to continue wasting time on a higher difficulty setting.

    ...at least that's how I see it, and how I play. Can I run elite mode? Yes. However, since there are no rewards left for me to collect from elite mode it's mostly left untouched.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    This is skill and derailment in the loosest definition, right?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    G0dSlay3r wrote:
    The problem is not with Enrage/Focus.
    The problem is with offensive passives that are now lagging behind defensive passives.
    Enrage/Focus is fine as it is. ...
    I disagree with your assessment.
    G0dSlay3r wrote:
    ...You're focusing too much on raw numbers. ...
    I focus on dps from parsed combat logs against my favorite test dummy, Kigatilik. However, it's easier to say numbers that everyone can easily look at in their tooltips. When comparing an enrage/focus build with a support/defensive passive to similar offensive passive build that doesn't use enrage/focus the dps is higher for the enrage/focus build.
    G0dSlay3r wrote:
    ...Enrage requires that you have more than decent STR(an almost useless stat) and CON stats to be effective. ...
    Stats by themselves have little bearing on your character when compared to powers that stats scale with. Saying that X stat is almost useless has no meaning when looking at it in a vacuum.
    G0dSlay3r wrote:
    ...Focus has a 20% chance to trigger in varying conditions. ...
    I don't know where you dug that up, but it's completely wrong. If the conditions are met (differing by toggle) a focus stack (or two if the focus toggle is ranked up) and energy are gained assuming you haven't already met those conditions within the last 4 seconds.
    G0dSlay3r wrote:
    ...There's no need to nerf Enrage and Focus. While they give an advantage to builds that use them, the same builds need to sacrifice a lot of things to be able to use them effectively. ...
    Focus needs DEX + melee build, and that's it. Assuming you want to play melee, that's not a sacrifice but icing on the cake.

    Enrage can be made perma with CON/INT stats and just the Enrage power. CON and INT don't even need to be made super stats. How effective your Enrage buff is determined by STR. Lets not forget that Enrage buffs *all* damage types regardless of ranged or melee. Not only can you run a defensive/support passive and deal more damage than an offensive passive without, an Enrage build lets you cherry pick the best damaging powers without worrying over damage types and ranged/melee to boot!
    G0dSlay3r wrote:
    ...A buff to offensive passives would be more than welcome. Bit without nerfing Focus/Enrage.
    It would encourage more variety in builds and playstyles.
    You say it will encourage diversity, I say it will shoehorn people into Enrage or Focus builds.

    If the damage on offensive passives was say... tripled to be competitive with Enrage/Focus... that would force everyone *not* using an offensive passive to use Enrage/Focus. Tanks would need one of the two just to hold aggro as even the buffed threat after F2P would be moot. Support would need it or be considered dead weight as there are very few encounters that require constant healing.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Falchoin wrote:
    I disagree with your assessment.


    I focus on dps from parsed combat logs against my favorite test dummy, Kigatilik. However, it's easier to say numbers that everyone can easily look at in their tooltips. When comparing an enrage/focus build with a support/defensive passive to similar offensive passive build that doesn't use enrage/focus the dps is higher for the enrage/focus build.

    Stats by themselves have little bearing on your character when compared to powers that stats scale with. Saying that X stat is almost useless has no meaning when looking at it in a vacuum.

    I don't know where you dug that up, but it's completely wrong. If the conditions are met (differing by toggle) a focus stack (or two if the focus toggle is ranked up) and energy are gained assuming you haven't already met those conditions within the last 4 seconds.

    Focus needs DEX + melee build, and that's it. Assuming you want to play melee, that's not a sacrifice but icing on the cake.

    Enrage can be made perma with CON/INT stats and just the Enrage power. CON and INT don't even need to be made super stats. How effective your Enrage buff is determined by STR. Lets not forget that Enrage buffs *all* damage types regardless of ranged or melee. Not only can you run a defensive/support passive and deal more damage than an offensive passive without, an Enrage build lets you cherry pick the best damaging powers without worrying over damage types and ranged/melee to boot!


    You say it will encourage diversity, I say it will shoehorn people into Enrage or Focus builds.

    If the damage on offensive passives was say... tripled to be competitive with Enrage/Focus... that would force everyone *not* using an offensive passive to use Enrage/Focus. Tanks would need one of the two just to hold aggro as even the buffed threat after F2P would be moot. Support would need it or be considered dead weight as there are very few encounters that require constant healing.

    focus has a 10% chance at rank 1 20 at rank 2 and 40 at rank 3 chance to occur when ever you do whatever it says to do according to the tooltip, and im pretty sure in practice with dodge. The 4 second thing is for defiant and unstoppables energy procs, but not for getting stacks

    I tested it out and ranged skills start off higher than melee, IE the reason melee have focus and enrage is so they can build up dmg to rival ranged dmg in long fights. fireball which is a tier 2 power, with an offensive stat and a str SS with enrage will give you 5.1k dmg on rank 3, with the same exact gear and build, the heavy hitting skills will give you around 4k. force cascade gives 6.8k dmg.

    point is focus and enrage are made to make melee fighting not gimp, and while they can be used by ranged charachters, they must sacrifice other stats, for example while i could get a 6.8k max force cascade, i didnt have the end to actually do it, but even if i did SS end, id be sacrificing something else in terms of needing con to maintain it, or recovery, int for lower times.
    Aura of primal is really good, but it requires excellent gear, and str as a super stat, and even then you cant compete in dmg with a pure dmger, you have really good all around abilities and good offense, but defensively you lack, you will have to use points on defensive skills to survive, because most offensive passives have a defensive element, quarry and way of the warrior is dodge, unstoppable has flat dmg reduction elementals have elemental dmg and specific type of elemental defense.

    Its actually pretty balanced when you start going through it.

    basically a offensive chr will do about 30% more dmg with same skill as a defensive player, going extreme str can tighten the gap, but someone going extreme str is in fact sacrificing some tanking ability. aura of primal with an intense str focus can get a lil closer, but another dps with same stats will still get about 20% higher. Of course the aop guy has better all around stuff, but like i said, they sacrifice some defense.
    all they get is more hp defensively.


    the key here is there are two issues here, role vs builds, and ranged vs melee.

    in terms of roles vs builds, some people think that someone who can survive should be extremely weak, or that there should be no good hybrid charachters. I disagree, i think other games have favored the extremes too much hybrids should be feasible, a charachter should be survivable without being completely unable to hurt a fruit fly. the fact is that defiance users are not the best tanks alone, some one who puts con ahead of strength and uses defensive gears would have better dmg mitigation.

    they are not the best offensively, a person who uses an offensive passive and focuses extremely on thier superstats will see the most benefits, and the highest number in hits dmg on anyclass will be some one who goes with str enrage and a superstrong investment in str gear. but thats only with enrage, which takes awhile to build, and can be lost through CC effects.

    through a lot of testing this weekend, you really start to see that these things are actually fairly balanced, with a focus on not making a hybrid a total gimp, which i think makes a lot of sense.

    ranged versus melee, they reviewed it and decided melee shouldnt be weaker than a ranged user in close combat in most cases, which makes sense, ranged people have superior aoe, an advantage in range (lunge is nice but it does have a range limit much lower than most decent ranged attacks) and in AoE they can attack more mobs faster, and get way better first strikes off then a melee. sure i can lunge for 300 dmg, you can force geyser for 1000 and be out of range of lunge. the melee balance as it is makes sense to me.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Falchoin wrote:
    I disagree with your assessment.

