Focused Feedback: Blaster Secondary Revamp

[Blackbird71]

1 hour ago, Jimmy said:

You need to look at the set as a whole really, even if some of the power ordering doesn't entirely make sense. Fiery Manipulation > Hot Feet is a good example of this. More powerful powers being earlier in the set is actually a net positive for the set, as it allows it to peak earlier.

 

With that in mind, feedback on the set overall is still welcome, and we will be paying attention to the feedback as these changes go live.

We are looking at the set as a whole, and many of us are shelving characters because of it.

[Wavicle]

1 minute ago, Blackbird71 said:

We are looking at the set as a whole, and many of us are shelving characters because of it.

Tac Arrow was OP compared to other Blasters secondaries. That is why it got nerfed. The rebalanced version of it performs similarly to other Blasters.

[Chris24601]

45 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

Tac Arrow was OP compared to other Blasters secondaries. That is why it got nerfed. The rebalanced version of it performs similarly to other Blasters.

But the main reason people took Tac Arrow was precisely because it wasn't like all the other secondaries. Specifically because it worked well as a purely ranged secondary.

 

NONE of the people saying they aren't happy with the range nerfs in Tac Arrow have said they don't accept the need for nerfs to the set or even to those particular powers; they're simply asking that the nerfs be to other areas of the powers to bring them into line.

[Wavicle]

1 minute ago, Chris24601 said:

But the main reason people took Tac Arrow was precisely because it wasn't like all the other secondaries. Specifically because it worked well as a purely ranged secondary.

 

NONE of the people saying they aren't happy with the range nerfs in Tac Arrow have said they don't accept the need for nerfs to the set or even to those particular powers; they're simply asking that the nerfs be to other areas of the powers to bring them into line.

It still works fine as a purely ranged secondary.

[Nemu]

Well, if people are gonna shelve their /TA blasters then...

 

I would be perfectly happy to rework tactical arrow into Tactical Fist!(with the exclamation mark), and can we do something about devices while we are at it? Make trip mine Trip Fist and time bomb Time fist? None of that wait and interrupt time, just fist, all fist, and nothing but fist...

[Chris24601]

50 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

It still works fine as a purely ranged secondary.

Accept that other people disagree with this assessment and that how a set feels is a very subjective thing and what isn't a big deal for you might be crippling to others.

 

For example, I literally cannot play using WASD to steer... I grew up on old-time FPS games like Doom and Dark Forces so the W and A not being in perfect alignment makes it horrendously uncomfortable so to this day I steer with the directional arrows. This means every time I need the mouse I have to leave the arrow keys to grab the mouse. That makes any location based power a non-starter (target_location helps, but location AoE's are often smaller than target-based one so it's less effective)... sidebar; this is why I LOVE the new /interact command since I'll no longer need the mouse for doors or glowies.

 

If you REALLY want me to accept a 60' range, I need a range-finder like most newer MMO's have so I can judge a proper starting distance without the need to always open with ENA or risk part of my attack chain getting the "derp" sound from not being in range.

[Saikochoro]

1 hour ago, Chris24601 said:

But the main reason people took Tac Arrow was precisely because it wasn't like all the other secondaries. Specifically because it worked well as a purely ranged secondary.

 

NONE of the people saying they aren't happy with the range nerfs in Tac Arrow have said they don't accept the need for nerfs to the set or even to those particular powers; they're simply asking that the nerfs be to other areas of the powers to bring them into line.

It still works perfectly fine as a ranged secondary. Absolutely none of the changes has changed it in that regard. Not even reducing the range on some powers. They still have plenty of range. 

Edited November 14, 2020 by Saikochoro

[Ejlertson]

12 hours ago, Jimmy said:

 

 

With that in mind, feedback on the set overall is still welcome, and we will be paying attention to the feedback as these changes go live.

Respectfully it doesn't feel or seem that way from the way feedback has been handled on Tactical Arrow. 

