Discord Weekly Discussion - Week 35: PVP

[Meretricious]

On 1/28/2020 at 3:50 PM, Zenex said:

Something I forgot to add. 

The npcs in pvp zones need to to be toned down as with current DR they are more powerful than they should be making nukes in WB, AV in Rv ect harder than they should 

 

I disagree. NPCs in zone, I feel, are not that big of a deal, and add more to the "hazard" feel of the map. Being strategic about how far you chase, or where you choose to plant (landing after a jump), diversifies every zone encounter. This is also great for players that toggle debuffs on you (radiation debuffs, snow storm, etc.), as you can stand in a friendly mob and throw aggro onto them. (Doing this does not guarantee you live. Standing still in a PvP zone is almost always risky. It's just another avenue of disruption you can pursue.)

 

Edit: After thinking about it more, I'm a little torn on this because I forgot how hostile zones are for Masterminds.

 

On 1/29/2020 at 9:51 AM, SwitchFade said:

I have only one reply.

 

I hope to see no impact to pve from any future pvp change, or any balance related changed of pve due to pvp. I hope to never be require to ever set foot in pvp to play pve. Otherwise, I'm all for happy pvp folk, I will just never interact in pvp.

 

23 hours ago, Sniktch said:

My opinion is:  Anything PvPers want that isn't designed to bait/crowbar people into PvP, they can have - as soon as Marshall and Born In Battle don't need villains to flag for PvP to get, whether by changing the requisite badges to not include PvP-zone Explore and History ones, or moving the plaques/badges out of PvP zones. 

 

And yes, Mac, I do know the history, etc - but the point, however annoying it is, bears repeating lest human nature rear its ugly head in the form of "it'll be different THIS time!".  Nukes, Shivans, and the original BiB/Marshall requirements were the definition of crowbarring folks into the zones, and I'm sure you remember just how nasty that turned for everyone involved.  As much as I honestly hate PvP, I don't begrudge you your 'fun' - I just want to be able to forget it exists regardless of where my characters live.

 

This discussion is purely based on fixing the state of PvP as it stands now and to balance some things that leave battles way too one-sided. Replies like these don't have much weight in this discussion, and are more trollish than helpful. I am confident that no PvPer, arena or otherwise, would want to intentionally disturb current PvE mechanics. Read that last sentence again. 

 

Some general, yet important things I think could be looked at:

- Getting suppressed out of Phase Shift by mez effects that come in after you toggle on the power. This doesn't even work on Diabolique, AFAIK.

- Eliminating or reducing the penalty for Absorb Pain and Share Pain, or reducing the timer to 10 seconds at most. I would argue that this change would not only be helpful for competitve PvP, but even make it desirable to play healing classes in PvP zones as well.

- Doing something about jump packs in both arena and pvp zones. You should not be able to use these in the arena at all. Having them used in zone makes it to where whoever has the highest altitude before they attack means they are most likely to win. Which means all encounters start and end with these two powers being used. Which means that if you choose to play without them you are already limiting yourself.

- Using base teleportation in zone. This one is absolutely no fun, and has turned off a lot of regulars from even entering zones anymore. Getting inspirations isn't an issue, but being able to teleport away from potential death, and all effects (base TPing cancels Heat Exhaustion, etc), means no one is at danger of ever dying.

- Changing Warburg to level 50, maybe with only alpha incarnate. Best PvP map to date. 

- Changing Sirens Call & Bloody Bay to level 30-38. As it stands, builds don't get fun until around 35 anyway.

 

Powersets:

- Thermal Shields adding +Absorbtion. Right now, the set has no real utility because it's outclassed in every way by Empathy. You can even add a PvE description like "Additionally, this shield insulates you, aborbing a small amount of damage over time" or something.

- Sonic Shields adding +Absorbtion. Since this set has no heal, I would argue that its absorbtion be greater than thermal shields.

- Cold Domination's slows affecting travel speed

- Kinetics' Inertial Reduction countering all -Jump effects. This might make kinetics useful to counterplay again.

 

Reach requests:

- Raising Corrupter/Dominator/Controller/Defender maximum health points by 6% (1702). Blasters should not be both the hardest hitting and one of the hardest to kill, while underappreciated classes/powersets are begging for some sort of PvP relevance. This is a reach, I know, and I am probably in the minority with this here.

- Being able to slot prestige sprints with KB ios. This would free up a lot of build space for everyone.

 

Thanks for your consideration, and I look forward to more interesting discussion.

Edited January 30, 2020 by Meretricious
Added section about PvP zones and masterminds.