    Again, comparing Enrage/Focus to Offensive Passives is like comparing horses with elephants.
    Comparable, but totally different with different purposes and uses.
    Falchoin wrote:
    I focus on dps from parsed combat logs against my favorite test dummy, Kigatilik. However, it's easier to say numbers that everyone can easily look at in their tooltips. When comparing an enrage/focus build with a support/defensive passive to similar offensive passive build that doesn't use enrage/focus the dps is higher for the enrage/focus build.
    No, seriously? You mean, powers that are meant to boost your offense actually boost it? Shocking!
    Falchoin wrote:
    Stats by themselves have little bearing on your character when compared to powers that stats scale with. Saying that X stat is almost useless has no meaning when looking at it in a vacuum.
    STR affects the bonus for Enrage, knock resistance, knock strength and gives a bonus to melee damage.
    Big knock strength is not really a good thing for a melee class, since it kills their DPS.
    Knock resistance is useless anyway.
    Melee damage bonus caps at 70 STR for a 20% bonus.

    Compare STR with stats like DEX, INT, PRE, CON and even END and their benefits. Much more useful as superstats.
    Falchoin wrote:
    I don't know where you dug that up, but it's completely wrong.
    Tooltip.
    "At Rank Two you have a 20% chance to gain an additional stack of Focus whenever you score a Critical Hit. At Rank Three, this chance increases to 40%."
    Falchoin wrote:
    Focus needs DEX + melee build, and that's it. Assuming you want to play melee, that's not a sacrifice but icing on the cake.
    Now you're oversimplifying. Depending on what Form you're using, it would need dodge gear or extra buffs that boost crit chance. Statting some EGO is also pretty much a must. You also have to rely on maintain attacks for Focus building. You can't reliably build focus stacks with charged bursts. Superstatting INT is also practically a must for those builds. Or using AoPM, which is not really a defensive, or offensive passive with comparable uses. Just a raw stat boost.
    Falchoin wrote:
    Enrage can be made perma with CON/INT stats and just the Enrage power. CON and INT don't even need to be made super stats.
    Again, oversimplifying. For perma-Enrage with CON and INT not as superstats? Only Aura of Primal Majesty can do that effectively, along with spending 4 advantage points on the Enrage power and statting extra CON/INT through upgrades.
    Unless you're building a build with a very specific function(like Pulswaves Zeus, which can primarily be considered an open mission boss killer), you're just gimping yourself.

    Falchoin wrote:
    How effective your Enrage buff is determined by STR. Lets not forget that Enrage buffs *all* damage types regardless of ranged or melee. Not only can you run a defensive/support passive and deal more damage than an offensive passive without, an Enrage build lets you cherry pick the best damaging powers without worrying over damage types and ranged/melee to boot!
    Aaaaand... that's supposed to be a bad thing?
    So, if you're building a DPS toon, Enrage just gives it more DPS.
    If you're building a defensive toon, Enrage can make sure you're not too gimped in the DPS department.

    Which makes the following a contradiction:
    Falchoin wrote:
    You say it will encourage diversity, I say it will shoehorn people into Enrage or Focus builds.

    Newsflash. By your previous statement, Focus/Enrage enables players to build effective hybrid builds. Gimping Enrage/Focus would not bring diversity. It would just seperate builds back to classic DPS/Tank.
    If players wanted fixed DPS/Tank/Support classes, they'd play Archetypes, or some other MMO altogether.

    Falchoin wrote:
    If the damage on offensive passives was say... tripled to be competitive with Enrage/Focus... that would force everyone *not* using an offensive passive to use Enrage/Focus. Tanks would need one of the two just to hold aggro as even the buffed threat after F2P would be moot. Support would need it or be considered dead weight as there are very few encounters that require constant healing.

    So, we can agree that everything should stay as it is and nothing is really unbalanced with Enrage/Focus. :)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Dolie wrote:
    Have Focus and Enrage stack up to 5 stacks max, meaning +75% base attack damage. Yes, this was already suggested, but not only that.

    On top of that, increase Offensive Passives' damage to reach +120% damage with really high SS. Say 275 in both.

    This will basically move a portion of damage from focus/enrage to the offensive passives. Brawlers will still do the same damage, Avengers will do better damage, as they should, and defensive and support characters that are built to stack up Enrage and Focus would do slightly less.
    This is basically what I had in mind.

    EDIT:i wonder if there is a way to make enrage/focus scale with role? Im not sure i have a problem with the damage that they do in avenger/brawler/guardian.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    OmegaBuild and Godslayer. Flachoin is right, you have not read the tooltips well enough.

    Example: Form of the Tempest. It gets a stack -whenever- you perform a critical hit, 100% chance, with 4 secs cooldown between stacks.

    100% chance.

    If you rank it up to Rank 2, you get a 20% chance to get an -additional- stack of focus whenver you crit. So 100% chance for 1 stack, +20% for 2 stacks instead.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    See the key here is, someone has to superstat strength for enrage to be worthwhile, i hazard to say, without enrage strength is a useless superstat, knock resistance and increase is as has been said pretty crappy, your better off forgoing the strength melee bonus or using gear
    every other stat has increased benefit for using it,
    you need like 200 dex to get 30% crit

    200 ego for 80% crit severity

    consitution has no hp cap, and high end stuff is full of big dmg hits,

    end for more max energy, and more gain per build,

    recovery for more energy return on energy return skills,

    presence for almost all forms of healing and threat management

    intelligience is straight hax

    the balancer for enrage is that it needs strength and it isnt on all the time unless you sacrifice power points get like 80 points in con and actively maintain it.
    far as focus, you need two stats to make its bonus strong, and its only a bonus to melee, and melee skills tend to not scale high on thier own, you're expected to either focus up high, or have enrage up high to be a powerful melee, ie you build it up and then become strong
    the only real complaint one could have, is that since everyone can use enrage, it makes people want to use strength if they are DD, however, what you give up in terms of your other stats limits you in an of itself. other valuable DD playstyles would have you doing less dmg more often via int/end/rec or geting critical bursts with dex and ego. you can choose your playstyle.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Dolie wrote:
    OmegaBuild and Godslayer. Flachoin is right, you have not read the tooltips well enough.

    Example: Form of the Tempest. It gets a stack -whenever- you perform a critical hit, 100% chance, with 4 secs cooldown between stacks.

    100% chance.

    If you rank it up to Rank 2, you get a 20% chance to get an -additional- stack of focus whenver you crit. So 100% chance for 1 stack, +20% for 2 stacks instead.

    My bad if it's so. Still doesn't change anything else significantly. Crits are 30~ % chance without any power buffs. So it's still not a guaranteed instant stack and requires maintain powers to build up effectively.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    All sarcasm aside, I don't like that Enrage and Focus grant larger damage buffs than passives. We only get one passive slot therefore your role in combat, in my opinion, should be mainly determined by the type of passive slotted.

    I like to min/max my characters, not to the extent of some, but probably more than most. It frustrates me to no end I can give up so much (ie: defensive or support passive) and still end up with less damage than an Enrage or Focus toon with a similar build using a defensive or support passive. I feel this cheapens the intended role, as I see it, of passives.

    I also don't think just buffing offensive passives to be competitive with Focus or Enrage is the best way to fix the problem.

    I've said my piece, made some suggestions and repeated myself a few times already. Anything more is meaningless. I agree we'll just have to disagree.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    how can you have a similar build tho, they have to have enrage, or enrage skills, high strength and midrange con, in all honestly they are probably giving up as much or more in terms of a superstat in strength, 2 ranks in enrage, time building the enrage and time maintaining it. You will not see some one with a similar build doing more dmg than someone with an offensive passive, i tested it. Aura of primal is the closest, and thats only with heavy gear, and a specific build, it also takes about 23x8 seconds to build up that charge and can be lost with a knock or control effect at the wrong time.

