Galaxy Brain's 2021 Sentinel Fix

[aethereal]

I agree with @oldskool, and also add to the list of issues:

 

• ST/AoE incoherence.  Sents have their inherent currently tuned to be strongly ST-focused, and their AoE target caps (and lack of ability to cluster enemies) obviously punish their ability to be a premiere AoE AT.  However, in general, in order to excel as a ST-class, because of the general dominance of AoE, you need to have really strong ST damage, which Sents don't, and their lack of durability compared to other armored classes hurts their ability to handle very hard targets (tough EBs, AVs, GMs).  The can compensate to some extent for their lack of durability by hover-blasting, but that's kind of an obnoxiously narrow way to have a role.  In addition, word of @Captain Powerhouse is that they're supposed to be "sustained AoE"-oriented.  I remain unsure that "sustained AoE" is a useful role -- burst AoE seems like the only AoE that matters, at least on teams.

[oldskool]

3 minutes ago, aethereal said:

• and their lack of durability compared to other armored classes hurts their ability to handle very hard targets (tough EBs, AVs, GMs).  The can compensate to some extent for their lack of durability by hover-blasting, but that's kind of an obnoxiously narrow way to have a role.  

I didn't mention durability because I personally do not have an issue with Sentinel durability.  I find the AT ridiculously survivable and I don't have hover on a single Sentinel.  Hell, I don't hover-blast on my Blaster builds either.  Those debt badges don't collect themselves!

[BZRKR]

30 minutes ago, aethereal said:

In addition, word of @Captain Powerhouse is that they're supposed to be "sustained AoE"-oriented.  I remain unsure that "sustained AoE" is a useful role -- burst AoE seems like the only AoE that matters, at least on teams.

This randomly inspires me to suggest:

What if a new Sentinel Inherent gave them a small +recharge and endurance discount for every enemy in visible line of sight, up to some capped limit? That way they can machinegun their low damage, low target cap attacks more often, thus "sustaining" their AoE output.

Apologies if something like this has been suggested elsewhere, elsewhen.

[aethereal]

18 minutes ago, oldskool said:

I didn't mention durability because I personally do not have an issue with Sentinel durability.  I find the AT ridiculously survivable and I don't have hover on a single Sentinel.  Hell, I don't hover-blast on my Blaster builds either.  Those debt badges don't collect themselves!

I don't have a big issue with Sent durability (they're certainly plenty durable for "ordinary" content), but if you're going to have a class that's kind of at its best in long, drawn-out fights against single hard targets, it kinda sucks to be a bit less durable than Scraps and Stalks as well as lower damage than them.

[xl8]

On 2/16/2021 at 12:54 PM, oldskool said:

"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.  

Here we go with the semantics again... I'm glad I gave you an "opportunity" to express your preference for sentinels (again).
The mechanic isn't beneficial, the numbers back this up.

Yes, they're vanilla. They're the middle of the road arch for those who want to play safe and deal damage.

[oldskool]

12 hours ago, xl8 said:

Here we go with the semantics again... 

Well, yes.  In this case it is actually rather important to discern meaning in the words used.  The response in question (your original one) used the word "good" in two different contexts suggesting different meaning of the same word applied in certain conditions.  You made a statement that "Brutes and scrappers are good at what they do and have very few complaints from players".  This is followed by "For the sake of semantics I'll say sentinels have good def/res and good attacks but don't succeed in anything that distinguishes them from the pack".  

My response to this was to breakdown the meaning, because frankly what you wrote makes no sense to me.  Brutes, Scrappers, and Sentinels shouldn't be lump together with the word "good" if that word means the same thing.  Your usage of it suggests good means something different for Brutes/Scrappers and something else for Sentinels.  I'm not trying to be pedantic.  I truly find the choice of words confusing.  The latter part of the commentary about Sentinels not succeeding in anything that distinguishes them seems contradictory.  If they have good attacks, and if Brutes/Scrappers are good, then why is it that Sentinels fail?  This is the reason why I go into other details on what makes Brutes/Scrappers work.  

