If You Could Change Sentinels, How Would You Do It? (Another Take)

[Rathulfr]

3 hours ago, oldskool said:

and just about every AT subforum has threads about some kind of identity crisis.  Well, maybe not Stalkers, or Blasters.

Um, actually... even Blasters have identity crises, i.e.: ranged DPS versus blappers.  The identity crisis is actually "baked in" to the AT itself, with most secondaries including melee attacks.  It's been said more than once that Blasters are a "damage" class, not a "ranged damage" class, and that anyone who plays a Blaster as ranged-only isn't really playing a Blaster properly. 

 

Guilty as charged: I prefer my Blasters ranged-only, and it's also one of the reasons why I like Sentinels, too.  As a Blaster, I have to decide to skip those pesky melee powers to grab more mitigation from elsewhere, like power pools.  But as a Sentinel, I'm free to be me -- ranged only primary, mitigation secondary.  If Sentinel damage wasn't so anemic, I'd never play a Blaster.  However, because Sentinel damage is so weak and difficult to improve, I end up playing Blasters with augmented mitigation, because it's easier to make a tanky Blaster than it is to make a blasty Sentinel.

 

[Zeraphia]

reserved

Edited July 7, 2020 by Zeraphia

[Hopestar]

16 hours ago, Chronicler J said:

I'd be nice if they performed a role first. Right now, why take a Sentinel when you can have a Blaster, or a Scrapper, or a Stalker, or a Brute?

 

9 hours ago, oldskool said:

Answer: Why not? 

 

Unless a group is specifically trying to do something within arbitrary guidelines, then there is simply no reason to be excluding players running a Sentinel.  Sentinels contribute with damage and they are one of the few ranged ATs that are largely hands off.  Sure, we could get into circular arguments about this AT can do that, but it also just flat out ignores that this game offers flexibility of play.  No one should be pigeon holing all concepts into thou shalt do X DPS or else.  If finishing a TF in a few more minutes is really that important, and so much so to kick Sentinels from a team or not even invite them, then I'd seriously worry more about the people making those choices vs the AT itself.  Difficulties can be scaled down, and just about every AT subforum has threads about some kind of identity crisis.  Well, maybe not Stalkers, or Blasters.  Beyond them, there are plenty of folks willing to say "whoa is me" on their AT choice while looking at how green the grass is on the other side.  

 

So that question you bring up.  It has two sides to it.  Does a party care more about AoE or ST?  If its ST then the question could easily be why ever bring anything besides a Stalker?  If you need something that does damage and is tanky, why ever bring anything than a Brute?  Need moar AoE?  Why ever bring anyone NOT running their Judgment Incarnate?  Oh, I mean... Why bring anything other than a Blaster.  

 

Why would anyone ever play anything other than a Night Widow when Ageless is a thing?  Why would anyone ever play anything other than a Crab Spider?  The answer to all of these questions are just simply staring everyone in the face.  Its because players find said AT fun, and this game isn't so difficult it needs super streamlined party compositions.  Its when people start imposing their own restrictions that these questions even matter, and even then... they don't. 

I ask myself the same question, why would I play a Sentinel when I can play Blaster which does more damage, can hit more targets with AoE, and is just as durable; Or a Stalker that can hit way harder, can be semi-ranged, and again is just as durable. Yes many classes can be compared the same way, but other than Kheldians, Sentinel is the only other AT with a barely functioning passive.

To reiterate @Chronicler J, Sentinels with their current passive and target limitations have no role to perform. I daresay the HEATs do the same jack-of-all-trades job Sentinels currently do, but 10x better.

[oldskool]

Or in other words, the Sentinel has no role to fill for those players that wish to be min-maxed on some aspect.  That's really all that boils down to.  

Here is another phrasing of the question.  How much damage you do you need to do?  If the answer is ALL OF IT, then pick a Blaster or Stalker.  😉 

[Rathulfr]

15 minutes ago, oldskool said:

Here is another phrasing of the question.  How much damage you do you need to do?  If the answer is ALL OF IT, then pick a Blaster or Stalker.  😉 

 

YES, ALL OF IT.

 

Edited July 7, 2020 by Rathulfr

[Hopestar]

19 hours ago, oldskool said:

Or in other words, the Sentinel has no role to fill for those players that wish to be min-maxed on some aspect.  That's really all that boils down to.  

Here is another phrasing of the question.  How much damage you do you need to do?  If the answer is ALL OF IT, then pick a Blaster or Stalker.  😉 

 

Let me make it clear and colorful.

It's not just a damage problem, Offensive Opportunity does more than Defensive yet still almost nothing, it has the tiny health of a Blaster, and reduced amount of targets for seemingly no reason other than reducing the ability to contribute AoE like a Scrapper/Stalker. As you can see, it's only receiving the weaknesses of other ATs and no strength of it's own.

