Blaster Secondaries: Why?

[biostem]

19 minutes ago, RialVestro said:

For every other Archetype the secondary powerset is something that compliments their primary powers. The Primary and Secondary work so well together that they blend almost seamlessly together.

Dead enemies can't kill you;  Use your high damage to take enemies out ASAP.  Pick a primary or secondary that provide extra control in order to lock-down or otherwise diminish the threat that enemies pose.  You must look at each ATs performance from a variety of angles;  A blaster may not be able to walk up to a group of enemies and just take them on directly, like a scrapper can, but that's not really the intent of the blaster - They perform best when someone or something else can allow them to deal damage with full abandon.  There are no doubt ways to work around their limitations, but said shortcomings aren't indicative of a lack in the ATs role/performance.

Edited October 25, 2019 by biostem

[Tacopotamus]

8 minutes ago, RialVestro said:

The fact is the Blaster's secondary is really detrimental to it's design rather than a complimentary. Blasters are damage dealers and the Melee attacks do deal a lot of Damage, I'll give it that. But why would you go into Melee to do DPS when there's already another Archetype better suited for it? (Scrappers) That makes about as much sense as a Controller trying to play like a Defender or a Scrapper trying to Tank. You'll never as good as the real thing. Scrappers can provide back up in emergency situations where the actual Tanker has already died, give them cover till they can be rezed and get their toggles back up. Controllers can back up Defenders in a similar way but they should only be as support not trying to take over completely. Blasters really should NEVER BE IN MELEE! Blasters who fight in Melee are suicidal. I do not understand the purpose of a Melee set on a character who can't survive fighting in Melee.

Just throwing my other 2 cents in.  You don’t have to go into the melee zone.  Sometimes the enemy comes to you.  That’s where the punishment is provided.  Sure you can kite!  But FUCK that!  Lay the smack down with a tier 9 and set the example for the poor bastard that dare get close.

 

I honestly don’t understand how people play their blasters as I’m seeing more push on secondaries than I initially thought I’d ever see. Every set has some differences...but for the sets that have blaps, I use them for single target leftovers.  I blast everything in sight and annihilate with any AOE/cones and then clean house.

 

I blast.  I blap.  I fap...errrr, I win.

[EmmySky]

With little or no defense...a blaster will get held, immobed or mezzed some which way....then the enemies come upon you and, while you can still blast them with ranges attacks, you have additional weapons at your disposal for those bad baddies.  I agree with the above poster....way more push back on this than I expected.  

Edited October 25, 2019 by EmmySky

[quixoteprog]

1 hour ago, Omega-202 said:

Why are you comparing "the solo specialist AT" to the "Glass Cannon AoE specialist AT" in a solo based metric test?  

 

You sound like a complete idiot who has lost the thread of the conversation.  Of couse the Scrappers going to win here.  You're racing a sports car and a jeep on flat terrain.  Of course the sports car will win.  But change the scenario, put the Blaster in a large team situation where their AoE matters or where the Scrapper's defenses stop mattering when they're both IOd out at the defense cap, and the Blaster will put the Scrapper to shame. 

I have lost the thread of the conversation? I seem to recall it being about how much sense melee powers make on an AT YOU YOURSELF say is a "Glass Cannon AoE specialist AT". How does that fit with a secondary loaded up with ST melee powers? Now you are saying the blaster only makes sense in a team? I was answering a challenge from someone who claimed that blasters COULD solo such a situation. That is was all "technique" and when I put him to the test he gave up.

 

Now, if you want to test the concept of blasters being built only to be a team AT... I actually would not argue that. But that is the PROBLEM from my perspective.  If you have an AT that is made to be kind of gimped solo but "really shines" when he gets on a team with other people to protect him that is kind of not a hero AT. Not to me.

 

And AGAIN, it still does not explain why these AoE specialists are loaded up with ST melee attacks. But, yeah, I probably don't understand all the complexity because I'm the idiot. Please, illuminate me.

[biostem]

7 minutes ago, quixoteprog said:

If you have an AT that is made to be kind of gimped solo but "really shines" when he gets on a team with other people to protect him that is kind of not a hero AT. Not to me.

