Blaster or Sentinel?

[JnEricsonx]

I've got a couple concepts in my head, one for AR, one for Beam Rifle, and one for Energy Blast.  Any of them could qualify for either AT, but, I've yet to make a Sentinel, so, anyone want to break down that AT in more detail/experience for me?

[ForeverLaxx]

Sentinels are essentially billed as "ranged Scrappers". They don't do as much ranged damage as Blasters, but they do it much more safely. Their armor sets also make it easier to build towards defense caps if you want to go for that than a Blaster would. Sentinels can also serve in an "off-tank" role, though their lack of any sort of taunt makes it nearly impossible to do more beyond soaking an alpha for the team.

 

The question might be decided if you team or solo more. Blasters can sometimes suffer solo due to getting mez'd and having no armors until their epic pools, but if you plan on teaming a lot this drawback starts to matter less.

[JnEricsonx]

Oh, I always team.

[Riverdusk]

37 minutes ago, JnEricsonx said:

Oh, I always team.

I'd definitely lean blaster then.  However of those you mentioned I'd say beam rifle would be the best if you do want to try sentinel.  Sentinel version of beam gets an extra aoe attack compared to the standard version which is kind of nice.  Blaster beam is still good though.  Energy and AR tend to do better on blaster imo.

 

 

Edited July 3, 2020 by Riverdusk

[DrInfernus]

It’s easier to make a survivable blaster than a damage-dealing Sentinel. 
 

I like Sentinels. They get the best versions of Beam Rifle, Electric Blast, Regen, and Super Reflexes. They get quicker recharge nukes than other ATs. They solo great, they feel tough. 
 

For me personally, though, there are just too many compromises. Their damage is too lacklustre, and the AoE cap just too low. They might feel tough, but they don’t feel strong. 

[Heraclea]

Blaster.  Sorry, everyone who loves or mains Sentinels.  I've gotten two to level 50 and I tend to think of the class as a failed experiment.  The problem is that it's much easier to bring a Blaster up to Sentinel level defenses than it is to bring a Sentinel up to Blaster level DPS.  One of my current build projects is to make a relatively tanky Blaster.  I'm building the blaster like I would a tank, with layered mitigation.  So far I've gotten the character up to around 35% smashing/lethal defense, with defense numbers to other types not much worse, and to around 28% smashing/lethal resistance on top of that.  This may be good enough for a blaster, given that the baddies die quite fast in her presence.  More importantly, it took resources - around 200 mil inf, and maybe 900 merits - but that was stuff I already had.  It also means that build aspects I ordinarily prioritize on a blaster, like recharge, take a bit of a backseat. But the character's still a blaster; not running out of attacks any time soon, especially since the main debuff she resists is recharge slow. 

 

More importantly, those defense and damage numbers are at least comparable to what a willpower sentinel gets out of the box.  I have not tried to turn any sentinel into a tank; don't take Fighting pool on either of mine, for instance.   Maybe that needs to be explored.  But the takeaway here is that you can build a blaster to sentinel-level damage mitigation, I don't know how you'd build a sentinel to put out blaster-level damage.  Advantage - blaster. 

[Gulbasaur]

I rank Blasters quite low on the "ATs I think are well designed" list. Like Peacebringers (IOs largely took away what made them unique and they can't self-buff to the same level that Warshades can) and Scrappers (Stalkers are basically Scrapper 2.0), I find it quite hard to justify playing them in a post-IO, post-Going Rogue game.* 

 

I've always felt that Blasters just don't do enough extra damage to counteract the squishiness and lack of team utility (although sets like time, devices and tactical arrow do add some), particularly as team play is mostly a melee/mid-range affair. Yes, you can one-shot someone from across a room, but how useful is that more than once per fight if your team is playing with a pre-CoV mentality where the Blaster pulls and the Tanker grabs aggro and it's not just a Brute running from mob to mob like a hyperactive spaniel. 

 

They're not the highest for single target or AoE damage. They're barely even the highest at range. They only do 12.5% higher damage than the VEATs, only they don't get the AoE debuffs that SoAs get and they don't get the control that Widows get (or the tankiness or the passive team buffs, including a 15% base damage buff although this does diminish in usefulness in among enhancements). Dominators aren't really that far behind blasters in terms of ranged damage, but they can also lock down elite bosses like 'twere nothing. I mean, Controllers get criticals which can put them at a pretty reasonable damage scale when they get going... Corruptors get Scourge, plus a lot of them have -res... 

 

You could argue that they have a higher damage cap than the other ranged AT's but to get to that cap you'll have to be playing in melee range because of how Fulcrum Shift works so the point is, as they say, moo. 

 

Yes, Blasters get Defiance, but lets not pretend Defiance is winning Inherent of the Year. The give up a hell of a lot for a modest damage buff and they're still not even the best at damage. 

