Galaxy Brain's 2021 Sentinel Fix

[Wavicle]

First off, don’t include corrupters. The time it takes for them to cast their buffs, and the variety of buff they have, makes it very difficult to include them. Just leave them out.

 

Compare to scrappers, stalkers, and blasters. Include aim and build up. Do not include the Debuffs from opportunity since those would also increase the damage of scrappers, stalkers and blasters on the team.

 

Include however, a separate number that goes next to the sentinels damage number, that is the cumulative amount more that the scrapper the stalker the blaster and the Sentinel combined get as a result of the sentinels debuffs. That will give you a more accurate idea of what the archetype brings to the team.

[oldskool]

10 hours ago, Monos King said:

I can't see why I would play a Sentinel over a blaster or scrapp in terms of role if Sentinels are stripped of their "group performance" enhancing element, and instead just receive a damage boost. They would have no identity, and just become a primary/secondary combo that could be simulated by various other ATs with ease.

 

This at the least results in something unique for an AT that struggles to have individuality once the novelty of having both range and armor is outleveled. It especially keeps things meaningful once raw damage overcomes the need for protection. What some of you might call overly complex I consider engaging.

I disagree heavily with the "just amp their damage" perspective.

I think there will always be an argument about identity even if this change were made.  There will never be a point at which players say "Why play a Sentinel when I can play a Blaster" until one exceeds the performance of the other.  That is what that logical loop causes and it won't go away regardless of whatever the dev team does.  

I'd argue the novelty of having range and armor *is* the identity of the AT.  The debuff is a form of damage.  Looking at it as group performance seems like rationalizing the mechanics as something greater than it is.  

Does Defiance really add a lot of identity to the Blaster?  Why must Opportunity be that metric for the Sentinel?

Just friendly question to have some friendly debate.  I see a lot of room for this train of thought to completely hold the Sentinel back from ever having a "place" in the game.    

[Wavicle]

Just now, oldskool said:

I think there will always be an argument about identity even if this change were made.  There will never be a point at which players say "Why play a Sentinel when I can play a Blaster" until one exceeds the performance of the other.  That is what that logical loop causes and it won't go away regardless of whatever the dev team does.  

I'd argue the novelty of having range and armor *is* the identity of the AT.  The debuff is a form of damage.  Looking at it as group performance seems like rationalizing the mechanics as something greater than it is.  

Does Defiance really add a lot of identity to the Blaster?  Why must Opportunity be that metric for the Sentinel?

Just friendly question to have some friendly debate.  I see a lot of room for this train of thought to completely hold the Sentinel back from ever having a "place" in the game.    

There seem to be a lot of players who feel that inherent powers need to provide some sort of a mini game that you play when you’re playing that archetype. I personally don’t think that that is necessary.

[oldskool]

8 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

There seem to be a lot of players who feel that inherent powers need to provide some sort of a mini game that you play when you’re playing that archetype. I personally don’t think that that is necessary.

I think my point is less about putting words in other's mouth (and I don't think that was the intent by any means) and more that this comes across as a double standard.  

The Blaster is sold to the prospective player as an AT that specializes in doing damage in any range.  The AT *does* that.  Defiance just facilitates more damage but also grants quality of life in mez protection (allowing the use of some attacks).  Defiance has changed more than once.  Never did it completely rewrite the core of the AT in my opinion.  

Sentinels are sold to the prospective player as an AT that specializes primarily in ranged combat while having a set of powers to facilitate their survival.  The AT *does* that.  Opportunity is additional flavor to facilitate damage in a failed concept of feast or famine.  Sentinels aren't billed as ranged tanks, group support, crowd controllers, or any other subset of roles.  

So why is it that the Blaster can just exist as it is and it has an identity.  However, the Sentinel has to have an inherent power that gives it an identity.  This just makes no sense.  

Also, Sentinels don't need to appeal to every player.  Folks should be OK taking a firm "NO" on the Sentinel if that is what suits them.  So, @Wavicle, this is where I agree with one of your other points about why can't the Sentinel just do more damage?  It isn't being billed as anything but a selfish DPS like a Scrapper or Stalker.  Why make it do something different?  This is especially true since the current state of Opportunity isn't that big of a team benefit as it currently sits.  Opportunity is romanticized as something it really isn't.  

