M3z
-
Posts
244 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Articles
Patch Notes
Posts posted by M3z
-
-
22 hours ago, M3z said:
For stalkers in PvP(these changes apply to pvp only), I am completely fine losing the heal ET and double energy focus charges in TF. There is not really a scenario where these benefits are helpful, stalkers cant at all scrap with other melees(their tankiness just lets them out damage race you) so losing the extra benefits for more up front crit damage would be far more useful. I have tested this in 8v8 arena and against a tank 1v1.
EM in pvp doesn't do great enough damage to justify playing this over a blaster. First off when running a melee you are on less targets in general and second the trouble of getting into melee against ranged characters with jaunt etc puts you at massive disadvantage. Now if the damage was increased so the single hits were more threatening rather than just doing slightly more than a single blaster attack that'd put this set in a much better place. Stalkers need to be rewarded for actually landing hits.
Landing an AS is the most difficult it's ever been in the history of this game with jaunt now being meta. So stalkers need very strong ST attacks to make up for this. Drop the heal (you cant scrap and you cant take, you get hit you generally die making the heal useless) get rid of the extra energy focus charge from TF (engagements are no more than 3-4 hits AT MOST) and provide greater crit damage(instead of 28% maybe 50-60%) or partial unresisted crits, either of those could make stalkers more of a threat.
I wish I could post a video on how difficult it actually is to close the distance in this meta, it's a nightmare.
Did some more testing v.s. a min/maxed pvp blaster build (fire/plant) with my min/maxed em/bio stalker, here are the numbers in pvp as to why stalkers could definitely use a bump in damage.
Typical fire/plant attack chain
(Anyone can hit this attack chain 100% of the time)
build up->blaze->strangler->blazing bolt
- Blaze: 384 damage (5 sec cooldown 100 ft+ Ranged)
- Strangler: 676 damage (10 sec cooldown 80ft+ ranged)
- Blazing Bolt 661 damage (Insta cast ranged SNIPE 5 sec cooldown 100ft+ range)
TOTAL: 1721 damage at 80 ft+ range (vs bio stalker)
Typical EM/Bio attack chain
(You will be lucky to get 2 attacks off against a breathing human being)
Build up->total focus(mini crit)(into rehide)->energy transfer(mini crit)->quick cast assassin strike
- Total Focus CRIT: 518 dmg(melee 10 sec CD)
- Energy Transfer CRIT: 696 (melee 6 sec CD)
- Assassin Strike Fast Cast: 441 (melee 7 sec CD)
TOTAL: 1,655 at 8ft range (vs plant blaster)
Notes on my em/bio build: I am running with 77% bonus damage
Conclusion:
- I'm not here to cry about blasters, I'm just giving an example of what you will have to contend with as a stalker and why they will need a bit more to be able to stand a chance
- "What about AS?" In serious 8s scenarios, it can be 3-4-5 spikes before you are able to land an AS, especially given the jaunt meta probably even less, in zones you get an AS off but rarely can you get a follow up other than zapp/moonbeam, the damage equates to around 1100-1300 with a BU+AS+snipe.
- Blaster attack chains which only require you to be within 80 ft of a target do more than a stalker critting multiple times in an attack chain that require you to be within 8ft of target.
- Blazing bolt does the same damage roughly as energy transfer mini critting at literally 10x the range and a lower cooldown and with zero prerequisites(you have to total focus crit to get fast animation!!).
- This was all within build up as well, outside of build up the stalker's numbers were pretty abysmal
Other hilarious notes:
Blaster has 1847 HP+absorb shield(in new patch at least 100-200 hp??)+40% res to ALL
Stalker has 1971 HP with some res/def (ranging from 10-30%) (bio armor)This means, given the numbers above a blaster CAN and WILL stand there and out scrap you as a stalker from RANGE
Anyway I know there are like 2 people on this planet who care about pvping with stalkers but I get really annoyed when I see total focus doing like 250 damage outside of build up.