So what do you make of many of the support sets, which have ally-only powers?  Are those not heroic?

 

What we're talking about here is not all or nothing;  Blasters' forte is dealing damage - whether single target or AoE, they excel when they can do so unaccosted.  They can accomplish this with a tremendous alpha strike, before the enemy aggroes them, or via other tools at their disposal.

[quixoteprog]

Just now, biostem said:

So what do you make of many of the support sets, which have ally-only powers?  Are those not heroic?

 

What we're talking about here is not all or nothing;  Blasters' forte is dealing damage - whether single target or AoE, they excel when they can do so unaccosted.  They can accomplish this with a tremendous alpha strike, before the enemy aggroes them, or via other tools at their disposal.

So, they can sneak attack foes unawares, which I assume SOME people consider heroic.

 

As for support sets with "ally only powers" I never understood how that was rationalized either. I can make someone else stronger, but not myself? It's kind of the same reasoning that make someone design a ranged fighter who has almost no defense against melee attacks numerous choices of melee powers.

 

I suppose you could characterize such people as heroic in the same sense that Mother Theresa was heroic in her struggle to help other. Blasters then could be characterized as heroic in the way a psychotic killer is heroic if he is a soldier in war time and not some nut killing civilians.

[biostem]

7 minutes ago, quixoteprog said:

So, they can sneak attack foes unawares, which I assume SOME people consider heroic.

 

As for support sets with "ally only powers" I never understood how that was rationalized either. I can make someone else stronger, but not myself? It's kind of the same reasoning that make someone design a ranged fighter who has almost no defense against melee attacks numerous choices of melee powers.

 

I suppose you could characterize such people as heroic in the same sense that Mother Theresa was heroic in her struggle to help other. Blasters then could be characterized as heroic in the way a psychotic killer is heroic if he is a soldier in war time and not some nut killing civilians.

No offense, but I really can't jive with your thinking, here;  To me, heroism is about *how* you use your abilities, not what those abilities are - That's why we can have demon summoning, mind controlling, darkness-blasting heroes, and empathic, light-blasting villains.  The "ally-only" aspect of powers is more about game balance;  Look at Champions Online to see just how out of whack things can get when you can target yourself just as easily, for using powers.

[Haijinx]

1 hour ago, biostem said:

No offense, but I really can't jive with your thinking, here;  To me, heroism is about *how* you use your abilities, not what those abilities are - That's why we can have demon summoning, mind controlling, darkness-blasting heroes, and empathic, light-blasting villains.  The "ally-only" aspect of powers is more about game balance;  Look at Champions Online to see just how out of whack things can get when you can target yourself just as easily, for using powers.

If the ally only req disappeared anyone not playing a support AT would be an idiot.  

 

 

 

[XaoGarrent]

57 minutes ago, biostem said:

No offense, but I really can't jive with your thinking, here;  To me, heroism is about *how* you use your abilities, not what those abilities are - That's why we can have demon summoning, mind controlling, darkness-blasting heroes, and empathic, light-blasting villains.  The "ally-only" aspect of powers is more about game balance;  Look at Champions Online to see just how out of whack things can get when you can target yourself just as easily, for using powers.

You couldn't have missed the point any harder if you tried.

 

That was one of the best features of Champions Online. In fact, most of what's being discussed here are mistakes that CoH made that were fixed in Champions... And then later on broken again when they started designing content that pigeonholed player builds into trinity roles- But that's actually the entire point here, it's clear that you want trinity style gameplay, which never did and never will make sense as a standard in a superhero game. The vast majority of heroes, especially the mainline ones I. E. not side characters or sidekicks, are to some degree or another self sufficient in their day to day activities.

 

This was supposed to be one of the big promises of Champions Online that they never full delivered, though before G. Crush got in there it looked like the game was slowly trying to get there: The ability to build your character the way you wanted. The selling point was that if you wanted to be a glass cannon that relied on raw damage and outside support, you could. You could also be a all rounder that was self sufficient, using the same exact attacks no less.... But they never quite got the formula right, and believe it or not, most of the problem wasn't the powers: It was the content and teaming systems.