 

There has been a lot of wellwriten , documented feedback on what and why is wrong with the changes, but the Release version posted appears to flat out ignore most of it.

 

 

[Wavicle]

10 hours ago, Ejlertson said:

Respectfully it doesn't feel or seem that way from the way feedback has been handled on Tactical Arrow. 

 

There has been a lot of wellwriten , documented feedback on what and why is wrong with the changes, but the Release version posted appears to flat out ignore most of it.

 

 

Feedback is welcome does not mean they’re going to do everything you say, or even anything you say.

[Zepp]

20 hours ago, Chris24601 said:

Accept that other people disagree with this assessment and that how a set feels is a very subjective thing and what isn't a big deal for you might be crippling to others.

 

For example, I literally cannot play using WASD to steer... I grew up on old-time FPS games like Doom and Dark Forces so the W and A not being in perfect alignment makes it horrendously uncomfortable so to this day I steer with the directional arrows. This means every time I need the mouse I have to leave the arrow keys to grab the mouse. That makes any location based power a non-starter (target_location helps, but location AoE's are often smaller than target-based one so it's less effective)... sidebar; this is why I LOVE the new /interact command since I'll no longer need the mouse for doors or glowies.

 

If you REALLY want me to accept a 60' range, I need a range-finder like most newer MMO's have so I can judge a proper starting distance without the need to always open with ENA or risk part of my attack chain getting the "derp" sound from not being in range.

5 Bombardment 2-slot + 2 Superior Blaster's Wrath 3-slot = +45% range = 87 range. Add Artillery & Positron Range boosts and you have solid distance on your AoE damage attacks.

Edited November 15, 2020 by Zepp

[Zepp]

While I am disappointed with the way jump has been handled (and the Shinobi revision), I understand the situation.

 

There seem to be some areas where change will need to be examined in the future.

• Looking at jump-stacking and movement buff revisions (Shinobi feels like it ought to have a movement buff).
• Trip Mine cast time.
• Time Bomb (everything about the power).
• Burst of Speed (the cooldown seems quite harsh and makes pairing it with combat TP feel clunky).

[Kenweir]

1 hour ago, Wavicle said:

Feedback is welcome does not mean they’re going to do everything you say, or even anything you say.

Correct ... but it at least INTIMATES that they are LISTENING AND PAYING ATTENTION TO FEEDBACK.

And as was said, it certainly doesn't FEEL or SEEM that way to those of us submitting feedback.

[Wavicle]

7 minutes ago, Kenweir said:

Correct ... but it at least INTIMATES that they are LISTENING AND PAYING ATTENTION TO FEEDBACK.

And as was said, it certainly doesn't FEEL or SEEM that way to those of us submitting feedback.

What would make you feel like they were listening and paying attention short of doing what you ask?

[Jimmy]

I can assure you that all the feedback has been read and discussed extensively. @Captain Powerhouse can attest to that too.

 

However:

1 hour ago, Wavicle said:

Feedback is welcome does not mean they’re going to do everything you say, or even anything you say.

This, as always, remains true.

 

[Kenweir]

4 minutes ago, Jimmy said:

I can assure you that all the feedback has been read and discussed extensively. @Captain Powerhouse can attest to that too.

 

However:

This, as always, remains true.

 

While I do appreciate you saying that, it still remains that I, among others, don't feel this way regarding this change. You can scroll back and see the many, MANY discussions regarding psi blast, defender versions of blasts, etc.. as an example.

Ultimately, it's YOUR game and we're guests here and we'll choose to play in your sandbox or not.

I say this as someone who continued to play Regen on live AFTER the nerfs and STILL plays Regen today in your sandbox, hoping against hope that it will one day be restored to at least a semblance of it's former glory.

But I've yet to see, one simple GOOD reason for this change other than "to bring parity among blaster sets" ... leaving out Psi, of course. I'm in no way advocating for a change to Psi either. It has its "shtick" as was mentioned previously, it should keep it.

All sets aren't meant to be the same or even play the same. Certainly there are similarities, in primary and secondary both but there are always differences.