 

Considering they're meant to be glass cannons, they're just not canon-y enough. Grab a sentinel (or a VEAT or a Kheldian if you're feeling spicy), slap on a couple of procs and you'll barely notice the difference in damage.

 

* I mean, unless you just think they're fun, in which case blast on, you crazy diamond. This isn't exactly the hardest game in the world and "I just think it's fun" is a 100% valid reason to play the way you play and don't let anyone tell you differently. I'm not anti-blaster and will happily team with you, I just think they pay a high utility/survivability cost for relatively meagre gains. 

Edited July 3, 2020 by Gulbasaur
Typos because I can't type-o.

[SuperPlyx]

2 hours ago, Gulbasaur said:

I rank Blasters quite low on the "ATs I think are well designed" list.

 

2 hours ago, Gulbasaur said:

Grab a sentinel (or a VEAT or a Kheldian if you're feeling spicy), slap on a couple of procs and you'll barely notice the difference in damage.

 

We must not be playing the same game.

[nihilii]

32 minutes ago, SuperPlyx said:

We must not be playing the same game.

Evidently we don't. 😄

 

The blaster vs sentinel debate has been hashed out on the Sentinel forums, and two popular, divisive statements rise to the top:

- "you can get a blaster to sentinel levels of defenses"

- "throw some procs on a sentinel and you'll feel near blaster level damage"

 

I say "divisive" because roughly speaking, there's also 2 groups of players.

If you're part of group A, you think the first statement is true and the second is crazy talk.

If you're part of group B, you think the second statement is correct and the first is bonkers.

 

Anecdotally it feels like group A outnumbers group B. So the proper answer to OP is probably to try the blaster.

But the even better answer is to try both to get a feel for it, because different people seem to end up at polar opposites in their perception of either AT.

Edited July 3, 2020 by nihilii

[Six-Six]

As a newb, I fell in love with Sentinels. My first toon ever to 50. I thought Blasters were much too tough on someone learning the ropes. But now that I have a couple of dozen 50s and incarnates under my belt, I'm starting to lean towards Blasters.

Sentinels are very forgiving. The secondary armour sets all make you very survivable (even if you don't know what you're doing... like me). Even a faultily-slotted sentinel secondary will see you walk out of a +2x8 solo fight. Damage-wise, it's there. you can build it up with your favourite IOs. But 1) there will always be someone with more damage than you, 2) sometimes damage isn't everything. The sentinel brings a few debuffs and a few other tricks to make up for the lacking damage.

Blasters are not the glass cannons they're made up to be. Defiance is a very strong inherent. And while most people will throw in a power pool to slot def and res, I have some blasters that don't and are still quite tough (besides you don't need a lot of defence when everything is dead 2 seconds after you arrive). It would be unfair to compare Sentinels and Blasters, as their similarities end with the fact that they're both ranged and have similarly-named power sets. They play different roles in a team and different play styles (blasters have a handful of melee attacks that hurt as well).

If I were you, I'd try both to see which one fits your style. Everyone's style is different, and the only one who can decide for you is you. 😃

[Gulbasaur]

30 minutes ago, nihilii said:

But the even better answer is to try both to get a feel for it, because different people seem to end up at polar opposites in their perception of either AT.

Yeah, I vote this. Personally, I'd answer "neither, grab a support set with heavy debuffs and transcend" but that's because I enjoy hybrid builds... I do need to roll a tanktroller again... I think something /time but I don't know what the something is yet. 

 

The reality is, as you say, you can proc or bonus your way to glory with either. I've never found blasters' damage worth the fuss, but the same is true of sentinels and scrappers. Tankers are rather relaxing to play and stalkers have the constant crit-stealth minigame going on which means you can hit for 1k damage and choose when you do it. I'm still trying to find something as awesome as my fortunata. 

 

I'd love to see blasters get a damage buff as they have the same issue that many of the Hero ATs have that they're balanced around a game with a different meta and their inherent powers are generally a bit wetter. If damage is their whole shtick, they shouldn't be in the middle for damage numbers in actual play as they lose their "ranged advantage" in group play as so many heals and buffs are AoE focused. 

 

I'd like to see Defiance scale in in a similar way to Fury, which is the closest mechanically with increasing damage buffs with increasing activity... only Defiance rarely gets you more than about 30% extra base damage whereas Brutes can sit at +100% without trying. 

Edited July 3, 2020 by Gulbasaur

[Black Zot]

I would strongly recommend going blaster for the AR.  Sentinel AR suffers terribly from the lower range gimping the set's emphasis on cone attacks.

[Coyote]

Sentinels, properly built, do a lot more damage than most players give them credit for. Their main weakness is a target cap of 10 targets on the AoE, because damage is there with IOs.