    Basically what enrage is, is allowing your dmg to scale with strength, the catch is, its a build up, they could put a clone skill in every framework that builds with strength, but why, you can just get enrage. they nerf enrage, they would just have to increase the dmg of melee skills to compensate, they adjusted our dmg with the idea that we would get a benefit for SS strength, without enrage/focus strength is a completely trash stat, no one would take it past 80, there is no other worthwhile benefit. knocking mobs far just makes you have to chase them down again, and in boss fights it has no value. knock resistance is barely noticeable past like 80 or 100 and doesnt matter at all after 3 knocks.
    If you want to slowly build up incredible spike dmg, then strength and enrage is the combo for you, on any job, just like if i want to lower costs and recharge times, i use int. Adjust your mind to the fact that str is a dmg building stat, which is totally logical. The reason these guys are doing a lot of dmg, is because they are using the slow build dmg stat of strength, and associated skills.

    Why should someone with 400 points in a stat called strength hit like a baby? i can pick up buildings, but i hit you for 3 dmg? thats totally illogical.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Your primary offense upgrade slot is dedicated to either strength, dexterity, or recovery. Meaning you might as well take some strength or dexterity, no matter which build you are, but especially melee.

    Even with strength from only a primary offense upgrade, Enrage does a lot of damage. At around 85 strength Enrage hits the +7.5% base damage per stack. That means +60% as a whole, which is nearly as much as an offensive passive gives you.

    So you can take defiance+enrage, have STR just on your primary offense, superstat, say, int/end (what I'm running), and still do as much damage as a character with an offensive passive.

    It's VERY easy to build enrage stacks with enrage, and you can do it out of combat, and also maintain it out of combat.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Falchoin wrote:

    I like to min/max my characters, not to the extent of some, but probably more than most. It frustrates me to no end I can give up so much (ie: defensive or support passive) and still end up with less damage than an Enrage or Focus toon with a similar build using a defensive or support passive. I feel this cheapens the intended role, as I see it, of passives.

    So, what's stopping you from using a combo of offensive passive + Enrage for maximum damage?
    Are there diminishing returns for stacking offense that i'm not aware of?

    I'm really trying to wrap my head around and understand why all the hate for Enrage/Focus, but i just can't see it.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Falchoin wrote:
    All sarcasm aside... I've said my piece, made some suggestions, and repeated myself a few times already.
    Anything more is meaningless. i agree we'll just have to disagree.
    Dude, QFfT :eek:
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    While I agree with this...
    Falchoin wrote:
    I like to min/max my characters, not to the extent of some, but probably more than most. It frustrates me to no end I can give up so much (ie: defensive or support passive) and still end up with less damage than an Enrage or Focus toon with a similar build using a defensive or support passive. I feel this cheapens the intended role, as I see it, of passives.

    and this...
    Falchoin wrote:
    I also don't think just buffing offensive passives to be competitive with Focus or Enrage is the best way to fix the problem.

    I do not feel that nerfing Focus/Enrage is the way to go. The Avenger role is the culprit here. It is underperforming and cheapens itself with no need of help from enrage or focus. Fix avenger role to buff ranged damage a bit more and increase its energy potential and people will be more inclined to build an avenger DPS for ranged powers than a sentinel DPS for ranged and will bring it more into line with Brawler on a pro/con comparison.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    G0dSlay3r wrote:
    So, what's stopping you from using a combo of offensive passive + Enrage for maximum damage?
    Are there diminishing returns for stacking offense that i'm not aware of?

    I'm really trying to wrap my head around and understand why all the hate for Enrage/Focus, but i just can't see it.

    The point is, the defensive people can still put a lot of damage out. Meaning they can be BOTH defensive AND offensive. There is really no drawback there. They have high survivability and can put out a ton of damage.

    it's good in both PVE and PVP scenarios.

    Sure you can stack a bunch of offense, but what about the defense? In PVE you'll get destroyed, especially by cosmics. And in PVP you're really not worth anything either.

    It's a loose loose situation while being defensive and choosing offensive toggles makes you good at pretty much everything.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    G0dSlay3r wrote:
    So, what's stopping you from using a combo of offensive passive + Enrage for maximum damage?
    Are there diminishing returns for stacking offense that i'm not aware of?

    I'm really trying to wrap my head around and understand why all the hate for Enrage/Focus, but i just can't see it.

    nope, a ranged attacker with strength SS and enrage will see some of the highest dmg with single attacks, but i think they dont like that they would have to use enrage to have the highest big number dmg.

    Btw, getting 7.5 a stack isnt going to cut it if you want dmg to compare with offensive passives, keep in mind melee frameworks have access to offensive passive and focus or enrage. A well statted DD range is going to get 75 from his passive alone, and probably extra functionality, no offensive passive is just damage alone. and they will not spend time watching thier recharges, wasting 80 str and 90 constitution in points, and getting a skill and 2 ranks. It may be worth it but only with a serious strength investment. btw if your offensive and dont want to have str rec or dex, you can get offense directly and crit severity, or cost discounts etc. not to mention some power replacers have different stat bonuses.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Jobrry wrote:
    The point is, the defensive people can still put a lot of damage out. Meaning they can be BOTH defensive AND offensive. There is really no drawback there. They have high survivability and can put out a ton of damage.

    it's good in both PVE and PVP scenarios.

    Sure you can stack a bunch of offense, but what about the defense? In PVE you'll get destroyed, especially by cosmics. And in PVP you're really not worth anything either.

    It's a loose loose situation while being defensive and choosing offensive toggles makes you good at pretty much everything.

    I don't see your point. With the proper mix of powers and advantages I can get decent, even good, DPS with nearly any defensive passive. Want proof? Take the Glacier AT. Put the 100% chill advantage on frost breath and the hard frost advantage on ice blast and you can annihilate master villains in just a few taps. There's no need to have enrage OR focus to have great DPS with a protector build. Ok, the Glacier even with those two advantages isn't going to outshine a maxed out DPS toon but if an AT can do that well with just 4 advantage points, how much better could a freeform version of the same do?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Galeforce wrote:
    I don't see your point. With the proper mix of powers and advantages I can get decent, even good, DPS with nearly any defensive passive. Want proof? Take the Glacier AT. Put the 100% chill advantage on frost breath and the hard frost advantage on ice blast and you can annihilate master villains in just a few taps. There's no need to have enrage OR focus to have great DPS with a protector build. Ok, the Glacier even with those two advantages isn't going to outshine a maxed out DPS toon but if an AT can do that well with just 4 advantage points, how much better could a freeform version of the same do?

    A freeform version of the same, to get better, would likely want Enrage.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Somethings gotta give with the roles/passives balance issue.

    If offensive roles could use defiance or Invul as a passive I dont think we'd be having this talk. So if passives are going to be exclusive, then make offensive/sentinel passives DO MORE! even if it's not damage mitigation.. give each offensive passive some survival tactics

    I love that Darkness now has Stealth as a survival tactic. Avoidance going to quarry is also VERY good idea. These have to be stronger and more defined.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Jobrry wrote:
    The point is, the defensive people can still put a lot of damage out. Meaning they can be BOTH defensive AND offensive. There is really no drawback there. They have high survivability and can put out a ton of damage.

    And that's a bad thing... why?

    That's the whole point of Freeform as a system. Making characters that don't follow the traditional roles of Tank/DPS/Support.

    You wanna be durable and do good damage? You can.
    You wanna be a tank healer? You can.

