If you could change the sentinel (or not) which would you choose?(Poll/Opinions)

[Hardboiled Hero]

Hmm..

  Sentinel: A soldier or guard whose job is to stand and keep watch.

 

As I play them, I really keep coming back to this thought.  I really feel like the intent for the Sentinel was to have an AT that stands between the melee and the "squishies" at range, so that when mobs break aggro from the tankers and brutes the sentinel can pick up the aggro and keep the "squishies" alive, without dying themselves.  This seems like a fine concept.

 

  The problems as I see them are primarily that mobs don't break off of tankers or brutes unless the group is being really careless.. and groups are often careless like this because nobody in the group is afraid of dying.. like.. nobody.. ever.  We've already discussed that Blasters can get defenses from pool powers which can give them enough survivability to be on such wreckless teams.. Likewise Defenders, Corruptors, Controllers, and Dominators all have methods they can use to stop themselves from getting beat down, even without needing to resort to pool powers.  In other words, there are no "squishies" in the game, so who is the sentinel meant to protect?

 

A second problem is that Sentinels have no mechanism to draw aggro to themselves.  Trust me, I've tried playing Sentinels with taunt from the presence pool..  it doesn't work.  Most mobs that break away from the tanks are either controlled or dead before it even matters.  Others get taunted and start running toward the sentinel, but as soon as a defender throws out a heal, or a controller uses their control, the mob is running after them (which I assume is because the Sentinel has not been taunting through the whole fight, so they haven't built up their taunt magnitude).

 

Finally, a Sentinel's defenses might be better than any other ranged attacker, but they're still not good enough to actually tank anything that's a real threat.

 

I honestly feel like the "problem" isn't so much with sentinels, but that most of the other classes could use some serious nerfs/reworks.  I love Dominators and I recall I used to complain often about having all of my controls resisted.. when running solo or without a decent tank, that's a serious issue, but in a team with a good tank it's a non-factor.. so we need to try to find a way to make dom/trollers decently controlling when solo without making them overpowered in teams.  The defenses in power pools should probably be nerfed significantly, or some even removed altogether.  Start by making it so maneuvers doesn't stack.  Maybe just make it so power pool defenses don't stack with power pool defenses. (Admittedly, I also think this needs to happen so that FF defenders/corruptors might be considered to be useful again.)  I imagine there would be a lot of players complaining/leaving if a change like that was made though.

[Seigmoraig]

The only real problem I have with Sentinels is their max targets per attack. My Radiation Blast gal can only hit 6 targets with her cone where the others hit 10.
An interesting fix to the max targets and to a lesser extent, the damage problem would to be to add a unique 6pcs set bonus to each of the ATOs (that way you are not locked into one or the other set if you only want to slot 1 ATO set in your build) to increase the max targets and damage values of one attack to the Blaster numbers. You could call it your "Signature Spell". This way you get to choose which of your attacks gets to be buffed to suit your playstyle the best.

 

Edited May 16, 2020 by Seigmoraig

[drbuzzard]

On 5/16/2020 at 10:53 AM, Seigmoraig said:

The only real problem I have with Sentinels is their max targets per attack. My Radiation Blast gal can only hit 6 targets with her cone where the others hit 10.
An interesting fix to the max targets and to a lesser extent, the damage problem would to be to add a unique 6pcs set bonus to each of the ATOs (that way you are not locked into one or the other set if you only want to slot 1 ATO set in your build) to increase the max targets and damage values of one attack to the Blaster numbers. You could call it your "Signature Spell". This way you get to choose which of your attacks gets to be buffed to suit your playstyle the best.

 

I agree that the max targets business is aggravating, and I would like to see it upped for all attacks. I will say I don't like the idea of tying too much power to the ATOs. Right now the ATOs for sentinels are not exactly critical to their performance, and I consider this a good thing. Look at how the ATOs of scrappers and stalkers make night and day differences, and I'd prefer the performance level of an AT to be utterly tied to their sets of enhancements. Heck, you actually have to play to the ATOs on scrappers and stalkers to optimize performance. I don't know that I like that, 

[drbuzzard]

On 5/16/2020 at 9:21 AM, Hardboiled Hero said:

I honestly feel like the "problem" isn't so much with sentinels, but that most of the other classes could use some serious nerfs/reworks.  I love Dominators and I recall I used to complain often about having all of my controls resisted.. when running solo or without a decent tank, that's a serious issue, but in a team with a good tank it's a non-factor.. so we need to try to find a way to make dom/trollers decently controlling when solo without making them overpowered in teams.  The defenses in power pools should probably be nerfed significantly, or some even removed altogether.  Start by making it so maneuvers doesn't stack.  Maybe just make it so power pool defenses don't stack with power pool defenses. (Admittedly, I also think this needs to happen so that FF defenders/corruptors might be considered to be useful again.)  I imagine there would be a lot of players complaining/leaving if a change like that was made though.

