Game Balance & The Endgame

[Mezmera]

10 minutes ago, aethereal said:

 

I mean, it's super obvious that a Controller plays more like a Dom than a Mastermind.  Is anyone willing to say with a straight face that this isn't true?

 

But more to the point:  you're still making the assumption that each villainous AT has exactly one "pairing" with a unique heroic AT.  That's just...  not necessarily true.  It seems clear to me that some kind of pairing and mirroring was a concept in play at some point, like it's not crazy to point out that some of the villainous ATs look a lot like some of the heroic ATs, but there's a big jump between there and, "each villain AT was designed from beginning of Cov development to release of CoV with a mandate to mirror one unique heroic AT."

Well I play my doms like Tankmages but I get that playstyles are subjective.  You can sit back and pew pew on any AT.  MM's with their support set and slight aggro control play much more similar to a Controller with their support set and slight aggro control than a Dom with their all or nothing hard control and damage and a Blaster and their all or nothing hard damage.  

Edited October 6, 2020 by Mezmera

[aethereal]

2 minutes ago, Mezmera said:

Well I play my doms like Tankmages but I get that playstyles are subjective.  You can sit back and pew pew on any AT.  MM's with their support set and slight aggro control play much more similar to a Controller with their support set and slight aggro control than a Dom with their all or nothing hard control and damage and a Blaster and their all or nothing hard damage.  

Controllers don't have "aggro" control (except Illusion), they have crowd control -- through almost entirely exactly the same powers that Dominators have crowd control.

 

Like, yes, I get it.  I can see what you're saying.  But also obviously Controllers play a ton like Dominators, using the same primary powersets to lock down opponents the same way.  Especially when you do straightforward play of the kind that we had more of back when CoV was released and fewer people had perma-dom.

[Mezmera]

8 minutes ago, FUBARczar said:

I know we differ, but honestly I think 4 Fire/Psi would have the best time b/c of the -regen and lots of AoE damage with hot feet, bonfire, and PSW.  

I wouldn't turn down psi secondary with their -regen and that aoe psi damage.  BUT.  I can cap my defenses with Nrg at all times with powerboosted Unleash Potential, Barrier and Demonic.  Well until they decide to break powerboost for the worse.  

 

Energy Release is a fantastic mechanic and with all of the hard aoe control you can get from Mind you can coordinate the overlapping holds onto those EB's that are really the only issue where psi would do so much better.  The damage in terms of ST and AoE is tops on Nrg doms honestly.  Psi is good and a nice balance so sure 3 Mind/Nrg and 1 Fire/Psi.  

 

Most of those hard engagements are ST in nature where sliding in 4 Weaken Resolves with -17% resist each would really be noticeable.  Then pair it with arguably the top ST damage dom and you've got a recipe for a fast run.  

[FUBARczar]

1 hour ago, aethereal said:

I mean, it's super obvious that a Controller plays more like a Dom than a Mastermind.  Is anyone willing to say with a straight face that this isn't true?

I will, you are totally trolling with this comment.  MMs and Controllers damage comes primarily from their pets, and spend a lot of their time buffing/debuffing.  Controllers do a little CC then buff/debuff, while Doms may open with CC but then it's attack, attack, attack. So yes Doms play a lot more like Blasters, and Controllers more like MMs.  

Edited October 6, 2020 by FUBARczar

[oedipus_tex]

I always viewed the Villain archetypes as somewhere midway between the Hero archetypes rather than direct analogies.

 

Corruptor is basically midway between Blaster and Defender. They were the only Villain archetype to get a Blast set so filled both roles.

 

Dominator is basically midway between Controller and a Blaster who focused on blaps (the Assault sets are very obviously a mashup of Blaster primary and secondary). Other than Corruptor, they were the only Villain archetype with ranged damage. 

 

Brute is somewhere midway between Scrapper and Tanker. 

 

 

Mastermind I just think they thought was cool, but I imagine partially inspired by Illusion Control.

[Wavicle]

Mastermind is a Defender that comes with their own team.