[Monos King]

10 minutes ago, oldskool said:

Does Defiance really add a lot of identity to the Blaster?  Why must Opportunity be that metric for the Sentinel?

The current archetypes pretty much have every metric covered, so if you want a new AT to even be in contention, it has to be much more notable. Like I had said, the effects of the current sentinel in terms of role are already easily simulated by other ATs. That's why it needs extra effort to gain an identity. Inherents working with the primary/secondary combo is a great way to do this. A great example: brutes and tanks. These two are essentially identical in role and potential (as was really intended since at the time City of Heroes and City of Villains archetypes were mutually exclusive but had to fill out the same basic roles) but their inherents make them bring completely different offensive strengths. 

 

The Rebirth Servers Guardian AT is a good example of an exception, since the primary and secondary are so unique and clear in purpose that they don't even need a unique inherent to expand on their role...yet they have one anyway.

[Monos King]

2 minutes ago, oldskool said:

It isn't being billed as anything but a selfish DPS like a Scrapper or Stalker.  Why make it do something different?  This is especially true since the current state of Opportunity isn't that big of a team benefit as it currently sits.  Opportunity is romanticized as something it really isn't.

This is called being lacking in purported purpose, and is one of the reasons threads like this exist to begin with. It wants to be a team benefit, but is lackluster and overlookable. So here we are.

[oldskool]

12 minutes ago, Monos King said:

This is called being lacking in purported purpose, and is one of the reasons threads like this exist to begin with. It wants to be a team benefit, but is lackluster and overlookable. So here we are.

Yet, no other damage dealing AT (Scrapper, Blaster, Stalker) have anything other than a self-serving inherent.  

I feel I understand where you're going here.  The Sentinel is new and there are already 3 other selfish DPS ATs.  Why play a 4th unless it brings group utility or something else that is "interesting"?  

What I am getting at is that kind of idea can potentially hold the AT back.  There is going to be a cost to its damage in order to have this faux group presence.  So that won't do much to move the needle on "why play X vs Y" debates.  It will then circle back to Sentinels are played for the novelty of their inherent and yet they fall off later.  

I feel the Sentinel is already pigeonholed here by design.  It was conceptually supposed to function as a Scrapper at range with a feast or famine mechanic.  That doesn't really scream team support, but like you note the inherent is lacking.  

I guess what I'm getting at is, I'm OK with it not being more engaging but being more functional.  I actually like the idea of the ranged Scrapper.  I couldn't care less that Opportunity gives it a group role or not.  Damage is a role. 

I've been in a lot of these debates and it seems like that is where the split goes.  Those wanting something more interesting, and those not really caring about that for the sake of basic functionality.  I don't know where a happy medium exists that ever stops the "why play X vs Y" debate.

Anyway, thanks for the clarity on your points.

Edited January 15, 2021 by oldskool

[honoroit]

15 minutes ago, oldskool said:

Yet, no other damage dealing AT (Scrapper, Blaster, Stalker) have anything other than a self-serving inherent.  

I feel I understand where you're going here.  The Sentinel is new and there are already 3 other selfish DPS ATs.  Why play a 4th unless it brings group utility or something else that is "interesting"?  

What I am getting at is that kind of idea can potentially hold the AT back.  There is going to be a cost to its damage in order to have this faux group presence.  So that won't do much to move the needle on "why play X vs Y" debates.  It will then circle back to Sentinels are played for the novelty of their inherent and yet they fall off later.  

I feel the Sentinel is already pigeonholed here by design.  It was conceptually supposed to function as a Scrapper at range with a feast or famine mechanic.  That doesn't really scream team support, but like you note the inherent is lacking.  

I guess what I'm getting at is, I'm OK with it not being more engaging but being more functional.  I actually like the idea of the ranged Scrapper.  I couldn't care less that Opportunity gives it a group role or not.  Damage is a role. 