You know what?  I happened to forget ATOs in my original list.  Sentinel ATOs are poor contributors to the AT's output vs Brute/Scrapper/Stalker/Blaster options.  Hell, even Corruptors have a damage contributing ATO and they are a true hybrid where the Sentinel is not.  

Also of note, I opened my response with a question on how the usage seemed to contradict the point.  That was an open invitation for clarity not the following:

12 hours ago, xl8 said:

 I'm glad I gave you an "opportunity" to express your preference for sentinels (again).

This is passive-aggressive.  

12 hours ago, xl8 said:

The mechanic isn't beneficial, the numbers back this up.

This combined with the above is rather frustrating to read.  Perhaps you found what I wrote condescending.  I'll apologize for that.  I didn't intend for that.  In the first point, I note that the structure of your statement did not make sense to me.  I tried to unpack that in order to both wrap my head around what is being stated and also examine an underlying problem statement.  That problem statement wasn't necessarily yours but something I considered as I worked through the concept I was applying a critique to. 

However, your approach here is to educate me on the obvious.  I'm well aware of the limitations of the mechanic in question (I've noted so numerous times).  I also stated my opinions on all of the other issues that I see with the AT.  This is of course is completely ignored by this statement and that is frankly, insulting when combined with passive-aggressive commentary.

What makes this really infuriating is the suggestion here on bias and cognitive dissonance on my part.  As if I somehow am not aware of the mechanics or how metrics work and that I am somehow championing something I clearly am not.  

12 hours ago, xl8 said:

Yes, they're vanilla. They're the middle of the road arch for those who want to play safe and deal damage.

I disagree with this entire concept.  I stated why before.  You are absolutely entitled to your opinion.  Regardless of whatever you think my intent was, I still respect that.  We can agree to disagree on this. 

Edited February 19, 2021 by oldskool

[oldskool]

@Galaxy Brain after thinking on this a bit more.  I have some other ideas.  

So what if the Sentinel had scaling damage based on to-hit?  Let's assume we get to have an inherent that has multiple parts in a re-design.  Let's assume some of the ideas presented in your Overwatch remain as unenhanced effects for teammates.  

Basically, the Sentinel buffs others around them as they "stand watch" in the group.  They provide some minor perception, to-hit, and maybe very minor defensive perks.  These effects do not boost the Sentinel.  

One thing the Sentinel's design *had* going for it was a both a rebalance of blast sets and snipe replacers.  The latter there is mostly meaningless now that snipes are now rotational.  The snipe powers gain scaling damage based on to-hit bonuses.  Why not take that lesson learned and just apply it to the Sentinel?  What if the Sentinel got stronger based on to-hit buffs?  There would need to be limits on how much certain powers gained from this, but it is a thought.  The effects could be whatever are possible in the engine.  Maybe it is flat damage.  Maybe the Sentinel has critical hits with a percentage equal to its to-hit buff.   

Also, what if the Sentinel kept all of its current buff/debuff values but had a special circumstance made for Leadership toggles?  So in some ways the Sentinel gains some ideas from both HEATs and VEATs.  The major difference is that Sentinels have individual power sets with variable abilities vs the HEAT/VEAT preset kits.  The Sentinel benefits for teams shouldn't exceed the values of the HEAT/VEAT but just take inspiration off that.  

What if the Sentinel replaced Aim with Build-Up?  All power sets except for Dual Pistols have Aim, even Assault Rifle.  This change would further make the Sentinel a unique AT for ranged blast sets.  Dual Pistols would likely need some kind of targeted redesign/buff within the AT for it to keep pace with that change.  I think completely removing Swap Ammo for BU isn't possible without a full redesign.  However, there could be other buffs done to the set.  Also, if the Sentinel did have some relationship of critical hit to its current to-hit value, then Aim ends up have a better justification over BU.  

Ultimately, what I would like to see is that the gap between the Sentinel and other damage-focused ATs reduced downward.  When looked at on paper, the Sentinel's base damage vs say the Blaster does reflect the AT damage scalar difference (not withstanding Fire or Ice Blast).  However Defiance vs Opportunity isn't much of a contest.  Defiance starts creating a much larger gap more consistently and earlier.  Opportunity really only matters against AV+ enemies which diminishes the value.  However, Blaster vs Sentinel is a poor comparison.  The Sentinel has conceptual models similar to Scrappers but even there the damage differences are larger than they should be.  