[aethereal]

1 minute ago, FUBARczar said:

I will, you are totally trolling with this comment.  MMs and Controllers damage comes primarily from their pets, and spend a lot of their time buffing/debuffing.  Controllers do a little CC then buff/debuff, while Doms do may open with CC but then it's attack, attack, attack. So yes Doms play a lot more like Blasters, and Controllers more like MMs.  

I feel like you're reacting to the weakness of control sets in the current meta, which was not true at release of CoV and leads you to discount the fact that Trollers and Doms have, after all, almost entirely the same powers in their primary and surely most important powerset.  Trollers are meant to be control-first, with buff/debuff to fill in the holes of stuff they can't keep fully locked down.  Dominators are meant to be control-first, with damage to kill the stuff they can't keep fully locked down.  Dominators get pets just like Trollers do.

 

Like, yes, things evolved and perma-dom became a thing achievable to anyone who worked hard for it and blaster nukes got buffed and now a control-first playstyle, at least on teams, is kinda bad.  So successful trollers lean more heavily on their secondary, and dominators lean more heavily on their secondary.  And I'm not saying that there aren't significant differences between Controllers and Doms.

 

But also, Masterminds only "spend a lot of their time buffing/debuffing" because their primary, AT-defining powers do not take a lot of combat-time to use, and they do not lock down opponents.  They just aren't that much like Controllers except, perhaps, in a loose, thematic, "Oh, this is kinda how my playstyle works, man" way.  And at that point we go back to Stalkers are the Blaster correspondents -- sure, their powers are very different, but they're high-DPS, one-shot, run if you don't kill everyone kind of way.

 

Like, if you look for "mirrors" in terms of just straight up "whose powers are most like whose other powers," then you get Tanks/Brutes, Scrappers/Stalkers, Defenders/Corruptors, Controllers/Dominators, ???/MMs and Blaster/???.  If you look for "mirrors" in terms of roles, you have all kinds of possible thematic matchups, including Tank/MM, Blaster/Stalker, and Blaster/Corruptor.

 

I think the people suggesting that villain ATs are a blend of heroic ATs are the closest to accurately describing the how things came situation, but I don't think that there's much sign that they are describing a unified design intent.  Rather, I think that the designers probably took inspiration from the heroic ATs, tried to come up with things that "felt villainous," and, if they ever had an intention to provide 1:1 mirrors of the heroic ATs, abandoned that as a design goal as they refined the ATs.

[Mezmera]

21 minutes ago, aethereal said:

I feel like you're reacting to the weakness of control sets in the current meta, which was not true at release of CoV and leads you to discount the fact that Trollers and Doms have, after all, almost entirely the same powers in their primary and surely most important powerset.  Trollers are meant to be control-first, with buff/debuff to fill in the holes of stuff they can't keep fully locked down.  Dominators are meant to be control-first, with damage to kill the stuff they can't keep fully locked down.  Dominators get pets just like Trollers do.

 

Like, yes, things evolved and perma-dom became a thing achievable to anyone who worked hard for it and blaster nukes got buffed and now a control-first playstyle, at least on teams, is kinda bad.  So successful trollers lean more heavily on their secondary, and dominators lean more heavily on their secondary.  And I'm not saying that there aren't significant differences between Controllers and Doms.

 

But also, Masterminds only "spend a lot of their time buffing/debuffing" because their primary, AT-defining powers do not take a lot of combat-time to use, and they do not lock down opponents.  They just aren't that much like Controllers except, perhaps, in a loose, thematic, "Oh, this is kinda how my playstyle works, man" way.  And at that point we go back to Stalkers are the Blaster correspondents -- sure, their powers are very different, but they're high-DPS, one-shot, run if you don't kill everyone kind of way.

 

Like, if you look for "mirrors" in terms of just straight up "whose powers are most like whose other powers," then you get Tanks/Brutes, Scrappers/Stalkers, Defenders/Corruptors, Controllers/Dominators, ???/MMs and Blaster/???.  If you look for "mirrors" in terms of roles, you have all kinds of possible thematic matchups, including Tank/MM, Blaster/Stalker, and Blaster/Corruptor.

