How to fix Electric blast

[Leogunner]

12 hours ago, Frostweaver said:

You still don't get it. It is not the fact that the secondary effect is sub-par. It is not... It is simply TOO late of a secondary effect, especially for the price in damage you pay.

Every other set that has mitigation, that effect takes place IMMEDIATELY to mitigate damage the moment it is cast. Late Mitigation works fine for constrollers or defenders who have other sources of mass mitigation. And every other set that has decidedly BETTER IMMEDIATE mitigation, also have considerably better Damage than Electric Blast.

 

That's the very thing I DO get. That electric blast is better suited for another AT is analogous to fire blast being less suited for those same ATs. Again, it's the same for melee ATs. 

 

I get that, for a Defender, at least fire blast is less shitty damage, but that goes without saying for every blast set compared. You'll still do more damage with elec on a blaster. 

 

12 hours ago, Frostweaver said:

Electric Blast is clear evidence of that mean streak. And your apologism isn't helping anyone.

The proponent argument seems to consistently assume things, be it not understanding, having little experience, having a mean streak or some other retarded crap. If you can't form a proper argument then so be it. 

 

That being said, I never said that the set shouldn't get changes, I just don't think the changes it should get must conform to the needs of a particular AT, in this case Blasters. More avenues of change should differentiate it from existing sets. Conforming to other sets isn't bad (such as fixing the recharge of the nuke) but I'd like to see changes to its unique aspects rather than giving it the same tier 3 blast or souped up DPS. 

[Galaxy Brain]

@Frostweaverno need to call Crysta a monkey / etc. That doesnt lead to anything but negativity. 

 

As for the base comparison, I mean using the same secondary / same enhancements (or as close as possible) for comparison. I've recently done this for every single scrapper primary on Test and gotten very interesting results based on several criteria set by both other forumites and the GMs themselves. Im not the only tester there either, just to show variance based on player. Perhaps this should be expanded to blaster primaries too?

 

Anyways, in my experience comparing elec blast on it's own vs other blast sets it gets the short end of the stick. It has a second AoE attack but it has an incredibly slow animation, and it loses out on a t3 blast in exchange for Sparky which is not as reliable given how it follows you and might not always target the guy you want (and you have to resume it every minute in another lengthy animation). So before we get to the secondary effects and so on, it already has a little struggle compared to comparable blast sets that have a solid t3 and / or secondary AoE attack.

 

When we look at Sparky's DPS if it were on a single target combined with how you gotta resummon it, on top of the actual damage lost on Thunderous Blast and Short Circuit compared to what the actual damage formulas say they should deal it shows that elec blast is a bit under par. That is without talking about end drain as an effect compared to other secondary effects.

 

That is not to say it doesnt have advantages. The return of endurance on several attacks is nice when it triggers, and pure energy damage is rare to have resisted. The end drain when it works is also great, but we have talked about how it's odd as a mechanic especially for a blaster without heavy investment. 

 

A buff to it as a whole would be welcome as it has inherit annoyances that other sets dont have to deal with. If anything they should play to its strengths and work with Short Circuit, Sparky and Thunderous Blast rather than make it conform to other sets as much.

 

Edit:

@Leogunner, on the note of conforming to different ATs... why not? Why cant Defender and Blaster versions of a set be tweaked to better fit their roles / styles? This already occurs with say, Scrappers and Tanker melee sets.

Edited October 28, 2019 by Galaxy Brain

[Frostweaver]

I formed a proper argumnent, your motivation is simply highly suspect. WHY are you defending a set that is clearly broken for blasters?

And I didn't say that it was GOOD for defenders, I implied strongly that it was less utterly broken. Electric Blast underperforms across all AT's, it's simply that defenders and corrupters have a method to leverage it's crappy secondary effect.

And if you had actually read my post, I was pointing out that the initial developers had a mean streak, not the misguided fools defending electric blast. Way to skim for Drama, buddy. But if you would like all the OTHER examples I have found of Statesman's 'mean streak' I would be happy to oblige you.