 

These proposed nerfs would do a splendid job of clearing the servers of people if that's your goal. I know I'd likely bail. I enjoy my romps around Paragon City, but it's old content, and I've done it all before. If you geld all my heroes, well I've walked away from the game (back on live) over nerfs before, I can certainly do it again. 

 

Perhaps it's wrong in some ways, but I've always like COH because you can get to being 'overpowered'. You're a damned superhero after all. 

[Seigmoraig]

On 5/16/2020 at 11:21 AM, Hardboiled Hero said:

(Admittedly, I also think this needs to happen so that FF defenders/corruptors might be considered to be useful again.)

Why would you want to gimp everybody so that a single boring powerset becomes "Viable" that makes no sense at all. Why not just change FF to make it fun and interesting ?

Broad, sweeping changes like that that would force 75% of the population to respec are NOT what you do to fix an issue with ONE set

Edited May 19, 2020 by Seigmoraig

[Hardboiled Hero]

8 hours ago, Seigmoraig said:

Why would you want to gimp everybody so that a single boring powerset becomes "Viable" that makes no sense at all. Why not just change FF to make it fun and interesting ?

Broad, sweeping changes like that that would force 75% of the population to respec are NOT what you do to fix an issue with ONE set

  Because I don't actually believe it's an "issue with one set"..  I only gave one example here, but there are plenty of sets that go under-used and under-appreciated.  This is a thread about sentinels, after all.. sentinels don't even have Force Fields powerset, so clearly I'm thinking about more than just Force Fields..  In fact, more than half of the AT's in the game have vestigial defensive sets, which are relics of a bygone era in which people without defensive sets would have lower survivability.  Now many defensive sets have no real value.

 

  Also, I'm not recommending "Broad, sweeping changes.."  If any changes were made, it would likely have to be several small targeted changes, some of which would be "nerfs" and others of which would be "Buffs"..  However, I would recommend implementing these changes all at once, so that you don't end up giving up on them half way through, getting a ton of needless "buffs" without the "nerfs" that were designed to have those "buffs" make sense, or vice versa.

 

  In fact, the reason I would recommend making changes to power pools is specifically because those changes wouldn't nerf the character types that are actually supposed to have good defense.  Another issue with powerpools is that, while defense is relatively easy to get from them, resistance is much harder.  So let's say I'm trying to build my Tanker and I need to decide on which Defensive set to take..  Now what I really want is for my tanker to have "Super Reflexes"..  but as things stand, That's a bad choice because I can easily get capped defenses if I take "Invulnerability", but my resistances would be much higher (with invuln).  It's not even a matter of "theme", because if my "theme" is having an agile melee character I can accomplish this by either taking "Super Reflexes", or by taking "Weave", "Combat Leaping", "Manuevers", etc...  The theme can be accomplished either way, but one of those ways is subjectively mechanically worse unless, for some reason, I have other power pools that I specifically want.

 

  So the problem could also be addressed by adding more/better options to power pools.. probably starting out with some options to close the gap between resistance based defenses and defense based defenses.  either way, power pools, I believe, are a problem.  I also believe that, if power pools are going to make squishy characters substantially more survivable, then they need to make survivable characters have substantially better damage, control, etc.. (I know there are a few such powers in the pools, but not many, and they're not very good.)

 

  I also don't think these changes would really mess with the average player's survivability or their perception thereof IF there were also certain buffs to go along with them.. for example, in my experience Dominators and Controllers are most likely to die from an alpha at the beginning of a fight (when they go to cast their first control)  What if they those AT's would generally have lower survivability than they have now, but they would also have access to a click power that would greatly increase their survivability for.. I dunno.. something like 5 seconds..  The idea here being that the Dominator/controller would actually be more likely to survive the beginning of the fight, giving them MORE time to gain control of their enemies..  The  role of the Sentinel would then come in if some enemies break off toward the dom/'troller while that clicky is still on cooldown.. the thing is, the Sentinel would also need to be buffed so that they can either reliably pull aggro, or somehow kill/control the mob before it gets to the "squishy".   But I also wouldn't necessarily want people to need a sentinel in a group.  If that same dom/'troller were in a group with a Bubbler instead of a sentinel, the bubbler could be increasing the Dom/'trollers survivability to it's current levels.. and also doesn't FF have some sort of control in it as well?  So the Dom wouldn't actually die any more often than they do now.. and they can still feel like a god, but now your sentinels and support characters get to do more and feel more like gods themselves.  Additionally, the Dom/'troller might actually be better at soloing because they have a little more time to get initial control over their encounters.