 

I think the people suggesting that villain ATs are a blend of heroic ATs are the closest to accurately describing the how things came situation, but I don't think that there's much sign that they are describing a unified design intent.  Rather, I think that the designers probably took inspiration from the heroic ATs, tried to come up with things that "felt villainous," and, if they ever had an intention to provide 1:1 mirrors of the heroic ATs, abandoned that as a design goal as they refined the ATs.

And no one is saying they aren't a blend of a few particular AT's.  What we are saying is when the bread comes out of the oven certain Villain playstyles coordinate more with one than another.  Not that there isn't some blending of their power sets.  Like yes a Brute is more like a Tank but with Fury running high it has some Scrapper like qualities.  Stalkers are harder to correlate to anything other than a Scrapper since they are so similar and always have been.  Corruptors are a blend of both blaster and defender leaning more toward Defender until Scourge kicks in.  

 

So yeah Dom's are a mix of Controller and Blaster and MM's are a mix of Controller and I guess a Tank that doesn't go out of it's way to hold aggro.  It's the villainous blend that sets them apart when the Villains came to be.  Not in every case do they mirror exactly a control set for a control set to how they play in game.  Some Villain AT's lean heavily toward one Hero AT.  Some Villain AT's lean more vaguely toward one way.  

Edited October 6, 2020 by Mezmera

[Naraka]

35 minutes ago, Mezmera said:

Stalkers are harder to correlate to anything other than a Scrapper since they are so similar and always have been.  

Isn't it obvious? 

 

A Blaster tries to obliterate its targets as quickly as possible. 

 

A Stalker tries to obliterate its target as quickly as possible. 

 

You might say a Scrapper is trying to do the same but if anything, it just wants to keep shredding. A blaster wants to end the fight to stay alive and a Stalker wants to do the same but also to "charge" up its kill-touch. 

 

Granted a lot of this has become skewed now that Stalkers don't really use AS in hide and they can AoE with the best of em and blasters have decent sustain but it's pretty much laid out in the playstyle. 

[Mezmera]

11 minutes ago, Naraka said:

Isn't it obvious? 

 

A Blaster tries to obliterate its targets as quickly as possible. 

 

A Stalker tries to obliterate its target as quickly as possible. 

 

You might say a Scrapper is trying to do the same but if anything, it just wants to keep shredding. A blaster wants to end the fight to stay alive and a Stalker wants to do the same but also to "charge" up its kill-touch. 

 

Granted a lot of this has become skewed now that Stalkers don't really use AS in hide and they can AoE with the best of em and blasters have decent sustain but it's pretty much laid out in the playstyle. 

But the whole defense/resist secondary with just about the same makeup and percentages.  Yeah let's just ignore all that they're blasters but the inverse since they are single target focused.  So yeah totally the same thing.  😕

 

I mean it's obvious to me.  But why not the Live devs who gave Stalkers and Scrappers the same exact APP/Patron power choices.  

Edited October 6, 2020 by Mezmera

[Naraka]

1 minute ago, Mezmera said:

But the whole defense/resist secondary with just about the same makeup and percentages.  Yeah let's just ignore all that they're blasters but the inverse since they are single target focused.  So yeah totally the same thing.  😕

You also have to consider that most of the standard Stalker armor sets don't scale by spawn size. Coupled with their lower HP/cap limiting the raw effectiveness of anything non-def and you end up with something you need to tread with carefully... Similar to a Blaster needing to plan out their attack pattern to optimize damage buffs and their lack of mez protection. 

 

Or are you making the argument that a standard Stalker can be just as reckless and boisterous as a Scrapper? Sure, you can now, but it wasn't always like that. 

 

And of course, the trade off from the blaster's AoE was mez protection and stealth. This was more of an advantage for PvP but that was a mode introduced with the villain ATs too. 

[Mezmera]

3 minutes ago, Naraka said:

You also have to consider that most of the standard Stalker armor sets don't scale by spawn size. Coupled with their lower HP/cap limiting the raw effectiveness of anything non-def and you end up with something you need to tread with carefully... Similar to a Blaster needing to plan out their attack pattern to optimize damage buffs and their lack of mez protection. 

 

Or are you making the argument that a standard Stalker can be just as reckless and boisterous as a Scrapper? Sure, you can now, but it wasn't always like that. 