I LIKE the energy melee changes, on every AT. Most of the Blaster Secondary changes? Same ...

But not this one. It just smacks of ... "Well, let's just change this to make them all the same. What about Psi blast? Nah, leave it, it's fine."

 

And I'm not okay with that. Sorry but that's that. And obviously, I'm not the only one.

 

[Saikochoro]

1 hour ago, Kenweir said:

Correct ... but it at least INTIMATES that they are LISTENING AND PAYING ATTENTION TO FEEDBACK.

And as was said, it certainly doesn't FEEL or SEEM that way to those of us submitting feedback.

They are listening and paying attention to feedback. They have providing responses all throughout everything that has been tested, including tactical arrow.  Just because their responses don’t line up with your view doesn’t mean they aren’t engaging the community. 
 

I don’t like the dark melee changes, but I’m not accusing them of not listening to feedback or paying attention to it. I just realize that they must not agree with my opinion on the change and that is okay. 

[Saikochoro]

5 hours ago, Kenweir said:

While I do appreciate you saying that, it still remains that I, among others, don't feel this way regarding this change. You can scroll back and see the many, MANY discussions regarding psi blast, defender versions of blasts, etc.. as an example.

Ultimately, it's YOUR game and we're guests here and we'll choose to play in your sandbox or not.

I say this as someone who continued to play Regen on live AFTER the nerfs and STILL plays Regen today in your sandbox, hoping against hope that it will one day be restored to at least a semblance of it's former glory.

But I've yet to see, one simple GOOD reason for this change other than "to bring parity among blaster sets" ... leaving out Psi, of course. I'm in no way advocating for a change to Psi either. It has its "shtick" as was mentioned previously, it should keep it.

All sets aren't meant to be the same or even play the same. Certainly there are similarities, in primary and secondary both but there are always differences.

I LIKE the energy melee changes, on every AT. Most of the Blaster Secondary changes? Same ...

But not this one. It just smacks of ... "Well, let's just change this to make them all the same. What about Psi blast? Nah, leave it, it's fine."

 

And I'm not okay with that. Sorry but that's that. And obviously, I'm not the only one.

 

Emphasis added by me to call out points.

 
There has been good reason for this change and parity among sets is one the BEST reasons for a change.  Like it or not, balance matters and things are balanced relative to other things performing similar tasks. As such, blaster secondaries must all have parity to a degree or else we have a Titan weapons issue. 
 

Parity does not mean exactly the same. It means that they are balanced. Tactical arrow was imbalanced because it was so safe. So they made some changes to it to bring aspects of it in line with other sets. Tactical arrow still plays significantly different than something like atomic manipulation or martial combat. So it is still unique. Just not as powerful as it was before. 
 

You say you like other changes and imply that they were good, but you don’t like this change. You imply that because you don’t like it it is bad, and any reasoning for said change is also bad.  We aren’t going to like all changes, it doesn’t mean they are bad or not well reasoned. It also doesn’t mean that they aren’t listening to feedback. Listening to feedback =/= doing everything you want them to do. 

 

Again, tactical arrow will still play as a ranged set and is not in the slightest the same as blapper heavy sets.  None of the nerfs/changes change that. 

Edited November 16, 2020 by Saikochoro

[Arcadio]

1 hour ago, Kenweir said:

While I do appreciate you saying that, it still remains that I, among others, don't feel this way regarding this change. You can scroll back and see the many, MANY discussions regarding psi blast, defender versions of blasts, etc.. as an example.

Ultimately, it's YOUR game and we're guests here and we'll choose to play in your sandbox or not.

I say this as someone who continued to play Regen on live AFTER the nerfs and STILL plays Regen today in your sandbox, hoping against hope that it will one day be restored to at least a semblance of it's former glory.

But I've yet to see, one simple GOOD reason for this change other than "to bring parity among blaster sets" ... leaving out Psi, of course. I'm in no way advocating for a change to Psi either. It has its "shtick" as was mentioned previously, it should keep it.