[SwitchFade]

1 minute ago, Meretricious said:

 

I disagree. NPCs in zone, I feel, are not that big of a deal, and add more to the "hazard" feel of the map. Being strategic about how far you chase, or where you choose to plant (landing after a jump), diversifies every zone encounter. This is also great for players that toggle debuffs on you (radiation debuffs, snow storm, etc.), as you can stand in a friendly mob and throw aggro onto them. (Doing this does not guarantee you live. Standing still in a PvP zone is almost always risky. It's just another avenue of disruption you can pursue.)

 

 

 

This discussion is purely based on fixing the state of PvP as it stands now and to balance some things that leave battles way too one-sided. Replies like these don't have much weight in this discussion, and are more trollish than helpful. I am confident that no PvPer, arena or otherwise, would want to intentionally disturb current PvE mechanics. Read that last sentence again. 

 

Some general, yet important things I think could be looked at:

- Getting suppressed out of Phase Shift by mez effects that come in after you toggle on the power. This doesn't even work on Diabolique, AFAIK.

- Eliminating or reducing the penalty for Absorb Pain and Share Pain, or reducing the timer to 10 seconds at most. I would argue that this change would not only be helpful for competitve PvP, but even make it desirable to play healing classes in PvP zones as well.

- Doing something about jump packs in both arena and pvp zones. You should not be able to use these in the arena at all. Having them used in zone makes it to where whoever has the highest altitude before they attack means they are most likely to win. Which means all encounters start and end with these two powers being used. Which means that if you choose to play without them you are already limiting yourself.

- Using base teleportation in zone. This one is absolutely no fun, and has turned off a lot of regulars from even entering zones anymore. Getting inspirations isn't an issue, but being able to teleport away from potential death, and all effects (base TPing cancels Heat Exhaustion, etc), means no one is at danger of ever dying.

 

Powersets:

- Thermal Shields adding +Absorbtion. Right now, the set has no real utility because it's outclassed in every way by Empathy. You can even add a PvE description like "Additionally, this shield insulates you, aborbing a small amount of damage over time" or something.

- Sonic Shields adding +Absorbtion. Since this set has no heal, I would argue that its absorbtion be greater than thermal shields.

- Cold Domination's slows affecting travel speed

- Kinetics' Inertial Reduction countering all -Jump effects. This might make kinetics useful to counterplay again.

 

Reach requests:

- Raising Corrupter/Dominator/Controller/Defender maximum health points by 6% (1702). Blasters should not be both the hardest hitting and one of the hardest to kill, while underappreciated classes/powersets are begging for some sort of PvP relevance. This is a reach, I know, and I am probably in the minority with this here.

- Being able to slot prestige sprints with KB ios. This would free up a lot of build space for everyone.

 

Thanks for your consideration, and I look forward to more interesting discussion.

I read the last sentence again, as requested. Feedback that is positive is not "trollish." We gave ours, respectfully, and we accept yours. Our feedback is that we are happy that pvp vets love, hope it gets worked on to pvp'ers delight on one condition, that no change will ever occur to pve because of pvp. This is valid feedback.

[Zenex]

5 hours ago, Meretricious said:

 

I disagree. NPCs in zone, I feel, are not that big of a deal, and add more to the "hazard" feel of the map. Being strategic about how far you chase, or where you choose to plant (landing after a jump), diversifies every zone encounter. This is also great for players that toggle debuffs on you (radiation debuffs, snow storm, etc.), as you can stand in a friendly mob and throw aggro onto them. (Doing this does not guarantee you live. Standing still in a PvP zone is almost always risky. It's just another avenue of disruption you can pursue.)

 

Edit: After thinking about it more, I'm a little torn on this because I forgot how hostile zones are for Masterminds.

I'm not saying to remove the NPCs or make them completely irrelevant, but my point was that originally players didn't sufferer from crippling DR which they now do and the pve content within the zones didn't compensate for this change when DR came into effect. Specifically in zones where the help of incarnates are not available.   

[Hot3]

7 hours ago, SwitchFade said:

I read the last sentence again, as requested. Feedback that is positive is not "trollish." We gave ours, respectfully, and we accept yours. Our feedback is that we are happy that pvp vets love, hope it gets worked on to pvp'ers delight on one condition, that no change will ever occur to pve because of pvp. This is valid feedback.

Um, yes I must agree.

 

As I’ve already requested you refrain from commenting on PvP topics, as you’ve stated you would like to forget it exists, but still continue to intrude.

 

It is extremely “trollish” and becoming borderline harassing. None of your feedback has been positive. “We hope you get what you want, as long as it doesn’t affect us” is not only unnecessary, but rather condescending.

 

Now please allow us to focus on valid, productive discussion. I’m sure there is a Task Force you’ve done a million times that involves the usage of zero brain cells that requires your undivided attention.

 

thank you.