 

And of course, the trade off from the blaster's AoE was mez protection and stealth. This was more of an advantage for PvP but that was a mode introduced with the villain ATs too. 

I've tanked Lord Recluse on my SR stalker.  A blaster could not tank Recluse.  

 

And Stalker defenses have always been as good as Scrappers, quite good in fact.  Just don't be a muppet when building one is all.  

Edited October 6, 2020 by Mezmera

[Troo]

22 minutes ago, Mezmera said:

A blaster could not tank Recluse.  

challenge accepted.

[Mezmera]

7 minutes ago, Troo said:

challenge accepted.

👍

[Naraka]

1 hour ago, Mezmera said:

I've tanked Lord Recluse on my SR stalker.  A blaster could not tank Recluse.  

 

And Stalker defenses have always been as good as Scrappers, quite good in fact.  Just don't be a muppet when building one is all.  

I said "non-def" armor. Sure they get the same amount of numerical resistance, but that is effectively less resistance if your HP cap is lower. Your scaling resistance is also less effective because it kicks in at a %of your max HP which will be lower. It's similar to capping a Blaster on def, it's a lot more likely you will get unluckily 2-shot.

 

Also, not having def (ie a resistance set) means you have a higher chance of getting clipped out of hide either initially or during a "re-hide" period, flubbing your extra crits. 

 

Also also, blurting out something you can solo with a specialized build hardly proves anything. 

 

And I'm not sure why you're resorting to name calling. Not my fault you decided not to understand what I typed. 

[Mezmera]

9 minutes ago, Naraka said:

I said "non-def" armor. Sure they get the same amount of numerical resistance, but that is effectively less resistance if your HP cap is lower. Your scaling resistance is also less effective because it kicks in at a %of your max HP which will be lower. It's similar to capping a Blaster on def, it's a lot more likely you will get unluckily 2-shot.

 

Also, not having def (ie a resistance set) means you have a higher chance of getting clipped out of hide either initially or during a "re-hide" period, flubbing your extra crits. 

 

Also also, blurting out something you can solo with a specialized build hardly proves anything. 

 

And I'm not sure why you're resorting to name calling. Not my fault you decided not to understand what I typed. 

And this is any different than how it operates for SR scrappers?  Yes they brought the hp up a tad on Stalkers to match that of Scrappers because all of what you just said for resistances and defenses is true.  

 

I wasn't blurting out something unproven.  I was using it as a basis for on the MisLib TF I've tanked Recluse on my SR stalker, which the tank on our team wasn't as well built and could not do it.  I'm sure a Scrapper can build their character in the same manner and tank Recluse just the same, just like most Brutes and Tanks can do it.  Let's see a Blaster do it since you feel they compare so much to Stalkers, I mean they lack a whole defense power set but hey they should be fine.  

 

There was no insinuation that you yourself are a muppet it was termed in a general sense that build your character well and there's lots you can do or don't and yeah.  If you feel it was directed towards you it was not and that's your feeling.  

Edited October 6, 2020 by Mezmera

[Coyote]

3 hours ago, FUBARczar said:

I will, you are totally trolling with this comment.  MMs and Controllers damage comes primarily from their pets, and spend a lot of their time buffing/debuffing.  Controllers do a little CC then buff/debuff, while Doms may open with CC but then it's attack, attack, attack. So yes Doms play a lot more like Blasters, and Controllers more like MMs.  

 

My Controllers open up with control like Dominators, then attack debuff attack in most cases. With procs increasing the damage of Holds and other powers significantly, pets are just collateral damage (heh) rather than a major source of damage.

Stalagmites (300 damage), Frost Breath (450), Ice Storm (400) are pretty good AoE damage for a non-blasting AT.

I've always seen Doms as comparable to Controllers, and other than a few very busy buff/debuff sets (EA, Kinetics), played Controllers to do damage with their controls that can be slotted for it.

Overall point is: Doms are closer to Trollers than to Blasters.

Edited October 6, 2020 by Coyote

[Naraka]

2 minutes ago, Mezmera said:

And this is any different than how it operates for SR scrappers?  Yes they brought the hp up a tad on Stalkers to match that of Scrappers because all of what you just said for resistances and defenses is true.  