If other sets can get pvp specific changes, give EM pvp specific changes because as you can see, for how impossibly hard it is to get into melee to begin with you are given less a reward than a blaster attacking at 10x your range than a stalker build that makes immense sacrifices in survivability for damage.
-
3
-
For stalkers in PvP(these changes apply to pvp only), I am completely fine losing the heal ET and double energy focus charges in TF. There is not really a scenario where these benefits are helpful, stalkers cant at all scrap with other melees(their tankiness just lets them out damage race you) so losing the extra benefits for more up front crit damage would be far more useful. I have tested this in 8v8 arena and against a tank 1v1.
EM in pvp doesn't do great enough damage to justify playing this over a blaster. First off when running a melee you are on less targets in general and second the trouble of getting into melee against ranged characters with jaunt etc puts you at massive disadvantage. Now if the damage was increased so the single hits were more threatening rather than just doing slightly more than a single blaster attack that'd put this set in a much better place. Stalkers need to be rewarded for actually landing hits.
Landing an AS is the most difficult it's ever been in the history of this game with jaunt now being meta. So stalkers need very strong ST attacks to make up for this. Drop the heal (you cant scrap and you cant take, you get hit you generally die making the heal useless) get rid of the extra energy focus charge from TF (engagements are no more than 3-4 hits AT MOST) and provide greater crit damage(instead of 28% maybe 50-60%) or partial unresisted crits, either of those could make stalkers more of a threat.
I wish I could post a video on how difficult it actually is to close the distance in this meta, it's a nightmare.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Gibson99 said:
More speed. More Jaunt! Nah. I say bring back slows.
You can do both. What if you bring back only slows with no movement speed buff to melee, does that help a set like broadsword or fire melee or any set that don't have access to slows? You'd have to pick armor set that has access to slows, which are not that great (ice armor etc).
Also you are against more movespeed in a game whos main selling point is the movement speed?
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, America's Angel said:
All valid points. Personally I'd love CoH PVP to be balanced around 1v1, 1v1 is what I like the most. But my two big concerns for balancing around it would be how the current 8v8 meta is affected, and how much it would change the PVP system as a whole. (Change stuff too much and it'll kill off PVP ala Issue 13.)
Worth talking about more post i27, though. My initial thoughts are we buff the underperforming melee sets (ice armour, dark armour, titan weapons, war mace, etc) to match the top ones (regen, EA, Inv, Super Strength, Dark Melee, Psy Melee, etc). Once that's done, then we can look at tweaking melee to make them balanced vs ranged. Maybe raising their damage, and reducing their durability is the answer? I don't know. But we'd need to buff the underperforming melee sets first IMO.
And if we could do this without touching ranged? All the better.
I would never say "reduce the durability" of underperforming sets for melee or ranged or anything. I mean sets like dark armor are absolute trash in pvp and need to be buffed. But there are certain power combinations of "meta pvp builds" such as bio tanks that need to be addressed because they are literally unkillable even in coordinated team pvp scenarios. I'm also not saying ranged doesn't need to be adjusted too, because it definitely does and has the biggest advantage. I just think melee needs to be able to actually kill things in pvp and if that means a reduction in survivability in the overperforming sets like bio then yes let's do it.
Going off on a tangent here so this isn't entirely directed towards you, America's Angel:
I think the community just needs to decide whether we want to balance around this pvp that is in the remnants of i13 mechanics(essentially what we are doing right now) or if we want to spend the time and redo the mechanics so that sets function somewhat similarly to how they do in pve. This would mean revamps of mez mechanics, diminishing returns and a look at procs as well as unresisted damage/debuffs to match their similar effectiveness in pve which would lead to more build viability.
Why? Because the sets were originally designed around slows/mezzes, base damage and other mechanics, not around procs(which often makes up 60% of the damage of current meta attack chains!), 2-4 second mez durations and no real effective slows. If you don't add new mechanics you end up with a damage race(because there are no other influential mechanics to balance around), which essentially sums up this current meta. Either you're an emp, or your a build that can cram as many procs into your attack chain as possible (blasters).