 

So TL;DR: 

Role = Damage albeit with some trades made on risk vs reward due to the fundamental mechanics

Playstyle = Ranged blast set plus defense

Inherent = Minor team, but not the Sentinel, benefits plus perhaps some further ties with to-hit mechanics

No matter what there will be those that never like this AT because it isn't the top damage dealing AT in the game.  That's fine.  However, the current incarnation can feel over penalized for what it actually has going for it.  

Edited February 21, 2021 by oldskool
There may be nuggets here from a number of other people's ideas. I'm just tossing out a frankstein's monster of effects that sounded interesting at the time.

[Galaxy Brain]

@oldskool, that would be neat... but what avenues would they have to interact with it outside some odds and ends buffs? It'd be cool for it to be tied to a crit chance specifically, or even a chance to Mark a target, unless the intent here is their natural +ToHit aura is meant to stack with other Sentinels too?

 

Thinking on it more, that could be neat in a team environment with other Sents / ToHit buffs flying around if it related to some sort of Crit Chance (even if we just took the bonus damage from Opportunity, tied that to ToHit, and then cranked up the damage MUCH higher given it is a % chance?) and then the Mark changes I suggested... hmmmm

Edited February 22, 2021 by Galaxy Brain

[Rathulfr]

On 2/16/2021 at 12:32 PM, oldskool said:

Hell, I don't hover-blast on my Blaster builds either.

Then you're doing it wrong.  😁

(I kid!  I kid!  Just being snarky for the sake of laughs.)

[oldskool]

3 hours ago, Galaxy Brain said:

@oldskool, that would be neat... but what avenues would they have to interact with it outside some odds and ends buffs? It'd be cool for it to be tied to a crit chance specifically, or even a chance to Mark a target, unless the intent here is their natural +ToHit aura is meant to stack with other Sentinels too?

 

Thinking on it more, that could be neat in a team environment with other Sents / ToHit buffs flying around if it related to some sort of Crit Chance (even if we just took the bonus damage from Opportunity, tied that to ToHit, and then cranked up the damage MUCH higher given it is a % chance?) and then the Mark changes I suggested... hmmmm

So my initial thought is that the aura that the Sentinel provides doesn't impact the origin caster.  However, other Sentinels could buff other Sentinels.  

There would need to be some reigning in of how much conversion could happen.  It could be too easy to hit 100% with people purposefully building that way.   If there was incentive to run the Leadership pool, then an individual Sentinel could easily build in their own 20%+ to-hit.  If you're using a temp buff like Aim or Build-up, or inspirations, then things could get out of hand.  So maybe a ratio of effect.  

I'm not sure if something like that is even possible really. 

Edited February 23, 2021 by oldskool

[Galaxy Brain]

6 minutes ago, oldskool said:

So my initial thought is that the aura that the Sentinel provides doesn't impact the origin caster.  However, other Sentinels could buff other Sentinels.  

There would need to be some reigning in of how much conversion could happen.  It could be too easy to hit 100% with people purposefully building that way.   If there was incentive to run the Leadership pool, then an individual Sentinel could easily build in their own 20%+ to-hit.  If you're using a temp buff like Aim or Build-up, or inspirations, then things could get out of hand.  So maybe a ratio of effect.  

I'm not sure if something like that is even possible really. 

In theory it is given that Sniper powers can scale based on ToHit, so *theoretically* you could assign the same scaling to something else.... 

[Wavicle]

I really recommend looking for simple solutions that actually change very little.

• Put offensive and defensive buffs together into one Opportunity buff
• Let it be activated by either t1 attack
• Make the offensive portion increase with buffs and enhancements
• Change Aim to Build Up
• Increase base damage to at least 1.0

Edited February 23, 2021 by Wavicle

[Wavicle]

For Dual Pistols:
 

• Slightly increase damage of added DoT when using fire rounds
• Add Range increase when using toxic rounds, same as when using ice rounds 

[Wavicle]

Actually I don't really like that last idea very much.