    All i see is "tanks should be tanks, dps should be dps!" whining.
    Jaybezz wrote:
    If offensive roles could use defiance or Invul as a passive I dont think we'd be having this talk. So if passives are going to be exclusive, then make offensive/sentinel passives DO MORE! even if it's not damage mitigation.. give each offensive passive some survival tactics

    I love that Darkness now has Stealth as a survival tactic. Avoidance going to quarry is also VERY good idea. These have to be stronger and more defined.

    This is where a power like Inertial Dampening Field comes in. So, yes, offensive passives still have defensive options.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Not going to say anything definitive one way or another one what's going to need to be done. However, I was playing with how varoius things interact in the power house with damage and roles do something interesting, the roles damage/healing percent boost applies last.

    What does this mean?

    Well, avenger/brawler gives +20% damage. So, if you have an attack that deals 100 damage it deals 120 damage, so far, that's not very impressive. Now, let's say you got an offensive passive giving +75% damage. You now deal 175 damage, if you switch to the appropriate offensive role, you do NOT gain 20 damage, you gain 20% of 175 damage. This gives you +35 damage for 210 damage total. You now have a 110% damage bonus from a 75% boost and a 20% boost.

    Now, active boosts to damage apply on the same layer as your passive. So, let's say hypothetically you have an enrage that gives 7.5% per stack, and you can 8 stack it for +60% damage. In the hypothetical situation above you end up with 235 damage in a balanced stance. 20% of that 235 is now 47 for a net damage of 282. So now I have a +182% net damage boost from +75%+60% on my buff layer and a +20% on my role layer. Add those straight up and you only get 155%, that +20% damage multiplier is now acting like a +47% damage boost. Now, let's say all the above was applied to a hypothetical role with a +50% damage boost. Now you're talking about a 352.5 damage when all's said and done. +252.5% damage.

    I'm not even touching the strength multiplier to damage in all this. I am not sure how that mechanic layers into damage calculation.

    I'm not saying cryptic should or shouldn't but I can see why they want to be careful on changes, when multiplying multipliers a small change can inflate big.

    This actually works in reverse for that sentinel role. You think you're taking a 20% hit to your damage. But let's say your passive is giving you +75% damage to that 100 damage attack for 175 damage. You take a -35 damage to that for 140 damage in the end, it'll hit you harder and harder the more multiples you cram on, like using an active offense boost or enrage. If you use my gratuitously stacked example of the +135% multipler attack it'll be cut from 235 damage to 188 damage. So, the avenger deals 282 damage, the sentinel deals only 188. That's an effective +182% multiplier vs an effective 88% multipier. The sentinel is tossing out 2/3rds the damage of an avenger.

    Of course the above gets even funner when you take crit boosts into account. Critical hits take the above damage and multiply it. Now you're multyping your multiplier multiplier. If you have 200 ego and dex based off of a numbers from an earlier post in this thread you'd be dealing +24% damage over long periods of time (over short bursts it's a crap shot). With a passive +75% boost on that 100 damage hypothetical attack that's 175 damage multiplied to 210 and with the crit boost to damage applied to the 210 damage that's 260.4 damage instead. A sentinel would deal 173 damage if they had a passive with the same boost.

    Long story short, roles multiply your multiplier which makes them scarier the larger a damage bonus you can stack up. They are worthless if you don't stack up your damage% boosts.

    Now I've seen a lot of assumptions thrown about with archetypes, so I figure I'd dig up the numbers and spew them out here for the benefit of reference. Anything not mentioned is assumed to be the same as a guardian:

    Defense: All roles take exactly the same damage from attacks. Roles do not affect the defenses granted by powers (Unless of course you're talking passives which are limited to specific roles). Circle of primal power is an exception to that rule. The only defensive edge that protector has is it's defensive passives. I spent time playing with different powers and standing in front of the laser testing range getting zapped repeatedly for great justice, (By the by Cryptic, could we please do away with different damage values lasers and have them replaced with different damage type lasers? That would keen!)

    HP: Roles modify BASE hp. All roles gain roughly +15 hp per point of constitution (for some reason it isn't exactly, but every time I get bonus hp on a character and divide it by constitution I get almost but not quite 15 and it's the same regardless of role). Sentinels and Avengers get base -17% hp (for some reason sentinels are always a hair less in hp but it is roughly 17% for both roughly -800 hp at level 40). If you are heavy into consitution and an avenger/sentinel it's more like a 10%ish hit to your end hp. Guardians and brawlers have baseline hp. Protectors get roughly +25% to their base hp (about +1200hp at level 40).

    Healing: Avengers get -20% healing, which hurts if you took any healing moves to boost your sticking power, granted healing doesn't have a whole lot of ways to stack healing multipliers like damage so you can take this more at face value, unless you're using ascencion, in which case it'll cut into your healing a bit more. Sentinels get a +20% healing bonus.

    Damage modifiers: Brawler/avenger. +20% to ranged or melee depending on which. Brawler takes a -30% to ranged damage and since a brawler's likely stacking mods this will make their ranged attacks seem rather pathetic compared to their melee ones. Using the above +75% multiplier example and a 100 damage ranged and melee attack (not even factoring in strength bonus) you are looking at a 210 damage attack vs a 122.5 damage attack. That's only a 22.5% effective multiplier on his ranged damage. Not so hot. Sentinel takes a -20% hit on damage, I already covered the implications there.

    Blocking: Blocking reduces damage by exactly the same amount regardless of role, I tested this recently cycled through every role and blocked damage it all came out the same. Brawlers and avengers gain no endurance from blocking. Protectors gain two seperate ticks of endurance from blocking one from ego one from constitution. Interestingly enough unless they fixed it recently, archetypes are all treated as if they were guardians when blocking. So a glacier doesn't gain bonus endurance when blocking, an an inferno actually gains endurance when blocking. As far as I know that aspect is a bug. But if you want to test how an avenger's surviveability is affected by gaining endurance when blocking, roll an inferno or tempest and play aorund, they they have avenger hp of course you'll have no healing outside of consumeable items. I just tested it now, in the live build you can still gain endurance as an offensive archetype blocking, and defensive archetypes are still shafted when it comes to blocking.

    Energy: Protectors have 20 less energy. Since energy builders return a percentage of your maximum energy, this reduces how much energy they generate from an energy builder. How much however is dependant on how heavily the protector in question boosted endurance. As endurance gets larger this modification becomes more and more negligeable much like the HP adjustments mentioned above. On top of this Protectors decay energy at double the rate. Sentinels as everyone likely knows have a greatly increased equalibrium and refuel to that point like a son of a gun and they decay at half rate. Avengers actually have a +25% boost to energy returned from their energy builder which is a lot more attractive then the half-decay they have. Brawlers have double energy decay.

    Control: Sentinels have +20% effectiveness avengers have -20% effectiveness.

    Threat: Protectors have a different calculation from presence that calculates threat. They get a positive bonus instead of a negative one.

