How to fix Sentinels

[Replacement]

I'm cool with a slight bump to Sentinel damage, but I'd really rather not see them hit Scrapper levels of damage or survivability.  I'd rather see a more utilitarian push to close the performance gap.

 

It's a really good point that the thematic +ToHit/Perception stuff just makes them even more of a VEAT, but I think there's plenty of opportunities to make it interesting.  For example, if defensive opportunity applied to targets you tagged (meaning allies could cash in on it) and offensive opportunity was mostly just reworked to be more visible and understandable. 

 

[DarknessEternal]

10 minutes ago, Replacement said:

I'm cool with a slight bump to Sentinel damage, but I'd really rather not see them hit Scrapper levels of damage or survivability.  

Increasing their damage scalar to scrapper’s would still leave them noticeably behind scrapper actual damage, because of critical, targets, and melee design superiority.

 

as for survivability, why not?  Aren’t we past the point of pretending “always at range” even exists?  All ATs are in melee nearly all of the time.

[Replacement]

10 minutes ago, DarknessEternal said:

Increasing their damage scalar to scrapper’s would still leave them noticeably behind scrapper actual damage, because of critical, targets, and melee design superiority.

 

as for survivability, why not?  Aren’t we past the point of pretending “always at range” even exists?  All ATs are in melee nearly all of the time.

tbh, I wouldn't know.  I don't really play with incarnate content.  I know that between 30 and 45, trying to get near things in a party as a dominator or blaster is really really hard on some content, like Warhulks.

 

So yeah, I believe range really is a big survivability bump.  Moreover, it's layered on top of their having armor secondary.  Range is like Defense: it doesn't help at all when it doesn't apply.  But that doesn't mean it didn't keep you from taking several hits.

 

[DarknessEternal]

So if your pretending “range” is a defense all on its own,  why have a defensive secondary at all?

[Sovera]

Range *is* a defense. Lets not play petty games and pretend it is not. Just a few days ago I was doing a Yin and when it was Clamor time someone clicked on the computers and suddenly boom, the initial ambush now had the second ambush on top of it and at exemp level 25ish the team was not ready to handle it and most of the team wiped. At that level Blasters aren't tough enough yet and the meleers we had couldn't keep up with their low level skills not completely slotted.

 

Of the eight only three survived and whittled the ambush down. I was floating when I saw things were going pear shaped, and munching purples, but the damage I was taking I know very well that if I was on the ground taking melee damage on top of ranged damage (plus mobs wasting time running around trying to get to me by jumping on the upper rafters) then I would have been licking ground especially once my purples were gone.

 

Which is where a Sentinel shines. All Sentinel players have their stories of surviving a wipe and eventually killing everything. In this context a Sentinel's toughness is welcome. It's just wasted once we reach high level and both meleers and Blasters then fix their defensive holes.

 

It's a bit like a Hunter in WoW. A Beastmaster's  ability to do damage on the run without having cast times makes them enormously overpowered during hard fights as they are learned. But once the fights are learned and the casters and melee know their role and where to move, and when, they start overshadowing Hunters.

 

It is what I mentioned a page ago. Were this the original CoH then Sentinels would have a place in it. The tough ranged character who does less damage than a pure damage dealing AT. Watch them do asspulls! Watch them hold the line once the meleers get overwhelmed!

 

But with the IO end game fixing the defensive holes but not having an answer to do the same in upping damage (increasing recharge is the only way, but putting in lots of defense does not exclude also adding recharge) there is no real downside to just play a pure damage dealer.

 

 

 

I think their real strength is something we never bring up and that is how they are so well balanced. Pick a blaster. You want damage? You play Fire. Playing anything else is gimping yourself to do a third of the damage. Ice with procs can keep up with Fire who doesn't even care about procs, which seems like a bad thing, but actually means they can ignore them and focus on grabbing set bonus, something which proc users are gimping themselves out of.

 

But anything else is just disappointing as damage is traded for dubious utility.