I've been in a lot of these debates and it seems like that is where the split goes.  Those wanting something more interesting, and those not really caring about that for the sake of basic functionality.  I don't know where a happy medium exists that ever stops the "why play X vs Y" debate.

Anyway, thanks for the clarity on your points.

while my experience with sentinel is low vs prior live AT, I would agree with sentiment of 'not really unique' -- i love the aoe snipe replacements, and sped cooldowns, and I suppose midrange tanky ranged dps may be usedful in some scenarios, and generally durable -- but it is overkill with current content when properly slotted. 

 - you can do some fun things with recharge time and easily get all your LoTG with the right secondary.

 

i do not feel practical affect of the sentinel passive as a player.

[aetherson]

48 minutes ago, oldskool said:

I think my point is less about putting words in other's mouth (and I don't think that was the intent by any means) and more that this comes across as a double standard.  

The Blaster is sold to the prospective player as an AT that specializes in doing damage in any range.  The AT *does* that.  Defiance just facilitates more damage but also grants quality of life in mez protection (allowing the use of some attacks).  Defiance has changed more than once.  Never did it completely rewrite the core of the AT in my opinion.

 

I definitely don't think that an AT needs to be defined by its inherent.  What even is the Defender inherent?  A self-damage-buff for solo only?

 

The reason that I think a Sentinel may want a somewhat more stand-out-ish inherent than most is that they're a damage-only class that is unlikely to do better damage than Blasters, Scrappers, or Stalkers.  Stalkers and Brutes stand away from Scrappers with unique AT elements that really do make them play differently.  Sents kind of want the same thing, I think.

 

Now, does the Sentinel need a super strong team role?  No, I don't think it does.  But if it's going to be the lowest-damage of the damage-dealing ATs, it's going to feel the competition with the other ATs more keenly than they are.  If what it brings to the table is the same as Scraps, Stalks, and Brutes, but less of it, and also no aggro management, then...  that's a legitimate problem with the AT and it could use something.

[Galaxy Brain]

56 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

First off, don’t include corrupters. The time it takes for them to cast their buffs, and the variety of buff they have, makes it very difficult to include them. Just leave them out.

I included them as there have been direct comparisons between them and Sentinels as ranged damage dealers

 

 

56 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

Compare to scrappers, stalkers, and blasters. Include aim and build up. Do not include the Debuffs from opportunity since those would also increase the damage of scrappers, stalkers and blasters on the team.

 

So this gets really really nitpicky. 1) Build Up/Aim do not have anywhere close to even like 30% uptime. I can average it out with 3slotted Rech and apply that damage bonus, or just slap +100% on em and call it a day, but Sentinels usually get Aim too. 

 

BU w/ 95% rech = 10s up / 46 rech = 22% Uptime = 22% Damage buff avg for Scrapper/Blaster, 17.6% for Stalker

 

Aim = 22% uptime,13.75% damage for Blaster, and 11% for Sentinel

 

With full boosts (Including the proc for opportunity, and the 10% damage boost on the new sentinel for both of these):

1. Blaster - 233.04  -   100%
2. Scrapper - 203.01  -   87% of Blaster
3. Stalker - 168.22 ~ 200.31 (184.28 avg)  -   79% AVG 
4. 1.0 New Sentinel - 146.68 -   63%
5. 1.0 Sentinel - 140.41 -   60%
6. New Sentinel - 139.34  -   60%
7. Sentinel - 133.39  -   57%

So what is interesting here is that at current in this particular case, even with the damage proc a Sentinel's burst appears to be 57% that of a Blaster's while the other 2 damage dealers are within 20% (BIG ASTERIX ON STALKER BURST). Boosting the Sentinel to 1.0 Damage Mod + the new proposal gets much closer, but still....

 

 

With averaged boosts:

1. Blaster - 153.74  -   100%
2. Scrapper - 149.33 -   97%
3. Stalker - 130.05 ~ 154.88 (142.47 avg) -   93%
4. 1.0 New Sentinel - 124.98 -   81%
5. 1.0 Sentinel - 118.73 -   77%
6. New Sentinel - 118.74 -   77%
7. Sentinel - 112.79 -   73%

While sustained, things are a lot closer for this first hit scenario. However, by stripping the debuffs you are ignoring an inherent part of the Sentinel when it comes to ST damage as even now all their hits inflict a static -5% Res. In this thread, bumping that to 15% would have a significant impact.