[GM Miss]

On 1/26/2020 at 3:47 PM, GM Miss said:

Hey guys - this weekly discussion thing is new to the forums. Let me give a little reminder that the only kind of discussion i'll allow here is constructive. We have done these discussions for 34 weeks in a row and it has always been constructive. 

 

I love when players want to talk - that's why i decided these would be a great idea - and they really have been. However, you can discuss and be kind - you can agree and disagree but you will always be considerate and respectful. This is the only time I will give this warning.

 

Now....let's talk about what could make pvp better in the future - I look forward to some awesome responses - much like a few we have already gotten.

 

Thanks 🙂

Allow me to quote myself. 

 

All feedback and discussion is welcome here, even feedback you don't like. 

 

If you don't like it - you are allowed to move on and not discuss that particular feedback. 

 

If you can't remain respectful and cordial - these discussions will stay on discord where they have been respectful for 34 weeks. 

[El Foya]

Bit late to the party. I seem to be the minority here, but the last thing I want is ranged classes getting more survivability. Blasters are so durable right now because most blasters got a double buff to survival between the larger hp pool and the secondaries having survival built in (I say most because some blaster secondaries got the shaft on survival. Looking at you elec manip!) Corrs, fenders and trollers have low hp to balance their ranged damage and heals/buffs/debuffs, and trollers and doms have stronger CC. Blasters are the outlier and need to be brought back down a bit.

 

Melee is in an abysmal state. Tanks in particular are hurting with the loss of bruising, which increased the damage of procs. I haven't killed anything on my tank since the patch, feels bad. Melee damage in general is much too low in pvp outside of psiblade scrappers. Any fight between 2 half decently built melee toons will usually drag until someone calls a draw, which gets boring fast. It's almost impossible to pressure a kiting ranged class (not just blasters, the other ones too) because even if you catch them for a hit your best attack will maybe do 1/3 their hp and there's no way to stop them just running away if things do go south.

 

As far as solutions go, I'm sticking with simple(ish) number changes because I only have a casual understanding of the code. First one on my list would be lowering the pvp resistance bonus of blasters from 40 to 20. This brings them down a bit without effecting pve, and makes taking tough from the fighting pool an attractive contender against leadership/phase. Next would be adding a damage buff to the pvp resist bonus power for melee classes and others that are struggling. This could work as a sort of nob for dialing in balance. A larger bonus for Tanks would help offset the loss of bruising and maybe open up some sets outside of super strength, since rage would be less potent due to dr on bonus damage. Brutes wouldn't get much out of more damage bonus because of fury, so maybe add a bit more resist on for them. I'd also love to see increased duration on all immobilize effects in pvp. Immobs are imo the perfect solution to keeping people in a fight without making them completely helpless like holds and stuns do. I also think it would strike a good balance with any changes to reduce how oppressive -jump and -fly effects (webnades) feel, which I agree with others is a thing that should happen.

 

Don't wanna drone on too long so I'll leave it at this for now, good discussion in here lots of good reads!

 

-El Foya/Erebus Algiz

[Troo]

@grimreaper12k more points of view the better.

 

"Listening is key to understanding." -someone smart than I

[MJB]

I'm going to try to avoid balance based things because no one can ever agree on those anyway, but things i would like to see:

 

• scoreboard improvement
  • at the moment all we get are kills, which aren't terribly useful. seeing player deaths, assists, damage done and healing done would be massive improvements
• more arena maps
• more game modes
  • getting base raids working again would be great, but also ctf, koth etc
• better combat logs
  • at the moment parsing combat logs is incredibly annoying, things like attacking with a fire move "burns" the target while punching them "deals damage". no one likes regex hell 😞
  • obviously an API would be even better, but probably more work than anyone is willing to put in
  • adding things like "entering skyway city"  and logging the score in arena matches would also help
• make warburg great again
  • the only zone that gets any activity at the moment is RV. i _think_ its mostly because its level 50. however i dont think warburg and the others should be made level 50 as well, being lower level is part of what makes them interesting (and pvping without incarnates is a great thing imo). what i would like to see is set bonuses being maintained in the lower level pvp zones so you dont need to run a separate build with catalysed io's for lower level zones (losing the ability to +5 io's is a pretty big problem)
  • really, what i (and i assume many others) is a lvl 50 (or equivalent) zone without incarnates, warburg just adds icing on the cake with being a free for all, so the endless spawn camping present in RV isn't really a factor
  • however, making more zones "great again" comes with the drawback of spreading out an already small player base even more... unfortunately im not sure what the solution to this is
• fixes to the arena listings
  • at the moment it is pretty easy to "bug out" a lobby, for example have 10+ people in the lobby and then change the number of players allowed per team. or often if you quit out of an arena game and relist a new one too quickly the lobby will become unusable/desync between different players. fixing these would be pretty nice

i might make another post at some point talking about balance, but there have been a lot of suggestions there already (some i agree with, some i dont) and honestly, i dont think "balance" can be achieved by popular vote... most people dont even have an idea of what they would want an ideal metagame to look like i feel...