 

To reiterate the roundabout point he's trying to get at, I believe, is that you're myopically focusing on specific points and tiny details to the detriment of the greater picture in order to justify game design that really just doesn't belong in this genre. Honestly, most people have gotten sick of trinity in fantasy MMOs, at this point, Guild Wars for instance started leaning in the direction of Co-Op style play years ago, I. E. Everyone does a little of everything style class design. I believe GW2 actually allows people to res each other without a special power like Payday and Warframe.

 

This is all a pointless discussion anyway... The game design of City of Heroes is an artifact of its time, outdated standards and limitations of the time more or less dictate what this game will be and there's really no changing it at this point. Especially when you factor in the cottage rule. Most of the sets that rely super heavily on melee attacks probably should be adjusted to have more utility powers, but they wont be, because it would mean completely scrapping powers in many cases, powers that in some cases have been around since launch.

[Demon Shell]

11 hours ago, quixoteprog said:

Sigh, I did not say /elec suck. Not because of how many melee attacks it has or for any other reason. I said the number of melee attacks don't make sense. Not as much as having some kind of defensive power or any number of other options.

My dude, Scrappers don't need more than 3 melee attacks. Outside of DB's combos, TW's momentum, and utility powers like Follow Up or any parry-like, they only need the big attack, the not-as-big attack, and the AoE. Their mandatory T1/T2 are shelved and your forth/fifth attacks are from your Epic.

 

If your build doesn't have the levels of recharge necessary to accomplish that, you'll need another attack. /Electric has one.

 

My Sonic/Martial Blaster has been jumping into melee since level 10. Once I got Eagles Claw at 38, it just became normal. Clear out the group with cones/nuke, jump into melee and ST the leftovers. Do Incarnates make that easier? Of course. But by comparison my /Dark Brute wasn't complete until I had the debuff resist from Ageless Radial (because cascading defense debuff and, unlike a Blaster, I couldn't blow up Minions to cut the incoming attacks in half). My Blaster didn't need anything specific. I only got (and only use) Barrier so I can rez others, because I'm probably not the one dying.

[biostem]

2 minutes ago, XaoGarrent said:

You couldn't have missed the point any harder if you tried.

No, what you end up with in CO, for those players with access to freeform, is a bunch of fully self-sufficient tank-mages, who don't need anyone else and who can do everything perfectly.  Imagine Justice League if everyone was a Kryptonian or Avengers if everyone could do it all.  I'm not in favor of the "holy trinity" per se - just that you shouldn't be able to do it all.

[XaoGarrent]

38 minutes ago, biostem said:

No, what you end up with in CO, for those players with access to freeform, is a bunch of fully self-sufficient tank-mages, who don't need anyone else and who can do everything perfectly.

You sound like you spent way, way too much time listening to people from the forums. Because you're just vomiting the stale memes from the forums, and forum vet CO wasn't the game everyone else played. This is an oft repeatedly, grossly exaggerated meme that only ever had at best a hint of truth to it. ...And it was becoming even LESS true around the time I quit. Around the time G. Crush was brought on, there began the growth of a Trinity meta that was directly due to the devs inflating numbers on newer content such that nothing but pure builds could perform their roles on teams correctly.

 

At this time they also hit the lynchpin that hybrids were using, while largely leaving the foundation of "Supertanks" as they were called alone. People complained endlessly about Supertanks, too... ...And they weren't particularly high damage, they were like Tankers in CoH in practice. This made it VERY clear that they intended the future of the game to be exactly what you're asking for: Trinity based. The almighty tanker is and always has been the foundation of the trinity, which is why they're always first in and usually last out- including in the design sense.

 

I, and I imagine many of the people I knew who quit before I did, would still be playing CO if the devs didn't make this INCREDIBLY clear with their ill advised design and balance decisions. CO always tried to push players into the trinity in any sort of team content, because they were absolutely dead set on not fixing the massive flaws in the teaming systems. Honestly, most of the friends I had made over the life of the game left long, long before I did, and all of them had these same complaints (well that and the loot boxes).