All sets aren't meant to be the same or even play the same. Certainly there are similarities, in primary and secondary both but there are always differences.

I LIKE the energy melee changes, on every AT. Most of the Blaster Secondary changes? Same ...

But not this one. It just smacks of ... "Well, let's just change this to make them all the same. What about Psi blast? Nah, leave it, it's fine."

 

And I'm not okay with that. Sorry but that's that. And obviously, I'm not the only one.

 

No one has ever bothered to address the reason given for the change in the patch notes, that the set is too safe. Instead people just make up what they think the reason is. Unless you want to address the central point you're not making an argument, you're just saying "I don't like it." That's not something to have a conversation about.

 

But somehow a couple of people have managed to go 20-something pages repeating that sentiment over and over. Which is actually kind of aggravating when I want to read how people feel about the other changes, but it's drown out by "TA has no melee attacks."

[Kenweir]

57 minutes ago, Arcadio said:

No one has ever bothered to address the reason given for the change in the patch notes, that the set is too safe. Instead people just make up what they think the reason is. Unless you want to address the central point you're not making an argument, you're just saying "I don't like it." That's not something to have a conversation about.

 

But somehow a couple of people have managed to go 20-something pages repeating that sentiment over and over. Which is actually kind of aggravating when I want to read how people feel about the other changes, but it's drown out by "TA has no melee attacks."

Alright, let me just respond to your "too safe" comment.

My Arch/TA blaster doesn't have capped defenses, pretty low resistances and takes Fly to stay out of Melee. So, sure, I guess we can call that marginally safe for a blaster. Since every blaster can take Hover/Fly though, he's pretty much on even footing with anyone else.

I can EASILY build (expensive, but with a farmer, who cares about expense) a water/devices blaster with ALL (except PSI) defenses capped and I don't even NEED to take Fly to stay out of Melee. So now ... which is TOO SAFE? Because I promise you, if I can do that with Water/Devices, I can do it with almost any secondary ... except Tac Arrow. So I find the whole "Tac Arrow is too safe" argument ... well, I'm laughing, let's leave it at that.

I've played my Arch/TA on live. I've played him on test. It's not the same, it's not as fun anymore and ultimately that's why I play the game and the characters that I play. But I'm not going to change your opinion, you're not going to change mine, so I'll just leave it alone. Smarter and better people than I have tried to explain why this is a bad thing and they weren't listened to either.

 

Enjoy.

 

Edited November 15, 2020 by Kenweir

[Wavicle]

27 minutes ago, Kenweir said:

I can EASILY build (expensive, but with a farmer, who cares about expense) a water/devices blaster with ALL (except PSI) defenses capped and I don't even NEED to take Fly to stay out of Melee. So now ... which is TOO SAFE? Because I promise you, if I can do that with Water/Devices, I can do it with almost any secondary ... except Tac Arrow.

WHY can't you do that with Tac Arrow?

[Kenweir]

31 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

WHY can't you do that with Tac Arrow?

No melee attacks (which has been stated time and time and time again in reference to the range cut and the initial statement of "encouraging blasters to enter melee range" and yes, I know 50-60 feet isn't melee range but it's what was said) so where are you gonna get s/l defenses from?

No PBAOE attacks so ... no s/l there either.

 

Oil slick only takes certain sets, there's only a tiny amount of s/l in there, I'd have to double-check on Test.

You can't slot superior avalanche ANYWHERE in Arch/Tac Arrow ... Time Bomb in Devices, there we go.

Honestly, if I worked at it and yanked some slots out of powers I'd rather not take some from, I probably could in Tac Arrow ... multi-slot Gymnastics, move some other things around, change some things, might be doable. It absolutely guts my build though to do so. Complete respec and re-buy of enhancements from the bottom up.

 

The larger point I was making ... it's EASY to do on most other sets, with melee powers, pet powers, PBAOE's, etc.. It's much, much harder to do with Tac Arrow and requires significant sacrifices to def cap. Because if it didn't, mine would be capped.