 

I had a Radiation Blaster triple procced in all attacks and I expected a lot out of it having come from a Sentinel with the same primary, only to see it do some Sentinel level numbers. I dropped it, made a new blaster, picked Fire, and *without* procs discovered a *large* difference.

 

A Sentinel though? Want Ice? Go for Ice. Want Radiation? Go for Radiation. Want Fire? Go for Fire. But you don't want HAVE to go Fire if we want damage. The sets are perfectly balanced (at most Assault Rifle could use a tweak for it's T9) allowing to pick the thematic flavor as desired being sure we are not gimping themselves. TW, SS, StJ and Fire for Blaster could sure enjoy some of that.

 

 

Btw, this is just me having a conversation shooting the breeze here. I have no vested interest in lobbying a 'Save The Sentinels' cause. At most it's an academic thing just talking between ourselves. I no longer play a Sentinel (and I think this is a common thing if were to take a poll) so to me it does not really matter if they are buffed or not.

[drbuzzard]

3 hours ago, DarknessEternal said:

Why would you exclude pets from a Crab's single target damage?  We're talking about damage.  We're not talking about some arbitrary construct of rules designed to favor one side or the other.

 

Single target damage, AOE damage, survivability: those are the categories that matter in this game.  Crabs beat Sentinels in all those fields.

If you are claiming a crab is a better sentinel than a sentinel, it would require comparing like to like. This is a pretty basic approach to comparison. Sentinels don't have pets, so excluding pet damage is logical.

 

I mean you could say that masterminds are like corrupters because they have some blasts with their pets, and a support secondary, and because the pets do more damage than the corrupter, the mastermind is a better corrupter. That would be nonsense, as would this claim.

 

Now if you want to simply argue that crabs are a better AT, I won't dispute that. They can be built to be more survivable and put out more damage. That's not really debatable and hence why sentinels need some help. However if I want to play a crab like I play my sentinel, It's not as good (as I've said before, I hate pets, so making a crabbermind doesn't appeal).

[drbuzzard]

1 hour ago, Sovera said:

Btw, this is just me having a conversation shooting the breeze here. I have no vested interest in lobbying a 'Save The Sentinels' cause. At most it's an academic thing just talking between ourselves. I no longer play a Sentinel (and I think this is a common thing if were to take a poll) so to me it does not really matter if they are buffed or not.

 

So even if they were buffed they would still hold no appeal? No matter how much they were buffed? Now granted, it won't happen, but say they had damage parity to blasters, you still would not bother?

[Replacement]

5 hours ago, DarknessEternal said:

So if your pretending “range” is a defense all on its own,  why have a defensive secondary at all?

You know very well defenses multiply.  Every defensive trick keeps death away longer.  Boss attacks 4 times for 100 damage each.  You evade 2 of them, and you have 20% resist so you take 80 damage from the remaining 2.   You've taken 160 damage instead of 400.  

 

It doesn't matter if you evaded those 2 from Defense or by simply not being there.  Maybe it was 1 of each.  

 

As you pointed out, you're gonna end up at point-blank range, taking hits.  You're also gonna straight-up get shot at.  Ranged attacks let you avoid somewhere between "some" and "a lot" of damage, depending on playstyle and set.  But they do not negate all attention you will receive.  Do not pretend it's so black-and-white.  

Edited November 22, 2019 by Replacement

[Obitus]

It is undeniable that range is a defense, but one must understand that for most of the game's lifespan, the developers hugely overrated range's defensive benefits, to the detriment of several ATs, most obviously Blasters.  Ranged attacks also obviously have added offensive utility; it's easier to shoot a runner with an 80' blast than it is to chase him down - but again that advantage was consistently overshadowed by the developers' determination to (over-)compensate for it.

 

As DarknessEternal notes, most builds have some amount of melee baked into their design - not all, but the exceptions are rare enough that we can safely generalize:  most any build which chooses a range-exclusive play style (either permanently or in a given situation) sacrifices something, often something substantial, whether it's an extra PBAoE attack, a control effect, a debuff, or just a heavy single-target hitter.