Maybe ToHit with the toxic rounds?

[oldskool]

14 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

I really recommend looking for simple solutions that actually change very little.

• Put offensive and defensive buffs together into one Opportunity buff
• Let it be activated by either t1 attack
• Make the offensive portion increase with buffs and enhancements
• Change Aim to Build Up
• Increase base damage to at least 1.0

A simple solution is where my heart is.  However, if given the chance to be creative I may as well give it a shot. 😅

[Galaxy Brain]

32 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

I really recommend looking for simple solutions that actually change very little.

• Put offensive and defensive buffs together into one Opportunity buff
• Let it be activated by either t1 attack
• Make the offensive portion increase with buffs and enhancements
• Change Aim to Build Up
• Increase base damage to at least 1.0

Agreed on pretty much all of this, but it doesn't address the issue with Marking a target nor really having it stand out from other damage dealers aside from being ranged. I would like there to be an easier way to highlight an enemy at the least that isn't tied to a meter. Like I said in the OP, it seems far too finnicky for what it does in most combat situations as you often do not have an ideal target to mark, making it feel "wasted" a lot of the time. As for the identity, this would certainly give them a super-mode of sorts every so often but would that really be enough...? They sort of lean towards support through offense already with their inherent -Res, so I feel leaning into that a bit would be nice for sure.

[Starhammer]

I love the Overwatch idea. For me, the idea of a Sentinel is a "watcher on the wall" a guard at post or on patrol, or to be fair, that old TV show. Giving them a bonus to perception, to hit, and to hit resistance feels thematically appropriate.

[Teirusu]

After thinking about this for a while, here's my particular suggestion for 'fixing' the Opportunity buffs with hopefully minimal changes/adjustments on both the Devs and the players and buffing Sentinels.

 

1.) Keep both opportunity buffs separate, as they are now.  Have the Offensive Opportunity be a chance to go off when the Sentinel uses -any- single target attacks.  Make the chance of it happening based on the rank of the mob, much like how the Scrapper's criticals function.  Minions could even be 0% because, conceptually, they're already filled with weaknesses that everyone can exploit.

 

Then, allow the Offensive Opportunity to stack, however, whenever it stacks, it has a different effect.  The first effect could be the -20% RES, then, the second affect could be the DOT damage, after that, it could be a Slow/Recharge slow, followed by a recovery debuff/end drain, and then finally a damage debuff.  (Doesn't have to be all that exactly, but that's just the general idea.)  The idea here is that a single Sentinel is unlikely to be able to get more then 1 or 2 stacks on a single target because of the chance.  So, this would allow multiple Sentinels on a team to increase the de-buffing on a single hard target by stacking their Offensive Opportunities.  Minor, but helpful and better then how it currently works.  The chance could be tweaked based upon how much it's feels like Sentinels need help on single-target damage.

2.) Defensive Opportunity could then be based on a chance to go off when you hit mobs with any AOE attacks.  This would not stack on yourself.  This is to help Sentinels with absorbing alpha strikes if they're leading off with AOEs and sustaining them.

 

With these changes, the Opportunities just happen and you don't need to think about them, they're like Scrapper criticals but they're different enough and no longer require using either the T1 or T2 power to function.  Moreover, the Offensive Opportunity stacks in such a way that multiple Sentinels on the team can be a use even against a single hard target like an AV or GM.


3.) If we further feel that Sentinels need any additional help, I do like the idea of ToHit buffs giving bonus Damage enhancement, although it would have to be some small ratio that isn't a must-have.  I'm thinking anywhere from 1/4 to 1/3 would be nice, but not too much.  The base ToHit provided by Aim itself would be a 12.5% damage buff if it was 1/4.  And, if we're talking about being at the ToHit cap of 200%, (so 125% ToHit buff) then the damage buff would be 31.25%.  Not super huge, but nice.  This is very close to the damage bonus a Sentinel needs to match the damage an equally slotted attack on a Blaster.  (Assuming around 95% damage enhancement in the same power, a Sentinel only needs another 35% bonus to match.)  With this kind of change, there would be no need to switch Aim for Build-up.