    What does this all mean in the end? Darned if I know, but at least all the math's out there, draw your own conclusions. Though I'm kind of curious if the avenger energy boost applies to reverberation powers too. That's something else to test, when I'm not half-blind from a migraine aura. In fact I really got to stop typing now, I can barely see what I'm typing.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    OmegaBuild wrote:
    nope, a ranged attacker with strength SS and enrage will see some of the highest dmg with single attacks, but i think they dont like that they would have to use enrage to have the highest big number dmg.
    A ranged character with an offensive passive that tries to build enrage will be forced to do it one stack at a time, 20 secs cooldown between each single stack (And some people do build this stacks -before- even going into a PvP match, probably with macros, perhaps exploiting). This is very inconvenient though. With the build I mentioned, which is my build by the way, you just build up 8 stacks in 20 seconds.
    Btw, getting 7.5 a stack isnt going to cut it if you want dmg to compare with offensive passives, keep in mind melee frameworks have access to offensive passive and focus or enrage.
    7.5*8 = 60. I get +60% damage from enrage, plus +15% per stack of defiance. My only source of strength is my primary offense (which also has some REC and CON on it) and a few talents. Hardly an investment.
    A well statted DD range is going to get 75 from his passive alone, and probably extra functionality, no offensive passive is just damage alone.
    Let's see, if I want to buff my elemental damage I'll need to take Fiery Form. What does that give? +75% damage aaaaand... Elemental damage resist? So, if I went that route, I'd get +15% damage over my current 60%, I'd lose the bonus health from Protector which is nearly 2k, and will lose my defiance stacking to +90% damage resistance. Yes, very balanced.
    and they will not spend time watching thier recharges, wasting 80 str and 90 constitution in points, and getting a skill and 2 ranks. It may be worth it but only with a serious strength investment. btw if your offensive and dont want to have str rec or dex, you can get offense directly and crit severity, or cost discounts etc. not to mention some power replacers have different stat bonuses.
    80 STR is not a waste, just primary offense it + talents. CON is -never- a waste, and it comes from my primary defense + a couple of secondaries. My equilibrium is still standing on 72 which is all I'll ever need.

    I did try the +offense route until just recently. Guess what? It gets soft capped the first 10 points you get +1% for ever 3 offense or so. By the time you have 60 offense, it gets downhill from there, 1% damage for 5.5 offense. Really not worth it, and you wouldn't be able to stack much more than +20% damage from it. I think my +60% from strength+enrage is far better.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    G0dSlay3r wrote:
    And that's a bad thing... why?

    That's the whole point of Freeform as a system. Making characters that don't follow the traditional roles of Tank/DPS/Support.

    You wanna be durable and do good damage? You can.
    You wanna be a tank healer? You can.

    All i see is "tanks should be tanks, dps should be dps!" whining.



    This is where a power like Inertial Dampening Field comes in. So, yes, offensive passives still have defensive options.

    Do you still not understand? It's like you don't read what anyone is saying at all.

    That's all fine and dandy, have a healer tank, I don't care.

    The problem is defensive passives are not balanced with offensive passive. If you choose a defensive passive you have the choice to still do a lot of offensive damage. If you choose an offensive passive you do NOT have the choice to still have some defense, you're just forced to get MORE offense.

    Yes, they DO have IDF now... that's ONE power, and it's almost useless in most PVP situations. The ONLY thing it's good for are DOTS and pet builds. Other builds are going to be doing 4k spike damage so reducing that by 70 is not going to help at all...
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Jobrry wrote:
    Do you still not understand? It's like you don't read what anyone is saying at all.

    That's all fine and dandy, have a healer tank, I don't care.

    The problem is defensive passives are not balanced with offensive passive. If you choose a defensive passive you have the choice to still do a lot of offensive damage. If you choose an offensive passive you do NOT have the choice to still have some defense, you're just forced to get MORE offense.

    Yes, they DO have IDF now... that's ONE power, and it's almost useless in most PVP situations. The ONLY thing it's good for are DOTS and pet builds. Other builds are going to be doing 4k spike damage so reducing that by 70 is not going to help at all...

    ^^ This right here is the big picture. I don't so much think that the buffs like Focus and Enrage are the culprits. Just standing on their own, Offensive Passives are Significantly Weaker than Defensive Passives, and have less options to increase survivability. I don't think that having more Defensive Options is the answer, really making Offensive Passives and Offensive Frameworks capable of dealing with Defensive Passives should be where we should be looking. A Prime Example of this is Munitions being incapable of overcoming Defensive Passives altogether. There isn't much of a need to rehash it here, when the Munitions thread is flooded with it.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Well, how adding to avenger role a feature where a certain percentage of damage is not impacted by defense?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Belreinuem wrote:
    Well, how adding to avenger role a feature where a certain percentage of damage is not impacted by defense?

    That's a very good suggestion. Other good ones that have been thrown around are buffing both ranged and melee, increasing energy gain from Energy Unlocks, Focus, Passives, etc. and simply decreasing energy gain from blocking instead of removing it altogether.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Jobrry wrote:
    Do you still not understand? It's like you don't read what anyone is saying at all.

    That's all fine and dandy, have a healer tank, I don't care.

    The problem is defensive passives are not balanced with offensive passive. If you choose a defensive passive you have the choice to still do a lot of offensive damage. If you choose an offensive passive you do NOT have the choice to still have some defense, you're just forced to get MORE offense.

    Yes, they DO have IDF now... that's ONE power, and it's almost useless in most PVP situations. The ONLY thing it's good for are DOTS and pet builds. Other builds are going to be doing 4k spike damage so reducing that by 70 is not going to help at all...

    I understand.
    And if you've read my previous posts, you'd find that i was saying the same things WillBlack just said.
    It's not the problem with Enrage/Focus.
    When it was explained that it's not a problem with Enrage and Focus, people just went wider.

    Offensive passives are lagging behind Defensive passives. So(most of the time in PvP) a build NEEDS another semi-permanent offense boost like Enrage or Focus to overcome layered defenses that defensive passive builds can produce. Or some other attack that ignores defense altogether.

    So, let's go by Falchions example. Let's nerf Enrage/Focus a bit and buff offensive passives a bit.
    The result? No change in damage do defensive passive builds.

    So let me ask, what would adding another 10-20% to offensive passive damage boost do?(finding a sweetspot would be the trick here)
    What would fixing Avenger role do for offensive passive ranged toons?

    Those are the primary culprits. Not Enrage or Focus.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    G0dSlay3r wrote:
    And that's a bad thing... why?
    That's the whole point of Freeform as a system. Making characters that don't follow the traditional roles of Tank/DPS/Support.

    In my eyes, the point of the open power system is to allow you to mix and match various powers so that you can achieve any theme that you want, not to make tank/mage/healers that make roles meaningless. what a "free power system" means to you is a matter of opinion and such cant be used to solidify a fact, so i wont sit here and argue with you about that. Before leaving this point i would like to draw attention to the fact that the devs did in fact put roles in the game which implys that the devs wanted me to loosely fit the tank, dps, or support roles, not the tank/DPS/support omni role.
    G0dSlay3r wrote:
    Offensive passives are lagging behind Defensive passives. So(most of the time in PvP) a build NEEDS another semi-permanent offense boost like Enrage or Focus to overcome layered defenses that defensive passive builds can produce. Or some other attack that ignores defense altogether.

    So, let's go by Falchions example. Let's nerf Enrage/Focus a bit and buff offensive passives a bit.
    The result? No change in damage do defensive passive builds.
    1. This statement makes it sound like this is only a pvp problem, but i see this as being just as much as a pve problem because:
    A. When every role is doing damage, it makes roles less meaningful
    B. Armor piercing dmg will mainly be useful in pvp and seems like it could easily lead to its own problems.
    C. It reduces diversity. example: I was asking for tips for my build on zone broadcast and was told to use enrage. I refitted my force toon to use the "rage of majesty passive" as its foundation. the result is that i hit herder, i can fully charge my force cascade now because of the END stat boost, because my high STR i send mobs flying w/ force powers and get better fall DMG, i have more HP, I don't have to deal with healing penalty, I have high PRE so i can heal better and my protection field is more hp on it. I didn't even have to regear. Because of this im on the FOTM enrage train and i know im not the only one.

    2. You also make it seem like defense stacking is the reason that enrage is needed. Defense stacking is its own problem and can be fixed with diminished returns.