Edited May 19, 2020 by Hardboiled Hero

[Obitus]

On 5/13/2020 at 10:35 AM, drbuzzard said:

If the sentinels damage was as good as a blasters, there would be no reason to choose one over the other (though AOE caps would at least give some reason, but then survivability could weigh in the favor of the sentinel). However sentinel damage is clearly not as good as blasters, so if one is picking an optimal team (say you want to set a speed TF record, or the Master of ITF challenge that I have mentioned) you will not be picking a sentinel. In a circumstance where you are competing in a stated goal, a sentinel must fall by the wayside. 

If the standard is "optimal team," then Defenders are basically the only AT worth playing.  (In City of Heroes, buff/debuff stacking has always been obscenely broken, possibly the most overpowered long-standing mechanical quirk in any MMO anywhere.  Nothing else in this game really scales up in a team setting.)

 

We all know the comparison between Blasters and Sentinels is more complex than that.  At best, you can simplify teaming capabilities into two loose categories: there are builds that are "optimal" for teams, and there are builds that can help carry a (bad or mediocre) team.  Sentinels, like Scrappers, skew heavily towards the latter - but they're mostly soloists.

 

Speaking of Scrappers, they complained for years that they didn't have a team role.  You don't hear those complaints much anymore, probably because Scrappers now have so much self-contained potential that most people would consider complaints to be in bad taste, even if Brutes have overshadowed Scrappers lately in the teaming/farming niches.  To me, the goal of any Sentinel redesign is to make Sentinel players feel roughly the same way, not to turn them into "optimal teamers;" the AT's bias towards solo/self-contained performance is baked in.

 

Forumites like to talk about how Blasters are more "team optimal" than Sentinels because they do more damage and have higher AoE target caps--and that may be true on paper, but when I read those arguments, my gut response is to ask what game you all are playing.  In my experience, higher level teams overflow with AoE damage.  An eighth team member generally won't move the needle one way or another, in terms of AoE kill speed, regardless of build.  The only difference in that scenario between the Blaster and the Sentinel is that the Sentinel is more likely to survive in the (unlikely) event that something goes terribly wrong.

 

And in smaller or weaker teams, the Blaster's massive defensive disadvantages are more likely to define the experience than the Sentinel's relative lack of damage.  Again, I'm not saying here that Sentinels don't deserve buffs, but framing the argument around Blasters' superior team utility strikes me as bizarre. 

 

The truth is that teams steamroll so effectively at levels 40+ that everyone will feel marginalized.  That isn't likely to change any time soon, at least not substantially, because the mechanics that make teams steamroll are largely the same mechanics that give City of Heroes its distinctive character.  The Homecoming devs might take steps to rein in e.g. Incarnate powers, but I imagine they'd consider dramatic changes to force multiplication, or to the general ratio of AoE damage to mob HP, to be beyond their mandate as caretakers for the game we've loved for 16 years now.

 

And that brings me to this:

On 5/16/2020 at 11:21 AM, Hardboiled Hero said:

I honestly feel like the "problem" isn't so much with sentinels, but that most of the other classes could use some serious nerfs/reworks . . .  The defenses in power pools should probably be nerfed significantly, or some even removed altogether.  Start by making it so maneuvers doesn't stack.  Maybe just make it so power pool defenses don't stack with power pool defenses. (Admittedly, I also think this needs to happen so that FF defenders/corruptors might be considered to be useful again.)  I imagine there would be a lot of players complaining/leaving if a change like that was made though.

I can't fathom how anyone can look at our present situation--playing an ancient game that was only recently resurrected, limping along almost purely due to nostalgia, gratitude, and affection for what was previously lost--and decide that what we really need is to turn CoH into something else entirely.  Our all-volunteer dev team should burn the midnight oil for however many thousands of manhours it takes to redesign the game more or less from scratch, presumably in the fervent hope that they can drive their ancient playerbase to one of the other bootleg CoH operations.

 

Seriously, can't we find a way to enjoy what we have, for what it is?  It could be gone tomorrow, for all we know. 

Edited May 19, 2020 by Obitus

[Hardboiled Hero]

13 hours ago, drbuzzard said:

 

These proposed nerfs would do a splendid job of clearing the servers of people if that's your goal. I know I'd likely bail. I enjoy my romps around Paragon City, but it's old content, and I've done it all before. If you geld all my heroes, well I've walked away from the game (back on live) over nerfs before, I can certainly do it again. 