 

That last example is instructive, because as several people have already noted in this thread, melee attack sets are, and always have been, generally stronger (in terms DPA/DPS potential) than ranged attack sets.  For years and years, the comparison really wasn't even competitive.  The balance is a lot better these days, but still far from perfect.  (lol, remember when tier 3 blasts had a 20' range?)

 

But the most obvious point here relates to the historical defensive comparison between ranged and melee builds.  It's all well and good to point to range's defensive advantage, but it looks pretty damn silly when you're comparing, say, a stock Blaster with a stock Scrapper - the latter routinely achieving 4 times as much numerical durability, and that's before we even get to the all-or-nothing character of mez protection in this game, which traditionally wasn't offered to ranged ATs at all, at least until Dominators/VEATs, IIRC.

 

Yet all we ever heard from the devs was that range is this awesome advantage that cannot be overstated; "range is a defense;" "we have to be super duper careful not to overtune Blasters or else they'll pwn the world."  It got real old.

 

Again, a large chunk of the above grievances no longer apply.  The introduction of IOs, for example, allowed e.g. Blasters to pick up decent defense, and if they stay at range they need to soft-cap fewer positions.  Toggles no longer drop when you're mezzed, and Clarion offers everyone a chance at comprehensive protection.  Sentinels sort of embody this shift away from a melee-centric design philosophy - they're the first ranged AT that has a comprehensive suite of melee-AT-style defensive powers.  (Again, possibly leaving aside VEATs, which have always been an outlier, and which in any case carry little thematic appeal to most people, judging by the population numbers.)

 

But as a more-or-less range-exclusive AT, Sentinels do inherit some of the problems that have dogged ranged attack sets since the beginning.  They also have (small) problems all their own.  One point that I think may be a little underrated is that their builds are unusually tight, because like melee ATs, Sentinels have to take all/most of their secondary powers - but their primaries don't have the power/slot efficiency of the average melee set.  "Ah ha," you might say, "But ranged sets generally have more AoEs, which is an advantage!"  That may be true, but if the single-target damage is lackluster, then you need copious AoE to offset that.  In other words, ranged attackers generally need more powers/slots devoted to offensive powers in order to play their intended role effectively. 

 

(And TAoE IO sets tend to suck, for the purpose of soft capping, an efficiency tax with which Blasters are quite familiar.)

 

Anyway, that's a massive wall of text to bolster a pretty trivial case - that Sentinel defenses should be on par with Scrappers'.  The difference is tiny even now, so it's hard to argue against the suggestion.  If only for the sake of simplicity, why not?

Edited November 22, 2019 by Obitus

[oldskool]

6 hours ago, Obitus said:

Anyway, that's a massive wall of text to bolster a pretty trivial case - that Sentinel defenses should be on par with Scrappers'.  The difference is tiny even now, so it's hard to argue against the suggestion.  If only for the sake of simplicity, why not?

I agree with the other stuff, but this is a great comment here.  

Just to add to it, when viewing what that 75% vs 70% secondary value translates to is really quite small.  Its not insignificant, but its small.  Super Reflexes between the two ATs on purely SO's have a difference of roughly 2% on the positional values.  So shifting the Sentinel up by 5% in its defenses isn't actually an additive 5%.  

Furthermore, Sentinels do have lower values on EVERYTHING related to defense.  Everything.  That includes Defense Debuff Resistance (which is slightly lower than the Scrapper/Stalker/Brute version) as well as the mezz protection.  Ninjutsu Bo Ryaku's KB/KD protection is lower on Sentinels than it is on Scrappers.  

Does a shift of 2% on defenses or +1.X KB/KD protection matter in the grand scheme of things?  Not really.  However, the design of it being that way speaks to something a bit broader than that.  The Sentinels have lower defensive effects in their secondaries for what reason?  Because they are ranged?  As the post above, and several others constantly point out, there isn't a really good reason to do this. 

