Can we give more blasting powers the "Sentinel/Freeze Ray Treatment"?

[Bossk_Hogg]

Worth noting that the sentinel versions of the powers are far more popular.

https://forums.homecomingservers.com/fotm-powers/

 

Screech is taken 64% of the time on 50's by Sentinels vs 37/42/42% on Defenders/Corrupters/Blasters

 

Stunning Shot is taken 61% on Sentinels, vs 20/24/30% on Defenders/Corrupters/Blasters

 

Disorienting Shot (Beanbag) is taken 60% on Sentinels vs 23/16/32% on Defenders/Corrupters/Blasters

 

Suppressive Fire is taken 79% on Sentinels vs 37/33/43% on Defenders/Corrupters/Blasters

 

Scramble Thoughts is pretty bad, as a 3 second cast time is terrible, and is redundant in a set with multiple better single target options. 31% on Sents vs 20/31/18% on Defenders/Corrupters/Blasters

 

Tesla Cage fares a bit better, likely due to hold proc ability, but is 87% on Sentinels vs 50/53/63% on Defenders/Corrupters/Blasters

 

They aren't quite as skipped as scrapper confronts (nothing is), but they are solidly in the garbage tier powers like Time Bomb, Black Hole, single target immobilizes, etc. They are largely eclipsed by epic pool hold choices, and should be evaluated to make them more compelling choices. 

[Itikar]

2 hours ago, Bossk_Hogg said:

Worth noting that the sentinel versions of the powers are far more popular.

https://forums.homecomingservers.com/fotm-powers/

 

Screech is taken 64% of the time on 50's by Sentinels vs 37/42/42% on Defenders/Corrupters/Blasters

 

Stunning Shot is taken 61% on Sentinels, vs 20/24/30% on Defenders/Corrupters/Blasters

 

Disorienting Shot (Beanbag) is taken 60% on Sentinels vs 23/16/32% on Defenders/Corrupters/Blasters

 

Suppressive Fire is taken 79% on Sentinels vs 37/33/43% on Defenders/Corrupters/Blasters

 

Scramble Thoughts is pretty bad, as a 3 second cast time is terrible, and is redundant in a set with multiple better single target options. 31% on Sents vs 20/31/18% on Defenders/Corrupters/Blasters

 

Tesla Cage fares a bit better, likely due to hold proc ability, but is 87% on Sentinels vs 50/53/63% on Defenders/Corrupters/Blasters

You forgot Power Push, which seems the real outlier here, its percentage is 40% on Sentinel and 33/31/26 on Blaster/Corruptor/Defender, but I guess this can be blamed on the general hate for Knockback. Oddly enough the much maligned Focused Power Bolt stands at 94.27.

 

Other than that, since they are damaging powers as opposed to mezs, and often damaging powers with a good DPA, it seems really obvious and unsurprising they are more popular on Sentinels than on other archetypes.

 

2 hours ago, Bossk_Hogg said:

They aren't quite as skipped as scrapper confronts (nothing is), but they are solidly in the garbage tier powers like Time Bomb, Black Hole, single target immobilizes, etc. They are largely eclipsed by epic pool hold choices, and should be evaluated to make them more compelling choices. 

Firstly your interpretation of that data is highly subjective, I am afraid, since for several of those powers the data might be seen as simply saying that the powers are not that bad, but simply optional. And that pretty much explains a 40 or 30%, less so those below 20% however. Ironically, you have also showed that Screech and Tesla Cage, the ones that according to OP required more urgently a buff are also those that are more popular, and therefore, logically, less requiring of a buff compared to the other ones mentioned.

 

Secondly the comparison to "garbage" is a hyperbole and a clear falsehood, which does not reinforce your points.

 

Thirdly the comparison is not really appropriate numberwise too, at least in some of the cases you mentioned, you got this:

 

- Time Bomb: 25/19/30/18 Blaster/Controller/Corruptor/Defender and 32 for Mastermind's Detonator which is somewhat comparable. This is comparable to Beanbag, Scramble Thoughts and Stunning Shot, but not to the other ones.