Blasters properly built can get to defense caps for several types of attacks, but not to all, and don't have mez protection, and don't have defense debuff resistance, which puts them a lot further behind the Sentinels than Sents are behind Blasters in damage.

 

The argument that you can build a Blaster to match Sentinel defenses is nonsensical. Sentinels start off with pretty comprehensive mez protection, Blasters can only get that with a tier-4 Incarnate. And at that point Sentinels can run Barrier for more defense/resist.

 

The argument that Sentinel damage is lacking is more informed, but still wrong... it just takes a build well designed with damage procs to get the higher damage results. No matter what, they'll trail Blasters, though.

 

So in the end, given that damage (especially on teams) is generally considered more important by most players than defensive ability, do you want a 100% improvement in survivability or a 50% improvement in damage (along with far better range, especially on the AoE and cones)? The survivability seems much higher, but how relevant is it, on teams?

[Bill Z Bubba]

3 hours ago, nihilii said:

The blaster vs sentinel debate has been hashed out on the Sentinel forums, and two popular, divisive statements rise to the top:

- "you can get a blaster to sentinel levels of defenses"

- "throw some procs on a sentinel and you'll feel near blaster level damage"

 

I say "divisive" because roughly speaking, there's also 2 groups of players.

If you're part of group A, you think the first statement is true and the second is crazy talk.

If you're part of group B, you think the second statement is correct and the first is bonkers.

 

I must be the real weirdo in the group as I find both of those statements to be false.

 

To the OP, I consider Sentinels to be tankmages. That thing that can easily be made to never die and hover in complete safety whilst blasting away with total impunity.

Blasters will kill everything vastly faster except when faceplanted. You say you always team? Then you'll faceplant far less.

Edited July 3, 2020 by Bill Z Bubba

[Bonkleberry]

I would vote for Sentinel.

 

On certains teams, a Blaster can go ham, sure. On every team a Sentinel can go ham. I just have no idea where people are getting this notion that Blasters can reach Sentinel level protection for resistances and mez at all times. Maybe if the team composition has a lot of support buffs. You cannot ignore the fact that a Blaster has to be careful not to attract too much aggro against certain enemy groups in certain team comps. A Sentinel has to be less careful and can pretty much pew pew away without fear most of the time.

 

A Sentinel can also boost overall team damage versus single targets with their special ability. Unless the target is an AV or GM, then Blaster Damage versus Sentinel Damage should not matter--everything dies in seconds anyway. Against a GM or AV, though, I would value the Sentinel more over the Blaster because of Opportunity. The entire team dishing out 20% more damage to the target would far outweigh any extra damage a Blaster brings to the table. Sure, the Blaster can be a trash hero with their target caps, but that is just meh for me. Nobody is proud or grateful to have a trash hero, because trash is just that, trash.

[Bill Z Bubba]

While the sentinel inherent does benefit everyone on a team, and the OP did state they team all the time, it should also be noted for others reading that the sent's single target damage output can't get anywhere near the blaster's. My fire/bio takes around 4 mins to solo a rikti pylon. My fire/time blaster does it in less than half that time. This, especially with the lower aoe caps, can extrapolate out to the aoe damage as well.

 

In the end, though, for you other soloists out there, who probably know it anyway, DPS drops to zero when you're licking dirt.

Edited July 3, 2020 by Bill Z Bubba

[MunkiLord]

Blaster

[EmmySky]

I have fallen in love with sentinels, so my opinion is certainly biased, but who's isn't lol

 

Sentinels are billed as ranged scrappers but they don't really deal enough damage for that.  They are more like ranged tanks except they don't hold the aggro as well.  They take the alpha better than blasters and will remain upright 99% of the time.  

 

I have often found myself in teams with less.....enthusiastic? players who seem to stand back then load up in buffs and insp before charging in.  Even tanks and brutes do this.  As that is kinda opposite my playstyle, I tend to charge first and insp as needed, I find teammates following me through maps rather than the 'leader'.  This works very well on sents, and they allow me to begin blasting away while still at range before I have completely closed to melee.  Closing to melee is a whole other issue, but you wanna compare blasters and sentinels so we will save that topic for another day.

 

You say you havent made a sent so I strongly encourage you to try one.  Beam/regen is a nice fun easy pairing.

 

Good luck!

Edited July 3, 2020 by EmmySky

[Heraclea]

4 hours ago, nihilii said:

Evidently we don't. 😄

 

The blaster vs sentinel debate has been hashed out on the Sentinel forums, and two popular, divisive statements rise to the top:

- "you can get a blaster to sentinel levels of defenses"

- "throw some procs on a sentinel and you'll feel near blaster level damage"

 

I say "divisive" because roughly speaking, there's also 2 groups of players.

