Blaster Secondaries: Why?

[biostem]

4 minutes ago, TheAdjustor said:

I am kind of curious where that's coming from. Just looking secondary sets there's plenty of ranged damage but there's really nothing for people that want to damage at range. As I said /mental manipulation comes close but it's trying for too much of an even split.

We're talking about blasters here, yes?  Your PRIMARY set is where your RANGED damage comes from.  Your SECONDARY set consists of utility powers and/or melee attacks.  Give me a few examples that give "plenty of ranged damage", because I honestly don't see that...

Edited October 28, 2019 by biostem

[TheAdjustor]

15 minutes ago, biostem said:

We're talking about blasters here, yes?  Your PRIMARY set is where your RANGED damage comes from.  Your SECONDARY set consists of utility powers and/or melee attacks.  Give me a few examples that give "plenty of ranged damage", because I honestly don't see that...

Well lets see looking at /mental you have out of 9 powers

have 4 utility / control powers

3 Melee /PBAOE (TK Thrust/ Mind Probe / Psychic Shockwave)

2 Ranged/ TAOE (Subdual / Psychic Scream)

 

It's almost there. If the sustain didn't force you into melee range it would be near perfect.

 

 

Edited October 28, 2019 by TheAdjustor

[biostem]

2 minutes ago, TheAdjustor said:

Well lets see looking at /mental you have out of 9 powers

have 5 utility / control powers

3 Melee /PBAOE (TK Thrust/ Mind Probe / Psychic Shockwave)

2 Ranged/ TAOE (Subdual / Psychic Scream)

Subdual is an immobilize.  Sure, it deals some damage, but that's not its primary purpose.

 

I don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but IIRC, psychic scream is like a 40' 45 degree cone - only 1/2 to 2/3 of your blast attacks.  Even if it were the full 80', that's only 2/9 powers, and that makes it "ranged damage" to you?

[Haijinx]

25 minutes ago, TheAdjustor said:

 

Yeah but the damage is not there. If had an equivalent to psionic scream and superior single target damage attack it would be there. 

Wonder what a proc monster type build might look like there.

 

 

[TheAdjustor]

8 minutes ago, biostem said:

Subdual is an immobilize.  Sure, it deals some damage, but that's not its primary purpose.

 

I don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but IIRC, psychic scream is like a 40' 45 degree cone - only 1/2 to 2/3 of your blast attacks.  Even if it were the full 80', that's only 2/9 powers, and that makes it "ranged damage" to you?

I have a sense you are being argumentative to be argumentative at this point.

 

Subdual is good damage, and if you are trying to put together a ranged damage chain odds are you are going to need to use it.

Psychic Scream is a 60 foot cone with good damage. 

 

I have to ask , have you ever built an arch/ment or a fire/ment or even energy/ ment

Edited October 29, 2019 by TheAdjustor

[biostem]

1 minute ago, TheAdjustor said:

I have sense you are being argumentative to be argumentative at this point.

 

Subdual is good damage, and if you are trying to put together a ranged damage chain odds are you are going to need to use it.

Psychic Scream is a 60 foot cone with good damage. 

 

I have to ask at this point, have you ever built an arch/ment or a fire/ment or even energy/ ment

I have to ask, do you consider 2/9 powers enough to consider an entire set "ranged"?

[TheAdjustor]

Just now, biostem said:

I have to ask, do you consider 2/9 powers enough to consider an entire set "ranged"?

I see I was right, I'll act accordingly.

 

No I consider 5/9 enough to make it utility and 2/9 enough to give it a ranged focus. Is 3 out of 9 enough to make an entire set "melee" for you ?

[biostem]

Just now, TheAdjustor said:

I see I was right, I'll act accordingly.

 

No I consider 5/9 enough to make it utility and 2/9 enough to give it a ranged focus. Is 3 out of 9 enough to make an entire set "melee" for you ?

I do not consider the secondaries *just* melee.  I consider most of them to be a combination of melee and support/utility.  So please, continue to strawman me and keep the salt coming!

[TheAdjustor]

Just now, biostem said:

I do not consider the secondaries *just* melee.  I consider most of them to be a combination of melee and support/utility.  So please, continue to strawman me and keep the salt coming!

I think we're done here. If/when you actually want to discuss this I am always up for it.

[biostem]

8 minutes ago, TheAdjustor said:

I think we're done here. If/when you actually want to discuss this I am always up for it.

Yeah, I think you've lost the plot several posts back;  Your criteria for deeming a blasters' secondary set "ranged damage" is out of whack, and instead of owning up to your mischaracterization thereof, you falsely claim to know your opponent's intentions and throwing out passive-aggressive insults.