 

- Black Hole: 10/9/14/15 on Controller/Corruptor/Defender/Mastermind, the lowest value here is higher than the lowest value you cited above, even if barely. Overall, however, this is not a fair comparison.

 

- The single target immobilizes have a popularity that is variable across powersets, with the lowest values I found ranging around 30% for controllers and 20% for dominators, but with some powersets having higher rates, for various reasons. Crush seems to be the most popular with 53% rate on controllers and 39 on Dominators. This is a faired comparison and the most matching one, in my opinion, however it still confirms the powers are not so bad, compared to Black Hole above, but are simply optional.

 

This to be fair, does not mean they cannot use help or improvement, but describing them as "useless" or "garbage" is not going to help the case of those who believe so. I am aware on videogaming forums such type of teenager speech is commonplace, but it's not really useful or helpful to anybody, first and foremost to the person using it. Then do as you prefer, keep stating clear hyperbolic falsehoods and enjoy them being called for what they are. Maybe on a game with a different age demographic such type of speech fares better, who knows. 😛

 

To further complete the picture given by the data, however, it seems only fair to compare some of the mentioned attacks to other powers within their power sets. This is useful in fact for evaluating how popular they are compared to the rest and whether they are the powers of those sets that need an intervention first. And what I found was quite curious. I checked Sonic Attack, for which Screech has been so maligned, and it turns out Screech is more popular than both Siren's Song and Shockwave, which is not so surprising, to be honest, but which would suggest that if Sonic Blast should be improved, then those powers are the one that need a popularity improvement the most.

 

Sirens Song: 26/39/21/29 Defender/Blaster/Sentinel/Corruptor

Shockwave: 27/44/39/36 idem as above

 

Lastly, perusing the data I noticed a thing that is worth mentioning in making these comparisons, and specifically that some of the values might not be very representative due to the limited number of the pool of characters with such powersets for certain archetypes. Take for example Time Bomb above, it seems almost one in 3 of the Traps corruptors got it, but the number of level 50 Traps corruptors is not very big, compared to, say, Blaster Devices (25%, 147 out of 572), so the popularity of the power on Corruptors might be conditioned by the small sample, and probably conditioned toward a higher value than the real usefulness of the power would yield. In other words, it's possible that if the Traps corruptors had been 572 like the Blasters, the power would have been less popular than 30%, like on Blasters.

 

Additionally, it seems that the level 50 power choices for some archetypes are not really reflective of the most optimal powers or DPA, or whatever. I checked for example Dual Pistols on Sentinel, and I found out a surprising result: Pistols is only taken by 73% of the level 50 DP Sentinels, while Dual Wield by over the 90%, yet it's pretty obvious that Pistols is a better attack than Dual Wield, both for its DPA and its slotting potential (Pistols can take defence debuff enhancements and sets, while Dual Wield slows and knockback). Not to mention the benefits of offensive opportunity triggered by Pistols, over those of defensive opportunity triggered by Dual Wield. In other words, not all level 50 characters have chosen the best powers, so taking the popularity of those powers among those characters as a reliable measure of balance, should really be done with a grain of salt. Incidentally this might also mean powers like Screech or Tesla Cage, which the OP denounced, might in fact not be as good as the data suggest.

 

So, the bottom line is that these data should be interpreted adeguately, and its biases should seriously be considered, both concerning the sample size and the reliability of the power picks as an indicator of balance.

 

 

Edited March 3, 2020 by Itikar

[Bossk_Hogg]

So it sounds like pretty much nothing would convince you they need a buff. Gotcha.

[Itikar]

20 minutes ago, Bossk_Hogg said:

So it sounds like pretty much nothing would convince you they need a buff. Gotcha.

This is an ad personam argument.

 

This type of arguments is usually seen when the party who argues admits the implicit fault of all their other arguments. Otherwise they would find a more convincing argument instead.

 

Let me state it again: I am not against buffing these powers, I am however skeptical of weak arguments.

 

And to be honest I have not seen really great arguments supporting the proposal in this thread so far. Ultimately I really win nothing from you guys having weak arguments, and I hope my critics can actually stimulate you to find better ones. Keep in mind that the developers are very aware of all the issues I mentioned, and being able to address them will certainly help your cause in their eyes. If you don't like this, then too bad for you.

