New Archetype: Protector (support/melee)

[Haijinx]

Just now, sacredlunatic said:

Doesn't change the fact that adding melee sets to Defenders would be a huge problem.  For one thing, they would likely duplicated abilities already in their Epic sets, so Those powers would have to be replaced.

I did not suggest Melee sets 

 

I suggested Assault sets.

[Wavicle]

Just now, Haijinx said:

I did not suggest Melee sets 

 

I suggested Assault sets.

That doesn't avoid the problem I cited.

[Leogunner]

8 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

Id rather do neither.  But proliferation would be much more straight forward than a new AT.

 

Look at Energy Blast vs Energy Assault.  They already share multiple powers. 

 

So you are actually only juggling partial set changes. (Replacing some ranged attacks with Melee attacks)

I'll share a fact for that: All Assault sets are hybrid sets that share powers with melee and ranged sets with only a handful of unique powers.  That's why they exist.

 

Sharing powersets is different from sharing powers.

[Haijinx]

1 minute ago, sacredlunatic said:

That doesn't avoid the problem I cited.

It partially does, since Assault sets are already largely similar to Blast sets.

[Wavicle]

5 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

And why the hell does ANOTHER AT's unique mechanics have to rely on another hypothetical AT's mechanics?  The point was making the AT unique in some way and you tried making an example of an AT that DOES have a unique mechanic.

 

I was alluding to the mess of "It's between this AT and that AT in this, it's between this AT and that AT in that..."  Just tell us what the AT is MEANT to do and then let the players fondle it to do what they want with it, even if it's at non-optimal capacities than a more specialized AT.

 

Then I'd ask what the absolute frikk a GUARDIAN has to do with trickery and sneaking about?  Maybe you didn't have a clear concept or you changed the concept halfway through?

 

That's fine.  I'm just saying don't tie your concept to an extremely situational power like Placate.  There's not that many people who clamour for it and its effects immediately disappear the moment your own effects start to touch the target which would be VERY likely if you have any kind of persistent debuffs on the field.

 

Also, I don't know how you can play anymore defensively than a Defender without completely cutting your offense at the ankles.  If that's the case, why not keep Placate as an offensive tool that's limited so you can actually do something effectively offensively but on a limited scale dubbed by Placate and its recharge?

 

 

Well, the inherent I designed DOES have a unique mechanic, so that has already been addressed.  The AT is meant to be a non squishy support toon.

I don't think Placate neccessarily has to be about being sneaky, but I see what you're getting at.  I just see it as an aggro management ability.  But that's fine, something else in that spot is an option.

I originally considered going with Confront, but I thought Placate would be more unique and interesting, given that only one AT really gets it and no AT that isn't pure dps gets it.

Edited December 15, 2019 by sacredlunatic

[Haijinx]

The Placate thing is a non problem.

 

With the chance to hide ATO, it not like Stalkers need it.

[Wavicle]

9 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

It partially does, since Assault sets are already largely similar to Blast sets.

If what you're suggesting actually worked they could have, instead of creating Sentinels, just proliferated Armor to Blasters.  There's a reason they did not do that.

[Leogunner]

5 minutes ago, sacredlunatic said:

Well, the inherent I designed DOES have a unique mechanic, so that has already been addressed.  The AT is meant to be a non squishy support toon.

Well you did bring up Corruptors' uniqueness.  I merely described how their inherent can be considered a uniquely offensive aspect of a support AT.

 

Perhaps you'd want to throw back all the way to the original comment saying how the AT would FUNCTION differently?  Inherent status protection is different, but it's also passive (the most passive you can get).  Nothing wrong with that....then what ELSE does it do uniquely?

 

FYI, I'm one of the 2 people that upvoted your OP.  I haven't been making many comments because I've been sick but now that I'm pretty good now, I make comments to get people talking and if it's a suggestion, brainstorming on improving stuff.  Being critical of ideas is a good thing.

[Haijinx]

Just now, sacredlunatic said:

If what you're suggesting actually worked they could have, instead of creating Sentinels, just proliferated Armor to Blasters.  There's a reason they did not do that.

I disagree. 

 

Corruptors already do damage.  The change would just change some of the damage to be Melee instead of Ranged. 

 

 

[Wavicle]

6 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

Well you did bring up Corruptors' uniqueness.  I merely described how their inherent can be considered a uniquely offensive aspect of a support AT.

 

Perhaps you'd want to throw back all the way to the original comment saying how the AT would FUNCTION differently?  Inherent status protection is different, but it's also passive (the most passive you can get).  Nothing wrong with that....then what ELSE does it do uniquely?

 

FYI, I'm one of the 2 people that upvoted your OP.  I haven't been making many comments because I've been sick but now that I'm pretty good now, I make comments to get people talking and if it's a suggestion, brainstorming on improving stuff.  Being critical of ideas is a good thing.