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, America's Angel said:
*Fightclub eye twitch*
I think the durability of some sets (regen, invuln, Elec, etc) are fine, and other weaker sets (Dark, Ice, etc) need bringing up. IMO, ranged should be balanced against ranged, and melee should be balanced against melee. This is a team game. Blasters don't need to be able to kill melee characters at range, Scrappers don't need to be able to catch and kill blasters in melee.
Agree with the rest of your post, though. Taunt 100% needs nerfing. I like that it forces enemies to get in close. But I dislike HOW close they have to get, and that it's perma. Way overpowered.
Also bigtime agree that melee attacks need their range increasing due to server tics. (Maybe to ~15ft like Knockout Blow? I can always land that fine.) It would need to be unenhanceable, though. (I always laugh when the alpha slot boosts my KO Blow range).
Ranged balanced against ranged and melee balanced against melee is myopic in terms growing the pvp population. It just adds another layer of unintuitive knowledge a player must have (on top of all the other nonsense a player must know to even be remotely competitive in even the most casual zone pvp). What the game SHOULD be balanced around is small teams and 1v1s, which is what it was balanced around pre i13, which while not perfect, allowed for 5x the amount of viable builds as available now. It should also go back to its PVE roots meaning, what makes your build strong in PVE should also apply to pvp (this is not happening anytime soon).
This would mean both melee and ranged should be threats to each other. I always link this vid I did a long time ago of what I envision melee to be! In the clips I'm going against rad/therms, fortunatas and other builds that were top tier builds at their time(much better than bs/sr!!) and beating them. It was a lot more interesting time in pvp.
I love playing stalker in arena so I don't want to play a CoH where melee and range both play their own pvp meta games and don't interact.
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, Alouu said:
This, except as a buff that lasts for ~10 seconds and is linked to landing a melee attack. That way it doesn't make just using fossilize and taunt any better, and only buffs the melee hit > more melee hits playstyle.
Edit: Also doing it this way allows it to limit the buff to aggressive play only, rather than also buffing evading.
I think this is a good change you are suggesting.
I also forgot to mention as well, if we were to do this change,I'd nerf taunt, give target taunt suppression after initial taunt(10 secs of taunt immunity after initial taunt duration runs out), remove stackable -range. Or at the very least make taunt so it's not a perma cage and at most you can have 60% uptime on a target.
I think we need to tweak melee to not be invulnerable (removal of barrier is good step in that direction), not have taunt be ridiculous and for them to actually be aggressive and threatening in an almost 0 CC environment. I'd also have different opinions on the balancing of melee if we were to ever re enable slows/revamp the mez system. The changes I'm suggesting are really just bandaids but something is better than nothing.
I wish I could post vids, it's so hard to get into melee against anyone moving around. Even jaunt puts you where the target was 1-2 seconds before. Also follow STOPS when you are like 10-15 feet away so that can screw you over big time when chasing. Manual following is of course an option(and really the best option), but in a jaunt meta world you often only have seconds to even get one attack off before your target jaunts into the skybox.
-
I would say raise max movespeed on melee by 10-20% (instead of 92 maybe they move 105-110 or something) and maybe give them 2-3 ft more base range on their attack(this is just to help with the low tickrate of the server and ping more than anything).
-
3
-
-
Is acid arrow that bad when you can slot achilles and annihilation for -40% res?
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, siolfir said:
To be fair Stalkers could almost guarantee it, but you'd have to not get hit during Placate's animation and you'd lose damage for it if you were already fighting.