    Im still not convinced that you can make avenger role appealing in pvp&pve without consolidating damage in avenger role by reducing non avenger damage.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    ccelizic wrote:
    Well, avenger/brawler gives +20% damage. So, if you have an attack that deals 100 damage it deals 120 damage, so far, that's not very impressive. Now, let's say you got an offensive passive giving +75% damage. You now deal 175 damage, if you switch to the appropriate offensive role, you do NOT gain 20 damage, you gain 20% of 175 damage. This gives you +35 damage for 210 damage total. You now have a 110% damage bonus from a 75% boost and a 20% boost.

    Now, active boosts to damage apply on the same layer as your passive. So, let's say hypothetically you have an enrage that gives 7.5% per stack, and you can 8 stack it for +60% damage. In the hypothetical situation above you end up with 235 damage in a balanced stance. 20% of that 235 is now 47 for a net damage of 282. So now I have a +182% net damage boost from +75%+60% on my buff layer and a +20% on my role layer. Add those straight up and you only get 155%, that +20% damage multiplier is now acting like a +47% damage boost. Now, let's say all the above was applied to a hypothetical role with a +50% damage boost. Now you're talking about a 352.5 damage when all's said and done. +252.5% damage.

    I'm not even touching the strength multiplier to damage in all this. I am not sure how that mechanic layers into damage calculation.

    I'm not saying cryptic should or shouldn't but I can see why they want to be careful on changes, when multiplying multipliers a small change can inflate big.

    This actually works in reverse for that sentinel role. You think you're taking a 20% hit to your damage. But let's say your passive is giving you +75% damage to that 100 damage attack for 175 damage. You take a -35 damage to that for 140 damage in the end, it'll hit you harder and harder the more multiples you cram on, like using an active offense boost or enrage. If you use my gratuitously stacked example of the +135% multipler attack it'll be cut from 235 damage to 188 damage. So, the avenger deals 282 damage, the sentinel deals only 188. That's an effective +182% multiplier vs an effective 88% multipier. The sentinel is tossing out 2/3rds the damage of an avenger.

    Of course the above gets even funner when you take crit boosts into account. Critical hits take the above damage and multiply it. Now you're multyping your multiplier multiplier. If you have 200 ego and dex based off of a numbers from an earlier post in this thread you'd be dealing +24% damage over long periods of time (over short bursts it's a crap shot). With a passive +75% boost on that 100 damage hypothetical attack that's 175 damage multiplied to 210 and with the crit boost to damage applied to the 210 damage that's 260.4 damage instead. A sentinel would deal 173 damage if they had a passive with the same boost.

    The only thing missing from your calculations are energy generation and efficiency... Avenger role only has access to two forms of energy generation: Energy Builders and Energy Unlocks. Sentinel role has access to 4 kinds of energy genration: EBs, EUs, Blocking and innate powerful energy return when below equilibrium. This innate return by sentinels is so strong that I can run IDF, minigun and concussion beams for full maintains of both mg and cb with four pets out and still not run completely out of energy. Sentinel may do less damage than a similarly buff stacked avenger, but it can do so on a more constant basis where the avenger is going to have to eventually stop and use his energy builder.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Post deleted by KenpoJuJitsu3
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Belreinuem wrote:
    Well, how adding to avenger role a feature where a certain percentage of damage is not impacted by defense?

    That would go a LONG way to balancing things out for this stance. But it still doesn't fix the underlying issue of how easy it is to gain high damage and high defense with a Defensive Passive, verses only being able to have high damage with an Offensive Passive.

    The core underlying problem is that as of right now, defense is better than offense. It's FAR easier to outlast incoming damage than it is to try to deal more damage faster.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    ahhh if the poster is infact right about the bonus coming after everything, it makes the role even more powerful that every thing else for dps optimized toons, and if they get more energy per energy builder that is also pretty hax. It also means that Sentinel is taking a heavy hit to dmg for all the energy they get. Which explains why, when i was testing, going avenger or brawler always seemed worth it. Far as energy management, there are really loads of options, molecular assembly scales with int, and gives very good returns, form of the tempest if you use dex, killer instinct/the archery version. force shield/field is good circle of primal. Unstoppable gets energy from knocks, and with rec high its definately a lot.
    Avenger/brawler are looking better and better.
    See thing is guys, yall are looking at midrange and thinking it should be trash, i disagree. the fact is you get a large boost to dmg from going offensive from the passive and the roll you get 75% and a 20% to damage after everything else, the more hax you are, the more noticeable thats going to be.



    Dolie wrote:
    A ranged character with an offensive passive that tries to build enrage will be forced to do it one stack at a time, 20 secs cooldown between each single stack (And some people do build this stacks -before- even going into a PvP match, probably with macros, perhaps exploiting). This is very inconvenient though. With the build I mentioned, which is my build by the way, you just build up 8 stacks in 20 seconds.


    7.5*8 = 60. I get +60% damage from enrage, plus +15% per stack of defiance. My only source of strength is my primary offense (which also has some REC and CON on it) and a few talents. Hardly an investment.

    Let's see, if I want to buff my elemental damage I'll need to take Fiery Form. What does that give? +75% damage aaaaand... Elemental damage resist? So, if I went that route, I'd get +15% damage over my current 60%, I'd lose the bonus health from Protector which is nearly 2k, and will lose my defiance stacking to +90% damage resistance. Yes, very balanced.

    80 STR is not a waste, just primary offense it + talents. CON is -never- a waste, and it comes from my primary defense + a couple of secondaries. My equilibrium is still standing on 72 which is all I'll ever need.

    I did try the +offense route until just recently. Guess what? It gets soft capped the first 10 points you get +1% for ever 3 offense or so. By the time you have 60 offense, it gets downhill from there, 1% damage for 5.5 offense. Really not worth it, and you wouldn't be able to stack much more than +20% damage from it. I think my +60% from strength+enrage is far better.

    Getting Strength from items stats whatever the source, means you are sacrificing for something, whether it be +5 to a dif stat, or dex/rec/endurance buff, offense etc.

    Con is subjective, having hp is nice, but there are ways that you rarely need to have it, especially if you're specializing, it also works cross purposes to presence on stats, which is heals and shields, or picking dodge and avoidance, you can also go with more base defense and resistance to specific types of dmg.

    Fiery Form is probably the most offensive passive, in that its added effect is a DoT, a free dot that you dont have to maintain.

    See thing is, how much better than a hybridized charachter do you guys expect to be, honestly the 60% dmg guy is not the one i was comparing to when i said 30% more dmg with the same skills when you go offensive, i was talking about the SS strength guy, that 60% will leave you way behind a brawler/avenger with an offensive passive.

    I think they key here, is you guys expect hybrids to be weak, or maybe that offensive types should be insanely stronger. The whole point of specializing is you sacrifice something for something else. the way this game and many games work is, its not a straight line, its a curve, this is so it doesnt make being a hybrid worthless, and force everyone in high level play, to basically play rigid roles, This is not that type of game people. If you weaken the hybrid, you start to make going with a rigid role team even better than it is right now, (and it is still better)
    This game is fun because you can be a healer and not be a total loser, you can deal and take dmg you can get yourself through most of the content, on a varied and balanced build. You still will however be out performed by specialists, specialists though, are made to be on teams. the reason it seems like its hard to survive with a fire passive is, its not a passive for survivalists, if you want to survive alone, you want to play a different kind of charachter, if you want more survivability, in this game it is readily available, you can go guardian, you can take defensive skills, like force fields, active defenses, heals with presence, or you can get a defensive passive and stat/skill more toward offense, with str/rage mechanics or AoPm

    You really should stop hating on the fact that you can take so many different directions and still have an enjoyable charachter that fits your style of play.