[vegetableknife]

I think the GM's should hold a Gladiator PvP tourney- if they still work.  Isn't it like a cool/underutilized system that's in the game right now?  Maybe it could get more pve'ers involved since you don't need to IO or slot them.  Its like superhero pokemon.

[barrier]

3 hours ago, grimreaper12k said:

Bit late to the party. I seem to be the minority here, but the last thing I want is ranged classes getting more survivability. Blasters are so durable right now because most blasters got a double buff to survival between the larger hp pool and the secondaries having survival built in (I say most because some blaster secondaries got the shaft on survival. Looking at you elec manip!) Corrs, fenders and trollers have low hp to balance their ranged damage and heals/buffs/debuffs, and trollers and doms have stronger CC. Blasters are the outlier and need to be brought back down a bit.

 

Melee is in an abysmal state. Tanks in particular are hurting with the loss of bruising, which increased the damage of procs. I haven't killed anything on my tank since the patch, feels bad. Melee damage in general is much too low in pvp outside of psiblade scrappers. Any fight between 2 half decently built melee toons will usually drag until someone calls a draw, which gets boring fast. It's almost impossible to pressure a kiting ranged class (not just blasters, the other ones too) because even if you catch them for a hit your best attack will maybe do 1/3 their hp and there's no way to stop them just running away if things do go south.

 

As far as solutions go, I'm sticking with simple(ish) number changes because I only have a casual understanding of the code. First one on my list would be lowering the pvp resistance bonus of blasters from 40 to 20. This brings them down a bit without effecting pve, and makes taking tough from the fighting pool an attractive contender against leadership/phase. Next would be adding a damage buff to the pvp resist bonus power for melee classes and others that are struggling. This could work as a sort of nob for dialing in balance. A larger bonus for Tanks would help offset the loss of bruising and maybe open up some sets outside of super strength, since rage would be less potent due to dr on bonus damage. Brutes wouldn't get much out of more damage bonus because of fury, so maybe add a bit more resist on for them. I'd also love to see increased duration on all immobilize effects in pvp. Immobs are imo the perfect solution to keeping people in a fight without making them completely helpless like holds and stuns do. I also think it would strike a good balance with any changes to reduce how oppressive -jump and -fly effects (webnades) feel, which I agree with others is a thing that should happen.

 

Don't wanna drone on too long so I'll leave it at this for now, good discussion in here lots of good reads!

 

-El Foya/Erebus Algiz

Melee is not ins an abysmal state.

 

I'll go ahead and post up evidence:

 

Watch what happens on the two matches after the linked time code.

 

I am on an SS/Rad Brute. Look at how insanely survivable the thing proves to be whenever mez, on a beam/plant blaster tries to DPS me down while I taunt him. Beam/Plant is probably the highest dps blaster combo in the game right now and the brute is literally brushing off the damage and continuing to shut down the blaster.

 

The "problem" with melee is two-fold.

 

1. People do not understand what a "role" is. A brute or a tank aren't meant to be DPS machines. If you want to play meleee for the sake of damage, roll a stalker. Stalkers are fine.

2. Selection bias. Because it takes a real special dude to think that they better create the tank because "Imma kill/arrest someone with these muscles" vs. the blaster who is going "Imma set people on fire and they will die." People who roll melee are often not the sharpest tools in the shed. This is extremely obvious if you've ever played a solidly-built melee toon that fits into a particular team role and then you go by RV and watch tanks getting rolled by blasters and brutes dying to corruptors. Thatshould basically never happen if you're paying 2/3rds attention to the screen.

 

Brutes are fine, Tanks are fine. Stalkers are fine. Scrappers are fickle depending on the defense set, but really mostly fine.

Edited January 31, 2020 by barrier

[Troo]

16 minutes ago, barrier said:

People who roll melee are often not the sharpest tools in the shed.

wow

[siolfir]

31 minutes ago, Troo said:

wow

key word there: often

 

Note that it is not "always", nor is the clause missing.

 

Also, skipping PvP entirely, if you had to pick the easiest ATs to play that require little to no thought on playing, which would you list first?

 

It may not be polite but there is a grain of truth in it.

[El Foya]

1 hour ago, barrier said:

Melee is not ins an abysmal state.

 

I'll go ahead and post up evidence:

 

Watch what happens on the two matches after the linked time code.