Edited October 26, 2019 by XaoGarrent

[biostem]

6 minutes ago, XaoGarrent said:

You sound like you spent way, way too much time listening to people from the forums. Because you're just vomiting the stale memes from the forums, and forum vet CO wasn't the game everyone else played. This is an oft repeatedly, grossly exaggerated meme that only ever had at best a hint of truth to it. ...And it was becoming even LESS true around the time I quit. Around the time G. Crush was brought on, there began the growth of a Trinity meta that was directly due to the devs inflating numbers on newer content such that nothing but pure builds could perform their roles on teams correctly.

 

At this time they also hit the lynchpin that hybrids were using, while largely leaving the foundation of "Supertanks" as they were called alone. People complained endlessly about Supertanks, too... ...And they weren't particularly high damage, they were like Tankers in CoH in practice. This made it VERY clear that they intended the future of the game to be exactly what you're asking for: Trinity based. The almighty tanker is and always has been the foundation of the trinity, which is why they're always first in and usually last out- including in the design sense.

 

I, and I imagine many of the people I knew who quit before I did, would still be playing CO if the devs didn't make this INCREDIBLY clear with their ill advised design and balance decisions. CO always tried to push players into the trinity in any sort of team content, because they were absolutely dead set on not fixing the massive flaws in the teaming systems. Honestly, most of the friends I had made over the life of the game left long, long before I did, and all of them had these same complaints (well that and the loot boxes).

You are dead wrong about me;  I bought a lifetime subscription to CO before it launched.  I played the hell out of the game, with dozens of characters at max level using all the different sets and trying out different RP concepts or just seeing what combinations worked or didn't.  It became readily apparent that certain passives are just better than others, and certain powers where best for general use - Use a self targeting bind and cast the best buffs on yourself, then proceed to obliterate all that stand in your way.  Sure, I could play my thematic shapeshifter who is gimped because I've taken powers from different sets that don't synergize well, and I'm locked into the same energy builder, but she's fun to play in short stints.  The point is that limitations can frequently spur one on to come up with different tactics or approaches to each encounter, ('necessity is the mother of invention' and all that).

[XaoGarrent]

49 minutes ago, biostem said:

You are dead wrong about me;  I bought a lifetime subscription to CO before it launched.  I played the hell out of the game, with dozens of characters at max level using all the different sets and trying out different RP concepts or just seeing what combinations worked or didn't.  It became readily apparent that certain passives are just better than others, and certain powers where best for general use - Use a self targeting bind and cast the best buffs on yourself, then proceed to obliterate all that stand in your way.  Sure, I could play my thematic shapeshifter who is gimped because I've taken powers from different sets that don't synergize well, and I'm locked into the same energy builder, but she's fun to play in short stints.  The point is that limitations can frequently spur one on to come up with different tactics or approaches to each encounter, ('necessity is the mother of invention' and all that).

I'm not wrong about you, because I said you sound *like,* not that you were. This isn't me guessing, this is me directly observing your language and simply telling you where it came from and that it was wrong then, and it's still wrong now. Most players ran the same sorts of theme and concept builds you did, and those builds included many types of hybrids and "tankmages" of WILDLY varying effectiveness and purpose. No one character could actually do everything on equal footing, and you are, as everyone did back then, conflating effectiveness with build choices as if they are completely equivalent in this discussion.

 

(even in the game's early lifetime this wasn't true, the incredibly dominant frakenbuilds of that time were mostly born out of the fact that most power choices sucked wholesale, regardless of "tankmage," theme character, or trinity specialist. Early on, defensive passives being nerfed into the ground was actually the talk of the town, because originally the majority of healing powers were so incredibly trash that it didn't matter that you could self target. You either don't remember things correctly, or you never actually learned the game in any significant capacity.)

 

I don't know *why* you're doing this, I'm not going to pretend I understand exactly why you believe these things. All that matters is that it's abundantly clear that you share the same talking points that many of the forums cliques constantly displayed and repeated as a dogma inside, what was effectively after the first few months, a complete echo chamber dominated by a couple loud minorities.