It still throws the "too safe" argument out the window. It's EASY on devices. It's easy on multiple secondaries. Why is Tac Arrow having solid range so much SAFER (and evidently so much of a problem?) than these other secondaries that have many other options for defense, or mitigation, or anything, really. Not to mention, if I pair devices with radiation, for instance, I can slam my foes with -DEF on every attack. What does Arch/Tac Arrow get again? Oh right, it's "too safe" with one of the most resisted damage types.

Again, I disagree with the range cuts. Some of the other things too. You don't and that's fine. I'll likely shelve my blaster. I won't lose any sleep over it, I'll just play my sentinel instead. You won't lose any sleep over it either. It's fine. I've had my say, you've had yours. End of the day, they'll change what they want to change.

 

Enjoy the rest of your weekend!

Edited November 15, 2020 by Kenweir

[Chris24601]

5 hours ago, Zepp said:

5 Bombardment 2-slot + 2 Superior Blaster's Wrath 3-slot = +45% range = 87 range. Add Artillery & Positron Range boosts and you have solid distance on your AoE damage attacks.

As has been addressed previously this...

 

A) makes the disparity in ranges WORSE not better because all those improvements are affecting all the powers based on their base ranges... so now your 80’ foot attacks have a 116’ range or almost 30’ difference instead of 20’.

 

The Issue isn’t so much the range as it is the range differrential that throws off the smooth operation with the set as it’s been used. Frankly, it’d be easier to deal with Archery also being nerfed to 60’ to match ranges than leave them as they are.

 

B) Falls apart as soon as you start exemplaring below about level 27 where those sets can be slotted. Similarly, slotting for range to compensate falls apart when exemplaring because of how the scaling works.

 

At this point a level 7 Tac Arrow player with a level 5 Range SO will outperform the an exemplared 50 with two 50+5 Range IOs slotted. When I brought this up in the Enhancement changes thread I was told to basically stop whining despite the way the scaling works makes even the means to work around the changes (by replacing set IOs with generic range IOs) useless.

 

If you like your range, you can’t exemplar below about level 29 without it starting to degrade immensely, even if at level 15 you had two range SOs in ENA... now you’ll have about a DO worth of range improvement.

 

Basically, nothing has been done to address it, and every attempt to find some way to get the problems addressed is shot down as unimportant. Forgive those of us who were very invested in a particular playstyle having it seriously disrupted being a little salty given that there’s been basically zero feedback from the devs on the issue and dismissive remarks from a relatively few but loud other posters (seriously... take a look at the likes and thanks on the “this is a problem” comments versus the “this is fine” comments... “this is fine” is loud, but aren’t getting nearly the agreement that “this is a problem” are getting.

 

 

[Wavicle]

8 minutes ago, Chris24601 said:

The Issue isn’t so much the range as it is the range differrential that throws off the smooth operation with the set as it’s been used. Frankly, it’d be easier to deal with Archery also being nerfed to 60’ to match ranges than leave them as they are.

That is 100% a player issue. You have the tools (moving closer) to deal with the problem.

If you really want to slot melee sets you can get such powers in Pools and Epics. And either way you have the advantage of being able to use your entire tool kit at range, regardless of what other powersets can slot for.

Edited November 15, 2020 by Wavicle

[Troo]

21 hours ago, ForeverLaxx said:

If I have to bound closer to the enemy to continue firing "at range" then I may as well pick a Secondary that has heavy-hitting melee powers. I'm not going to jump back and forth between two sets of ranges simply because the devs say I have to.

On 11/14/2020 at 12:35 PM, Chris24601 said:

reason people took Tac Arrow was precisely because it wasn't like all the other secondaries. Specifically because it worked well as a purely ranged secondary.

 

In my opinion, we are seeing too many powersets getting more than just adjustments. Are re-imagined power sets necessary? Do all AT power sets have to be the same?