 

Perhaps it's wrong in some ways, but I've always like COH because you can get to being 'overpowered'. You're a damned superhero after all. 

  And this is exactly why I started my poll in general, so that we could continue the discussion with less "assumption".  While no one over there has outright said they would leave, even though I specifically asked, the vast majority so far would be against any change to survivability at all.

 

  Then again, most of them seem to view the question as an attempt to change the power level of the game, but I actually like the games power level. Like you, I want to be able to feel like a superhero.. but I want to get that feeling from AT's and powersets that aren't appreciated right now.  I don't think we need to make anybody feel "less" in order to make others feel "more".. (Unless those players are getting their fun specifically because other players are "less") In my poll, I'm specifically trying not present any arguments, complaints, or "fixes".. because I want to get the opinions and feelings of others without trying to sway anyone.. what we learn there is really meant to be used in other discussions.. like this one.  However, that means that I can't really explain to them how and why I don't think a change to defenses would really mean a change to survivability, as I did in my previous post here.

[Hardboiled Hero]

40 minutes ago, Obitus said:

And that brings me to this:

I can't fathom how anyone can look at our present situation--playing an ancient game that was only recently resurrected, limping along almost purely due to nostalgia, gratitude, and affection for what was previously lost--and decide that what we really need is to turn CoH into something else entirely.  Our all-volunteer dev team should burn the midnight oil for however many thousands of manhours it takes to redesign the game more or less from scratch, presumably in the fervent hope that they can drive their ancient playerbase to one of the other bootleg CoH operations.

 

Seriously, can't we find a way to enjoy what we have, for what it is?  It could be gone tomorrow, for all we know. 

  There are a lot of things I love..  My Family, My Country..  I love those things as they are, warts and all.  That doesn't mean I don't want those things to grow and change.  I love myself..  I'm not perfect.  I want to grow and change too.. that's part of what it means to be alive.

 

  Also, I don't really expect the Devs to do any of this.. But it's an interesting topic to think about..  an interesting discussion to have.  Wanting to think about something and have conersation with/about that thing..  isn't that love?

[drbuzzard]

3 hours ago, Obitus said:

If the standard is "optimal team," then Defenders are basically the only AT worth playing.  (In City of Heroes, buff/debuff stacking has always been obscenely broken, possibly the most overpowered long-standing mechanical quirk in any MMO anywhere.  Nothing else in this game really scales up in a team setting.)

 

 

I used to play with Repeat Offenders back on live, so I know of what you speak. If I could get a proper buff/debuff team together of people who knew how to leverage that, it would no doubt break the hell out of the game. I've been there and done that.

 

However the reason I've been talking of the optimal team composition is the master of ITF races which are run on Excelsior. There's a guy who keeps track of the records of timed ITF runs with limitations to the team (which have been getting more harsh with time as people improve). I think the main form right now is 5 player, no deaths, no temp powers, no inspirations, 30 minute timer. Blasters are the standing champs for an all AT run. I think the fastest overall was 4 blasters and 1 defender. I've tried to get sentinel teams together for this, and I have trouble getting together a 5 man team which can just survive, much less vie for the record time.

 

Keep that in mind. The blasters have set the record in a no death run, and the sentinels have died (mine survived, and a few other well optimized didn't die, but while 3 of us have well twinked sentinels, we have to get two more and they died). For all the talk about sentinels margin of durability, it doesn't hold at endgame is fairly trying circumstances.

 

As I've said before, sentinels are nice and easy to level up and play. I imagine that leads to people being rather more lackadaisical about optimization. Blasters get beat down while leveling up, so it's a different road which makes people scrounge for tweaks.

 

I fully understand that, in normal circumstances, it doesn't make much difference what AT you grab for a team. I run many ITFs a day with various alts since it's my favorite TF. I don't really care what I get throwing together that PUG. This game is pretty much simply easy. However I'd like to see things a bit better balanced across ATs in an absolute sense, and sentinels need some help in that context.

[drbuzzard]

3 hours ago, Hardboiled Hero said:

  And this is exactly why I started my poll in general, so that we could continue the discussion with less "assumption".  While no one over there has outright said they would leave, even though I specifically asked, the vast majority so far would be against any change to survivability at all.