So for the sake of consistency across AT, let's have Sentinels with the same 75% values in their secondary.  

Damage balance is a complicated issue that would require a large realignment across AT if all of the DPA potential of range sets were to shift.  That may happen at some point after enemy resistance values and melee set review happens.  

One thing I don't want to see is Sentinel getting some ad hoc +acc/to hit/perception buffs.  There isn't that much use for that in this game, and Sentinel AT doesn't need it at all.  We'd gain an inherent that helps everyone else with a snipe make use of faster sniper changes.  God, what a kick in the crotch that would for an AT that designed snipes OUT of the power set!  For the melee classes and *EATS it doesn't do that much either.  

I said this once, and I'll say it again.  What's in a name?  A bouncer at a club is a sentinel.  Most of the time they stand watch and only take action when necessary.  That isn't what I consider grounds for compelling game play.  Sentinel means to stand and keep watch often by a soldier or a guard.  Stand and do nothing and only intervene when necessary.  Sounds like fun!  Want something that moves ahead of a team and does something more frontlinish?  Call it.. Vanguard.  Stalkers already can scout.  Trying to define balance by tripping over a name definition feels asinine.  For the sake of the game if the Sentinel is going to be a DPS role, then make it a damn DPS role.  

Edited November 22, 2019 by oldskool

[Replacement]

8 hours ago, Obitus said:

It is undeniable that range is a defense, but one must understand that for most of the game's lifespan, the developers hugely overrated range's defensive benefits, to the detriment of several ATs, most obviously Blasters.  Ranged attacks also obviously have added offensive utility; it's easier to shoot a runner with an 80' blast than it is to chase him down - but again that advantage was consistently overshadowed by the developers' determination to (over-)compensate for it.

 

As DarknessEternal notes, most builds have some amount of melee baked into their design - not all, but the exceptions are rare enough that we can safely generalize:  most any build which chooses a range-exclusive play style (either permanently or in a given situation) sacrifices something, often something substantial, whether it's an extra PBAoE attack, a control effect, a debuff, or just a heavy single-target hitter.

 

That last example is instructive, because as several people have already noted in this thread, melee attack sets are, and always have been, generally stronger (in terms DPA/DPS potential) than ranged attack sets.  For years and years, the comparison really wasn't even competitive.  The balance is a lot better these days, but still far from perfect.  (lol, remember when tier 3 blasts had a 20' range?)

 

But the most obvious point here relates to the historical defensive comparison between ranged and melee builds.  It's all well and good to point to range's defensive advantage, but it looks pretty damn silly when you're comparing, say, a stock Blaster with a stock Scrapper - the latter routinely achieving 4 times as much numerical durability, and that's before we even get to the all-or-nothing character of mez protection in this game, which traditionally wasn't offered to ranged ATs at all, at least until Dominators/VEATs, IIRC.

 

Yet all we ever heard from the devs was that range is this awesome advantage that cannot be overstated; "range is a defense;" "we have to be super duper careful not to overtune Blasters or else they'll pwn the world."  It got real old.

 

Again, a large chunk of the above grievances no longer apply.  The introduction of IOs, for example, allowed e.g. Blasters to pick up decent defense, and if they stay at range they need to soft-cap fewer positions.  Toggles no longer drop when you're mezzed, and Clarion offers everyone a chance at comprehensive protection.  Sentinels sort of embody this shift away from a melee-centric design philosophy - they're the first ranged AT that has a comprehensive suite of melee-AT-style defensive powers.  (Again, possibly leaving aside VEATs, which have always been an outlier, and which in any case carry little thematic appeal to most people, judging by the population numbers.)