 

 

 

56 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

 

Include however, a separate number that goes next to the sentinels damage number, that is the cumulative amount more that the scrapper the stalker the blaster and the Sentinel combined get as a result of the sentinels debuffs. That will give you a more accurate idea of what the archetype brings to the team.

 

Currently, all these results above would be boosted more or less equally by the Sentinel. Lets eyeball a Blaster for comparison:

 

Dark Blast -> 9.38 Damage Proc + BU/Aim/Defiance/Opportunity Dam Buff + -15% Res on target = 285.98 final damage (Burst), or 194.79 (Averaged), for a total bonus of 23%/27% more output from the Blaster thanks to the Sentinel (Proposed). This should be mirrored across all the rest as well, and we could round it out to be about a 25% bonus on average. 

 

The trick though is that only a portion of the bonus is additive as the Proc and -Res multiply other bonuses.

 

 

[Wavicle]

Thanks. Those look more meaningful to me and nicely demonstrate why Sents currently lag behind and why some reasonable buffs such as some of those that have been suggested would not make them OP nor make Blasters obsolete.

[SwitchFade]

There seems to be several confluent, yet dissimilar, problem statements in juxtaposition. So, without any derision, it may be best to simply state the problem in a single sentence. I bet there will be differing opinions here. Further, are our perspectives aligned on foundation, such as in an SO environment? I bet not...

 

What exact problem are we trying to solve?

 

Is it one of basic fundimental blueprint? If we look at a scale of damage dispensation vs mitigation, where extreme dispensation in all forms results in less mitigation, it stands to reason that extreme mitigation would result in less dispensation. By comparing all ATs on a scale, the sentinell is at neither extreme of tank --- blaster. A sentinel gains mitigation at the expense of dispensation. Should dispensation increase, mitigation would summarily decrease, meaningfully. If I inspect all ATs on this slider they fit numerically, including a sentinel, with each possessing different methods of dispensation and mitigation.

 

Ok so, perhaps the issue is one of identity? Sure. Have we solved that basic issue in majority? I bet not. This one is much more difficult to solve, as it is subjective. Support? Primary damage dispensation? Support damage dispensation? New player friendly? Solo artist? Team only? Reconnaissance? Hybrid? What problem are we solving here?

 

Perhaps it's one of purpose. This one seems quite clear, yet, I would wager there's not consensus. A sentinel offers easy to reach satisfactory damage mitigation, whilst also offering medium ranged satisfactory damage dispensation potential in an easy to understand package, for the average player. This is complimented by offering a team a benefit by way of making content easier through offering an increase in team damage dispensation.

 

If our intent (over many threads) is crafting a coherent and viable solution, we would begin with an equally cogent problem statement. I'm not convinced we, as a team, have clearly and completely defined the problem we are trying to solve.

 

If I inspect the raw data and comparison of AT metrics, it's quite evident that the AT is balanced well and has a very clear design purpose that is not incorrect. However, playing one does, in fact, give me the perception that there is an x factor missing and/or misadjusted.

 

I do think that there is a case for change, due to the fact it has garnered little market share among ATs. What form that change is, though, requires a clear problem statement based on factual data. I'm not quite sure we are there, yet.

 

Edited January 16, 2021 by SwitchFade

[oldskool]

1 hour ago, SwitchFade said:

What exact problem are we trying to solve?

Within this thread it would seem that the proposal is aimed at two functions.  Damage dealing and group presence.  

Now, my own perspective on a problem statement is this; the feast or famine design of Opportunity doesn't work as intended.  

The conceptual design of the AT, as stated in September 2019 if I am remembering correctly, is that of a ranged Scrapper.  The intent of Opportunity was that the Sentinel would have peaks and valleys in performance.  During Opportunity the damage function of the AT would spike up which would, conceptually, exceed Scrappers.  Then, during the downtime the Sentinel would do a bit less damage.  