 And your comments have been some of the most constructive on the thread, and I appreciate that. If I come across as just arguing I apologize, it was only the suggestions by some people that there was no possibility for this combination of power sets to be fun to play or that it was somehow by definition over powered or under powered that I objected to. 

 

I’m pretty confident that these devs are at some point going to attempt a melee support class using some version of the existing support sets. Maybe it won’t look anything like what I’ve described here, but I think we’re going to get it eventually. 

[Bossk_Hogg]

1 hour ago, Haijinx said:

It is perhaps easier to adjust melee scale than coming up with a new AT. 

They'd still suck, because they'd get hit with more splash damage and be mezzed more often. That's why the Guardian secondary is a mix of support and shields. 

[Haijinx]

1 hour ago, Bossk_Hogg said:

They'd still suck, because they'd get hit with more splash damage and be mezzed more often. That's why the Guardian secondary is a mix of support and shields. 

The other guardian?  This one didn't seem to have that.

[Wavicle]

1 hour ago, Haijinx said:

The other guardian?  This one didn't seem to have that.

This one gets a small amount of mez protection and absorption in the inherent to make up for the lack of actual armor.

I know nothing at all about the class on Rebirth.

[Replacement]

5 hours ago, Haijinx said:

For example.  If we prolifered some Assault sets to Corruptors, you could basically do the Support+ Melee thing, without changing the game's character all that much.  Since the inherent, hp, epics, etc already are hashed out.

 

But proponents always want the new AT.  And to me that suggests something.

I will keep taking aim at this every time I see it proposed: This breaks more than it fixes.

 

Corruptor with Assault sets - trying to actually play in the melee - creates really bad false choices.  Like, petless mastermind bad.  Assault/Empathy, for example, is asking for its own demise.  Or Force Fields, for as long as it cannot self-buff.  By extension, this affects the long-view of "how is Corruptor performing?" You cannot change Thermal Radiation just to accomadate the folks pairing it with Assaults -- that would make the Blastruptors overpowered.  

 

I understand resistance to adding new ATs, but I will always prefer a suggestion of a new AT over creating several noob traps.  Corruptor playing Assault, but actually only playing gimp-blast (because they can't actually melee!), does not satisfy the fantasy that melee/support provides.

 

I would also strongly caution everyone to stay away from assuming the worst in others, such as suggesting this is a roundabout way of getting some OP combo they secretly need to rule the universe.  Suggesting people want a new AT because they have narcissistic needs for power-tripping creates unnecessary adversaries; Occam's Razor says they probably just don't feel they can do their character concept justice with the current ATs.

[Zepp]

10 hours ago, boggo2300 said:

it's NOT FUN (I played a beta of the original guardian)

I played an Assault/Support[composition] on beta and it was quite fun.

 

Edit: While I am not too keen on this AT, I find the zealous opposition to new ATs overall to be quite alarming. It is especially disconcerting to here people proposing a pseudo-new AT that ports Assault sets to a ranged AT. It is not only an absurd argument, but it fails to prevent the problem it purports to solve. Porting a half-melee set to a ranged AT would actually have more balance issues than creating a new AT. If you are opposed to new ATs fine, state your case but do not pile on. Furthermore, comments that are simply in opposition with no productive suggestions water down the actual conversation of whether a specific proposal is feasible, and how to make it better. I read through this entire thread, and I've gotten little out of it because of the sidebar of whether ATs ought to be proposed.

Edited December 16, 2019 by Zepp

[Haijinx]

7 hours ago, Replacement said:

I will keep taking aim at this every time I see it proposed: This breaks more than it fixes.

 

Corruptor with Assault sets - trying to actually play in the melee - creates really bad false choices.  Like, petless mastermind bad.  Assault/Empathy, for example, is asking for its own demise.  Or Force Fields, for as long as it cannot self-buff.  By extension, this affects the long-view of "how is Corruptor performing?" You cannot change Thermal Radiation just to accomadate the folks pairing it with Assaults -- that would make the Blastruptors overpowered.  

 

I understand resistance to adding new ATs, but I will always prefer a suggestion of a new AT over creating several noob traps.  Corruptor playing Assault, but actually only playing gimp-blast (because they can't actually melee!), does not satisfy the fantasy that melee/support provides.

 

I would also strongly caution everyone to stay away from assuming the worst in others, such as suggesting this is a roundabout way of getting some OP combo they secretly need to rule the universe.  Suggesting people want a new AT because they have narcissistic needs for power-tripping creates unnecessary adversaries; Occam's Razor says they probably just don't feel they can do their character concept justice with the current ATs.

Blasters have been going into melee since Issue 1 with no mezz protection.