 

I am on an SS/Rad Brute. Look at how insanely survivable the thing proves to be whenever mez, on a beam/plant blaster tries to DPS me down while I taunt him. Beam/Plant is probably the highest dps blaster combo in the game right now and the brute is literally brushing off the damage and continuing to shut down the blaster.

 

The "problem" with melee is two-fold.

 

1. People do not understand what a "role" is. A brute or a tank aren't meant to be DPS machines. If you want to play meleee for the sake of damage, roll a stalker. Stalkers are fine.

2. Selection bias. Because it takes a real special dude to think that they better create the tank because "Imma kill/arrest someone with these muscles" vs. the blaster who is going "Imma set people on fire and they will die." People who roll melee are often not the sharpest tools in the shed. This is extremely obvious if you've ever played a solidly-built melee toon that fits into a particular team role and then you go by RV and watch tanks getting rolled by blasters and brutes dying to corruptors. Thatshould basically never happen if you're paying 2/3rds attention to the screen.

 

Brutes are fine, Tanks are fine. Stalkers are fine. Scrappers are fickle depending on the defense set, but really mostly fine.

There is an unfortunate amount of condescension in this post, but let's move past that.

 

The video shows that tanks/brutes can fill a niche, but it also shows 2 teams full of ranged classes. Your video is, more than anything, evidence of the disparity between ranged and melee. I counted a total of 3 tanks, 1 brute, 1 stalker and one spicy mastermind from the timestamp till the end of the vid. Not even 1 scrapper. Every other character was ranged dps or support (which is ranged dps with heals).

 

Tanks/brutes have a niche in 8v8 arena with their taunt and durability, that doesn't mean melee outside of stalkers shouldn't be able to threaten ranged classes with their damage at all. To use your phrasing: A blaster or corr aren't meant to be damage soaking machines. Between incarnates and sets, that's exactly what ranged has become tho, so to compensate melee needs more damage to compete.

 

Tanks are described in the character creation page as a class that can take a lot of damage AND dish it out, so between that and the stat bars rating their melee damage as a 7/10 i think it's more than fair for people making one to assume it will have at least respectable damage output. This is CoX, not WoW. Roles are looser, tank type characters don't have to do abysmal damage and melee DPS sure as hell should be able to compete on even footing with their ranged counterparts.

 

Melee is not fine because you, personally, are fine being regulated to taunt duty and nothing else in a game where there's very little emphasis on class roles. But hey, that's just an opinion!

 

Edit: After rereading this I realized it's coming off more snarky than I intended. Some of the snark was totally intentional ofc, but I still feel the need to leave this edit note at the bottom because I'm too lazy to retype my post in a less snarky manner.

Edited February 1, 2020 by grimreaper12k

[barrier]

17 minutes ago, grimreaper12k said:

There is an unfortunate amount of condescension in this post, but let's move past that.

 

The video shows that tanks/brutes can fill a niche, but it also shows 2 teams full of ranged classes. Your video is, more than anything, evidence of the disparity between ranged and melee. I counted a total of 3 tanks, 1 brute, 1 stalker and one spicy mastermind from the timestamp till the end of the vid. Not even 1 scrapper. Every other character was ranged dps or support (which is ranged dps with heals).

 

Tanks/brutes have a niche in 8v8 arena with their taunt and durability, that doesn't mean melee outside of stalkers shouldn't be able to threaten ranged classes with their damage at all. To use your phrasing: A blaster or corr aren't meant to be damage soaking machines. Between incarnates and sets, that's exactly what ranged has become tho, so to compensate melee needs more damage to compete.

 

Tanks are described in the character creation page as a class that can take a lot of damage AND dish it out, so between that and the stat bars rating their melee damage as a 7/10 i think it's more than fair for people making one to assume it will have at least respectable damage output. This is CoX, not WoW. Roles are looser, tank type characters don't have to do abysmal damage and melee DPS sure as hell should be able to compete on even footing with their ranged counterparts.

 

Melee is not fine because you, personally, are fine being regulated to taunt duty and nothing else in a game where there's very little emphasis on class roles. But hey, that's just an opinion!

 

Edit: After rereading this I realized it's coming off more snarky than I intended. Some of the snark was totally intentional ofc, but I still feel the need to leave this edit note at the bottom because I'm too lazy to retype my post in a less snarky manner.

I really don't care about any snark because being an adult involves learning to argue content without going "momma momma, he hurt me feels".

 

See, if you have a problem with roles, I think you have a problem with team pvp. Every single MMO out there revolves around specialization, and the notion that this game should be reduced to a fighting game by normalizing AT's into a singular role should be anathema to the design of the game.

 

You are not locked out of blasters, corrs, or any other ranged class at the character creation screen. This is the thing you really need to understand when balancing a game. Not every character should be able to do everything and if that's your goal, controllers need far more help than any melee class right now.