That just isn't how the AT plays out in reality.  This is exacerbated by the IO system and current power creeps.  So the Sentinel, even during Opportunity, never excels against the Scrapper and just has generally lower overall damage at all times. 

The feast or famine aspect should have been an approximately 50/50 ratio, but this doesn't happen during the leveling process in my experience.  I have a number of Sentinels, and it isn't until they have excessive amounts of global recharge that this uptime is even possible.  This has a very real impact on the impression of the AT as people work through the leveling process.  It comes across that their inherent isn't really doing anything and that is because it really isn't contributing much.  

The nature of this perception problem of the inherent also seems to create this hyper focus on "identity".  Sure, folks would bring this up anyway.  There is no shortage of navel gazing on "what is my purpose" across a few ATs right now.  However, Opportunity doesn't function as it should which then spirals out into all of these other thought processes.  

The split nature of Offensive and Defensive modes has further problems.  The first major issue for most players is the perceived lack of agency in their build design and loadout decisions.  Offensive Opportunity is only possibly with the T1 and Defensive Opportunity is only possible with the T2.  This leads some players to feel as if they have to have both which limits their build options.  That is counter to the entire theme of how characters work in City of X.  

What's even worse is that Offensive and Defensive effects are proc-like effects and they aren't even that great.  Offensive Opportunity creates a proc-like damage effect which is derived off the base damage rating of the power and it never scales with enhancement.  Ranged power base damage has several struggles in relation to melee and the Sentinel's overall AT modifier doesn't make this better.  In other words, this aspect of Opportunity is stagnant and appears to reduce in effectiveness over the course of the character's career.  How utterly underwhelming.  

The healing and endurance return of Defensive Opportunity also reduce in effectiveness as the character matures.  The IO system and the armor set variance of the AT allow for enough self-sustain that this feature isn't necessary even post-level 22 single origin availability.  

So neither Offensive or Defensive Opportunity bring much value to the Sentinel after a certain period within the leveling process.  The major area of value is the resistance debuff but the availability on this isn't even 50% without significant investment.  The kind of investment you can place into the Sentinel can done on any of the other ATs with a much more noticeable return on the investment.  To add even more insult to injury, the high investment needs of the Sentinel just get the inherent to function on uptime as it is intended.  That's the floor for the AT to function properly.  It is also the ceiling on how it can go.  I don't fault anyone for being disappointed with the Sentinel when viewed in this way.  

None of the above is to say the Sentinel isn't functional.  It actually is.  A lot of its overall perceived damage weakness is generally overstated in relation to a meta that is laser focused on overkill.  However, the Sentinel does have a lot of area for improvement to smooth out its effectiveness from start to finish.  This is what needs to be looked at primarily.  There are other issues with the AT too, but Opportunity is the start of that corrective process. 

Edited January 16, 2021 by oldskool

[Galaxy Brain]

Very well put @oldskool, and to answer your question @SwitchFade I'll have to mirror what he said as well as expand on my OP.

 

I think the "problem" with Sentinels is that they're almost a textbook "works on paper, not in practice" AT, if you had to condense it.

 

As noted on my prior posts, when the stars align you can do pretty respectable damage to a single target... but the key there is when the stars align. Their inherent is very finnicky in terms of being split between the T1 and T2, and needing to select somebody to trigger it + land the hit, on top of having poor uptime out of the box. Dominators are the only other AT with an inherent that works similarly but at least they do not need to "rely" on Domination to work in terms of offensive output nor do they need specific triggers. It just happens and they get to decide when and where to use it. They face a similar struggle with uptime (until you perma it), but it feels like more of a bonus than something that you need to play catch up in normal gameplay, if that makes sense? Dominators release when they want to and have great uptime, and being on a team even without permadom lets them get Domination faster through multiple means. Sentinels do not always get to use their inherent the way they want to since it is so target dependant, and like what Oldskool pointed out the values when you don't have each piece working together are not up to snuff when combined with the uptime. 

 

There are other issues sure, like how the best primary is Psy Mastery 😛 , but the root of a lot of it has to do with the inherent IMO as it is so prominent for them. Sentinels are an entire, fleshed out AT and yet they are on the low end of popularity like with EATs which people generally only make one of. There's definitely something missing.