 

Sure Empathy would be a poor choice.  A lot of others would be fine though.

 

You could gate access like you do with shields.

 

Force Fields would likely do well.  They get mezz protection, and some defense to self.  They also have some other tools.

 

=====

You could be right about the motives, the concepts suggested could just be OP'd coincidently.  Almost every time.

 

 

 

[Pbuckley818]

Ok, so heres the deal a lot of people are clamoring for this AT. A lot of people are aslo ardently opposed to the idea, either on the premise that it will make one or more existing Melee and or Support AT's obsolete, or that it will invalidate everything that makes the VEAT's special. On top of that their is always someone trying to shoehorn an Assault Primary into the discussion, or suggest some other game altering "Fix" that won't satisfy people looking to play an AT like this.

 

As a result I have taken to working on a Melee/Support AT of my own using the VEATs as a starting point, with a lot of research and experimentation I hope to end up with something that people are happy with, and that can be implemented on a server with little to know issue. Basically I plan to put at least as much work into it as malonkey1 has invested into the Duo. If it can workm it will, if it can't, it wont, and that will be that. Maybe once one of us has put in that level of work, people can see the potential of the AT.

 

Right now Project Protector has a Defense/Support Primary, and a Melee Secondary. It's support powers are intended to be slightly better than a VEAT or Mastermind, but may be rolled back to be about the same. While it's Survivability is intended to be around that of a Stalker/Scrapper, with it's damage being comparable to a Tanker. Instead of getting Taunt it get's a Confront like ability called Goad, which comes with a -Res, -Def DeBuff (To compensate for a lot of Support powers POSSIBLY loosing their -Res). While the Protector is not a Tank, nor is it even a Scrapper, or a Defender it is still a support with decent damage numbers. Which seems to work just fine for VEAT's, and if you want to complain about it being too similar to VEAT's I think Fortunata and Dominator have words to take up with you.

 

Why did I add this here? Mainly beceasue I hate that so many of these posts get made and none of the authors ever seem to collaborate in any meaningfull way. So here am, putting my money where my mouth is.

Edited December 16, 2019 by Pbuckley818

[Zepp]

13 minutes ago, Pbuckley818 said:

Why did I add this here? Mainly beceasue I hate that so many of these posts get made and none of the authors ever seem to collaborate in any meaningfull way. So here am, putting my money where my mouth is.

If you want a collaboratively crafted AT, the best example is the Operative which is an assault/supportish class which I would say is one of the best proposals I've seen, and I have actually gone through every proposal out there as far as I know. Perhaps you could use that as a startpoint.

[Saiyajinzoningen]

this sounds like a classic paladin class, everyone hates paladins cause they are super boring and tedious.................not

[boggo2300]

9 hours ago, Saiyajinzoningen said:

this sounds like a classic paladin class, everyone hates paladins cause they are super boring and tedious.................not

And City plays EXACTLY like WOW.................not

[Zepp]

2 hours ago, boggo2300 said:

And City plays EXACTLY like WOW.................not

It does not, but that is not really an argument against this AT proposal either...

[boggo2300]

1 minute ago, Zepp said:

It does not, but that is not really an argument against this AT proposal either...

wasn't intended to be, it was an argument against what I quoted

[Zepp]

Just now, boggo2300 said:

wasn't intended to be, it was an argument against what I quoted

Yet it is not. While they are not directly comparable, there is sufficient overlap to suggest that there is some validity to the suggestion that a class similar to the Paladin from D&D, EQ, WoW, AQW, FF-XIV, CoL, etc. would be enjoyable to a sufficient number of players in the CoX-realms to make it a viable suggestion. In other words, this is neither a sound argument against the AT proposal, nor is it a sound argument against the quoted text.

[Haijinx]

1 hour ago, Zepp said:

Yet it is not. While they are not directly comparable, there is sufficient overlap to suggest that there is some validity to the suggestion that a class similar to the Paladin from D&D, EQ, WoW, AQW, FF-XIV, CoL, etc. would be enjoyable to a sufficient number of players in the CoX-realms to make it a viable suggestion. In other words, this is neither a sound argument against the AT proposal, nor is it a sound argument against the quoted text.

Isn't a cleric / druid / etc also a melee support class?

 

Most of these games have very few ranged classes.  

 

There usually are not attempts to make Ranged Cleric classes.  

 

So we have the inverse of that.  Why do we need melee support ATs again? 

[EmmySky]

29 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

Isn't a cleric / druid / etc also a melee support class?

 

Most of these games have very few ranged classes.  

 

There usually are not attempts to make Ranged Cleric classes.  

 

So we have the inverse of that.  Why do we need melee support ATs again? 

Because I want a kin(or emp)/MA!  😛