ScarySai

Alright, I'm just going to address something really quick. Being a min/maxer, good at the game, or doing high end content isn't elitism. Stop using the term like that, it's wrong.

First half is right. Going past cap still boosts debuff resistance and additionally works as a buffer to prevent your actual value from dropping lower than cap. Edit: whoops, someone beat me to it.

Why would you revive this thread?

Sentinels are basically an attempt to create the 'pure ranged with an armor' archetype, but they're balanced in a way where they just kinda end up as a poor man's SoA. As it stands, they're supposed to be your group's 'sniper', or something like that. The dude that spots and weakens priority targets, but with more emphasis on blasting than say, a corr or defender. Problem is that a soldier of arachnos, for all intents and purposes, fills this role 5000% better. Between their leadership, debuffs and general usefulness at every level with their leadership, they're so much better at the hybrid blaster/support role as a baseline, even with most of their mace/pack abilities being garbage, the sheer amount of utility offered by venom nade and their leadership buffs can't be understated. Best way to look at sentinels would be to loosen some of the AoE restrictions in some cases and make the inherent much less terrible to activate. The way nuke damage calculation works on targets that aren't taped to your forehead is so unnecessarily restrictive. And unlike other things with the game, they can't blame Paragon for this one, Sentinels are a purely HC creation.

SS is untouched and savage for scrappers/stalkers had crit rates 'fixed', which did kill the set for stalkers, but brute was always the best version for savage anyway. TW was adjusted, I was never a fan of the set, personally - but the fixes make me care for it even less.

That's what the mods use to murder posts.

Let's just all agree that I'm right and everyone else is wrong.

Inb4 40% defense hardcap proposal that has nothing to do with the thread.

Certain sets excel on one over the other. Savage will always be best on a brute, super strength will always be better on a tank.

Nah, not that far (As hilarious as that would be.), the cap as it was before they changed fury to be more manageable in teams when you aren't the main aggro magnet.

I'm personally of the opinion that a damage capped brute should be the deadliest thing in the game, at least among the melee ATs. Anger the hulk and he not only kills you, but he kills your entire city. But even if we don't go that far, I'd like to see their damage cap back to where it was before, at the very least.

Not wrong, I just find the trend of people going "here's my awful idea, I did the math, use your own math to prove my idea wrong!" to be generally annoying. The idea isn't in the game, so any math provided for it is worthless.

No. The idea sucks, so your math is irrelevant. Game design is more than just bad ideas backed by questionable math.

This one's simple. Imagine if you could actually tell how long each CC effect on you will last so you can respond appropriately, instead of just seeing "stunned" or whatever in big red letters.

That idea is terrible and you genuinely need to give up on it, especially in a totally unrelated thread like this.

To be more accurate, it benefits certain powersets more than others. An ice blaster gets way more out of procs than a fire blaster, but the fire blaster also doesn't really need them to do scary things.

I still consider competently built brutes better than tanks overall. That said, I'd love to see that very strange damage cap nerf undone. Reducing it because fury was easier to cap is weird, because well played brutes don't have fury issues, especially solo.

This thread is just full of comedians.

Apparently all it takes to be a power gaming elitist is to point out the objective fact that sentinels don't hold a candle to blasters with minimal investment, with blasters just having higher potential overall. I also think comparing them to blasters I'd a bit unfair though. Soldiers of arachnos are basically what sentinels wish they could be. Tank buff was mostly fine. I just take issue with the damage cap nerf, as I never had issue maintaining fury, a damage capped brute should be scary.

Blaster nerfs are unlikely. Maybe fire blast will get a love tap, but really - overall blast set buffs are more likely than blaster nerfs.

Now that videos are back, I do hope the enthusiasm for this thread picks back up.

Today is the day forum arguments become a lot shorter.

Dismissing my valid responses as deflections is a good way to get me to dismiss your outrageous claims (with no evidence, by the way.) That go against ingame experience and general consensus. The fact you honestly believe blasters can't drop +4 bosses in seconds is very telling.