 

I wasn't blurting out something unproven.  I was using it as a basis for on the MisLib TF I've tanked Recluse on my SR stalker, which the tank on our team wasn't as well built and could not do it.  I'm sure a Scrapper can build their character in the same manner and tank Recluse just the same, just like most Brutes and Tanks can do it.  Let's see a Blaster do it since you feel they compare so much to Stalkers, I mean they lack a whole defense power set but hey they should be fine.  

 

There was no insinuation that you yourself are a muppet it was termed in a general sense that build your character well and there's lots you can do or don't and yeah.  If you feel it was directed towards you it was not and that's your feeling.  

Now do it on an /Elec Stalker. Or /DA stalker. Not saying a special build can't just that there will be a difference because of the difference in their HP cap (AND Base HP). 

 

Like I said, whether you directed your insult at me or not (because, frankly, anyone can claim plausible deniability when challenged) it's pretty rich you shift to playing the elitist role even after being corrected of your own misunderstanding. Why you have done this is beyond me as it's a waste of my time. 

 

All in all, it's common advise for a long while that resist sets aren't as good on Stalkers and to a lesser extent Scrappers. As for bringing up soloing LR, it's merely a move of the goal post as once someone manages to do it on a blaster, the argument is moot or shifted to not using certain powers or buffs. And overall, it's a ridiculous strawman since no one is arguing Stalker is AS fragile as a Blaster. That I'm even having to defend the FACT that Stalker is more fragile than a Scrapper feels like a waste of space and time. 

[Mezmera]

25 minutes ago, Naraka said:

Now do it on an /Elec Stalker. Or /DA stalker. Not saying a special build can't just that there will be a difference because of the difference in their HP cap (AND Base HP). 

 

Like I said, whether you directed your insult at me or not (because, frankly, anyone can claim plausible deniability when challenged) it's pretty rich you shift to playing the elitist role even after being corrected of your own misunderstanding. Why you have done this is beyond me as it's a waste of my time. 

 

All in all, it's common advise for a long while that resist sets aren't as good on Stalkers and to a lesser extent Scrappers. As for bringing up soloing LR, it's merely a move of the goal post as once someone manages to do it on a blaster, the argument is moot or shifted to not using certain powers or buffs. And overall, it's a ridiculous strawman since no one is arguing Stalker is AS fragile as a Blaster. That I'm even having to defend the FACT that Stalker is more fragile than a Scrapper feels like a waste of space and time. 

What am I misunderstanding here?  You're labeling an AT something completely out of it's scope (Blasters with mad defense/resists as if) to something that not even the Live devs associated them to.  So if two AT's share the same powers and stats (aside from a bit smaller hp rectified) and perform pretty much in the same manner they aren't alike?  What am I missing here?

 

The powersets pretty much perform similar across the board between SR stalkers and scrappers.  You can take that to Invulnerability, Ice, Ninjitsu, Elec and whatever else you want to compare.  I see no reason Invuln and Ice can't do it, they're sneaky good sets, Ninjitsu not so much and that'll be the case for both Stalkers and Scrappers.  So I don't really see where you're going with this whole Blasters are Stalkers minus high resists and defenses oh and far less aoe damage (stalkers), AND one has to live in melee and the other doesn't.  Yeah okay I'm convinced I'll call it a night thanks.  

 

Edit: 

To be fair to Ninjitsu it may have been slightly modified since Live I had a stalker version on Live and was less than impressed so I was more in the onward and upward mode for my next stalkers on HC.  

 

Edited October 6, 2020 by Mezmera

[Naraka]

4 minutes ago, Mezmera said:

What am I misunderstanding here?  You're labeling an AT something completely out of it's scope (Blasters with mad defense/resists as if) to something that not even the Live devs associated them to.  So if two AT's share the same powers and stats (aside from a bit smaller hp rectified) and perform pretty much in the same manner they aren't alike?  What am I missing here?