 

The strength of a sentinel is being able to be mid-ranged and slightly more durable than a Blaster/Defender, so I ask you, is that really worth everything above?
Also, being much better at ST than AoE, this seems to be the opposite of what Captain Powerhouse was going for.

 

The lower damage would be acceptable if it did something unique like more AoE than ST and had some form of control somewhere to help you stay mid-range.

[nihilii]

1 hour ago, Hopestar said:

The lower damage would be acceptable if it did something unique like more AoE than ST and had some form of control somewhere to help you stay mid-range.

Sentinels epics are filled with spammable AoE immobilizes if that's your jam.

[drbuzzard]

I find that tashibishi does a pretty good job of keeping things out of your face. Mind you the rest of that epic set I consider to be crap, but the caltrops are quite nice.

[nihilii]

5 minutes ago, drbuzzard said:

I find that tashibishi does a pretty good job of keeping things out of your face. Mind you the rest of that epic set I consider to be crap, but the caltrops are quite nice.

Urge to reroll ice/something/caltrops rising... I don't even care about efficiency, I just want to ice storm - caltrops things into nothingness and laugh at the piddly remaining damage.

[oldskool]

3 hours ago, Hopestar said:

 

Let me make it clear and colorful.

It's not just a damage problem, Offensive Opportunity does more than Defensive yet still almost nothing, it has the tiny health of a Blaster, and reduced amount of targets for seemingly no reason other than reducing the ability to contribute AoE like a Scrapper/Stalker. As you can see, it's only receiving the weaknesses of other ATs and no strength of it's own.

 

The strength of a sentinel is being able to be mid-ranged and slightly more durable than a Blaster/Defender, so I ask you, is that really worth everything above?
Also, being much better at ST than AoE, this seems to be the opposite of what Captain Powerhouse was going for.

 

The lower damage would be acceptable if it did something unique like more AoE than ST and had some form of control somewhere to help you stay mid-range.

All of that big text where you're being condescending only highlights that you feel there are other aspects adding insult to injury for the lack of damage.  

 

The lower damage would be acceptable if it did something unique like more AoE, huh?  How is that not more damage?  

You've already hit on the why play a Sentinel when Blasters/Stalkers can do it all better.  Now you're just nitpicking and trying to rationalize something else over the damage issue. 

Its OK if you don't like the AT.  Its OK if you don't like it for the damage, or the inherent, or whatever other means.  At least be honest with yourself and everyone else though. 

Edited July 8, 2020 by oldskool

[Hopestar]

2 hours ago, nihilii said:

Sentinels epics are filled with spammable AoE immobilizes if that's your jam.

They are and they work great at that, I just feel that control is something the primary should have and not be something you have to wait until lvl 35 for stopping enemies from running you down.

Clearly some people are zealous and angry about other people adding anything that goes against their personal vision and going to add things I never implied or said, so I won't bother replying anymore in this topic as it will only spiral downhill as my words are left on deaf ears.

[oldskool]

19 minutes ago, Hopestar said:

Clearly some people are zealous and angry about other people adding anything that goes against their personal vision and going to add things I never implied or said, so I won't bother replying anymore in this topic as it will only spiral downhill as my words are left on deaf ears.

You may not respond here, but I at least hope you read this.  

 

You responded to something I wrote.  That's fine.  You mentioned this: 

 

On 7/7/2020 at 4:51 PM, Hopestar said:

 

I ask myself the same question, why would I play a Sentinel when I can play Blaster which does more damage, can hit more targets with AoE, and is just as durable; Or a Stalker that can hit way harder, can be semi-ranged, and again is just as durable. Yes many classes can be compared the same way, but other than Kheldians, Sentinel is the only other AT with a barely functioning passive.

To reiterate @Chronicler J, Sentinels with their current passive and target limitations have no role to perform. I daresay the HEATs do the same jack-of-all-trades job Sentinels currently do, but 10x better.

The bold items are all in regards to damage.  It just so happens that Blasters trend towards the higher ends of AoE and ranged damage (not considering some support set shenanigans).  It just so happens Stalkers trend towards the higher spectrum of ST damage.  You're first thoughts, and these are words you wrote, were all in relation to comparing the Sentinel with two ATs that happen to be the strongest performers in their respective areas.  

Yes, you brought up the inherent towards the end.  However, the inherent comment is placed after the other items.  You thought about it last.  You're other follow-up response in the same posting mentions target limitations, but sure it's secondary this time.  Still, that's a 40 to 60% damage boost we're talking about if cones/spheres hit in the same manner as Blasters.  The passive itself is also tied to doing damage.  Hell, Blaster and Stalker passives are tied to doing damage and you've already noted how you favor them over Sentinels.  