 

But as a more-or-less range-exclusive AT, Sentinels do inherit some of the problems that have dogged ranged attack sets since the beginning.  They also have (small) problems all their own.  One point that I think may be a little underrated is that their builds are unusually tight, because like melee ATs, Sentinels have to take all/most of their secondary powers - but their primaries don't have the power/slot efficiency of the average melee set.  "Ah ha," you might say, "But ranged sets generally have more AoEs, which is an advantage!"  That may be true, but if the single-target damage is lackluster, then you need copious AoE to offset that.  In other words, ranged attackers generally need more powers/slots devoted to offensive powers in order to play their intended role effectively. 

 

(And TAoE IO sets tend to suck, for the purpose of soft capping, an efficiency tax with which Blasters are quite familiar.)

 

Anyway, that's a massive wall of text to bolster a pretty trivial case - that Sentinel defenses should be on par with Scrappers'.  The difference is tiny even now, so it's hard to argue against the suggestion.  If only for the sake of simplicity, why not?

This is well thought-out and I appreciate it, but I feel like it (and DarknessEternal's perspective) indicates a swing too far in the other direction.  "Ranged doesn't matter, so let's pretend it's not even a thing" is just throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

 

If the Developers overvalued its defenses on Live, that is not an excuse to pretend it doesn't exist now.

 

Observation: Blasters have less survival than a Sentinel, but more reason to be in the melee.  This is a generalization based on their /Manipulations and varies from build-to-build, but it's broadly true.

 

At the end of the day, it feels more like a matter of opinion.  We all understand Sentinel is (intentionally!) a bit weak, but not so much so that people won't invite them.  I would like to see buffs, but I don't think +Survival is the answer, when they already have plenty.  I'd like to see a minor damage bump, but I'm similarly just not sold on crit-less Scrapper damage.  I don't really want "a Scrapper, except more convenient."

 

Considering Tankers are (probably) losing Bruising, I'd rather see Sentinels' -Resist component expanded on to bridge the gap (and distort the damage caps).  This is in addition to a minor damage bump, to be clear.  I do think they need one, just not 1.125.

 

 

Edited November 22, 2019 by Replacement

[Obitus]

1 hour ago, Replacement said:

Observation: Blasters have less survival than a Sentinel, but more reason to be in the melee.  This is a generalization based on their /Manipulations and varies from build-to-build, but it's broadly true.

This is an irony that made me chuckle as I was rambling through that post, last night.  Sentinels are (by far) the beefiest "ranged" AT in the game (disregarding our VEAT friends, at least), but they have probably the least reason to be in melee.  Still, even Sentinels benefit a great deal from, say, adding an Epic-pool melee attack to their chain.  They can also have e.g. PBAoE nukes.

 

1 hour ago, Replacement said:

At the end of the day, it feels more like a matter of opinion.  We all understand Sentinel is (intentionally!) a bit weak, but not so much so that people won't invite them.  I would like to see buffs, but I don't think Defense is the answer, when they already have plenty.  I'd like to see a minor damage bump, but I'm similarly just not sold on crit-less Scrapper damage.  I don't really want "a Scrapper, except more convenient."

I don't disagree with that last line.  The defense issue just seems like such a small thing; I'd prefer Sentinel defensive powers to have the same values simply because it'd be one less thing to have to think about.

 

As for offense, if we take, say, Fire Blast as the baseline, then Sentinel damage is mostly fine.  The problems are that:

• Most blast sets kinda suck in terms of DPA/DPS potential, and
• To the extent that blast sets are balanced now on other ATs, fast snipes do a lot of the heavy lifting, and Sentinels don't get snipes.

This is why I'd prefer to see some sort of blast-set rebalancing effort rather than a simple boost to the Sentinel AT scalar.  There's no reason that Sentinels couldn't have a fast-snipe analogue, even if the design docs mandate that Sentinels can't have snipe-tier range.  Likewise, there's no reason that, say, Ice Blast should have its single-target DPS knee-capped (Freeze Ray) on Sentinels.