@Galaxy Brain I was referring to the old expression 'nerf monkeys'. Basically those who mindlessly peck at a million keyboards trying to make something work, and then when they never come up with Shakespeare's complete works they attempt to prevent anyone else from succeeding where they have failed.

Edited October 28, 2019 by Frostweaver

[Crysta Clear]

What annoyances? I don't have any issue with Short Circuit, I love having it for those enemies against whom it deals basically double damage. Plenty of enemies are tagged as EMP-vulnerable. Praetorian Clockworks, Freakshow, Arachnos Tarantula units, the Clockwork Menders that Arachnos and Longbow sometimes spawn with, all the IDF's bots, literally anything that is a member of the Nemesis Army, Malta's Titan robots...

 

Thunderous Blast's animation time is a non-issue because you open an encounter with your T9 nuke. If you're in the middle of a fight, using Thunderous Blast is wasting half its potential as there will be some enemies in the mob group that have already gone down. It doesn't start the actual battle until after the animation has finished, so you can feel free to immediately follow it up with Ball Lightning for some more wide-spread chaos. If the animation time of Thunderous Blast is something that you are finding yourself needing to consider, then quite simply, you are not using it properly.

 

I'll give you Voltaic Sentinel being awkward, but I skipped it as I hate pets and summons in the first place, so even if it was good I would've skipped it. That being said, I don't ever touch my Lore slot pets' command buttons either, and they just kind of follow me and pick their own targets. I've never once had them aggro something I or my party hadn't already aggro'd, though they don't always focus fire a specific enemy with me, and I have noticed they are a significant increase in DPS. So if the Voltaic Sentinel is anything like unmicromanaged Lore slot Storm Elementals, then maybe it isn't very awkward after all.

Edited October 28, 2019 by Crysta Clear

[Frostweaver]

So you skip a set-defining power that in essence replaces most set's biggest st attack outside of snipe, and declare that it's okay?

Edited October 28, 2019 by Frostweaver

[Crysta Clear]

I absolutely declare that's okay. It's not really set-defining either. Electric Blast's set-defining feature is draining endurance, which, even on a Blaster, I have found useful. But it doesn't matter, because it seems like it's not only me with whom you're arguing in incredibly bad faith, Frostweaver. I'm starting to think that nothing that goes through your head ever actually matters. 🙂

Edited October 28, 2019 by Crysta Clear

[Frostweaver]

Just now, Crysta Clear said:

I absolutely declare that's okay. It's not really set-defining either. Electric Blast's set-defining feature is draining endurance, which, even on a Blaster, I have found useful.

Good for you. Remind me what your Electric Blaster's Name is again, So I can make sure not to invite you when I need a real blaster?

[Crysta Clear]

Mareth. Please block me. I don't ever want to spend time with you in-game.

[Leogunner]

17 minutes ago, Frostweaver said:

I formed a proper argumnent, your motivation is simply highly suspect. WHY are you defending a set that is clearly broken for blasters?

 

I'm assuming you're replying to my post. 

 

I don't feel you formed a proper argument because you're obviously basing said argument on false pretenses. I'm not defending the set (although @Crysta Clearseems to be). I'm a believer in open debate and discussion and you are advocating for a change. I don't just jump on a bandwagon, especially when we're talking about power creep.

 

17 minutes ago, Frostweaver said:

And I didn't say that it was GOOD for defenders, I implied strongly that it was less utterly broken. Electric Blast underperforms across all AT's, it's simply that defenders and corrupters have a method to leverage it's crappy secondary effect.

You ask why I defend the set and this is partly why I entered the discussion. It's not a crappy secondary effect. Had you formed a reasoned opinion on this matter rather than exaggerate, I probably would have continued spectating. 

 

17 minutes ago, Frostweaver said:

And if you had actually read my post, I was pointing out that the initial developers had a mean streak, not the misguided fools defending electric blast. Way to skim for Drama, buddy. But if you would like all the OTHER examples I have found of Statesman's 'mean streak' I would be happy to oblige you.