Not that many Stalkers take Placate anymore.
put chance for hide proc into TF
also I've rolled and min/max'd my em/bio stalker can we make this patch live thx :)
-
22 hours ago, macskull said:
Yeah as far as I know, AS's crit damage (slow cast only) is the only unresisted damage left in the game right now. I don't know that I'd make other Stalker crits entirely unresisted. Maybe 25% or 50% or something. That would definitely need some tweaking, and should only apply to melee attack crits. Can probably make similar arguments for Scrapper crits as well, and make a smaller (10%?) portion of Tanker/Brute damage unresisted. I can't comment too much on individual power tweaks since most of my PvP Stalker experience was either on an Elec/WP in RV on Freedom on live, or a PvE-built Psi/SR on Excelsior here.
Exclusive of the table in the OP or my spitballing above, Greater Psi Blade is absolutely the best non-AS/non-snipe Stalker attack because it does about 33% more damage than the damage formula suggests it should (it's about 206 instead of 153) and it can occasionally gain another few hundred damage from Insight and it can take hold procs.
The mechanics in this game such as damage formula, mez duration, squishies walking around with 40% res to all etc etc and any other mechanics and even the lack of unresisted damage was all balanced around (or at least in Castle's stupid vision) i13 movement suppression. So when you reference any design framework from Castle I think we just have to remember that we are working within the busted remnants of Castle's i13 which was balanced around parameters such as 0 movement(hence why there probably wasn't unresisted damage because engagements left both ranged/melee with an equal exchange of attacks).
I know you ended up agreeing with me anyways but my point is in this new high movement based meta we play in, as a stalker there is a good chance you won't get 2 attacks off, unless the target doesn't know what they're doing or they're distracted. AS leaves you a million miles away from your target usually (long cast time) so if you do manage to get your second hit off you should be rewarded and should be able to get a kill. Given how much resistance is in this game and also that I don't think 185 feels high enough (need to test this) I think the unresisted damage for stalker crits will allow them to get the 2 hit kills they used to have access to.
If they get it scrappers should too I think.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, MoisesG said:
and that attitude is why most people dont pvp and it is practically dead.
it was just a question.
It's because the mechanics don't make sense in pvp, not because some guy on the forums said a mean thing
-
1
-
2
-
-
Maybe make the crits partial unresisted as well.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, BrandX said:
Oh, I promise you, Scrappers and Stalkers would gladly give up the heal for crits doing the damage they are supposed to be doing and not just the 28% 😛
100% I would give up the healing for more damage any day.
-
1
-
-
33 minutes ago, ABlueThingy said:
I'm sorry, I was trying to provoke more discussion. Both for my own ignorance and because it might help for other people to read about PVPer thoughts.
Thank you! That was enlightening!
A follow up question: Do the changes to the powexec_target change anything? With the targeting macros in PVE you can track Tsoo teleporters through walls even because it ignores line of sight. Hypothetically you could juke behind walls or under cover and then teleport out to hit your target. And you wouldn't have to aim when teleport-following the target.
If you had a teammate hidden or a stationary pet you might even be able to rig a set of binds/macros to bounce back to them after you attack.
The changes might just mean people may occasionally jaunt through a building here or there, but overall because powerexec_target doesn't track moving targets that well (you end up far behind the target usually) in combination with the slight delay after coming out of jaunt animation means there's a good chance your spike timing won't be synchronized. I think will mean people will opt to just continue spiking the old fashioned way. People generally save their jaunt charges for going up to raptor pack, if a target caller sees you wasting your jaunt charges pulling off crazy horizontal maneuvers you are at risk of getting called.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, ABlueThingy said:
Could you elaborate? I'm not much of a PVPer myself so I've not heard about Jaunt being used in PVP.
Jaunt as it relates to the arena community is it provides an alternative defensive option other than just tanking a spike with greens or phasing. If you are paying good attention you can jaunt out of danger before or during the initial parts of a spike usually living. People tend to jaunt up and use arena temp jetpack (raptor pack) and wait til the coast is clear before coming back down.
Before this it was, you'd force a target to phase during a spike, then while they were in NoPhase (aka they can't use phase again for 2 mins) you'd kill them and it was really hard to do anything about it. Now you have another defensive option to survive a spike.