 

They were wrong. They were heard. The game crashed on launch. This was, in the long run, ultimately disastrous, because in its earliest moments, when it needed to make its best impression, the game was dominated by a constant stream of nerfs to any sort of hybrid build that was seen being successful in the wild, because nobody knew the difference between a "tankmage" and the frankenbuilds people were playing. Different types of "tankmages" are all over CoX, the EATs are basically all DESIGNED as them. People just don't care here. But in that game people like you had a MYOPIC and religious obsession with them.

 

What's really, really important to note here is that all this was happening while the devs TRIED to "fix" exactly what you were complaining about, and the game hemorrhaged players. This really is just me telling history at this point. It's incredibly sad to me that even after this kind of thinking virtually killed a game when it was listened to, people CONTINUE denying their mistakes.

Edited October 26, 2019 by XaoGarrent

[biostem]

3 minutes ago, XaoGarrent said:

This really is just me telling history at this point. It's incredibly sad to me that even after this kind of thinking virtually killed a game when it was listened to, people CONTINUE denying their mistakes.

Or... now hear me out here, CO just isn't that good of a game.  Maybe, just maybe, all those people pointing out those flaws, were right.  But, no... you're "telling history" because you obviously know so much better than everyone else.  *rolls eyes*

[XaoGarrent]

Just now, biostem said:

Or... now hear me out here, CO just isn't that good of a game.  Maybe, just maybe, all those people pointing out those flaws, were right.  But, no... you're "telling history" because you obviously know so much better than everyone else.  *rolls eyes*

You know I'm right, you just don't like it.

[Haijinx]

I wonder which has a bigger playerbase these days?

 

CO which is technically still an active title?

 

Or COH homecoming, etc

 

I didn't mind the look of CO but I never actually found teams so my experience the was short lived.   

[DocRadio]

On 10/23/2019 at 4:35 AM, krj12 said:

I'll respond to the question "what did you expect them to be".

 

I expect them to be something complimentary to a ranged dps play style, preferably a set of self buff powers along with a build up.

 

 

 

Well... they're not that. I think that the devs of the original game feared and overrated ranged damage. So blasters were the only archetype in the game where the primary was all that mattered. Front loaded damage with a mix of secondary abilities culled from tanker melee sets and controller single target holds and roots. Personally when I look at sets like martial, time, atomic, and tactical arrow I'm shocked that the developers had started making really good secondaries for blasters. Blaster players have some really good choices now, and even the old sets that were subpar now have sustains. I mean look at energize, it is amazing.

[MunkiLord]

5 hours ago, RialVestro said:

Blasters really should NEVER BE IN MELEE!

You're just wrong and that is an absurd declaration to make. Blasters do some of their best work in melee.

 

4 hours ago, quixoteprog said:

If you have an AT that is made to be kind of gimped solo

Blasters are not gimped solo.

 

 

[Haijinx]

23 minutes ago, RialVestro said:

No they do their best work at a distance. That's why they're called BLASTers and their Primary powers are all long range attacks.

 

Blasters in Melee die quickly. You might get one or two attacks off before you die but you're going to die. You want to actually survive then stay as far away from the mobs as you can. You can't attack the mobs if you're dead.

I got a blaster to 50 in Pugs with 3 total defeats, I like to wade into melee.

[StratoNexus]

19 minutes ago, RialVestro said:

No they do their best work at a distance. That's why they're called BLASTers and their Primary powers are all long range attacks.

 

Blasters in Melee die quickly. You might get one or two attacks off before you die but you're going to die. You want to actually survive then stay as far away from the mobs as you can. You can't attack the mobs if you're dead.

This has not been my experience. Blasters do their best work at close range, where they can easily enter melee when desired and avoid most enemy AoEs. Even without IOs, blasters do not die in melee immediately, unless they are eating all the aggro of large spawns, and if you use your inspires, you can even survive that for awhile.

 

I live near and in melee with most of my blasters even before IOs. I have some range only concept characters, but they are weaker than a blaster who also does melee (although to be honest, even my range only characters like to stay close, otherwise how can I get Fulcrum Shift).