If you're part of group A, you think the first statement is true and the second is crazy talk.

If you're part of group B, you think the second statement is correct and the first is bonkers.

 

An argument can be made for both.  For the sentinel, their proc options will be strongly contingent on the attack set they chose, and the sets with control or other exotic features will create more opportunities.  I usually look for debuff procs over damage procs myself.  I just don't know of any damage procs that are reliable enough and hard hitting enough to make up the difference.  Blasters get one of the most valuable procs in the game, the chance for status protection, that potentially removes the sentinel's  main advantage.  This is the first one I get. 

 

Blaster sustain powers are something else that tips the scale in the blaster's favor.  These work in a number of different ways; some are toggles, others attacks,  but most of them add regeneration as well as recovery.  Regeneration is of course a poor sister to defense and resistance, and too often it needs time to work you don't have.  But it is fairly easy, say on my electric/electric blaster, to get quite a bit of regen working.  The amount of sustain a sentinel has is also strongly contingent on their secondary.

[Zeraphia]

7 hours ago, nihilii said:

Evidently we don't. 😄

 

The blaster vs sentinel debate has been hashed out on the Sentinel forums, and two popular, divisive statements rise to the top:

- "you can get a blaster to sentinel levels of defenses"

- "throw some procs on a sentinel and you'll feel near blaster level damage"

 

I say "divisive" because roughly speaking, there's also 2 groups of players.

If you're part of group A, you think the first statement is true and the second is crazy talk.

If you're part of group B, you think the second statement is correct and the first is bonkers.

 

Anecdotally it feels like group A outnumbers group B. So the proper answer to OP is probably to try the blaster.

But the even better answer is to try both to get a feel for it, because different people seem to end up at polar opposites in their perception of either AT.

I'm not in either group, I'm in group C, I do think you can get Sentinels to decent damage levels, but not by themselves, only through the Psi Mastery EPP and a lot of procs, can they start to "match" some baseline (still not even close to outlier) Blaster/Scrapper combos. Sentinel basic damage itself (just primary) is extremely lackluster, Sentinel damage WITH Psi EPP is *decent*. 

All that said, I'm going to be completely sadistically honest here... I've found my Blasters who take the Fire Mastery's permanent Bonfire power with kb->kd ended up more survivable due to that control power than any combination of Sentinel I've rolled, and far more damaging. Blasters don't just get better damage, they get access to Build Up and Aim, they get far more damage-dealing tools with their secondary. All that said, my fire^3 with Bonfire has 70% S/L, 40 fire, like 30 cold, and 35% E/N/R defense, and I really can't say I faceplant anymore despite playing the most "unsafe" combination.

[Mender Silos]

In a world where you can be anything, always play the archetype that you enjoy!

Unless you can be a Mender.

Then be a Mender.

[Redlynne]

7 minutes ago, Mender Silos said:

Unless you can be a Mender.

Then be a Mender.

Just don't be a Derek...?

[drbuzzard]

I have a host of sentinels, and a few blasters. Blasters do quite a bit more damage between defiance, a higher scalar, AOE caps, and snipes (with quicksnipe). At 50, with incarnate and the right IO build, their durability is quite impressive. Sentinels can be extremely durable(more so than blasters, assuming they are both built by competent people), and it's nice to pop a nuke every 23 seconds or so (when you build for recharge). Their inherent is team friendly, and they feature almost always the best defensive versions of their armor sets found in the game(they have far and away the best regen set in the game). Their ranged attack sets are also the best balanced across sets, as opposed to those sets for other ATs which have major gaps in quality. They make for a pleasant and easy ride up the levels, and are quite enjoyable to play. However if you at big on playing lvl 50 content, a blaster is probably more useful, especially on teams. If you solo or like sub 50 content, I'd favor a sentinel. 

 

Oh, and it should be emphasized that competitive sentinel builds lean heavily on procs for their damage, which I personally find very gimmicky, and have a suspicion isn't going to last forever. 

 

 

Edited July 3, 2020 by drbuzzard

[QuiJon]

16 hours ago, JnEricsonx said:

I've got a couple concepts in my head, one for AR, one for Beam Rifle, and one for Energy Blast.  Any of them could qualify for either AT, but, I've yet to make a Sentinel, so, anyone want to break down that AT in more detail/experience for me?

Sentinels are blasters if blasters really sucked badly. 

[QuiJon]

9 hours ago, nihilii said:

But the even better answer is to try both to get a feel for it, because different people seem to end up at polar opposites in their perception of either AT.

But if you are going to "try" the sentinel out just power level one in AE up to the 40s, cause frankly it is really when you get to end game that you realize how badly blasters are out classing you. You feel almost competent for the first 25-30 levels before that confidence starts to scale down and you start counting it taking 28 attacks to kill a +2 boss.