You assume the devs had a mean streak... Or do you have actual proof? Or are you so short sighted to not understand when you yourself are making assumptions? 

Edited October 28, 2019 by Leogunner

[Galaxy Brain]

Due to having a bit extra time to cast, even with the range I find TB to miss out on some targets on a team setting as other attacks get flown in compared to how other nukes can more reliably wipe the floor a bit more quickly.

 

I think that some tests are in order like with Scrappers though to get some data on the matter. I'll say I do like how SC does bonus EMP damage.... but why not all Elec attacks? The set deals less damage unless bots are involved and even still SC has a long cast time too.

 

Come to think of it, electricity has a trope of being "fast" but elec blast is saddled with a handful of very slow powers 😛

[Crysta Clear]

That's objectively not true, the missing targets due to animation speed thing. Targets are selected when you press the button. If enemies run off toward your teammates after you hit the button, but before the animation finishes? You are still hitting exactly the same number of targets as you would if the enemies stood still.

[Leogunner]

5 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Due to having a bit extra time to cast, even with the range I find TB to miss out on some targets on a team setting as other attacks get flown in compared to how other nukes can more reliably wipe the floor a bit more quickly.

 

I think that some tests are in order like with Scrappers though to get some data on the matter. I'll say I do like how SC does bonus EMP damage.... but why not all Elec attacks? The set deals less damage unless bots are involved and even still SC has a long cast time too.

 

Come to think of it, electricity has a trope of being "fast" but elec blast is saddled with a handful of very slow powers 😛

I could see adding another attack to VS that it only uses on EMP vulnerable targets. Could be practically and plethora of options. 

[Galaxy Brain]

8 minutes ago, Crysta Clear said:

That's objectively not true, the missing targets due to animation speed thing. Targets are selected when you press the button. If enemies run off toward your teammates after you hit the button, but before the animation finishes? You are still hitting exactly the same number of targets as you would if the enemies stood still.

I'm talking about other AoEs going in before TB finishes and applies damage.

[Crysta Clear]

Why change anything at all though? Lightning Bolt and Zapp deal absolutely conformed damage, recharge and range for the single-target and snipe in comparable sets, with the exception of Moonbeam which has 175 range instead of 150 for some odd reason. Ball Lightning does the second most of the early targeted AoE's, with only Fire Ball outdamaging it and only then by ~10 base damage.

 

And that makes sort of sense, a little. I would just save Thunderous Blast and nuke the next mob group, while the other people in your party's nukes are recharging, if that's really a problem you're encountering. I've never encountered it, though.

Edited October 28, 2019 by Crysta Clear

[Galaxy Brain]

Part of it comes from incarnate nukes and the general high output that maxed out characters can achieve. There are times when mobs can be wiped from non nukes as well in the time your nuke fires off, which means that faster AoEs become more reliable to fire off as the team keeps momentum. 

 

Nukes, and TB, still do work when you're first to the fight sure, but in the same time frame there are other AoEs at the high end that can make the efficiency take a hit.

 

But anyways, tagging elec sets as all EMP attacks would be interesting but it needs careful consideration for how many enemies are actually tagged as such.

Edited October 28, 2019 by Galaxy Brain

[Shazbotacus]

I wish people gave this much of a damn about getting mercs fixed. Or perhaps there’s virtually no bickering about it because it’s so unanimously agreed upon?

[Frostweaver]

ninjas and animals suck just as much as mercs, so it's not 'spectacularly bad' like electric blast.

Edited October 28, 2019 by Frostweaver

[Galaxy Brain]

Just now, Frostweaver said:

ninjas and animals suck just as much as mercs, so it's not an 'spectacularly bad' like electric blast.

Elec is not spectacularly bad, no set is that bad. Compared to other blast sets though it definitely is on the low end.

 

Mercs comes up every so often but MM balance is weird.

[Frostweaver]

1 minute ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Elec is not spectacularly bad, no set is that bad.

Energy Melee

[Galaxy Brain]

Just now, Frostweaver said:

Energy Melee

Ok fair lol.