 

It should be noted that blasters have higher base hit points than support characters and a higher hit point cap. So even before IOs, they have a bigger cushion in that aspect. The +hit point accolades help blasters more due to this as well. And if you build for it, you are just 27 hp shy of the Tanker base.

 

The most important aspect of the blaster as currently designed, of course, is how much fun it is to smack stuff in melee but also be able to freely shoot targets at range. Constantly switching targets, being in the thick of the melee scrum, but also being able to turn and Bitter Ice Blast or snipe an enemy who is antagonizing a corruptor and then immediately switch back to the boss that is aggroed on the tank, but right next to you and level it with Havoc Punch. Just because that concept does not work for some people, does not mean it is a wrong or non-complimentary concept.

[MunkiLord]

50 minutes ago, RialVestro said:

 

Blasters in Melee die quickly. You might get one or two attacks off before you die but you're going to die. You want to actually survive then stay as far away from the mobs as you can. You can't attack the mobs if you're dead.

That's user error. I did a solo Master ITF at +2x5 and didn't have any problems in melee. Though admittedly I didn't just stand in melee when it came to the AVs. 

 

Also did an all Blaster ITF and died a ton cuz I kept using Provoke. But that was user error too. 

Edited October 26, 2019 by MunkiLord

[Haijinx]

4 minutes ago, RialVestro said:

That's kind of my point though. You're always taking aggro in Melee range. The only way to avoid that is to stay out of Melee.

Until you have enough defense or support though, you don't go into melee until the alpha is broken and the tanks/brutes/scrappers have gone in.   

 

Of course if there's plenty of support available can just go crazy.  Good idea to stay within range of everyone's Maneuvers though.  

[Nemu]

Moonfire first mission solo +1/8 with my blaster against mez heavy vampires. I'm no longer softcapped but I'm still whipping through the mission with relative ease. Proper insp use and techniques become more important as we lose our defensive edge but one thing I'm not shy about is damage. Because the faster I kill the faster I stop taking damage. I know some people here will argue oh but a scrapper will do it faster or oh but you still have your set bonuses. First of all not all ATs are the same and there is no point in making parallels between them, that's just a tired way to setup "this AT can't do XYZ so they must be bad." Second if I were leveling on SOs I'd adjust my diff and compensate for my power level accordingly, will that change my playstyle and how I leverage my melee powers? Nope.

 

Melee works for some people, accept it.

 

https://youtu.be/25nq9BKh15I

Edited October 26, 2019 by Nemu

[Procellus]

I can't believe that all these players that are smarterer and betterer than me keep missing my point.

 

What are the point of Blasters and do their Secondaries help them to fulfill that purpose?

 

It wasn't strictly about the melee attacks. It never was. It was about whether or not Blaster Secondaries helped them fulfill their primary purpose. Melee attacks just seem to take a greater percentage of the available powers in any given set.

 

What are Blasters? "AoE death dealing specialists" I hear. Great! Then why are a supermajority of the the melee attacks single target? Does that make sense for an AoE damage dealer?

 

"Burst damage!" you could reply and I think this is the strongest argument. But I would point out that, from the secondaries, only Build Up really does that and does it every 90 seconds without recharge enhancement and it is a 10 second duration. Great! Sounds bursty! But that's only one power. But the fact that in this thread there are multiple ideas about what the AT is supposed to be, I think, shows that the secondaries are a mess theme-wise and do not add to a cohesive whole.

 

Another thing is that I misspoke. I said "disadvantaged" when I should have said "less advantaged." For a lot of (most?) mobs keeping them at range halves their number of attacks. For an AT with little defense de facto halving the amount of thing being thrown our was is advantageous. If I were to draw a diagram like the one below and ask people, "In which scenario is the Blaster more advantaged?"

 

😀: Blaster

🤬: Bad guy

 

😀 --------------->🤬 or 😀🤬

 

Most people would say the former. That is my point.

 

Edited October 26, 2019 by Procellus
Clearing up an argument