The issue in the arena community is we're in this meta of everyone jaunting/raptor packing around and it creates this very unfun/boring gameplay (in my opinion and a lot of other people I've talked to).
THAT SAID, there needs to be more defensive options outside of just phase but jaunt is just so stupid that it's basically like having a 16 second(the time it takes to get 2 charges of jaunt to jaunt up) get out of jail card. Not to mention it's very advantageous to just pre jaunt up all the time just to get high ground and deter spikes on yourself leading to situations where teams just have half their team flying around. It looks as stupid as it sounds.
I have a couple of propositions/ideas:
1. Increase cooldown on jaunt, maybe double it or triple it.
2. Remove "global cooldown/rooting" after jaunting, meaning you can instantly attack or jaunt after jaunting. For me this would help with jaunt chasing, sometimes I jaunt chase and the guy is no where to be found because I have no idea if they jaunted up twice and then forward or jaunted up 3 times. Once they are out of the render zone it's hard to chase people with jaunt because you just have no idea where they are and the .3 second delay really seems to mess me up personally. I like the mobility in COH so I would totally be okay with everyone zipping around at a million miles per hour.
3. Add a different NoPhase condition to jaunt, Maybe if you Jaunt 4 times during a 60 second duration a different NoPhase(could be called NoJaunt) timer is applied to you (different from regular phase). Meaning you'd have 2 different times you could escape with jaunt per minute as well as being able to phase once every 2 mins. This would reset on death.
Anyway, these are just some ideas I'm not really sold on any of the numbers I've provided, these are just rough ideas to work off of or throw away. ALSO I AM NOT SAYING DO ALL OF THESE IDEAS TOGETHER. Really if there were just more mechanics in the game teams had to juggle other than just damage/heals (this is why I keep bringing up slows guys 🙂 ) then I think things would also be better for everyone.
-
2
-
3
-
-
2 EF stacks should mean ET just deletes your target.
-
2
-
3
-
-
"Why not remove accolades?"
Damage is extremely high(because of procs), there are many builds that can kill a 1606 AT in one attack chain (alot of common pvp blaster builds and some stalkers) so having more HP is a requirement to not instantly exploding from pvp min/max builds.
A follow up question might be:
"Why not just cap everyone's HP?"
This would create more build freedom, but it'd all just end up going to +dmg +range and things like that creating bigger disparity between melee/range I think. Blasters (by far the strongest AT in the game for pvp) already get a massive boost in range from their snipes (+50% I think?), you add the ability for them to create builds solely focused on adding more range and it just becomes absurd.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Troo said:
@Xanatos I think we could pose similar questions of both the kickballers, zone pvpers and the pvers.
How often do folks visit:
- Bloody Bay
- Siren's Call
- Warburg
- Recluses Victory
- Arena
I like to make decisions that include data, not just gut instinct or personal preference.
My gut instinct says:
- Some roll 50s, skipping 1-49, playing mainly in arena and RV and don't want to be bothered collecting accolades.
- Some play 1-50 and only go to the zones for temps and badges.
- Less likely fall in-between these groups.
Where is the data to confirm or deny these to be true?
My personal preference would be a harshness for some folks, I'm also not forcing it on anyone.
I don't think we should have anything that wasn't earned by the level of the pvp zone.
Globals, IO bonuses, accolades, etc.. Some would argue venomously against that, even though they never or rarely set foot in the zones it would effect.
A lot of these changes are lowering the bar making it easier for people to pvp. If you didn't get hp accolades, you are at a 20% health deficit compared to regular pvpers who know about these things and usually farm up their accolades after PLing. Does it solve all of the hurdles people need to go through like knowing how to build and what AT powerset combos to use? No, but it's a step in the right direction of making pvp min/max builds more accessible.