 

If the blast sets were balanced better, and if they had a better inherent, Sentinels would neither need nor deserve a flat damage boost.  Sentinels do have intrinsic advantages over Scrappers/Blasters; the latter should maintain some sort of offensive advantage to reflect that.  It's just that right now Sentinels without the right primary (and without abusing the hell out of Epics/procs) feels truly anemic.

Edited November 22, 2019 by Obitus

[Cutter]

Seems like fairly broad agreement for Damage = 1.0 and defenses = .75, so really what's left to determine is a worthwhile inherent? How about this?

 

I Have The High Ground - As the battle rages on, the Sentinel becomes better able to identify and exploit their enemies' weaknesses, while at the same time reducing the threat posed by the enemies' attacks.

• Same mechanic (attacking builds the bar)
• Triggers on any single-target attack (or give it a button like Domination)
• Grants two effects, buff to self and debuff to enemies:
  • Self: Gain a minor +To-hit (and damage?) buff, and the secondary effects of the Sentinel's attacks are magnified, a la Power Boost
  • Enemy: The Sentinel's attacks light up enemies, providing a minor Res, Def and Damage debuff, as well as weakening the secondary effects of the enemy's attacks

It's entirely possible that this would be enough by itself to give the Sentinel a distinct role and identity?

[Bossk_Hogg]

21 hours ago, Replacement said:

tbh, I wouldn't know.  I don't really play with incarnate content.  I know that between 30 and 45, trying to get near things in a party as a dominator or blaster is really really hard on some content, like Warhulks.

 

So yeah, I believe range really is a big survivability bump.  Moreover, it's layered on top of their having armor secondary.  Range is like Defense: it doesn't help at all when it doesn't apply.  But that doesn't mean it didn't keep you from taking several hits.

 

My fire/fire sent basically has to live in melee range thanks to inferno and burn. Post tank changes, she'll just be a gimped fire/fire tank with no team utility and less damage/survivability. 

[Rathulfr]

On 11/21/2019 at 6:59 PM, Sovera said:

I no longer play a Sentinel (and I think this is a common thing if were to take a poll) so to me it does not really matter if they are buffed or not.

 

That poll would include me, one of the biggest pro-Sentinel evangelists just a few months ago (you can check my post history, if you like).  But I suddenly went silent once I got back to playing Blasters with the new/improved secondaries.  I pretty much gave up on the Sentinels, at that point.

 

I did dust off a level 41 Energy² Sentinel last night, to compare it the Energy² Blaster that I just finished.  I equipped him with all (except the Superiors) the attuned IOs from my 50+3 T4 Energy/WP Sentinel that I haven't played for a few months.  I had to spackle in the gaps with common IOs for the moment.  He's still fun, just nowhere near as effective as the Blaster at the same level (who was equipped with only common IOs at level 41).  Arguably, the Sentinel is definitely more durable at 41 than the Blaster.  But man it takes a long time to kill things, compared to any other DPS class.

 

[RANT: And why the hell is Energize on Sentinels only 60% as effective as it is on Blasters, when Sentinels have toggles to run in addition to their attacks?!?  But I digress...]

 

Edited November 23, 2019 by Rathulfr

[Sovera]

7 hours ago, Rathulfr said:

 

That poll would include me, one of the biggest pro-Sentinel evangelists just a few months ago (you can check my post history, if you like).  But I suddenly went silent once I got back to playing Blasters with the new/improved secondaries.  I pretty much gave up on the Sentinels, at that point.

 

I did dust off a level 41 Energy² Sentinel last night, to compare it the Energy² Blaster that I just finished.  I equipped him with all (except the Superiors) the attuned IOs from my 50+3 T4 Energy/WP Sentinel that I haven't played for a few months.  I had to spackle in the gaps with common IOs for the moment.  He's still fun, just nowhere near as effective as the Blaster at the same level (who was equipped with only common IOs at level 41).  Arguably, the Sentinel is definitely more durable at 41 than the Blaster.  But man it takes a long time to kill things, compared to any other DPS class.