Edited October 29, 2019 by biostem

[TheAdjustor]

9 minutes ago, biostem said:

Yeah, I think you've lost the plot several posts back;  Your criteria for deeming a blasters' secondary set "ranged damage" is out of whack, and instead of owning up to your mischaracterization thereof, you falsely claim to know your opponent's intentions and throwing out passive-aggressive insults.

Sigh, I am trying not to make this personal but really ? You aren't even groking how obvious you are.

 

26 minutes ago, TheAdjustor said:

I have a sense you are being argumentative to be argumentative at this point.

 

 

[biostem]

23 minutes ago, TheAdjustor said:

Sigh, I am trying not to make this personal but really ? You aren't even groking how obvious you are.

Then address my points:

 

1. You said blaster secondaries were "ranged damage".

 

2. Your criteria for #1 is that 2/9 powers on 1 particular secondary set have *some* kind of range.

 

1 and 2 do not gel, whether speaking statistically or functionally.  You are wrong.  Admit it and let's move on with the conversation.

Edited October 29, 2019 by biostem

[TheAdjustor]

3 minutes ago, biostem said:

Then address my points:

 

1. You said blaster secondaries were "ranged damage".

 

2. Your criteria for #1 is that 2/9 powers on 1 particular secondary set have *some* kind of range.

 

1 and 2 do not gel, whether speaking statistically or functionally.  You are wrong.  Admit it and let's move on with the conversation.

vs

 

1 hour ago, TheAdjustor said:

I am kind of curious where that's coming from. Just looking secondary sets there's plenty of ranged damage but there's really nothing for people that want to damage at range. As I said /mental manipulation comes close but it's trying for too much of an even split.

 

And yeah I'm done with this I really don't want to have start reporting your posts because you have some weird chip on your shoulder.

Edited October 29, 2019 by TheAdjustor

[biostem]

1 minute ago, TheAdjustor said:

there's plenty of ranged damage but there's really nothing for people that want to damage at range

To which I replied that it is the PRIMARY that deals the ranged damage.  If you are looking for ranged damage in the secondary, then you are looking in the wrong place.  Also, saying "there's plenty of ranged damage" and "there's really nothing for people that want damage at ranged" are contradictory - which is it?  Is there "plenty of ranged damage" or is there "really nothing for people that want to damage at range"?

[TheAdjustor]

5 minutes ago, biostem said:

To which I replied that it is the PRIMARY that deals the ranged damage.  If you are looking for ranged damage in the secondary, then you are looking in the wrong place.  Also, saying "there's plenty of ranged damage" and "there's really nothing for people that want damage at ranged" are contradictory - which is it?  Is there "plenty of ranged damage" or is there "really nothing for people that want to damage at range"?

Dude you can have lots of ranged damage but have it be BAD or simply not good enough to make a fully ranged style viable.

Edited October 29, 2019 by TheAdjustor

[biostem]

1 minute ago, TheAdjustor said:

Dude you can have lots of ranged damage but have it be BAD or simply not good enough.

See my point about using your PRIMARY for that purpose.  Get it through your head:  A blaster's secondary set is not there for dealing ranged damage.  You are chasing a wild goose, looking for a red herring, hunting a snipe...

[TheAdjustor]

Just now, biostem said:

See my point about using your PRIMARY for that purpose.  Get it through your head:  A blaster's secondary set is not there for dealing ranged damage.  You are chasing a wild goose, looking for a red herring, hunting a snipe...

I am sorry that's ridiculous, even if you are using Fire you are going to wind up doing crap damage without the secondary.

[biostem]

1 minute ago, TheAdjustor said:

I am sorry that's ridiculous, even if you are using Fire you are going to wind up doing crap damage without the secondary.

Oh look, another strawman.  Who said "without the secondary"?  My contention with you is that a blaster's secondary isn't a "ranged damage set".  If you ignore all the melee/PBAoE powers in your secondary, then yes, you will deal reduced damage, (when compared to someone who does take full advantage of it).

[TheAdjustor]

3 hours ago, biostem said:

Your primary is where the ranged damage comes from.  The secondary is to support or supplement that;  Immobilizes, melee attacks, self buffs, other debuffs or utility powers.  Some like tactical arrow or devices lean more toward the debuff/utility side of things.

 

12 minutes ago, biostem said:

Oh look, another strawman.  Who said "without the secondary"?  My contention with you is that a blaster's secondary isn't a "ranged damage set".  If you ignore all the melee/PBAoE powers in your secondary, then yes, you will deal reduced damage, (when compared to someone who does take full advantage of it).