And also I don't agree that there is much distinction between zoners/arena pvpers, most arena people come from zones (myself included). The only difference I see is playstyle, popping incan to get greens that heal for 1k, jump pack+animation cancelling in the sky(this just makes melees absolutely useless), base teleporting. I'm not even trying to disparage people for doing that (if you don't do it you are at a disadvantage) but it does make for this defensive oriented blaster focused pvp. RV is basically a bunch of jump packing blasters and a couple scrappers/brutes/tankers completely invulnerable in either their t9 or barrier lol. If anyone wants to argue that's fun I would love to see the argument.
-
2 hours ago, barrier said:
I think you need to see what an SS/X/Fossilize Brute can do if played like a blaster in zone. There is very little reason to play a blaster in zone if you have a proper tank/brute build that properly procs KO Blow, Stone Cage and Fossilize. I hate to say this but Madvillain was right on this stuff.
I know exactly what it can do, if you have a brain and greens it's no different than a blaster. that might be the only semi decent melee build, but a far cry from what melee was like pre i13.
what I wish melee was like again:
-
3
-
-
5 minutes ago, barrier said:
I strongly disagree with this point. I never once died on my SS/Rad Brute in 8v8. Not a single time ever. That's because the only real threats to a properly spec'd taunt bot are t4 incarnates.
I recently respec'd that toon into a fossilize build and I can definitely tell you that even before getting barrier, it is probably the most survivable spike toon that I have and it can consistently do an epic ton of damage. I am not seriously worried at all about having incarnates removed. It will probably fare better than now.
melee in organized team is different than zone/small teams. Even then melee in organizes boils down to taunting, if taunting is banned (it is) melee is useless.
Melee in zones/small teams are invulnerable(if running pvp viable build) but aren't really able to get kills.
Overall the verdict on melee outside of fightclub non movement based 1v1s is they are absolute trash. This is from someone who has tried to pvp with both stalkers/scrappers pretty extensively in various formats (zones/8v8s etc).
The solution is a change to the mez system, but that is a very complicated subject that I don't feel like going into in this post lol.
-
1 minute ago, Bopper said:
Test out Energy Melee on Brainstorm (Beta). You'll weep tears of joy at the orange numbers.
I have, and I am shaking and crying (in joy).
-
5
-
1
-
-
I just wanna see those big ol' orange numbers baby.
-
7
-
1
-
-
Temp phase (which doesn't follow no phase rules meaning you can double phase), jump packs and fly packs (the 4 hour ones you can get from p2w vendor) along with all of the base buffs etc are what I have a problem with and should be removed because they aren't fun at all to play against or with and encourages 0 risk defensive gameplay (read boring). If you know what you are doing in zones there is zero reason why you should ever ever die if you are trying.
We are playing in a game with almost 0 CC (2-4 second mez durations are only relevant in arena) or crowd controls (slows literally do not work anymore and since PB -special was taken out of the game are completely non existent) do we really need more escapes?
-
-
Veteran Combatant
-
Indestructible
-
Prescience
-
Oppression
-
Freeze Ray
-
Call to War
-
Special Technique
-
2
-
Focused Feedback: Energy Melee Revamp
in [Open Beta] Focused Feedback
Posted · Edited by M3z
Melee as a whole is just absolute trash, won't go off on that tangent here. But if I can get changes for energy melee to be functional on release for stalkers(like people in the pvp community ALREADY HAVE DONE for trick arrow), stalkers will go from having 1 functional set for pvp to 2. I love the EM changes but as you can see the numbers are still pretty much a joke. Blasters basically get 2 ranged energy transfers worth of damage in snipe (a snipe for god sakes) and strangler. Also the numbers I posted are mini critted ET, without mini crit, ET literally does less damage than blaster range attacks.
What I'm saying is, if you manage to get in melee in pvp, allow the melee AT to do some damage. I mean if blasters, which are tankier(than this particular stalker build) and have 10x more range than I do, can do more damage than me, what is the point?( Give stalkers partially unresisted crits or greater crit damage on ET/TF something. When I first saw the total focus damage I almost thought it was bugged it was so low.
Edit: this isn't really directed towards you siolfir, more just ranting lol