 

The character descriptions have never been accurate in PVP and aiming to make character fit those descriptions is a mistake. There have been two epochs as it pertains to pvp in this game. In one of them, defenders were a major source of damage in team arena matches and villain jump teams made fortunatas into major damage dealers. In the second, teams full of earth/fire doms dominated blaster teams. Balancing around character descriptions on the start-up screen would have quashed those metas before they became what they were.

 

It's also worth noting that I don't think we've had more people actively PVPing since i13 than right now. We have a solid set of 5 or 6 teams that scrim almost every night of the week. Major meta tweaks should come from feedback pushed by those 6 teams rather than from people that hypothetically want to pvp. Those hypotheticals always find a way to stay hypothetical.

[Troo]

@barrier the stuff you're laying down.. man, just makes me think "take it back to zero, and start from there".

 

11 minutes ago, barrier said:

I don't think we've had more people actively PVPing since i13

Seriously?! Maybe in the very narrow specific version of pvp in which you're participating. (I may regret saying 'narrow specific version' later, but not now.)

 

In my opinion, there is a lot of potential to let more players enjoy some of the zones, mini games and pvp infrastructure that is in place. Your preferred version just isn't it.

[macskull]

37 minutes ago, grimreaper12k said:

There is an unfortunate amount of condescension in this post, but let's move past that.

 

The video shows that tanks/brutes can fill a niche, but it also shows 2 teams full of ranged classes. Your video is, more than anything, evidence of the disparity between ranged and melee. I counted a total of 3 tanks, 1 brute, 1 stalker and one spicy mastermind from the timestamp till the end of the vid. Not even 1 scrapper. Every other character was ranged dps or support (which is ranged dps with heals).

 

Tanks/brutes have a niche in 8v8 arena with their taunt and durability, that doesn't mean melee outside of stalkers shouldn't be able to threaten ranged classes with their damage at all. To use your phrasing: A blaster or corr aren't meant to be damage soaking machines. Between incarnates and sets, that's exactly what ranged has become tho, so to compensate melee needs more damage to compete.

 

Tanks are described in the character creation page as a class that can take a lot of damage AND dish it out, so between that and the stat bars rating their melee damage as a 7/10 i think it's more than fair for people making one to assume it will have at least respectable damage output. This is CoX, not WoW. Roles are looser, tank type characters don't have to do abysmal damage and melee DPS sure as hell should be able to compete on even footing with their ranged counterparts.

 

Melee is not fine because you, personally, are fine being regulated to taunt duty and nothing else in a game where there's very little emphasis on class roles. But hey, that's just an opinion!

 

Edit: After rereading this I realized it's coming off more snarky than I intended. Some of the snark was totally intentional ofc, but I still feel the need to leave this edit note at the bottom because I'm too lazy to retype my post in a less snarky manner.

In an effort to keep things constructive and ensure there's some discussion here, I'll offer the following points which I've said here and elsewhere when this sort of discussion comes up:

 

Most of the discussions, suggestions, and arguments here are revolving around team-based arena PvP and there's not so much discussion about zone PvP or duels because by their very nature those are pretty much impossible to balance on a broad scale. Dueling in this game has always been very rock/paper/scissors, and some melee builds were incredibly popular for dueling (hello, Ice/Energy Tankers and Spines/Regen Scrappers). Zone PvP is usually an "anything goes" environment and it's very rare that both sides are evenly balanced numbers-wise (which is really why I wish Warburg was more active, because at least that way anyone not on your team is fair game).

 

In the case of team PvP in a game where movement is as important as it is, naturally you want the ability to deal a large amount of damage to a single target within a very short period of time (before they can phase/break line of sight/get healed) and ranged ATs are (usually) the best way to do this because they don't have to be in melee range to deal their damage. It's also important to note that because PvP is so vastly different than PvE (and this was true even before the PvP overhaul in Issue 13) the defined "roles" an AT has in PvE might be very different or simply nonexistent in PvP. Most melee ATs are more than capable of putting out solid amounts of damage in melee range, and some can even put out good ranged damage, but they can't do it as consistently or as quickly as a ranged AT can.

 

The game already has several tools to help melee players close the gap to ranged ATs (web grenades and a stackable 75% range debuff from taunt are the two major ones) but in reality you can't expect a character who has much higher survivability than a ranged AT to also be able to consistently put out as much damage as a ranged AT. To your point re: ranged ATs being "damage soaking machines," you can take a look at the first match in the linked video to see just how quickly ranged ATs explode when targeted versus how long it took for that Tanker to go down the one time he was targeted.

[macskull]

5 minutes ago, Troo said:

Seriously?! Maybe in the very narrow specific version of pvp in which you're participating. (I may regret saying 'narrow specific version' later, but not now.)