 

[RANT: And why the hell is Energize on Sentinels only 60% as effective as it is on Blasters, when Sentinels have toggles to run in addition to their attacks?!?  But I digress...]

 

This is my experience leveling a Sentinel after all these months of playing one all the time (I have something like 28 saved builds for Sentinels compared to 4 builds for scrappers, 3 Blasters, 5 Controllers, etc). And this is leveraging my understanding of procs and each attack having two, no recharge, etc. I pity the regular players leveling a Sentinel without the experience to load up on damage procs to help what frankly feels like anemic damage.

[Haijinx]

On 11/21/2019 at 6:41 PM, DarknessEternal said:

Increasing their damage scalar to scrapper’s would still leave them noticeably behind scrapper actual damage, because of critical, targets, and melee design superiority.

 

as for survivability, why not?  Aren’t we past the point of pretending “always at range” even exists?  All ATs are in melee nearly all of the time.

There is a certain opportunity cost to melee range attacks though.

 

Ranged attacks require much less positioning before you start doing damage.  

 

So perhaps bringing Sents to a better scalar would be enough.  

 

The Sent secondaries are actually decent, they are probably not the problem 

[drbuzzard]

6 hours ago, Haijinx said:

The Sent secondaries are actually decent, they are probably not the problem 

You know, I'd actually say the design of sentinel secondaries is their greatest strength. Perhaps I'm being a touch hyperbolic, but I think they knocked it out of the park when they adapted most of the secondaries. The sentinel versions of SR, Ninja, Regen and Energy Aura are the best in the game. The rest are all quite solid as well (this is not to say that the 70%->75% change should be skipped though because I prefer consistency). They did an interesting job of layering effects to grant a solid degree of durability no matter if you're resistance, defense, or mixed without making any of the sets huge outliers in power.

[DarknessEternal]

8 hours ago, Haijinx said:

There is a certain opportunity cost to melee range attacks though.

 

Ranged attacks require much less positioning before you start doing damage.  

 

 

I know you're agreeing, so this isn't an argument, just a continuation.

 

That's what I meant by melee design superiority.  Except for one outlier (Fire), all of the ranged sets would do noticeably less damage than nearly every melee set even if they were on the same scalar.  Melee sets are just designed to do more damage.

[Haijinx]

17 hours ago, Rathulfr said:

 

That poll would include me, one of the biggest pro-Sentinel evangelists just a few months ago (you can check my post history, if you like).  But I suddenly went silent once I got back to playing Blasters with the new/improved secondaries.  I pretty much gave up on the Sentinels, at that point.

 

I did dust off a level 41 Energy² Sentinel last night, to compare it the Energy² Blaster that I just finished.  I equipped him with all (except the Superiors) the attuned IOs from my 50+3 T4 Energy/WP Sentinel that I haven't played for a few months.  I had to spackle in the gaps with common IOs for the moment.  He's still fun, just nowhere near as effective as the Blaster at the same level (who was equipped with only common IOs at level 41).  Arguably, the Sentinel is definitely more durable at 41 than the Blaster.  But man it takes a long time to kill things, compared to any other DPS class.

 

[RANT: And why the hell is Energize on Sentinels only 60% as effective as it is on Blasters, when Sentinels have toggles to run in addition to their attacks?!?  But I digress...]

 

Energize is the same as Stalker, perhaps?

 

Blaster Energize is beyond awesome though.  Its quite possibly the best single power in COH.

[Haijinx]

1 hour ago, DarknessEternal said:

I know you're agreeing, so this isn't an argument, just a continuation.

 

That's what I meant by melee design superiority.  Except for one outlier (Fire), all of the ranged sets would do noticeably less damage than nearly every melee set even if they were on the same scalar.  Melee sets are just designed to do more damage.

My take is .. 

 

Sents probably should do slightly less damage than Scrappers over time, ignoring nukes 

 

Then let the nukes balance out the crits, build up vs aim, etc. 