    I think the problem is you guys expect Roles to tell you everything you need to know about a charachter, its just a modifier. simply taking a role doesnt make you into something totally different, if that was the case it would suck, keep in mind you can change roles between every fight, and 1 time instantly in battle, with only a minute cooldown in a fight, Role is one factor, skill selection is another factor, and stats is the last factor, to be a pure offense guy is to take all these into consideration. If your a guy with a guardian role, and 300 strength, your not a pure tank. If your an Avenger with 300 presence and a bunch of shield skills, your not pure offense. If your a Sentinel with Beam cannon Two pets Shoulder missles your probably not pure support. And given the freefrom nature of the game, that makes a lot of sense, and is a lot of the fun.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    We have dimishing returns on stat effects. Why not add them to roles. Avenger max damage buff is 120% and after that the dimishing kicks in. Same goes for def, hp etc.


    Wouldn't it solve the "overbuffing" problems for damage and defense?
    Just a idea. I know it will never happen.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Sigh, now that i think about it, the devs probably have alot on their plate with the mission scaling changes/new power set, resistance, ect. I think I would be surprised if the devs addressed this role/damage fiasco any time soon (it wasn't even addressed in the SOTG).

    I think I may have to back off on this issue until i hear some kind of statement from the devs on how they feel about this issue. There isn't much point in nerfing enrage as long as avenger role remains broken.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    i wasnt sure when we started this discussion but i dont see the problem with Avenger, 20% damage boost, applied after other damage boosts, no penalty to any type of attack, balanced by weaker holds/resistances and less healing effect.
    In pve the holds is not much of an issue
    the heals suck, but you arent taking anyloss attacking from a range or close up, this is not just the using melee skills, its the fact that you can used a ranged attack up close, whereas a brawler can not do any dmg with melee attacks from afar. they can lunge but it puts them right in the middle of all enemies.
    Avenger is the most offensive orriented class it goes, more so than brawler, it takes the highest penalty, im not saying no builds in other roles can do dmg, but no one can do as much direct dmg close up or far as an avenger. the penalty is weakness versus certain things.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Post deleted by KenpoJuJitsu3
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    OmegaBuild wrote:
    i wasnt sure when we started this discussion but i dont see the problem with Avenger, 20% damage boost, applied after other damage boosts, no penalty to any type of attack, balanced by weaker holds/resistances and less healing effect.
    In pve the holds is not much of an issue
    the heals suck, but you arent taking anyloss attacking from a range or close up, this is not just the using melee skills, its the fact that you can used a ranged attack up close, whereas a brawler can not do any dmg with melee attacks from afar. they can lunge but it puts them right in the middle of all enemies.
    Avenger is the most offensive orriented class it goes, more so than brawler, it takes the highest penalty, im not saying no builds in other roles can do dmg, but no one can do as much direct dmg close up or far as an avenger. the penalty is weakness versus certain things.

    Everything you say here would make sense, if it all actually worked that way. You're missing out on a major point, that distance is irrelevant. Even melee-oriented enemies have 100' range attacks, and there's no missing, so you are always taking damage, regardless of being in range or melee of enemies. Lunges close the gap in, and melee attacks have both a higher base damage than ranged, and can be further buffed by Toggles, where only Ranged Toxic damage can be buffed via Toggle. Avenger is also limited to Offensive Passives, which cut your survivability down to almost nothing, unless the damage type you are fighting against matches your Passive's damage type.

    You can say that Avenger is balanced all you want, but the fact you are saying that shows you've never actually played a character in Avenger Role. Try making a character that uses an Offensive Passive and build them to do as much damage as possible. Go into the Battlestation and try to fight a 5-man hard spawn. Don't be disheartened when you die, because you're likely to die a number of times before you get down the pattern to be able to do so. Once you've done that, switch to Guardian and notice how much easier it is. Then, do the exact same test using Regen or Invuln and notice how much easier it is than using an Offensive Passive in Guardian.

    Your last statement of "no one can do as much direct dmg close up or far as an avenger. the penalty is weakness versus certain things." is only partially correct. A correct statement would read more like:
    Avenger deals more damage at a range than any other role, which is still less than Brawler's damage, and does the same damage as Guardian in melee range (or less than Guardian in many setups, even at a range), at the cost of EVERYTHING ELSE.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Avenger sucks as far as roles go. There are just too many penalties for being in Avenger which the damage bonus does not make up for.

    It's clear that when Brawler was made it was not balanced against Avenger.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    OmegaBuild wrote:
    i wasnt sure when we started this discussion but i dont see the problem with Avenger, 20% damage boost, applied after other damage boosts, no penalty to any type of attack, balanced by weaker holds/resistances and less healing effect.
    In pve the holds is not much of an issue
    the heals suck, but you arent taking anyloss attacking from a range or close up, this is not just the using melee skills, its the fact that you can used a ranged attack up close, whereas a brawler can not do any dmg with melee attacks from afar. they can lunge but it puts them right in the middle of all enemies.
    Avenger is the most offensive orriented class it goes, more so than brawler, it takes the highest penalty, im not saying no builds in other roles can do dmg, but no one can do as much direct dmg close up or far as an avenger. the penalty is weakness versus certain things.

    Avenger was ok in theory. But at this point there's been enough game time put in to make the call that Avenger is a little underpowered. I think they made the right call by not letting it get out of control. Too much damage breaks the game. But it's really too limited. One problem is that it's ranged damage only. You dont seem to acknowledge that. Another problem is that you get no energy from blocking. Plus you're more fragile.

    Check out my Zeus build where I show everyone that Aura of Majesty plus Rage deals more damage than anything you can build in Avenger, without all the penalties, and without limits on the damage type. Unless you disagree with my evidence you have to admit that Avenger stance is not the #1 offensive stance.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    kamokami wrote:
    Avenger sucks as far as roles go. There are just too many penalties for being in Avenger which the damage bonus does not make up for.
    If Avenger were just +20% all damage, +20% all damage taken (or -20% HP, -20% healing), it would be decent compared to Guardian. The problem is that Avenger is +20% ranged damage, -20% HP, -20% healing, -20% holds, -20% hold resistance, no energy from blocking, and that's too many penalties. If you removed the crowd control modifiers it would be balanced vs Guardian. Unfortunately, Guardian is significantly outclassed by all three other stances: Protector gives -30 stat points worth of energy penalties in exchange for 70 stat points worth of hp, 20% hold resistance, double benefit from blocking, Sentinel gives -20% hp and damage for +20% healing and crowd control, plus enormous energy returns, Brawler gives +20% melee damage, +5% energy discount, snare on attack, for -20% ranged damage (basically irrelevant), no energy from blocking, and -20% to hold strength.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    So regardless of the 20 pages of posts, is the 3.31 patch going live, I assume?
    (read: i suppose there is *some* patch feedback somewhere in here):D

    -r0y
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    ROY wrote:
    So regardless of the 20 pages of posts, is the 3.31 patch going live, I assume?
    (read: i suppose there is *some* patch feedback somewhere in here):D

    -r0y

    This is the first PTS iteration of a brand new powerset. This patch will never see live.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Pulsewave wrote:
    Avenger was ok in theory. But at this point there's been enough game time put in to make the call that Avenger is a little underpowered. I think they made the right call by not letting it get out of control. Too much damage breaks the game. But it's really too limited. One problem is that it's ranged damage only. You dont seem to acknowledge that. Another problem is that you get no energy from blocking. Plus you're more fragile.