 

In my opinion, there is a lot of potential to let more players enjoy some of the zones, mini games and pvp infrastructure that is in place. Your preferred version just isn't it.

There is more potential to get people into the zones. Rewards for engaging in PvP would be a good start and it doesn't take any mechanics changes to make that happen, but in reality unless someone is already interested in PvP in the first place there is nothing that is going to get them to start doing it and stick with it. The biggest barriers to new players entering PvP are:

1. PvP functions almost completely differently from PvE so there's a relatively steep learning curve, especially if you don't understand the game mechanics well
2. PvP opponents tend to be more powerful, smarter, and have access to a wider array of powers than anything you'd see in PvE
3. Most people don't handle defeat well and after dying a handful of times will decide they hate PvP and PvPers are a bunch of jerks

Some of the Issue 13 PvP changes were good, some were well-intentioned but poorly implemented, and others just plain sucked. The problem with those changes was that they were designed to draw new players into PvP by making it more accessible to the casual player but for the most part those changes failed to take any of those three items I listed into account so what ended up happening was you got almost no new players interested but lost a large portion of the established player base. If you're going to make further mechanics changes, they should not be designed with the primary objective of getting new players involved because there's no guarantee that will happen and unless you're making those changes with the input of people that actually do PvP, you're likely to alienate those players as well.

[barrier]

18 minutes ago, Troo said:

@barrier the stuff you're laying down.. man, just makes me think "take it back to zero, and start from there".

 

Seriously?! Maybe in the very narrow specific version of pvp in which you're participating. (I may regret saying 'narrow specific version' later, but not now.)

 

In my opinion, there is a lot of potential to let more players enjoy some of the zones, mini games and pvp infrastructure that is in place. Your preferred version just isn't it.

Want to tell me more about the last time developers took your point of view to task?

[Troo]

14 minutes ago, macskull said:

There is more potential to get people into the zones. Rewards for engaging in PvP would be a good start and it doesn't take any mechanics changes to make that happen, but in reality unless someone is already interested in PvP in the first place there is nothing that is going to get them to start doing it and stick with it. The biggest barriers to new players entering PvP are:

1. PvP functions almost completely differently from PvE so there's a relatively steep learning curve, especially if you don't understand the game mechanics well
2. PvP opponents tend to be more powerful, smarter, and have access to a wider array of powers than anything you'd see in PvE
3. Most people don't handle defeat well and after dying a handful of times will decide they hate PvP and PvPers are a bunch of jerks

Some of the Issue 13 PvP changes were good, some were well-intentioned but poorly implemented, and others just plain sucked. The problem with those changes was that they were designed to draw new players into PvP by making it more accessible to the casual player but for the most part those changes failed to take any of those three items I listed into account so what ended up happening was you got almost no new players interested but lost a large portion of the established player base. If you're going to make further mechanics changes, they should not be designed with the primary objective of getting new players involved because there's no guarantee that will happen and unless you're making those changes with the input of people that actually do PvP, you're likely to alienate those players as well.

I appreciate what you're communicating.

1 & 3 - I agree, these are pretty spot on.

2.. it should be relatively the same challenge level as something in PVE, shouldn't it?

Not giant monsters or AVs that often require a team to take down. Hero One is likely more challenging than one opponent in PVP or maybe equivalent for a high performing 50+?

 

Edited February 1, 2020 by Troo

[macskull]

4 minutes ago, Troo said:

I appreciate what you're communicating.

1 & 3 - I agree, these are pretty spot on.

2.. it should be relatively the same challenge level as something in PVE, shouldn't it?

Not giant monsters or AVs that often require a team to take down. Hero One is likely more challenging than one opponent in PVP or maybe equivalent for a high performing 50+?

No, not really. My Fire/Cold Corruptor can solo most AVs and GMs with impunity, they're just big sacks of HP that I have to DPS through. They don't move around, I have enough defense where they can't hit me, they don't try new things every time I fight them, and they don't learn from their mistakes. They're only "difficult" in the sense that they have a lot of HP and hit pretty hard if they manage to land an attack.

[Troo]

33 minutes ago, barrier said:

Want to tell me more about the last time developers took your point of view to task?

ya... I don't think that is necessary. Being one of the ones that (not proudly) broke aspects of pvp. There was a point we figured it out, and then showed some friends, who told some folks or got copied. At which point it became griefing and not fun. I've seen changes, being teleported, rooting, entering enemy bases... yeah, I don't think I need to give any history lessons.

 

You might not know some of us because we don't play with you. Understand, there were pvpers before or other than this current 'pvp community'.