 

The powersets pretty much perform similar across the board between SR stalkers and scrappers.  You can take that to Invulnerability, Ice, Ninjitsu, Elec and whatever else you want to compare.  I see no reason Invuln and Ice can't do it, they're sneaky good sets, Ninjitsu not so much and that'll be the case for both Stalkers and Scrappers.  So I don't really see where you're going with this whole Blasters are Stalkers minus high resists and defenses oh and far less aoe damage, AND one has to live in melee and the other doesn't.  Yeah okay I'm convinced I'll call it a night thanks.  

 

 

Did you even read your  own post? You said "Stalkers are harder to correlate to anything other than a Scrapper since they are so similar and always have been" 

 

If that is still in the context of the rest of the paragraph you yourself wrote that began with " And no one is saying they aren't a blend of a few particular AT's." then it's assumed to be more a blend of Scrapper and Blaster, not either or. One could also make the argument that Assassin's Strike is similar to a ST nuke or a melee snipe, either are traits one could attribute to the burst oriented tactics of Blaster. 

[oedipus_tex]

Many of the control sets aren't that different on Controller versus Dominator. A few are, but not across the board.

 

Electric Control for example can achieve a mag 6 hard mezz with the single target Hold, the AoE Hold, and the first target hit by Synaptic Overload. Also the Immobilizes if anyone cares about that. With Synaptic, you can slot Contagious Confusion to supplement the power not Dominating all targets, but this is just as effective on a Controller.

 

The real difference between Electric Control on a Controller versus a Dominator is damage capability and where it comes from. Electric Control on a Controller has to rely on the Hold and AoE Immob as attacks, as well as possibly Jolting Chain procced for damage. My Elec Doms don't slot any of those as attacks. Elec also happens to have one of the slower Holds, so Elec Controllers have particularly poor damage.

 

What makes Doms control strength even harder to categorize is around 1/3rd of the sets get a Power Boost like power that makes their control powers have potentially much longer durations than other Doms. This power always appears in the 5th slot of the Assault set, which is always devoted to a set defining self buff. Controllers can also take Power Boost in their APPs, and aren't locked in by the secondary set they choose, so any controller primary/secondary could potentially compete with Dom control duration. 

[FUBARczar]

10 hours ago, aethereal said:

I feel like you're reacting to the weakness of control sets in the current meta, which was not true at release of CoV and leads you to discount the fact that Trollers and Doms have, after all, almost entirely the same powers in their primary and surely most important powerset.  Trollers are meant to be control-first, with buff/debuff to fill in the holes of stuff they can't keep fully locked down.  Dominators are meant to be control-first, with damage to kill the stuff they can't keep fully locked down.  Dominators get pets just like Trollers do.

 

Like, yes, things evolved and perma-dom became a thing achievable to anyone who worked hard for it and blaster nukes got buffed and now a control-first playstyle, at least on teams, is kinda bad.  So successful trollers lean more heavily on their secondary, and dominators lean more heavily on their secondary.  And I'm not saying that there aren't significant differences between Controllers and Doms.

It's about their Playstyle and their ROLES.  It is not about their powers, nor is it about their whole secondary basically being a blaster rolled up into one Assault set.  You are defining Dominators by powers that have recharges between 60-240 seconds. Dominators spend most of their time dealing damage, that is the play style, blast and melee like Blappers and Blasttrollers.   And they are glass canons just like Blasters, without all the self/team buff, self/team heals, enemy debuffing like controllers. 

Now Controllers (except Kins, which are nothing like playing a Dominator) almost exclusively play at range, just like a MM, and buffing/debuffing, healing and then spamming anything they can proc out.

 

Role-wise Controllers and MMs are 100% interchangeable on a team, as are Doms and Blasters.  If a team had one buffer/debuffer, say a Controller, it would be a largely different team if it was replaced with a Dom, whereas it would be nigh identical if replaced by an MM.

 

7 hours ago, Coyote said:

My Controllers open up with control like Dominators, then attack debuff attack in most cases. With procs increasing the damage of Holds and other powers significantly, pets are just collateral damage (heh) rather than a major source of damage.

Stalagmites (300 damage), Frost Breath (450), Ice Storm (400) are pretty good AoE damage for a non-blasting AT.

I've always seen Doms as comparable to Controllers, and other than a few very busy buff/debuff sets (EA, Kinetics), played Controllers to do damage with their controls that can be slotted for it.