 

Right now though, do they even match Brutes?

 

[atletikus]

 

On 11/22/2019 at 6:30 PM, Cutter said:

Seems like fairly broad agreement for Damage = 1.0 and defenses = .75, so really what's left to determine is a worthwhile inherent? How about this?

 

I Have The High Ground - As the battle rages on, the Sentinel becomes better able to identify and exploit their enemies' weaknesses, while at the same time reducing the threat posed by the enemies' attacks.

• Same mechanic (attacking builds the bar)
• Triggers on any single-target attack (or give it a button like Domination)
• Grants two effects, buff to self and debuff to enemies:
  • Self: Gain a minor +To-hit (and damage?) buff, and the secondary effects of the Sentinel's attacks are magnified, a la Power Boost
  • Enemy: The Sentinel's attacks light up enemies, providing a minor Res, Def and Damage debuff, as well as weakening the secondary effects of the enemy's attacks

It's entirely possible that this would be enough by itself to give the Sentinel a distinct role and identity?

Agreed on both the boost to damage and defenses. As for the inherent; I would like something that is useful both solo, but even more so on team so a Sentinel offers something beyond subpar DPS. The current inherent seem only slightly useful on AV/GM, and is pretty much wasted on anything less. 

I fancy Martial Manipulation's Reach for the Limit mechanic, akin to Defiance, the Blaster inherent that rewards active gameplay, by providing a random chance of triggering a short duration +ToHit/+DMG. I envision this for the Sentinel made into a party-wide (PBAoE 60 radius) bonus. However, when the team goes below a threshold health, the inherent becomes defensive in nature - providing the Sentinel/team (if it triggers) instead with a similarly party-wide (PBAoE 60 radius) short duration +Defense/+Resistance/+Regeneration/+Recovery buff and possibly also a taunt (centered on Sentinel) or placate. This would be thematic for an AT called Sentinel, as it would become someone watching over the team; a guardian, instead of a selfish AT that has pretty good survivability but not enough damage to really attract much aggro. 

Edited November 23, 2019 by atletikus

[Haijinx]

"I have the high ground" is a dumb name tbh.

 

[Cutter]

9 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

"I have the high ground" is a dumb name tbh.

 

Clearly Star Wars themed placeholder names don't fly everywhere. Win some lose some.

 

53 minutes ago, atletikus said:

 

Agreed on both the boost to damage and defenses. As for the inherent; I would like something that is useful both solo, but even more so on team so a Sentinel offers something beyond subpar DPS. The current inherent seem only slightly useful on AV/GM, and is pretty much wasted on anything less. 

I fancy Martial Manipulation's Reach for the Limit mechanic, akin to Defiance, the Blaster inherent that rewards active gameplay, by providing a random chance of triggering a short duration +ToHit/+DMG. I envision this for the Sentinel made into a party-wide (PBAoE 60 radius) bonus. However, when the team goes below a threshold health, the inherent becomes defensive in nature - providing the Sentinel/team (if it triggers) instead with a similarly party-wide (PBAoE 60 radius) short duration +Defense/+Resistance/+Regeneration/+Recovery buff and possibly also a taunt (centered on Sentinel) or placate. This would be thematic for an AT called Sentinel, as it would become someone watching over the team; a guardian, instead of a selfish AT that has pretty good survivability but not enough damage to really attract much aggro. 

I've previously suggested team buff effects, and the response was underwhelming. Plus there's an issue of stepping on the toes of other ATs. Hence why this time around I'm running buff/debuff secondary effects up the flagpole.

[Haijinx]

16 minutes ago, Cutter said:

Clearly Star Wars themed placeholder names don't fly everywhere. Win some lose some.

 

I've previously suggested team buff effects, and the response was underwhelming. Plus there's an issue of stepping on the toes of other ATs. Hence why this time around I'm running buff/debuff secondary effects up the flagpole.

I'm pretty sure there is a Forums Rule against the Prequels.