Edited February 1, 2020 by Troo

[macskull]

2 minutes ago, Troo said:

ya... I don't think that is necessary. Being one of the ones that (not proudly) broke aspects of pvp. There was a point we figured it out, and then showed some friends, who told some folks or got copied. At which point it became griefing and not fun. I've seen changes, being teleported, rooting, entering enemy bases... yeah, I don't think I need any history lessons.

 

You might not know some of us because we don't play with you. Understand, there were pvpers before this current 'community'.

To be fair, it was "lolJustice" for a reason, and I'm saying that as someone who got his start there.

Edited February 1, 2020 by macskull

[El Foya]

@macskull I just want to clarify, because you took the time to respond with a well written post. I'm for sure aware of the chaotic nature of zone pvp and the impossible task it would be to balance it perfectly, as well as how absurd it is to balance around 1v1 in ANY mmo. I also don't think blasters are as durable as tanks or even a well built scrapper. If you'll forgive me for using arbitrary numbers, I see it something like this. If blasters have 100 points in damage and 50 points in durability, tanks have 100 points in durability and 25 in damage and for a middle ground I'd put scrappers at about 65 in each. It's not that I think blasters are insanely tanky, just too tanky for the damage they put out. What I was trying to say in my OP was that I don't want to see corrs/doms/fenders/trollers getting survival buffs while melee gets left further behind when bringing blasters down a bit makes the whole field more even. Also that melee damage is often too low even in 1v1 melee "fiteclub" situations and many drag on for 10+mins or end in draws, which is only important because it shows that even in optimal conditions melee damage is lacking. Lastly, while gap closers like webnade and taunt do help, ranged classes tend to stack +range buffs and also have easy access to webnades so the effectiveness is diminished.

 

Maybe I'm just too thirsty for the days when a headsplitter crit was a death sentence for a blaster, but I'd at least like a reason to play kickball on a punchy dude again besides "spam taunt".

[Troo]

 

11 minutes ago, macskull said:

To be fair, it was "lolJustice" for a reason, and I'm saying that as someone who got his start there.

well, I can't argue that.

 

19 minutes ago, macskull said:

can solo most AVs and GMs with impunity, they're just big sacks of HP that I have to DPS through.

1 on 1 yes.

Add the possibility of another entering the frey and it changes. 

Numina, Sister Psyche, Back Alley Brawler, Manticore together vs a group of players can be a challenge. 4v4? Or, if the Freedom Phalanx had brains or could change tactics... Should pvp be more challenging than that? Maybe, maybe not.

 

What you've described is what we used to do to pvp melee monsters with a Rad/Dark corruptor. Never really much danger for the corruptor while an opponent got to choose. Try and run away or face a slow demoralizing defeat. Was that fair.. not really. She definitely wasn't defeating anyone with decent HP very quickly.

If any other player targets were around, that changed the dynamic. Toe to toe was a no no. Different tactics.

If against a more nuanced AT, that absolutely changed the dynamic. Different tactics.

 

@barrier I am of the opinion that high level pvp should be more a stalemate than a race to see who can spike who first. This is from an energy/regen stalker.

I loved open zone free for alls, base raids, 1 v 1 arena, and even gladiator matches and small team matches. The kickball shot caller spike fest.. meh. Seems to come down to which team can listen the best.

Heaven forbid a team that isn't using microphones wants to play. That type of pvp has a place - but it shouldn't dictate what happens elsewhere. 

 

Side note: The frantic button smashing to cycle targets in the video @grimreaper12k posted.. It made me laugh and sad at the same time.

[Meretricious]

6 hours ago, grimreaper12k said:

Bit late to the party. I seem to be the minority here, but the last thing I want is ranged classes getting more survivability. Blasters are so durable right now because most blasters got a double buff to survival between the larger hp pool and the secondaries having survival built in (I say most because some blaster secondaries got the shaft on survival. Looking at you elec manip!) Corrs, fenders and trollers have low hp to balance their ranged damage and heals/buffs/debuffs, and trollers and doms have stronger CC. Blasters are the outlier and need to be brought back down a bit.

 

 

Brutes and Tanks have their roles in PvP, but they should not be super DPS machines. Scrappers already crit heavy damage, and so do Stalkers, where a good 70% of HP can be gone from Greater Psi Blade alone. Melee can also survive a whole lot better than any blaster or corrupter if you aren't tied to the idea that one must stand and fight. (If you do stand, and you're built to take hits, you probably won't die without at least 3 to 4 players attacking you.) If you play with some strategy you will never have to worry about feeling useless. I get where you are coming from when you talk about buffs and debuffs accounting for corr/controller lower HP, but DR curbs those values by quite a bit. 

 

For the moment, I find it hard to accept a blaster HP nerf because that already affects PvE negatively. A buff, on the otherhand, would be easier to implement since HP and all are percentages.