 

  Then again, most of them seem to view the question as an attempt to change the power level of the game, but I actually like the games power level. Like you, I want to be able to feel like a superhero.. but I want to get that feeling from AT's and powersets that aren't appreciated right now.  I don't think we need to make anybody feel "less" in order to make others feel "more".. (Unless those players are getting their fun specifically because other players are "less") In my poll, I'm specifically trying not present any arguments, complaints, or "fixes".. because I want to get the opinions and feelings of others without trying to sway anyone.. what we learn there is really meant to be used in other discussions.. like this one.  However, that means that I can't really explain to them how and why I don't think a change to defenses would really mean a change to survivability, as I did in my previous post here.

 

There's pretty much 2 power sets which do a good job of providing a team with a lot of defense -cold and force field. One is a brilliant set, and is fairly common in play, and as we know that's not force field. Why is this? It's because cold has a lot of utility beyond just upping defense. It also debuffs the heck out of enemies. What does force field do? It can make anyone into a sort of a defense tank, sort of. That's 3 of the 9 powers. Then it does a bunch of knockback, which while a few will sing the praises of that, I'm not one of them. It requires a lot of skill and finesse for knockback to be used in a way which doesn't hamper a team, and that's very uncommon.

 

So why don't people play FF? Because the set sucks, it has little to do with too much defense being out there (a FF def would still be useful leveling up or for people at endgame who are not well optimized). I remember I bailed on the game after GDN hit (global defense nerf) which was in i4 iirc (ED hit after that, and took it even farther). I felt that it went too far, and happened before the invention system which enabled people to make most of it back up and eventually past it. I came back eventually since no other MMO I tried even came close to the feel that I liked. There was a period between i6 or so and i8 which I think brought in inventions where everyone was pretty well nerfed compared to the hieghts, and honestly even then you didn't see a lot of bubblers. It's just a bad powerset design. With the market prices back on live, few enough people were defensive powerhouses like we have now all over the place.

 

 

[Zerethon]

Kinda late here, but working on Sentinel #5 now so i have a waaay better idea of how they work/play and what really murders things

"Ranged scrapper" not in the slightest - They're more like pure-human Warshades/PB's with more builds, just durable as heck with pretty solid damage output

As far as "Changing" the class, i would entirely do away with the current opportunity system and rework them to be more dom-like, with an active power.

EG, when the bar is full, you click activate "Opportunity strike" which works like domination, and it doubles the effect of your passive while active

This decouples it from your T1 attacks and lets you hold it easier (especially at low levels) without wasting it to kill a random minion or something.

New descriptions/effects would be like:

Opportunity (Passive): As a sentinel, your constant assault weakens your enemies resolve and builds yours up, reducing their defense and resistance to damage as long as you keep striking them. Working alongside other sentinels increases this effect (Passive -5% Def (All) -5% Res (All) on hit, unique per sentinel, becomes -10% while in opportunity strike. Or whatever the real numbers are from the server right now and then double those when activated)

Opportunity Strike (Active Self buff, click, requires full resolve meter): When the time is right, you unleash your full power as a sentinel. Activating this power increases the debuff effect of opportunity and causes your next single-target power to apply Vulnerability on a successful hit, Further weakening your target. Additionally, while active your successful attacks of any type will deal bonus damage and cause you to gain a small amount of health and endurance

Basically, we've now taken the confusing and poorly-explained power and given it a simple description and visible numbers, combined its' effects, and made it mechanically better (Bar full, click button, hit any power with a colored ring around it)

Also, made it SLIGHTLY more powerful for those paying attention, when you pop it, you can ST to apply the current debuff to a single target, but your PASSIVE debuff is also doubled during the duration which basically brings you to a 1.05 scale at a full 10% debuff

Seriously, if you don't believe me roll a dark blast sentinel and do the Dark blast -> Gloom combo with a full bar at near max range so you stack both buffs, thats when you realize how ALL powersets should feel on a sent.

[Wavicle]

Change Opportunity to an active marked target ability

Increase base damage to 1.0

Edited May 22, 2020 by Wavicle

[Bill Z Bubba]

I'm probably alone on this but considering how ridiculously safe Sentinels are, I see no reason for a base damage increase. Granted, most of my Sents are fire blast users, so I get that this affects my view on the topic, but blast output discrepancies between the sets cross AT boundaries and should be viewed as such.

[Wavicle]

I think you have to take into account not just how safe they are but also what they contribute to the team. Being safe, unless you have taunts, does not contribute anything to the team.

 

If opportunity did a little bit less for team damage then higher base damage would be fully justified if it isn’t already.

[Bill Z Bubba]

I dunno. I've always considered not faceplanting to be a great benefit for a team.

[SwitchFade]

Again, hard NO VOTE on any images that removes the healing from defensive opportunity.