[Bossk_Hogg]

You basically spent a lot of time and words on the equivalent "Nuh uh". That's not worth engaging with. It's easy to shoot down arguments and say they aren't persuasive, particularly with someone more interested in poking holes in the argument rather than seeing if the core request has any merit. I'm not particularly interested in helping you reliving your LD debate glory years. Ohhh, ad hominim, -5 points! I'm not interested in engaging with the "debate me you coward" crowd on shit that actually matters, because its throwing good effort after bad. 

 

COH isnt a hard game. Tanks didnt NEED to be buffed recently. They can get to 50, and find teams. Nuh uh on tank buffs. Snipes functioned, even if they weren't popular. Nuh Uh on fast snipe. You can halve defenders damage and they too, would be "fine". There'd even be plenty of people defending the status quo if someone asked for a buff back to previous levels. One day, I do expect the difficulty to be upped though. It would be nice to have all the sets relatively balanced before that point, so the sonic/sonic defenders, elec/dark blasters, etc arent squashed under the new content baseline. This is why I, at least, am asking for buffs to weak choices/sets despite them being "fine" in terms of hitting 50 and finding teams. I mean, people take door sitters, so does anything really need a buff?

 

Tell ya what. You explain why the powers are compelling picks and don't need a buff.  Yeah, yeah, onus on the person asking for the change, but sorry to burst your bubble, this isn't a formal high school debate, so I don't care about whatever arbitrary rules you decide on. But you're clearly a master of debate, so take the challenge. Convince us they don't need a change, particularly a chance already made for a new AT.

Edited March 3, 2020 by Bossk_Hogg

[Galaxy Brain]

1 hour ago, Itikar said:

This to be fair, does not mean they cannot use help or improvement, but describing them as "useless" or "garbage" is not going to help the case of those who believe so. I am aware on videogaming forums such type of teenager speech is commonplace, but it's not really useful or helpful to anybody, first and foremost to the person using it. Then do as you prefer, keep stating clear hyperbolic falsehoods and enjoy them being called for what they are. Maybe on a game with a different age demographic such type of speech fares better, who knows. 😛

"How do you do, fellow kids?"

 

The points about how often the powers are picked are entirely valid and carry far more weight than the language used to describe them.

 

Edited March 3, 2020 by Galaxy Brain

[Itikar]

7 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

The points about how often the powers are picked are entirely valid and carry far more weight than the language used to describe them.

This is false, and I have shown why with several examples and reasoned arguments in the previous post, which included several references to numbers and data as well and pointed out potential biases with it, paradoxically in some cases even in favor of the buffs. The aspect of data interpretation is a pretty crucial one in many fields and belittling it does nothing to show the validity of one's argument and a lot in showing its flaws.

 

13 minutes ago, Bossk_Hogg said:

 

More personal attacks, provocations and strawmen, and zero relevant arguments. So much worse for you, I guess.

 

And it's ironical I am not even really against this proposal to begin with.

[Galaxy Brain]

You attack argument lots, and not back up with fact

[Itikar]

Just now, Galaxy Brain said:

You attack argument lots, and not back up with fact

Another personal attack. And a falsehood too, there are plenty of facts in my previous posts. Again, in some cases not even facts against the proposal itself.

 

Furthermore, I really wonder how these personal attacks contribute at making the proposal appear sound and viable. Hint: they don't.

[Widower]

Hello. Let us all be calm and civil. Thank you.

[Bossk_Hogg]

27 minutes ago, Itikar said:

This is false, and I have shown why with several examples and reasoned arguments in the previous post, which included several references to numbers and data as well and pointed out potential biases with it, paradoxically in some cases even in favor of the buffs. The aspect of data interpretation is a pretty crucial one in many fields and belittling it does nothing to show the validity of one's argument and a lot in showing its flaws.

 

More personal attacks, provocations and strawmen, and zero relevant arguments. So much worse for you, I guess.

 

And it's ironical I am not even really against this proposal to begin with.

I see you aren't interested in putting forth arguments of your own! Harrumph, good day sir. A million points to Hufflepuff!