 

 

 

 

[oldskool]

1 hour ago, Galaxy Brain said:

There are other issues sure, like how the best primary is Psy Mastery 😛 

[Galaxy Brain]

Something I just thought of, but what about simply letting Sentinels stack their debuff up to 5 times even when solo? The 5-time rule applies only to multiple sentinels at the moment, but you'll only ever see it with 5 Sentinels (lol). Changing it to just globally stack 5 times would help if you're the only sentinel or if there are less than 5 on a team and be a nice, subtle change that makes it like you're slowly opening up the enemy.

[xl8]

I like @Galaxy Brain suggestions, but the Sentinel is a class that suffers from trying to be 2 different things at once. It needs to be specialized to be successful and when trying to balance defense with offense it will always fall short.

[Galaxy Brain]

1 hour ago, xl8 said:

I like @Galaxy Brain suggestions, but the Sentinel is a class that suffers from trying to be 2 different things at once. It needs to be specialized to be successful and when trying to balance defense with offense it will always fall short.

I get that line of thinking, but the last bit is untrue when Brutes and Scrappers exist.

[xl8]

On 2/14/2021 at 11:39 AM, Galaxy Brain said:

but the last bit is untrue when Brutes and Scrappers exist.

Depends what you mean. Brutes and scrappers are good at what they do and have very few complaints from players.

The same cannot be said of sentinels.

For the sake of semantics I'll say sentinels have good def/res and good attacks but don't succeed in being anything that distinguishes them from the pack.

The balance between secondary and primary means they don't stand out in either respect. Personally, I don't have an issue with that. They are vanilla.

They would benefit from having a useful mechanic that's worth is reflected in limits on primary/secondary.

[Galaxy Brain]

1 hour ago, xl8 said:

Depends what you mean. Brutes and scrappers are good at what they do and have very few complaints from players.

The same cannot be said of sentinels.

For the sake of semantics I'll say sentinels have good def/res and good attacks but don't succeed in being anything that distinguishes them from the pack.

The balance between secondary and primary means they don't stand out in either respect. Personally, I don't have an issue with that. They are vanilla.

They would benefit from having a useful mechanic that's worth is reflected in limits on primary/secondary.

I understand what you mean by them not standing out, thats the same boat I'm in with them! I was more confused by the specialization between Offense and Defense, needing to pick either. That is where Brutes and Scrappers stand out as high-damage offensive ATs that are also armored to the point of being essentially immortal in many cases.

[golstat2003]

On 1/15/2021 at 4:09 PM, oldskool said:

I think there will always be an argument about identity even if this change were made.  There will never be a point at which players say "Why play a Sentinel when I can play a Blaster" until one exceeds the performance of the other.  That is what that logical loop causes and it won't go away regardless of whatever the dev team does.  

I'd argue the novelty of having range and armor *is* the identity of the AT.  The debuff is a form of damage.  Looking at it as group performance seems like rationalizing the mechanics as something greater than it is.  

Does Defiance really add a lot of identity to the Blaster?  Why must Opportunity be that metric for the Sentinel?

Just friendly question to have some friendly debate.  I see a lot of room for this train of thought to completely hold the Sentinel back from ever having a "place" in the game.    

Pretty much this, having read this thread to this point. I'm not playing Sent for any of their secondary or team abilities. LOL at that.

 

I play them when I want, cause I can have range and armor . . . and combos I can't get in other sets.

[golstat2003]

On 1/15/2021 at 4:11 PM, Wavicle said:

There seem to be a lot of players who feel that inherent powers need to provide some sort of a mini game that you play when you’re playing that archetype. I personally don’t think that that is necessary.

Agreed. I actually really don't get this with the current meta of AOE, burn everything down.

 

But I won't argue with folks who find that fun.

[golstat2003]

On 1/15/2021 at 4:51 PM, oldskool said:

Yet, no other damage dealing AT (Scrapper, Blaster, Stalker) have anything other than a self-serving inherent.  

I feel I understand where you're going here.  The Sentinel is new and there are already 3 other selfish DPS ATs.  Why play a 4th unless it brings group utility or something else that is "interesting"?  