[Wavicle]

I've been playing Sentinels a lot lately and I think I was basically right.

Increase base damage to 1.0 and significantly improve the strength and ease of use of the inherent. Whatever is done to the inherent should slightly increase the team support contribution and significantly improve the self damage contribution. Probably it should be a separate button, not part of an attack, and should include both Offensive and Defensive buffs on every casting.

End goal should be for Sentinel and Blaster to have roughly IDENTICAL single target damage. Sentinel will still be behind in range and in AoE size but make up for that with their armor and the team support element of their inherent.

Edited May 23, 2020 by Wavicle

[Wavicle]

Probably, in some but not necessarily all cases, the Blaster should have to go to Melee to beat the Sentinel's SINGLE TARGET ranged damage. Obviously the Blaster should almost always beat the Sentinel at AoE.

Edited May 24, 2020 by Wavicle

[oldskool]

On 5/23/2020 at 5:44 PM, Wavicle said:

I've been playing Sentinels a lot lately and I think I was basically right.

Increase base damage to 1.0 and significantly improve the strength and ease of use of the inherent. Whatever is done to the inherent should slightly increase the team support contribution and significantly improve the self damage contribution. Probably it should be a separate button, not part of an attack, and should include both Offensive and Defensive buffs on every casting.

End goal should be for Sentinel and Blaster to have roughly IDENTICAL single target damage. Sentinel will still be behind in range and in AoE size but make up for that with their armor and the team support element of their inherent.

In order for Sentinels and Blasters to have roughly identical ST DPS, then the AT needs a significant overhaul.  The scalar difference right now is 0.95 vs 1.125.  On top of this, Sentinels almost always impose a -5% resistance debuff.  Once you attack a target successfully, that debuff is there, and it will constantly refresh as long as you're hitting a target.  

The only Sentinel set that had no significant change to its core rotation or power constructs was Water Blast.  Dehydrate and Whirlpool are in different selection orders.  Geyser was normalized like the rest of the Sentinel T9s.  Other those things there was no CC power conversion nor was there a snipe.  That's the only set that is as close to apples to apples as it comes.  All other sets have some change that makes a true one on one comparison impossible.  Snipe powers really do impact Blaster damage quite substantially.  Many of those, even run on just basic fast snipe damage, do nearly double the damage of the highest damage Sentinel power.  That doesn't mean that Blaster ST does double that of a Sentinel, but instead it creates a far more significant contributor to overall damage.  

In order for Sentinels to get near Blaster single target right now, Sentinels have to stuff powers with damage procs.  The more the merrier, and a fully procced Dominate is ideal for true e-peen waving.  A PPM 3.5 proc is 71 damage.  71 damage is more than a 100% increase in damage over the common T1 power (which are often 52 dmg).  Even if the expected average damage contribution of a proc is only 20~ damage, that is still a significant damage improvement within just one power slot.  It can get exponentially better.  Some of the better heavy hitters of the Sentinel do around 120 to 140+ damage.  That means the average proc is around half the value of the entire power's damage when it activates.  The general trend of powers is the higher the damage the longer the recharge and sometimes even the animation.  This means the average expected rate of proc trigger is even better than a T1's.  In other words, you're getting more than +20 dmg per slot on average.  The other day I was doing some testing with some snipes.  Even baseline fast snipe damage can be a significant difference over the best of what a Sentinel can offer through just basic damage slotting.  Rotations across the primaries are still different enough that the gaps have a lot of variance.  Still, these DPA power differences are hard to dismiss.  

What I'm saying here is that a jump from 0.95 to 1.0 isn't enough.  Improving the current implementation of Opportunity won't be enough either unless it can be made permanent, and that is probably unlikely to happen.  Blaster snipe powers plus Defiance's regular availability are both contributors to single target damage disparity.  So it isn't just an AT scalar issue.  There are individual damage scalar issues on top of having an unreliable, and often split, inherent.  

If the Sentinel's AoE capacity is to remain lower than that of a Blaster's, then, I think it is fair that Sentinel single target be compensated higher.  I agree that it should take Blaster melee in order for them to exceed Sentinels, and that should be inclusive of Sentinel Epics [edit: by the way, this is already largely true. Most blapper or range/melee mix are going to out perform most Sentinel builds handily.  It isn't that hard to build a Blaster to do this, but it can get more complicated for the Sentinel to try to narrow the gap.  So current design works.  However, the gap can be tightened to allow for easier build creation for 90% of the player base vs the tiny few min/maxers.].  This maybe a tall order that sounds easier to say than do though when considering current use of procs in epic holds (an issue in every AT that can abuse it).  