 

In general, there are no sets that are unplayably awful though. Even EM and Mercs "work" even if they are a slog.

 

Elec Blast just needs some love to be brought to par.

[Frostweaver]

5 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Ok fair lol.

 

In general, there are no sets that are unplayably awful though. Even EM and Mercs "work" even if they are a slog.

 

Elec Blast just needs some love to be brought to par.

That's exactly Right. Electric Blast needs some love. It's not 'power Creep' to want to bring it up to a level where it's an appealing alternative for modern IO builds.

To be fair, even balancing the IO sets a little might help. I mean, there's accurate healing and accurate to-hit debuff... There is truly a Dearth of endurance modification options.

Edited October 28, 2019 by Frostweaver

[Leogunner]

7 minutes ago, Frostweaver said:

That's exactly Right. Electric Blast needs some love. It's not 'power Creep' to want to bring it up to a level where it's an appealing alternative for modern IO builds.

To be fair, even balancing the IO sets a little might help. I mean, there's accurate healing and accurate to-hit debuff... There is truly a Dearth of endurance modification options.

Oh it's power creep, alright.  But power creep isn't an excuse used to dismiss a suggestion, it's a reason to be critical of changes.  Criticizing =/= "shouting down" or dismissing.

[Bossk_Hogg]

3 hours ago, Crysta Clear said:

Targeted and Location AoE Blaster T9's in Mid's read out as follows, at a base Lv. 50 value without enhancements or passives of any kind.

 

Geyser: 125s recharge, 219 base damage
Blizzard: 170s recharge, 417 base damage (over the whole 15 second duration, in the form of 75 ticks each of 2.78 lethal and 2.78 cold, need to keep them inside it for 15 seconds somehow)

Thunderous Blast: 170s recharge, 250 base damage

Overcharge: 125s recharge, 219 base damage

Full Auto: 60s recharge, 178 base damage (lethal, bad typing / commonly resisted by most enemies)
Rain of Arrows: 60s recharge, 225 base damage (lethal, bad typing / commonly resisted by most enemies)

 

So it seems to me that, of all the Ranged AoE Blaster T9's, only Thunderous Blast deals the same 250 base damage that the PBAoE Blaster T9's deal pretty uniformly across the board (with the exception of Fire Blast's Inferno, the outlier for its DoT effect). And its recharge is 25 seconds longer than the PBAoE T9's that clock in at universally 145s across the board.

 

There is no buff required, here. Thunderous Blast deals equal damage to the PBAoE T9's without requiring the Electric Blaster to close into melee. In exchange for the safety of range, you have a 25s longer base recharge. This literally is objective mathematics, here.

 

You're wrong though. COH has a formula for damage powers, ntaking into account radius, recharge + arcanatime, and AT modifier. Range, animation time, and damage type aren't actually a factor, but even if they were, T Blast should deal more, with its long animation and shorter range than the other ranged nukes (60- vs 80).

 

Given that the area is the same for all the "standard" nukes, you can simply divide the total damage by recharge to find the coefficient.

Overcharge/Geyser (ranged): 219/125 = 1.75

Blackstar/Nova/Psychic Wail/etc (PBAE): 250.2/145 = 1.72

Thunderous Blast: 250.2/170 = 1.47

 

Based on the damage formula, thunderous blast deals about 85% of the damage it should do. This is an objective fact based on the rules of the game's design. Will you please stop fighting us on this? Sentinel Electric blast already has the right recharge, we just need the other sets to fall in line.

[Troo]

1 hour ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Ok fair lol.

 

In general, there are no sets that are unplayably awful though. Even EM and Mercs "work" even if they are a slog.

 

Elec Blast just needs some love to be brought to par.

Trick Arrow

[Troo]

3 hours ago, Frostweaver said:

So you skip a set-defining power that in essence replaces most set's biggest st attack outside of snipe, and declare that it's okay?

Wow, folks get to choose what they want. If a player skips Rage on SS, is that not 'okay'?