[Leogunner]

1 hour ago, Galaxy Brain said:

"How do you do, fellow kids?"

 

The points about how often the powers are picked are entirely valid and carry far more weight than the language used to describe them.

 

Is it thought?

 

One aspect we're forgetting here is the "at 50" part.  People do take certain powers to make leveling easier and there is a teensy itty bitty amount of the game that comes before lvl 50 and there's the possibility people do /respec on their way and as more powers become available.

 

But then I suppose if you only care about end-game viability, we should start adding great amounts of damage and slashing recharge times to a lot of things.

[Galaxy Brain]

I do want to apologize to you @Itikar, I was in a crabby mood + on mobile and seeing the back and forth set me off. Attacking the language of an argument by belittling/dismissing the poster just sort of opens the door to this kind of discourse. I should not have attacked in kind, but that is on me.

 

Anywho, as for the main point of the thread there is a legit comparison to be made where certain sets get mez powers that also deal respectable damage while others get comparable mez which do not deal damage. Take Cosmic Burst and Beanbag for example, both are ST stuns but one is a T3 blast in a set with about the same amount of AoE powers while the other is just a stun:

 

	Cosmic Burst	Beanbag
Damage	132.63	12.51
Cast Time	2.07s	0.9s
Stun Mag	3	3
Stun Time	9.54s	11.92s
Recharge	10s	20s
End Cost	10.4	10.2
Range	80	60

 

Comparing the two, Cosmic burst does animate over x2 slower than Beanbag, and has a slightly shorter duration stun, but it carries half the recharge time, +20ft of range, similar End Cost... and over x10 damage. 

 

Beanbag is faster to come out sure, but it does not really compare to Cosmic where it has the same mag stun for a similar duration that can be applied more often, and then on top of that deal WAYYY more damage and even a secondary effect of -Def on top of that (and from further away).

 

Yes, these are two different powersets, but it sort of highlights the issue from the OP. Some blast sets have mez "attacks" that are jam packed with effects like Cosmic, while others get Beanbags. Why not toss the latter some love to where they can really compete for a pick like Cosmic Burst, Lancer Shot, etc can?

 

 

[Itikar]

3 hours ago, Galaxy Brain said:

I do want to apologize to you @Itikar, I was in a crabby mood + on mobile and seeing the back and forth set me off. Attacking the language of an argument by belittling/dismissing the poster just sort of opens the door to this kind of discourse. I should not have attacked in kind, but that is on me.

Firstly: apologies accepted. You might have noticed my attack to the language of the poster was closed by an emoticon. I do still believe, however, that in the context of a discussion that really aims to go somewhere language is important. This is a discussion forum, after all, and if words and their meanings do not matter here I do not see where else they matter. I simply tried to show the other poster why using such language was only detrimental to their cause. No more, no less. I subsequently argued and discussed extensively the points they raised with an objective, clear and open-minded attitude, without being shy to highlight when some points were actually in favor of their or OP's points, as you can verify.

 

3 hours ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Comparing the two, Cosmic burst does animate over x2 slower than Beanbag, and has a slightly shorter duration stun, but it carries half the recharge time, +20ft of range, similar End Cost... and over x10 damage. 

 

Beanbag is faster to come out sure, but it does not really compare to Cosmic where it has the same mag stun for a similar duration that can be applied more often, and then on top of that deal WAYYY more damage and even a secondary effect of -Def on top of that (and from further away).

 

Yes, these are two different powersets, but it sort of highlights the issue from the OP. Some blast sets have mez "attacks" that are jam packed with effects like Cosmic, while others get Beanbags. Why not toss the latter some love to where they can really compete for a pick like Cosmic Burst, Lancer Shot, etc can?

Secondly, and referring to what I just mentioned above, I suspect you might have missed this excerpt from one of my previous posts on the first page of this thread:

 

Quote

Now to be fair I will give you one thing, even if the comparison of crowd control powersets with blasting sets is wrong, because they are supposed to do different things, it must be made clear the aim of a blasting set is not to mez stuff, but to actually, well, blast stuff. Defenders and corruptors lend themselves to other considerations, to be honest, but as far as blasters are concerned, their blasts are supposed to blast, no point to argue otherwise there. If they also mez, good, but I cannot disagree a power that only mezzes without doing much damage is a little odd on a blasting set of a blaster.   