The more I think about it, the more my position evolves.  This is the issue as I see it: 

 

What is the baseline of comparison?  -- Blaster comparisons are utterly flawed.  Blasters are not a ranged only AT.  Their secondaries are wildcards that can open up more damage from the early levels up through the end game.  There just isn't any point in comparing half of that AT's damage potential with the vast majority of the Sentinel's all range design.  If the comparison point is more like Scrappers, then Sentinel balance needs to consider its wider AoE potential against Scrapper ST DPS.  Perhaps the happy middle is Sentinel AoE > than (most) Scrapper AoE but Sentinel AoE < Blaster AoE.  Sentinel ST > Blaster ST, but Sentinel ST < Scrapper ST.  This isn't a really clean view of the current state of the game either.  Some Blaster builds can out damage Scrappers in ST and AoE.  So I'm not sure if the idea of even using Blasters as a measuring stick is worth anyone's time.  Blasters are a conceptual island.  They effectively have two primary power sets just like Dominators do.

Team support.  Should the Sentinel have any at all?  Is it an alternative ranged heavy damage AT with defensive properties or is it some jack-of-all-trades VEAT-lite AT?  I don't think the idea of a "role" for the Sentinels needs to be all that complicated.  Blasters are, by design, the most singularly focused damage AT in the game.  The fact they can play almost exclusively at range is a feature, but it isn't necessarily all they do.  Scrappers by their original design were durable single-target specialists.  This is readily apparent in their power designs of legacy sets, and I've played the game long enough to remember the developer chats.  

Sentinels fill a niche role that didn't exist.  That is one of nearly full range damage plus durability.  Whether or not it can off-tank is about as important to me as tanking on my Stalkers.  That's to say, not at all.  The idea that the Sentinel has an inherent that can benefit teams is nice, but there is absolutely nothing else in the primaries or secondaries that support that design.  So do they need to have that niche too?  If we're going to go down the rabbit hole of Sentinels offering nothing to teams due to their primaries and secondaries, then what about Scrappers or Stalkers?  Especially Stalkers.  What do Stalkers bring for team support?  Sneaking to glowies is a nice side benefit of the AT but it isn't exactly how the AT is advertised.  It is a single target damage specialist.  

DPA of powers.  Scrappers/Stalkers work well by design because melee power sets were designed against defensive secondaries.  Scrappers, Stalkers, Brutes, and now Tankers all do very good self-contained damage within their melee sets because those sets where designed like that.  Ranged attack sets clearly were not.  Blaster design is just damage.  It isn't ranged damage, it isn't melee damage.  It is all damage.  Since the original design team believed that range was a huge defense tool, and it can be, they opted to make things like snipe situational bursts of damage plus crash-included large scale T9 nukes.  Melee sets = sustained damage, and ranged sets = bursts.  That seems to be the original concept.  We've moved away from that because in practice being so heavily dependent on range sets doing bursts of damage really kind of sucked for Blasters.  So now they have crashless T9 powers and snipes that are rotational.  Sentinels are effectively playing with design paradigms that are now several issues old and aren't going to be sustainable if this trend continues.  

I'm not really sure where this AT is going to go.  Its functional for my tastes right now.  I can play in +2/x8 or +4/x8 easily, and I can do that on Stalkers/Brutes/Scrappers/Tankers/Blasters too.  The AT certainly does need some cleaning up, but minor scalar changes won't do it.  At least not without something that dramatically addresses the DPA disparities between various powers. 

 

Edit: Ideally, I think the pecking order should be something like Stalker -> Scrapper = Brute -> Sentinel on a single targets.  AoE could be reversed.  I think, again totally ideally, comparisons of Sentinels vs Blasters/Defenders/Corruptors needs to be dropped off into the dumpster.  The Sentinel is about as analogous to those former ATs as my cup of coffee is to a nuclear reactor.  Sentinels have more in common with the melee ATs than they do the ranged ones.  Even then direct parallels aren't close to perfect.  Sentinels already fit into the pecking order laid out.  They just need some tightening up to narrow whatever gaps exist in the dev's eyes.  What we peon players think is just our own speculation. 

 

Edited May 27, 2020 by oldskool

[Wavicle]

Good analysis. I agree with all your points.

I am glad we agree on roughly where the balance point lies.

Blasters=Better AoE, Better Single Target IF they go to Melee
Sentinels=Better Ranged Single Target

Whether they need to contribute to "support" at all is a question. I figured since Scrappers can "tank" a little bit it was acceptable for Sentinels to "support" just a little bit as well. But if that stands in the way of making them an effective damage dealer alongside Blasters, Stalkers, and Scrappers then get rid of it.