You have the corner on strawmen here not only the bulk of them but you actually strawman yourself. What's more you have been at it all along. You complain about passive aggressive behavior when your whole form of discussion is endless passive aggressive attacks. Oh well I am done.

 

Edited October 29, 2019 by TheAdjustor

[biostem]

1 minute ago, TheAdjustor said:

You have the corner on strawmen here not only the bulk of them but you actually strawman yourself.

Those 2 quotes aren't contradictory in any way, nor do they falsely represent someone else's statement or position.

Edited October 29, 2019 by biostem

[SmalltalkJava]

I think we need a DPS off.   Best settle it on the field.  

[MunkiLord]

20 minutes ago, SmalltalkJava said:

I think we need a DPS off.   Best settle it on the field.  

You haven't heard? It's way too easy to fake videos, so clearly we wouldn't be able to rely on that!

[Ukase]

3 hours ago, Tahliah said:

I agree with most of what you've said here, @Ukase.  But I do take issue with some of your criteria for a decent blaster: you may count only those who use binds and/or macros as a well-played blaster, but some blasters (like mine) don't rely on binds or macros at all.

 

You also give a lot of credence to experience, and while this is important, it's not a compelling argument.  Of course I can run DFB, Frostfire, [insert any mish/tf/trial] as TEH best.  All I have to do is run them a bazillion times.  That's not a good blaster, that's someone who knows that content well and can therefore (and only therefore) excel.

 

A "good" blaster doesn't need to run memorized content to shine; we are awesome in any content, even that we don't know like the back of our hand and play on autopilot. If all I ever did was [insert "x" trial, raid, whatever], of course I'd excel at it.  A monkey repeating the same content would excel at some point.  "I'm the best at the content I constantly repeat" is not the same as "I'm a good blaster."  Not even close.

Well, I certainly can't disagree with what you wrote. I probably should have written things more clearly.

I think the experience  - not knowing the content, but the lessons learned from getting know the content are what help shape a simple blaster into a really good one.
 I also didn't intend to suggest the use of macros or binds implied that a blaster that didn't use them was not good, nor that one that does use them is good. Only that their use would suggest someone knows a bit more about the game than someone who doesn't use them. It's not a hard fast rule, just something that I think is likely to be case more often than not. 

And I probably still didn't express myself very clearly. Sorry! 

[Omega-202]

52 minutes ago, RialVestro said:

That is a decent point though I would assume that all content would have been updated along with the introduction of Incarnates because the game would be ridiculously easy if they didn't. Similar to how the enemies would scale up if you started at a higher level than 35. It should scale up for incarnates as well.

Sorry you're claiming that something designed to be a challenge for teams can be easily soloed and you think I lack understanding of game mechanics? You can't throw out an unbelievable claim like that and expect people to just accept that as true. Of course I'm going to assume it's faked because that I know is possible where as soloing something meant for a team I have never seen before.

You don't have any clue about the game mechanics.  Nothing scales to Incarnates.  

 

Why are you commenting on things that you're completely ignorant of?  You're arguing against people who know this game like the back of their hand while you have a child's grasp of the game.  Please stop.  You don't know what you're talking about.  

 

To make it worse, people are trying to educate you and you refuse to look at the evidence.  Anyone with half a brain knows its possible to solo every TF in the game and with some practice could do so on the test server if asked to.  

Edited October 29, 2019 by Omega-202

[Tacopotamus]

1 hour ago, RialVestro said:

That is a decent point though I would assume that all content would have been updated along with the introduction of Incarnates because the game would be ridiculously easy if they didn't. Similar to how the enemies would scale up if you started at a higher level than 35. It should scale up for incarnates as well.

Sorry you're claiming that something designed to be a challenge for teams can be easily soloed and you think I lack understanding of game mechanics? You can't throw out an unbelievable claim like that and expect people to just accept that as true. Of course I'm going to assume it's faked because that I know is possible where as soloing something meant for a team I have never seen before.

 

Oh and how is telling someone that you need a team to successfully complete a TF designed for a team detrimental? You got that totally backwards. Telling them they CAN solo the ITF is detrimental. You're going to get some poor noob killed if they buy that BS. If I'm wrong nothing bad happens because I'm not the one telling them to solo one of the hardest challenges in the game with a Blaster!

 

Oh and anyone can solo a Giant Monster... as long as that GM is named Sally. 😉 She only has 1 HP.

I’m now almost 100% convinced you’re trolling right now mang.

 

No new player should do this with a blaster right off the shelf.  They should see someone solo it and aspire to it and see the potential their AT has.  What would this take for you to believe it? (If you’re not trolling)