Overall point is: Doms are closer to Trollers than to Blasters.

Oh you are one of those that hit AoE Immob or Hold leaving enemy spawns all spread out reducing the effectiveness of the teams' AoEs.

for the rest see the above text.

 

7 hours ago, Naraka said:

 

If that is still in the context of the rest of the paragraph you yourself wrote that began with " And no one is saying they aren't a blend of a few particular AT's." then it's assumed to be more a blend of Scrapper and Blaster, not either or. One could also make the argument that Assassin's Strike is similar to a ST nuke or a melee snipe, either are traits one could attribute to the burst oriented tactics of Blaster. 

Bruh, what?  It is about Roles and playstyle.  Blasters and Stalkers play nothing alike, nor are their builds anything alike.  BUT, wow Scrappers and Stalkers play very much alike and their builds are soooooo very similar as well.  The overlap is like 90% on playstyle and builds.  It's not exactly rocket science these characteristics seem pretty self-evident.  

 

c'mon really comparing AS to a nuke... Anyone else want to second this?

 

[Naraka]

1 hour ago, FUBARczar said:

Bruh, what?  It is about Roles and playstyle.  Blasters and Stalkers play nothing alike, nor are their builds anything alike.  BUT, wow Scrappers and Stalkers play very much alike and their builds are soooooo very similar as well.  The overlap is like 90% on playstyle and builds.  It's not exactly rocket science these characteristics seem pretty self-evident.  

 

c'mon really comparing AS to a nuke... Anyone else want to second this?

 

Bruh, this line of discussion is more about the history of the AT and implementation. The roles of villain ATs don't have as concrete a connection to heroes because they are all solo oriented. And technically, a Stalker didn't play much like a Scrapper either unless the ubiquitous scrapperlock was never actually a thing and the only thing needed to be a Scrapper was melee attacks that crit. 

 

I also said a "melee snipe" if you're one of those types that just have to mince words without bothering to see where someone else is coming from and prefer to just balk in disbelief and waste people's time. 

 

There was a time where a good chunk of a Stalker's alpha relied on that big first crit. And before you pivot back to "but they play like this now" that was not the context of the initial post that started this line of dialogue so please go read that first. 

[FUBARczar]

1 hour ago, Naraka said:

Bruh, this line of discussion is more about the history of the AT and implementation. The roles of villain ATs don't have as concrete a connection to heroes because they are all solo oriented. And technically, a Stalker didn't play much like a Scrapper either unless the ubiquitous scrapperlock was never actually a thing and the only thing needed to be a Scrapper was melee attacks that crit. 

 

I also said a "melee snipe" if you're one of those types that just have to mince words without bothering to see where someone else is coming from and prefer to just balk in disbelief and waste people's time. 

 

There was a time where a good chunk of a Stalker's alpha relied on that big first crit. And before you pivot back to "but they play like this now" that was not the context of the initial post that started this line of dialogue so please go read that first. 

 

Stalkers have always played like scrappers, although many players got stuck in AS mode.  Additionally, as development progressed the Devs continued to refine Stalkers.  As they did so Stalkers performance and playstyle by design was compared to and became more Scrapperesque.  

 

I wasn't mincing words.  I didn't have anything to say about about comparing AS to Snipe, or being described as a melee snipe.  I can't comment line by line, word by word.  But your other comparison of AS to Nuke, that was worthy of scrutiny so I commented on that.  In fact, you throwing in a comment like, "One could also make the argument that Assassin's Strike is similar to a ST nuke," that's the real waste of time.

 

Even back in the early days people realized that to stay up with teams it was best to lead with the auto-crit of the Heaviest Hitter than to start with AS.  In fact, a trend of people skipping AS in their builds partially led to the changes of quick snipe, and Stalker 2.0.  And how they play now is important because it highlights the direction of Stalkers' development, the intention of the AT.   

 

 

[oedipus_tex]

I think what most of us can agree on is that the original version of Stalkers and Dominators sucked and thankfully they've been revisited since then. 🙂 Whatever the original vision was, they've changed a lot. Same with Blasters. The original version of Domination didn't even give mezz protection.