[Bill Z Bubba]

On 5/23/2020 at 4:44 PM, Wavicle said:

End goal should be for Sentinel and Blaster to have roughly IDENTICAL single target damage.

Having recently struggled with my blasters in a way I don't at all with my sentinels, I can't agree to this. I see no reason for sentinels to match blaster damage output at all, in any area, when they spend their entire existence cruising along with vastly superior mitigation.

[Rathulfr]

On 5/24/2020 at 9:45 AM, oldskool said:

What is the baseline of comparison?  -- Blaster comparisons are utterly flawed.  Blasters are not a ranged only AT.  Their secondaries are wildcards that can open up more damage from the early levels up through the end game.  There just isn't any point in comparing half of that AT's damage potential with the vast majority of the Sentinel's all range design.

This is precisely the nut of the problem for me.  Since I logged on to my very first Blaster in I1 or I2 (I forget exactly when), I've wanted to play a purely ranged damage dealer.  I was immediately dismayed by the Blaster secondaries, which contain so many melee attacks, and by the PBAoE nukes in the primaries. 

 

I never could get the hang of mixing ranged and melee attacks, never mind playing an active "blapper".  So I just shrugged and adapted into a ranged-only style and ignored the melee attacks in the secondaries.  Yes, I realize that put me at a bit of a disadvantage in the DPS e-peen measuring contests, but I noticed no actual disadvantage in game play (aside from not eating floor as much because of reduced exposure to melee attacks).

 

When I discovered the Sentinels of Homecoming, I was overjoyed!  Finally: a ranged-only DPS AT that I might enjoy (sorry, Corruptors/Defenders just don't do it for me).  I really loved playing my Sentinels at first, until I could no longer ignore their lackluster damage.  I understand that there has to be some trade-off between damage and durability, but it's obvious that the disparity is too much with Sentinels. 

 

Why don't Scrappers with the same secondaries suffer the same disparity in their DPS?  I'm not suggesting that Sentinel DPS needs to be the same as Scrapper DPS, just that the disparity between damage and durability in Sentinels should be less severe than it appears to be with Scrappers.

 

Which brings us back to @oldskool's point: just what is a Sentinel supposed to be?  We've seen @Captain Powerhouse suggest that they might be considered more like "ranged Scrappers".  If so, why is there such a disparity in damage vs. durability?  Maybe instead of making Sentinels more like Blasters, maybe we should be talking about making them more like Scrappers?  Maybe Opportunity needs to be changed to a ramp towards a burst of crits for a short period (different from the Scrapper's random crits), or maybe a chance of crits for all team members for a short period, or maybe just a higher chance of crits for all team members on just the target of Opportunity (instead of the -20% resistance)?

 

If we brought Sentinels to parity with Scrappers, that might eliminate the unfair comparisons to Blasters with their rotational fast-snipes and Defiance, which @oldskool points out as the non-trivial, significant, difference between Sentinels and Blasters.

 

I don't know for sure: I'm just thinking aloud here.

 

[Bill Z Bubba]

19 minutes ago, Rathulfr said:

but it's obvious that the disparity is too much with Sentinels. 

Obvious to who? My fire/bio sent takes down pylons faster than both my claws/sr brute and my sr/claws tank. And thanks to being able to stay at range suffers from VASTLY less incoming damage.

 

20 minutes ago, Rathulfr said:

Why don't Scrappers with the same secondaries suffer the same disparity in their DPS?

See above comment about the discrepancy between incoming melee damage and incoming ranged damage.

 

20 minutes ago, Rathulfr said:

just what is a Sentinel supposed to be?

A tankmage. And that's what they are. They sit in extreme safety blasting away without a care in the world, arguably as safe as tanks and dishing out greater damage.

 

Quite frankly, from the moment I first viewed them when the post-snap CoH was back online, I called them out for what they are: something that doesn't actually belong in this game.

 

But they are here, and I've got several of them because they are fun and they are safe and they do get the job done.

[Rathulfr]

11 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

Obvious to who? My fire/bio sent takes down pylons faster ...

I've highlighted the key phrase that makes it obvious to everyone: Fire/Bio.  Anything Fire/* or */Bio, much less Fire+Bio, should be considered an outlier, since both of those sets have built-in advantages over other sets.  Comparing Fire Blast to any other Blast set is a non-starter, as is Bio (the poster child for a brokenly OP set) to any other mitigation set.

Edited May 27, 2020 by Rathulfr