How to fix Sentinels

[Omega-202]

2 minutes ago, Replacement said:

@Omega-202 You have convinced me that if any (non-Epic) AT should get a stance inherent, it would be Sentinels.  Precisely because it helps with a "Jack of All Trades."  

 

I still don't like them, though. 🙂

 

 

I get it.  It might not be the flashiest or coolest idea, but support stance auras just seems too straight forward and effective to not seriously consider.  I can't think of any missing roles that a Sentinel could otherwise fill, and customizable Jack of All Trades (which we are missing) is something they are close to doing already.

 

My overall pitch is:

- Raise damage scale from 0.95 to 1.0

- Raise defense scale from 0.70 to 0.75

- Range and target caps can stay as is to give then a "medium range" feel

- Maybe keep some aspect of the passive -resist on attacks, especially with Tankers losing Bruising

- Give them 4 aura stances with solid range (60 ft) with various bonuses.  For example they could be

   a) Damage and movement speed (named Countercharge)

   b) To hit, perception and regen (named Alert)

   c) Defense and recovery (named Fall Back)

   d) Resist and recharge (named Last Stand)

 

...or some other mix and match, with appropriate "Sentinel" names that sound like something that fits "someone who guards something".  

[Omega-202]

10 minutes ago, drbuzzard said:

Of course my initial suggesting of simply being the king of resistance debuffing requires a lot less trouble by both the devs and the players, offers a different playstyle feel, and benefits a whole team. But I suppose nobody else liked a simple solution.

It's the most boring solution in this whole thread.  Notice how nobody seemed to like it?  

[Replacement]

On 11/22/2019 at 10:44 AM, Replacement said:

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.

Me, a few pages back.  I don't see why this is a boring path.  This is a good "team player" niche to fill, and I think Drbuzzard's method is solid (stacking to a cap, meaning multiple Sentinels can contribute to a point).

 

It's not flashy, but it doesn't feel like a gimmick either.  The only adjustment to this I'd make is that I now would also like a defensive benefit.  really tiny pbaoe heals whenever they shoot something.  I dunno.  Some way to feel like they're being a sentinel, which means watching out for others. (yes I realize tiny aoe heals all the time would be super gimmicky.  Shhhhhhh)

Edited December 6, 2019 by Replacement

[drbuzzard]

2 hours ago, Omega-202 said:

It's the most boring solution in this whole thread.  Notice how nobody seemed to like it?  

It's powerful and easy for the devs to implement. It benefits teams, and lets sentinels stack easily. Maybe I'm a bit different, but mechanics that work interest me, not flashy buttons to mash which have limited actual effect.

[nihilii]

I like the idea of sentinels applying -res all the time. You can't ever go wrong with -res. When Bruising was introduced, it made tankers useful at a time where it was hard to justify their presence.

 

It's also thematic, if you're thinking of the sentinel as someone who keeps watch on the enemy and prods them for weaknesses the rest of the team can exploit.

[Wavicle]

On 12/6/2019 at 1:14 PM, drbuzzard said:

Of course my initial suggesting of simply being the king of resistance debuffing requires a lot less trouble by both the devs and the players, offers a different playstyle feel, and benefits a whole team. But I suppose nobody else liked a simple solution.

The problem with that solution is it makes them better at support but does not make them better damage dealers.  Since the problem with the AT is that they are a Pure DPS class that does bad DPS, giving them more support is not a solution.

[Omega-202]

1 hour ago, sacredlunatic said:

The problem with that solution is it makes them better at support but does not make them better damage dealers.  Since the problem with the AT is that they are a Pure DPS class that does bad DPS, giving them more support is not a solution.

Except it would increase damage because -resist means more damage for everyone, including the Sentinel.  It just makes the whole class even more boring than it already is, while stepping on the toes of Sonic blast users and Defenders and Corruptors in general.  

[Wavicle]

People were talking about roles, and also worrying about treading on the territory of team support toons.

It seems to me it makes some sense for Sentinels to be a LITTLE bit support-like.

Blaster and Stalker are super self focused.
Scrapper can off tank a little bit, even without Confront.
Sentinel being able to support a little bit makes some sense in that context.

 

[carnalchaos]

I think throwing out ideas here is useful brainstorming.  Maybe towards end of it we could summarize them and setup a poll?

 

I liked the mention of a perception power and making us a kind of foil for stalkers but agree that is somewhat limited in pve.  Maybe a team wide debuffing removal tool?  A clicky break free for the whole team with a perception buff attached?  Squishies would love us, and would give us a friendly team power with some tactical usefulness.   

 

Its strong but it doesn't really benefit us since we get status protection anyways, probably too strong though.

[Menelruin]

Everyone seems dead set against having a Stance mechanic, but at present almost all ATs have a unique mechanic for their inherent, and Stances are one thing none of them have yet.....