What I am getting at is that kind of idea can potentially hold the AT back.  There is going to be a cost to its damage in order to have this faux group presence.  So that won't do much to move the needle on "why play X vs Y" debates.  It will then circle back to Sentinels are played for the novelty of their inherent and yet they fall off later.  

I feel the Sentinel is already pigeonholed here by design.  It was conceptually supposed to function as a Scrapper at range with a feast or famine mechanic.  That doesn't really scream team support, but like you note the inherent is lacking.  

I guess what I'm getting at is, I'm OK with it not being more engaging but being more functional.  I actually like the idea of the ranged Scrapper.  I couldn't care less that Opportunity gives it a group role or not.  Damage is a role. 

I've been in a lot of these debates and it seems like that is where the split goes.  Those wanting something more interesting, and those not really caring about that for the sake of basic functionality.  I don't know where a happy medium exists that ever stops the "why play X vs Y" debate.

Anyway, thanks for the clarity on your points.

Perhaps a question here is "why do we need more ATs if the ones that already exist do everything we need them to do?"

 

I don't have an answer.

[oldskool]

21 hours ago, xl8 said:

Depends what you mean. Brutes and scrappers are good at what they do and have very few complaints from players.

The same cannot be said of sentinels.

For the sake of semantics I'll say sentinels have good def/res and good attacks but don't succeed in being anything that distinguishes them from the pack.

The balance between secondary and primary means they don't stand out in either respect. Personally, I don't have an issue with that. They are vanilla.

They would benefit from having a useful mechanic that's worth is reflected in limits on primary/secondary.

"Good attacks" seems a bit counter to the point though.  If the Sentinel was good enough at what it is designed to do (damage), then I'm not sure we'd all be having this conversation.  

Brutes and Scrappers have an offensive primary and defensive secondary. However, they can be considered to "excel" for a number of reasons.  

The Sentinel is rather balanced when viewed only in its AT sandbox.  However, compared to other ATs in the same role (damage) it is under tuned.  They aren't "vanilla".  They are under performing in their function and do so when viewed at a macro-level of the game.   Now, I know I have hammered the point that damage is often overstated.  It is.  CoX isn't that difficult.  However, for a damage AT in this game the Sentinel is behind in most builds that aren't designed in one singular way.  That's a design that needs to be corrected.  When two powers out of the epic sets can either meet or exceed the damage potential of an entire primary there is a problem. 

The Opportunity mechanic is something that needs to be addressed, but I'm not certain it is the *only* thing that needs to be addressed.  

What features make all of the perceptions of the Sentinel turn into a compounding problem? 

- Base damage scalar is the lowest of all damage oriented ATs which is also now the standard on Tankers (FFS...). 

- Legacy challenges with balancing of damage in ranged sets vs melee sets. 

- Current HC power creep of all other ATs using ranged sets and fast snipes.  The Sentinel snipe replacers don't really keep pace.  

- Lack of meaningful damage contribution out of the inherent outside of specific conditions.  Blasters and Brutes gain global damage modifiers.  Scrappers and Stalkers gain critical modifiers.  Sentinels have 1 damage boosting effect linked to their T1 power that doesn't scale in addition to resistance debuffs that are likely to go the way of the dinosaur.  
- Undertuning on secondary effects on some powers. Piercing Rounds, Life Drain, and the like all have *worse* modifiers than any other AT with the same power.  Why?
- Lack of power diversity (late game melee options) has legacy issues with the IO system.  Willpower, the secondary, is a glaring issue here.  Willpower seems designed with the IO system in mind and a heavy abundance of melee sets capable of closing its S/L defense gap.  Sentinels largely rely on ranged sets which heavily leans on range/elec/nega defenses.  

Sentinels may appear like they have no role or place next to other ATs due to fundamental breakdowns in the core design.  

Edited February 16, 2021 by oldskool

[oldskool]

2 hours ago, golstat2003 said:

Perhaps a question here is "why do we need more ATs if the ones that already exist do everything we need them to do?"

 

I don't have an answer.

Variety is the spice of life.