So I happened to make a joke about the damage aspect.  I apologize if that bothered you.  I was hoping the tongue in cheek nature was obvious and I guess it wasn't.  However, is it that difficult for you to recognize that when folks bring up Blasters/Stalkers vs Sentinels the underlying theme of what rubs people wrong about it is damage? 

You decided to follow-up with large scale text and it was definitely written/presented in a manner to talk down to me like I'm an idiot.  Here's the thing though.  You're follow-up didn't really support you're previous argument very well.  At least, not to me, and so I challenged it.  That's not at all being "zealous" about the AT.  That's pretty laughable actually.  We haven't had a one-on-one conversation so you're really in no position to make a claim like that.  Its just an ad hominem deflection vs defending a position.  

You're entitled to your views on why you don't like the AT.  I'm not sure why it would be perceived that I am "angry" that you don't care for it.  I really don't care.  The passive aggressive tone just notes the "angry" comment is projection.  So again, I apologize if what I wrote bothered you.  

 

Here's thing, If I challenge an idea my intent isn't to shut you down.  Its to engage in the debate.  Sometimes passions rise high, but that doesn't mean I don't respect other people's views.  I'll give credit to people where credit is due, but I'll also challenge hyperbole/poorly defended positions.  

#olivebranch

[Gobbledigook]

Opportunity should not be tied to a t1\t2 power as a lot of builds do not use these. Tankers changed it and so should Sentinels.

 

Turn Opportunity into a power boost like effect on a timer as it is now but not tied to any specific attack. It will buff the sentinel and the whole teams damage, recharge, defence  and secondary effects whilst it is active. 25% or so.

 

 OR

 

turn Opportunity into a chance to double hit\strike on all attacks, all the time or on a timer. At least that would be a little different than criticals or fury which we already have.

 

Survival should be lower than scrappers due to range.

[Underfyre]

13 hours ago, Gobbledegook said:

Opportunity should not be tied to a t1\t2 power as a lot of builds do not use these. Tankers changed it and so should Sentinels.

Every build is using either its T1 or its T2. There is no escaping their use in a rotation as a filler. What is true is that nobody is letting the desire for either Offensive or Defensive dictate which of the two attacks they may skip in their final build.

[drbuzzard]

 

47 minutes ago, underfyre said:

Every build is using either its T1 or its T2. There is no escaping their use in a rotation as a filler. What is true is that nobody is letting the desire for either Offensive or Defensive dictate which of the two attacks they may skip in their final build.

Yeah, I pick whichever attack is better. If the numbers justify it (good DPAS), I take both. I never take them because I want both versions of opportunity.

[Gobbledigook]

3 hours ago, underfyre said:

Every build is using either its T1 or its T2. There is no escaping their use in a rotation as a filler. What is true is that nobody is letting the desire for either Offensive or Defensive dictate which of the two attacks they may skip in their final build.

No they aren't. Fire does not need flares or fireblast for example in a rotation really, it's a dps loss. Flares now and then to proc Opportunity. 

 

I am not going to use a bad Dpa attack other than to proc Opportunity for the minus resist to one hard target the odd occasion.

Edited July 9, 2020 by Gobbledegook

[Underfyre]

3 hours ago, Gobbledegook said:

No they aren't. Fire does not need flares or fireblast for example in a rotation really, it's a dps loss. Flares now and then to proc Opportunity. 

 

I am not going to use a bad Dpa attack other than to proc Opportunity for the minus resist to one hard target the odd occasion.

I guess if you're running running Dominate and Mind Probe. Fire on its own will need Flares to fill rotational gaps while you wait for Blazing Blast or Blaze or Fireball to come off cooldown.

[Gobbledigook]

1 hour ago, underfyre said:

I guess if you're running running Dominate and Mind Probe. Fire on its own will need Flares to fill rotational gaps while you wait for Blazing Blast or Blaze or Fireball to come off cooldown.

Barely. I wouldn't exactly call it a rotation filler. More to proc opportunity.

[Cyrious]

If I may throw out my tidbit: Blasters are mostly treated like a rifle in that they fight their best at medium-long range, belting out damage and killing targets long before they can get close enough to do significant damage. I was thinking that Sentinel's should be treated like a shotgun: Somewhat mediocre (Essentially about 5-10% less damage than what is currently done) damage at the range limit, devastating damage at point-blank range (About par with a Stalker, depending on balancing). It becomes a balancing act: Do I stay at range and pelt my target with weaker attacks, or do I charge in and rely on damage mitigation to keep me alive while I belt out damage?

 

Now, separate from my little bit above: Opportunity's biggest flaw IMO is that if the target tagged dies, it doesn't allow tagging another target with the debuff while the bar is charged. What I propose is that if Opportunity is active, every shot belted out procs the debuff on all targets hit, even the AOEs and Judgements. So, if I trigger Opportunity and kill a target with it, I can switch to the next target, attack it, and it will get the debuff. If I decide to use a targeted AOE (Lets say, Rain of Fire) on a pack of enemies when Opportunity is up, all targets hit even once by it will get the debuff.