[Bossk_Hogg]

On 12/7/2019 at 3:45 PM, sacredlunatic said:

The problem with that solution is it makes them better at support but does not make them better damage dealers.  Since the problem with the AT is that they are a Pure DPS class that does bad DPS, giving them more support is not a solution.

I mean, they could be given corrupter debuff/buff numbers on top of a damage scale increase. That would make them more team friendly while still being a benefit solo. 

[Zepp]

I think combining the offensive/defensive opportunity mechanic, changing from +Dmg to -Res, and making it always on rather than on a build-up would be the best solution for the inherent. Raising offensive and defensive scales would also be reasonable.

Adding a perception mechanic in addition to these changes would be thematic and interesting, even if many see it as less useful.

 

Toggles are a bad idea for an inherent because they will prevent large swaths of players from trying out the AT because stances are only popular among a specific subsection of the playerbase, and the goal of an inherent should be to increase the likelihood of people to play an AT, not decreasing it.

[Wavicle]

I feel like the design of the archetype is fine.  Just increase the damage across the board.  Maybe slightly increase the Heal effect from Defensive. Done.  All these complicated solutions...

Edited December 10, 2019 by sacredlunatic

[oldskool]

1 hour ago, sacredlunatic said:

I feel like the design of the archetype is fine.  Just increase the damage across the board.  Maybe slightly increase the Heal effect from Defensive. Done.  All these complicated solutions...

These discussions always get circular.  Like this statement for example.  Then someone may chime in to say how a damage increase across the board doesn't address the DPA disparity between ranged and melee sets.  Then we'll go back to talking about stances. 

Not trashing this comment, but just pointing out an observation.  Its good to talk things out even if the proposed solutions are complicated or ones that I don't care for personally.  May as well hash this out now and then when the time comes people can have some relatively developed view points on what they would like to see happen. 

Edited December 10, 2019 by oldskool

[Replacement]

I feel like the best thing we could really get would be an idea from the HC developers on what direction they really want Sentinels to go in.  I would hate for them to start dropping Sentinel updates and have a bunch of people upset because they had their own idea of what the Sentinel was supposed to be.

 

I mean, we all see how evident it is that "they're a bit good at several things and great at nothing" but I'm not getting the vibe that they ever intended them to be a jack-of-all-trades.  More that they were stuck with one the moment they committed to blast/armor.

 

CP wants to double-down on making their name relevant (at least, that was my interpretation.  I intend no words to be put in his mouth), sort of scouty-watchery.  Scenarios I see

• It ends up being a flavor thing and they continue to be an everyman (in which case, multi-auras and stances and such are on the table), 
• The current middle-ground perfornace is to be viewed as a baseline and whatever they do to change Sentinel ends up being the identity added to it.  A solid example of this is Stalker, which is basically "Scrapper with just a few tweaks that make it play radically different."

I have a feeling Sentinel is next, if we can ever get Tanker out of the pipe.

[Bossk_Hogg]

16 hours ago, Zepp said:

 

Toggles are a bad idea for an inherent because they will prevent large swaths of players from trying out the AT because stances are only popular among a specific subsection of the playerbase, and the goal of an inherent should be to increase the likelihood of people to play an AT, not decreasing it.

I don't get why you think this is too complicated. The AT has toggles in its secondary. Turning on one of two toggles depending on the role you want isnt exactly rocket surgery. Sentinels are by far the most basic and lazy playstyle AT out there. You have the durability of a scrapper but don't have to even worry about positioning. Plus it would still be far simpler to play than the current version. 

Edited December 10, 2019 by Bossk_Hogg

[oldskool]

3 hours ago, Replacement said:

I feel like the best thing we could really get would be an idea from the HC developers on what direction they really want Sentinels to go in.  I would hate for them to start dropping Sentinel updates and have a bunch of people upset because they had their own idea of what the Sentinel was supposed to be.

First part is rational.  The last bit is well... its going to happen regardless. 

Edited December 10, 2019 by oldskool

[drbuzzard]

It's funny that my initial, simple suggestion was criticized because it intruded into the realm of the buff/debuff classes. Of course it was in a way that sentinels already did so, so I didn't feel that magnifying it a bit would be something out of line. The stance suggestion just sounds like someone wants to be a corrupter with status protection and call it a sentinel. It's the whole span of buffs all available to an alleged DPS class. I see this idea flying like a lead balloon. 

[Zepp]

8 hours ago, Bossk_Hogg said:

I don't get why you think this is too complicated. The AT has toggles in its secondary. Turning on one of two toggles depending on the role you want isnt exactly rocket surgery. Sentinels are by far the most basic and lazy playstyle AT out there. You have the durability of a scrapper but don't have to even worry about positioning. Plus it would still be far simpler to play than the current version. 

I did not say it was too complicated (although increasing to the possibility of nearly 50 stance combinations for some sets would be a bit annoying). I said it would make the AT less attractive to too many players. Some people really love their stancing. Some people vomit at the thought of playing a stance-based character. Why force an entire AT into stance hell (for those that do not like stances)? It seems like you want to take the least popular AT and make it even less popular...