    Check out my Zeus build where I show everyone that Aura of Majesty plus Rage deals more damage than anything you can build in Avenger, without all the penalties, and without limits on the damage type. Unless you disagree with my evidence you have to admit that Avenger stance is not the #1 offensive stance.

    hmmm id say that the Aura of primal build you presented is defiantely a beast of all around damages, but as far as pure offense, im not so sure. It may beat it over time with decent recovery int and end, but in terms of raw damage..... well it all depends on the crits, because i can probably get energy management good enough to pump out dmg, but im not so sure about the ego for good crits. But make no mistake, the avenger builds i tested out perform aopm if we dont consider crits, and by no small margin.

    but really man, thats only one build, if thats the only build that can touch avenger/brawler that just speaks to the build.

    brawler does not out perform avenger really, because no matter how you slice it, you got to be close, and you have to take dmg, avenger can choose which. It would simply make no sense for brawler to get a heavy loss to HP or life return, because a brawler has no means to avoid it. A brawler is right there next to the tank, and has to live, or deal with all the tricks the enemy may pull out, that means they either take dmg, or run away and stop dealing dmg. ranged attacks dont suffer this penalty, with a good tank, they will very rarely take any dmg. they suffer no real penalty for being rooted or snared in terms of dmg. brawler does. I had to log off my melee charachter go get my all around charachter and suit him up as an avenger to fight kigatilik, because of the nature of his powers. just being around the tank was a danger, which impacted the whole fight.
    Brawler can not use ranged attacks effectively at all, in any case where this would be advantagous, they will not be. you cant ignore that. lunge is not the same, it still requires you to get in the mix, toe to toe, and take some of whats being dealed out, your threat generation is the same as guardian, you may turn some heads.
    now if you compare avengers survivability or long term stamina to guardian or sentinel or protector, i have to laugh, because it is obviously not going to be as survivable, that is the point of the role? if you want to live, then be a guardian and give up your dmg, if you plan to survive by blocking building up energy and doing some dmg once in awhile, then uhhhhhhh your not cut out to be offense.
    brawler has to take dmg, avenger does not, if your talking about solo builds, then since soloing is generally about surviving and dealing dmg, of course the balanced classes are going to look good. Ill tell you this, if i do a 6.8K (non crit)force cascade, screw that i can get even more dmg with an active offense on top. knock enemies across the room, then pop a defensive passive unbreakable, how many enemies will be left? can you really say that is not power?

    btw just to be clear here, avenger has no penalty on any type of dmg, it simply doesnt have a bonus to melee dmg, however you can still use ranged attacks up close to little to no detriment, you can use your melee if you want on avenger but properly built your ranged will does as much if not more
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Where do people get the crazy notion that just because avenger role users can attack from range while brawler role users have to get up close that avengers can attack with impunity from a position of complete safety? I have yet to see a mob in this game that did not have a 100' attack that they use the entire time they are closing to within 50' even if they are supposedly a melee-centric mob. Being at 100' is no more or less dangerous than being at 10'. Especially since there is no miss chance in this game. Every attack is guaranteed to hit its target. There's no guarantee that it will do significant damage especially if the target is using several stacked defenses, but it WILL hit regardless.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Okay people..... Can we get to the actual discussion about the pts build? Not this age old debate that should be located in its own thread. There are soome changes that need to be made on this build and unfortunately this thread isn't issuing them. Start a new thread for the Avenger needs buffing/ Enrage or Focus need nerfing. We need to discuss the fixes that will make the game enjoyable; Not annoy each other and the devs with completely off topic debates.

    On Topic: Heavy weapons looks good, Lacks Actual useful utilities (Read: The Brick needs Acssess to an Active offense and Defense and at least one none pre scaled heal since you guys don't wanna move Beastial over to Might where it belongs.) and hits like a giant Foam bat. (Especially powers like earth splitter; which is a tier 3. It deals less damage then the tier 1s.) Arc of Ruin is where it should be. The block needs something new to differentiate it from other blocks. It looks cool, but is just a retaliiation clone. Alot of the powers have scaling issues as well but that will eventually be fixed. The disoriants need to have a point or be scrapped alltogether in favor of a more usefull effect. Set also needs a 360* attack (possibly a maintain} that has acsess to challenging strikes;And a couple of single target options that possibly don't knockback but knock up or down, and have acssess Crippling challenge. Annihalates dvantage needs a 10-20sec internal cooldown put on it to keep the game fair (for both mobs and players). The Lunge needs a custom advantage. And the rooting while melee needs to go now, idc how heavy the weapon is. The audio also needs normalizing and sound effects that make more sense.

    As long as the Lair and instance brings actual NEW content to higher levels (I'm talkin bout Level 35-40 not 20-30)I'm all for it. This game needs multiple things to look forward to at endgame, not just a few lairs that'll get stagnant after a while.

    Also Someone desparately needs to take a look at the tailor and fix those bugs.... not to mention remove the damn restrictions on costume pieces and let the players decide what looks riight.

    Otherwise I'm enthused to see what the next patch will bring us.

    -Xiro
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    ^---Everything Arylle said + If you can't make the tailor changes in time with the cost issue..make the tailor free until you have such time to work on it.

    Also....

    -Please please please fix the costume save naming issue asap.
    -Please balance out the weapon skins between HW and SB/DB so we have weapon sets.
    -Skewer looks weird with 2/3rds of the weapon options...perhaps this one should be a SB power(or at least have itself cloned over to SB).
  • Archived PostArchived Post Posts: 1,156,071 Arc User
    edited April 2011
    Galeforce wrote:
    The only thing missing from your calculations are energy generation and efficiency... Avenger role only has access to two forms of energy generation: Energy Builders and Energy Unlocks. Sentinel role has access to 4 kinds of energy genration: EBs, EUs, Blocking and innate powerful energy return when below equilibrium. This innate return by sentinels is so strong that I can run IDF, minigun and concussion beams for full maintains of both mg and cb with four pets out and still not run completely out of energy. Sentinel may do less damage than a similarly buff stacked avenger, but it can do so on a more constant basis where the avenger is going to have to eventually stop and use his energy builder.

    I dunno how far the pets tip the DPS equation, I only have had a few chars with one pet power and it wasn't a lot of abuse, though I could see it add up in a swarm.

    However, one of my first level 40s was a dedicated avenger fire character and this was back when it was painful to level anything. And those low levels were painful... until i got flashfire. I forget when the point was, but there was a definite point where my fire avenger turned into a perpetual feedback loop of burning face melting death. If I toss an EB attack it's 1 or 2 bolts at most, that thermal reverberation combined with everything is on fire and flaming patches everywhere just keeps that endurance pool stoked. Not sure I could sustain pets and IDF while doing all that, however I smacked a group of critters with a fireball flashfire and then sustained conflagation full tilt. I ran out of things to burn about halfway through the sustain and ended the conflag at 50% endurance which refilled to full an instant later. This character is pre/rec to boot my max endurance is 156. End/Rec is probably scarier. I will state again however, I didn't reach that state until later in the game. If they keep retooling energy unlocks that might help things but who knows.

    I actually went to the task of calculating how much of a damage bonus I got on my conflagation cause all this talk about damage got me curious. Came up to +409% damagein short bursts (using immolation) and +345% for the long run. Largely because unstable accelerant gives me another +50% bonus damage which is multiplied into that stack of multiples. hmmmm I know you are using concussor beam and I don't know power armor like the back of my hand but IIRC you could squeeze a damage debuff off too so you'd get stacking multiples.

    I think the strongest boost you could give to an Avengers energy honestly is to give a boost to energy unlock returns. I lean on that heavily on all my blasty characters to keep my endurance pool filled while I press an attack. Energy on block would be nice, I admit, but my avengers spend most of their time attacking, and energy unlocks reward you for doing that.

    As I said before, you can test avengers with endurance on block by making an avenger archetype though. Tempests and infernos have all the attributes of an avenger EXCEPT they gain endurance by blocking.
Sign In or Register to comment.