A tweak to the Opportunity bar itself: It charges with attacks as normal and activates once charged, but instead of completely draining after a set time period, it starts a slow constant drain (until empty) once full. Attacking will add time to the bar. A well built Sentinel can keep Opportunity up constantly when in combat.

 

As for selecting an Opportunity type for when it does proc, make it like the Adaptation selection for Bio armor or the ammo type for DP. You click it, its set, and will pop that type when the proc goes off, with a minor flat effect when the proc is not active. Ex: Offensive grants a 5% damage boost when selected but not procced, a 20% damage boost when procced. Defensive grants a minor constant heal tick (about 1 tick per second, 1% HP per tick), which gets a multiplier when procced that scales it up and down according to how much damage was dealt each heal tick (up to a maximum of 10% HP/Tick, but the scaling to get this high requires external damage buffs).

 

Too much? Not enough?

[SwitchFade]

As this is a new thread...

 

Any change to opportunity that removes the current defensive opportunity healing is a hard no vote.

 

Other than that, change away, for the better only. Any change to opp must include the healing component from defensive opportunity

[Zeraphia]

On 7/11/2020 at 12:48 PM, SwitchFade said:

As this is a new thread...

 

Any change to opportunity that removes the current defensive opportunity healing is a hard no vote.

 

Other than that, change away, for the better only. Any change to opp must include the healing component from defensive opportunity

You are the primary reason I created the first question 🙂

[Six-Six]

An idea just hit me. 

What if the opportunity aspect is expanded? When the Opp bar is full you now have choices:
T1 = +damage
T2 = +hp/end
T3 = +to hit buff
T4 = +disorient/stun
T5 = -to hit debuff
T6 = +confuse
T7 = +regen
T8 = +double hit
T9 = -recharge/slow

So, the secondaries are still the robust armour that they are, but now the primaries, can no longer be seen as a weak attack. It's damage + a special which don't have to last long.

Just a brain fart.

[Underfyre]

31 minutes ago, Six Six said:

An idea just hit me. 

What if the opportunity aspect is expanded? When the Opp bar is full you now have choices:
T1 = +damage
T2 = +hp/end
T3 = +to hit buff
T4 = +disorient/stun
T5 = -to hit debuff
T6 = +confuse
T7 = +regen
T8 = +double hit
T9 = -recharge/slow

So, the secondaries are still the robust armour that they are, but now the primaries, can no longer be seen as a weak attack. It's damage + a special which don't have to last long.

Just a brain fart.

Just ...no. sorry, but no.

[Hjarki]

One thing that did occur to me for Opportunity was to simply change it to 'reverse Corruption'. So at 100% health, a target would have a 100% chance to take additional damage, scaling down to 50% health (where it would have a 0% chance). While the damage multiplier for the AT would likely need to be adjusted downward somewhat, this sort of mechanic seems like a fairly elegant way to give something that makes Sentinels unique without making them 'better Blasters'.

[Captain Powerhouse]

On 7/6/2020 at 7:59 AM, oldskool said:

1) What is "optimal usage"?  -  The AT has no instruction book, and I think many of us are missing the design intent. 

2) How does Offensive Opportunity turn the AT from "ridiculously low" damage to "absurd high" damage?

 

Been meaning to reply to this but been swamped:

 

An unrealistic state so keep that in mind when i say this, true sentinel performance will likely never hit this level, its just "on paper":

 

Without offensive opportunity, the sentinel modifier is at .95 if i recall correctly. At even level foes, the additional -5% resist means in solo play this is about 0.9975 equivalent base damage (things go down against higher level foes)

 

With offensive opportunity, the sentinel has procs equal to +20% enhanceable damage (so long the attack obeys the damage formula) for about scale 1.045. The AT also can land it's -25% resist during this window against the single foe, provided it is strong enough to survive a long test, it would bump hypothetical damage to 1.425 scale (again, even foes, if they have enough HP to make that one-shot debuff count)

 

Since the mechanic is designed for an max 50% uptime, the average of these two ends up being an average 1.21 scale damage, actually higher than scrapper + crits, in between scrapper hypothetical 1.18125 scale (vs minions) and 1.2375 (against non-minions) 

 

And of course, even then its only valid for single target damage (since the -res is not AoE) but every Sentinel gets a mini-nuke, the same is not true for Scrappers.

 

Now, all this is just a hypothetical optimal that only truly work in paper, but it is basically the center of the balance for the whole feast/famine design.

 

The fact it cant really be practical to leverage in game is why there is going to be a big revamp for everything, at some point.