Which goes back to what I have stated at least a few times by now, that all things considered, and while I do not see the arguments presented as very stringent, I cannot say I am against this proposal per se. This does not mean I am going to take acritically and consider 100% reliable data extracted from a database that shows sting of the wasp as equivalent or possibly superior to gambler's cut, but it does neither mean I am opposed to this change in principle.

 

I do not think this is a quality of life change. This is a request for a buff. And there is nothing wrong in that, if it's called for what it is.

 

I do not think the mez powers mentioned in the proposal are bad per se, they are simply optional powers, as there are others like that in many powersets. If all powers were 100% unskippable there would be little point in choosing powers at level-up.

 

I do not think archetype differences should be ignored in discussing power balance, because that only seems fair.

 

Now, said all that, back to Cosmic Burst vs. Beanbag, yes, they are different powersets, and if I may add, it seems AR is a bit lacking in single target powers. It does have a lot of aoe, but fundamentally it has three powers over nine that deal single target damage: the T1, the T2 and the snipe (sentinels trade the snipe for aim though). I assume these might already work into a single target attack chain with a high enough recharge, but I don't see it as a bad thing having other options there.

 

It must also be noted that in the sentinel's version of the powerset the stun duration was considerably reduced, mids gives me 2.98 base duration for disorienting shot, I cannot verify this in game now, but it seems consistent with what I noticed for suppressive fire on dual pistols. The recharge has been drastically reduced too, so both have basically been turned from real mez into interrupt attacks.

 

The bottom line, and the answer to your question, is that personally I don't see why not. And neither I see a stringent "why yes", to be honest, which is essentially my position on the matter so far. But in the end it seems likely to me that a little price will have to be paid if one wants to bring these attacks in line across the ranged archetypes. I assume, in light of all the above, the price would be more than acceptable for many, but this should still be noted.

 

Edited March 4, 2020 by Itikar

[Galaxy Brain]

23 hours ago, Itikar said:

If all powers were 100% unskippable there would be little point in choosing powers at level-up.

I agree with this in terms of "Unskippable", but on the flipside I feel that having powers that are "Yeah, skip these lol" is equally bad. As you say, many of these are certainly optional powers but as-is they are not optimal. Boosting them up would indeed be buffing them beyond "QoL" as well. 

 

I think this is where AT differences should come into play as well. Blasters, Corruptors and Defenders all get the same powers for the most part, but these could be targets to make each version stand out a bit from others. Blaster Tesla Cage can be more offensive while Defender TC has an amazing -End/-Rec attached, and so on.

[Sailboat]

My Archery/TacArrow Blaster slotted up Stunning Shot.  Also two single-target Holds and an AoE Hold.  He's currently 46.  Maybe I am doing it wrong?

[Galaxy Brain]

2 hours ago, Sailboat said:

My Archery/TacArrow Blaster slotted up Stunning Shot.  Also two single-target Holds and an AoE Hold.  He's currently 46.  Maybe I am doing it wrong?

You arent doing it wrong, but every set is different. 

[ClawsandEffect]

Personally, I think where this whole thing gets out of hand is approaching the game with the idea that a power that doesn't deal enough damage to add to an attack chain is "useless". 

 

Taking Screech as my example here. I used to play a Sonic/Devices blaster on live and got a TON of use out of Screech when I soloed. I'd stealth up and put a group to sleep with Siren's Song. Then I'd wake up a LT with Screech...who was now stunned and unable to attack me. And wash rinse repeat of the whole cycle. I would frequently go entire missions without even being attacked, let alone damaged. 

 

Point being, there is a place in the game for low damage mez powers in offense sets. Most of those sets deal plenty of damage and aren't really being hurt by having 1 power in them that doesn't do much, but does do something else. 

 

If I recall correctly, the original intent of the low damage mez powers was to give blasters a means to deal with enemies who mez by mezzing them first. 

[Galaxy Brain]

Right, but that was also pre current defiance where we can attack through mez + support sets can also provide mez protection