[Bossk_Hogg]

Oh please. As if people won't be in offensive stance the vast majority of the time. It's not like anyone uses anything but incendiary ammo most of the time anyways. Defensive would be for when/if you want to off tank. It's also hardly the least popular AT's, beating corrupters, stalkers, dominators, and outnumbering VEATS and EATS combined. Its roughly tied with defenders. If anything, the class is lowish in popularity because it's utterly one dimensional and not good at its one dimension.

 

Those that vomit at the thought of stances can bring a bucket or ideally get a few more brain cells to rub together.  

[Zepp]

Your argument makes no sense... stancing takes no thought, but people who don't like stancing are stupid? That makes no sense.

Dislike of stancing rarely has anything to do with cognitive load, it is a matter of the way a character feels. That is why there are one-form Khelds, because stancing isn't everyone's cup of tea. Yes, I overstated its lack of popularity a tad, but it is still far from the top option. Adding a stancing inherent would likely make it less popular than it currently is.

Also, a significant percentage of players run stanceless DP (2.5-15.5% depending on AT) or Bio (around 1%), and they work fine without stances. Why force a stance-centric playstyle on an entire AT?

[Omega-202]

10 hours ago, Zepp said:

Your argument makes no sense... stancing takes no thought, but people who don't like stancing are stupid? That makes no sense.

Dislike of stancing rarely has anything to do with cognitive load, it is a matter of the way a character feels. That is why there are one-form Khelds, because stancing isn't everyone's cup of tea. Yes, I overstated its lack of popularity a tad, but it is still far from the top option. Adding a stancing inherent would likely make it less popular than it currently is.

Also, a significant percentage of players run stanceless DP (2.5-15.5% depending on AT) or Bio (around 1%), and they work fine without stances. Why force a stance-centric playstyle on an entire AT?

A similar percent of MM's run petless.  What's your point?  You can't cater to 1% of the population.  

 

And the proposed stances wouldn't be anything like Kheldians.  A set of mutually exclusive buff toggles is nothing like a full transformation that locks out 3/4 of your powers.  You trying to equivocate them indicates to me that you're trying to poison the idea and are arguing in bad faith, or you're too dim to understand the proposal.  

 

I cannot understand how tacking on a set of inherent toggles is any more of a discouragement than Domination management or Opportunity v1.0.  Hell, you want to talk about a mechanic that makes people not want to play an AT, look at the terrible set up Sentinels currently have.  I have chatted with people in game with lvl 35+ Sentinels who still had no idea what their inherent does.  One guy thought that triggering it was random.  

 

Stop projecting your feelings against something and trying to portray them as facts.  Too many people in this thread are doing it.

[drbuzzard]

In the tanker thread over on the test forum CP mentioned that he feels that stacking resistance debuff is too powerful, so we can just skip my idea.

[Frosticus]

I wonder if they data mined the current sets with stances what they would find? 

I play a lot of bio armor and i bet 97% of my playtime is spent in offensive mode. 

I only change stances if something defeats me and I feel that more durability would have kept me in the running vs killing them faster, which isnt often as killing them faster is usually the best solution. 

 

 

[Omega-202]

9 minutes ago, Frosticus said:

I wonder if they data mined the current sets with stances what they would find? 

I play a lot of bio armor and i bet 97% of my playtime is spent in offensive mode. 

I only change stances if something defeats me and I feel that more durability would have kept me in the running vs killing them faster, which isnt often as killing them faster is usually the best solution. 

 

 

I think that speaks to poor balance between the stances and a systemic issue with endgame balance in the game than anything to do directly with the idea of stances.

 

COX endgame comes down to one thing and one thing only: damage.  Survival is binary, either you are tough enough to live at +4/8 (or +3/8 due to level shift) or not.  More durability than that is wasted.  Same for endurance recovery, either you can go forever or you drain, there's barely a middle ground, and extra recovery beyond "can attack forever" is a waste.  Same with accuracy.  But more damage is always better.  That's the issue with Bio Armor.  Everything but damage is binary while damage is not.  

 

But if you put things in the "non damage" stances that aren't binary, then we could have something, especially if they're group buffs.  Hefty Recharge bonuses in an aura?  Power boost effect?  

 

Or, the marginal benefit for the more binary attributes just need to be buffed.  Hypothetical situation:

A) 15% damage boost + 10% to hit boost

 

versus

 

B) 10% defense boost + 40% recharge boost + 50% movement speed boost;

 

versus 

 

C) 15% resist all damage + 50% Debuff resistance + 50% Mez resistance + 75% Power boost

 

and you now have a decent debate about which is better.  There's going to be certain teams that wouldn't turn down C if you're heavy on squishies or B if you want faster nukes instead of a small damage bump.  

 

I don't disagree that Bio Armor does a bad job of selling stances, but that's a Bio Armor and balance issue, not a mechanics issue.