Below TA has adjustments and functionality changes that have an unnecessary impact on play style. Why not just make a new blappier power set similar to TA?

 

FYI - Darkness has two 80 eighty footers and a 70 footer. (one is being changed)

 

Tactical Arrow

Spoiler

On 11/13/2020 at 11:38 AM, Jimmy said:

Tactical Arrow

•  Electrified Net Arrow
  • Range reduced from 80ft to 60ft to be in line with other Blaster Manipulation T1 Immobilize powers
  • Endurance cost increased from 5.2 to 7.8 to be in line with other Blaster Manipulation T1 Immobilize powers
•  Ice Arrow
  • Range reduced from 80ft to 60ft to be in line with other Blaster Manipulation ST mez powers
  • Recharge increased from 12s to 16s
  • Hold changed from Mag 3, Scale 12 to:
    • Mag 2, Scale 10 (non stacking)
    • Mag 1, Scale 6 (stacking)
•  Upshot
  • +Recharge buff reduced to from 30% to 15%
  • +Damage buff reduced from 100% to 81.25%
  • +ToHit reduced from 20% to 15%
•  Flash Arrow
  • This power's effects are no longer irresistible
    • This brings it in line with Smoke Grenade, which has always been resistable
•  Gymnastics (Replaces Agility)
  • Gymnastics and Agility have been merged into a new toggle power
  • Provides knockback protection, a 1.75% defence buff, a recharge bonus, a movement speed buff and some slow / mez protection
  • If you previously had Agility, you now have Gymnastics
  • The Jump bonus has been removed (the run speed bonus remains), but the travel power stacking restrictions have been removed
•  ESD Arrow
  • Hold now only applies to robots
  • Hold changed from Mag 3, Scale 8 to:
    • Mag 2, Scale 8 (non stacking)
    • Mag 1, Scale 5 (stacking)
  • Added Stun against all foes (does not override the robot hold):
    • Mag 2, Scale 8 (non stacking)
    • Mag 1, Scale 5 (stacking)
  • Now accepts Stun enhancements and sets
•  Oil Slick Arrow (Replaced Gymnastics)
  • Similar to the Trick Arrow version, but does not have a defence debuff and only has a 15ft radius
  • If you previously had Gymnastics, you now have Oil Slick Arrow

 

 

Meanwhile Darkness notes have errors.

 

Darkness Manipulation

•  Penumbral Grasp
  • Range increased from 50ft to 60ft to be in line with other Blaster Manipulation T1 Immobilize powers

 

 Penumbral Grasp

Penumbral Grasp live is 80 feet. The change is a nerf from 80 feet to 60 feet not an increase.

 Touch of the Beyond

Touch of the Beyond had it's Accuracy significantly reduced

 

Darkness Manipulation Live vs Beta

Spoiler

Darkness Manipulation

•  Penumbral Grasp
  • Range increased from 50ft to 60ft to be in line with other Blaster Manipulation T1 Immobilize powers
•  Touch of the Beyond
  • Increased the duration of the self buff from 60s to 120s
  • The self buff now also provides Fear protection
  • The self buff now auto-hits, regardless of if the enemy-targeting portion of this power hits
  • Added a short, non-enhanceable Mag 3 Hold (in PvE only)
  • The regeneration buff should no longer be weaker when used against higher or lower level enemies
  • Fixed the duraton of the PvE Terrorize Protection
•  Dark Pit
  • Recharge time increased from 60s to 90s
  • Endurance cost increased from 13 to 20.18
  • Stun changed from Mag 2, Scale 12 to:
    • Mag 2, Scale 8 (non stacking)
    • Mag 1, Scale 5 (stacking)

Live Version

 

 

 

 

Edited November 15, 2020 by Troo

[Vanden]

32 minutes ago, Troo said:

Touch of the Beyond had it's Accuracy significantly reduced

Touch of the Beyond had an accuracy boost because it was the only sustain that could fail entirely on a single missed ToHit check. Now that the sustain effect is autohit there's no need for the accuracy bonus.