Sentinels. Are they underused?

[Wavicle]

5 hours ago, Zeraphia said:

they're a jack-of-all-trades master-of-none in a game that highly rewards specialization. If you're a newer player Sentinels will be friendlier to you, if you're experienced and want more technical gameplay, Blasters are IMO better.

That’s called a “trap” character. They should not be like that. That’s exactly the complaint.

[Wavicle]

1 hour ago, ZemX said:

Or am I misreading it?

Yes.

 

We’re not saying they should do the same damage as scrappers, we’re saying they should do more damage than they currently do.

[Bill Z Bubba]

11 minutes ago, underfyre said:

Health caps aren't something I track, but from Mid's I get:

 

Scrapper cap: 2409

Sentinel cap: 2088

 

Both are capped at 75% resists. Health pool matters, especially where regen/s is concerned. The armors as sets aren't 1 for 1 copies. So we have differences like the superior Fiery Embrace against the weaker Molten Embrace. There are no damage auras (besides the one from the epic pool) since it's a "ranged" AT. Sentinels definitely scored with Master Brawler.

 

Mids is right on the HP as per CoD and HC Wiki. Health pools absolutely matter but if Sents and Stalkers have the same MaxHP and Sents are getting superior versions of the armor sets AND can fight 100% from range (really, anyone stating this isn't huge for mitigation is out of their damn minds) then Sents are pretty far ahead of the game and should NOT be pulling scrapper/stalker/blaster damage numbers. At all. Ever.

[Wavicle]

Just now, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

Mids is right on the HP as per CoD and HC Wiki. Health pools absolutely matter but if Sents and Stalkers have the same MaxHP and Sents are getting superior versions of the armor sets AND can fight 100% from range (really, anyone stating this isn't huge for mitigation is out of their damn minds) then Sents are pretty far ahead of the game and should NOT be pulling scrapper/stalker/blaster damage numbers. At all. Ever.

Unless you have taunts, higher hit points are not something you’re contributing to the team. Survivability is a nice bonus for you personally but unless you are using it to provide safety for the team it’s only a small bonus in the team environment. So while I agree that sentinels should remain the lowest of the four, they should be in the same range.

[Bill Z Bubba]

4 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

Unless you have taunts, higher hit points are not something you’re contributing to the team. Survivability is a nice bonus for you personally but unless you are using it to provide safety for the team it’s only a small bonus in the team environment. So while I agree that sentinels should remain the lowest of the four, they should be in the same range.

 

Define the range. My race against a blaster showed me not far behind and we were both using fire blast.

 

It's the same argument I'm having about tanks being overbuffed. Heightened mitigation should mean lowered damage but more and more it seems that very few agree with this concept.

[drbuzzard]

8 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

Unless you have taunts, higher hit points are not something you’re contributing to the team. Survivability is a nice bonus for you personally but unless you are using it to provide safety for the team it’s only a small bonus in the team environment. So while I agree that sentinels should remain the lowest of the four, they should be in the same range.

Yeah, This reminds me of the argument when they buffed tankers. Let's look at the game from a time spent vs. rewards earned. Does being immune to damage gain you anything? Past a point, no, not a damn thing. You can phase shift to your heart's content but it won't get you drops, XP, or influence.

 

Yes, sentinels are pretty damned survivable. However their damage is tepid, and for the vast majority of content (and certainly enough for the purpose of generating rewards), their mitigation is past necessary. Blasters can get close enough and do far more damage thus generating rewards at a faster clip.

[drbuzzard]

4 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

Define the range. My race against a blaster showed me not far behind and we were both using fire blast.

 

It's the same argument I'm having about tanks being overbuffed. Heightened mitigation should mean lowered damage but more and more it seems that very few agree with this concept.

When people start setting records for solo TFs or farming with tanks, you'll have a point. Damage is king. Mitigation is nice, but once you get enough, more is pointless. More damage is never bad.

[siolfir]

Honestly, just getting rid of the range penalties and target cap decreases on the AoEs is probably enough with the existing inherent and modifiers, but the inherent requiring T1 or T2 for the full effect just reeks of what people complained about with Bruising and Tankers.

[Bill Z Bubba]

7 minutes ago, drbuzzard said:

When people start setting records for solo TFs or farming with tanks, you'll have a point. Damage is king. Mitigation is nice, but once you get enough, more is pointless. More damage is never bad.

 

Let's talk this one. None of my claws and sr using BZBs can handle a hardcore ITF solo. (Where hardcore = no insps, no temps, enemies buffed, players debuffed, Master of rules run.) None of them. It's not the builds, it's the powersets. They just aren't capable of it.

 

So I build a shield/em/soul tank and she pulls it off. Damage is king? It is in the meta team game. I see all the folks speed running at base diff in minutes entire TFs. But there's no challenge there specifically because they're all geared toward max damage at min difficulty for max merits. Granted, they sure as hell ain't getting max rewards that way beyond merits.

 

What is the best time for a hardcore ITF run with a brute? Or even a no insps standard max diff run? What AT and powerset combo has the best time right now? I honestly have no clue.

 

But most everyone states we can't balance around the outliers and instead they should be brought into line. ... Or at least for a long time I thought that was the prevailing opinion.

 

My primary question is what is the line? Should my sd/em/soul tank EVER be able to take a pylon down faster than my claws/sr scrapper? I say no, but I absolutely can beat my scrapper's time with my tank if I saturate AAO. This isn't balanced to me. This isn't logical or rational because it ignores this "rule" I've put on a hill and decided to die on.

 

And pushing an AT with mitigation that makes it a breeze to play from 1 to 50 compared to the blaster that WILL lag behind until it can perma clarion for even MORE damage output seems to go against what I always thought was the point of archetype balance.

 

Again, however, there are currently so many ridiculous cases where the supposed rule of greater mitigation means lesser damage output that I'm forced to wonder if that ship has completely sailed and I really should just STFU and GTFO of these discussions.

[Wavicle]

Solo performance has very little, if any, bearing on these discussions.

 

Everybody acknowledges that sentinels are fine solo. The issue is that they do not contribute enough to a team compared to other archetypes.

[drbuzzard]

Have you compared a EM/SD scrapper on that pylon time? You know as well as I do that ATs aren't even close to balanced across power sets. Isn't EM king of single target now?

 

Honestly, I think the ship you mention has sailed. I would suspect the idea is to make all the ATs playable  on teams and solo. This is still a work in progress. I rather doubt any real balance is ever likely to be in the cards. That's probably fine for a legacy game which never really did balance worth a damn.

[siolfir]

4 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

The issue is that they do not contribute enough to a team compared to other archetypes.

That same argument could be used to invalidate nearly all of the archetypes.

[Wavicle]

Just now, siolfir said:

That same argument could be used to invalidate nearly all of the archetypes.

I don’t agree at all. Most ATs are actually pretty well balanced (not talking about individual powersets).

[drbuzzard]

2 minutes ago, siolfir said:

That same argument could be used to invalidate nearly all of the archetypes.

Which ones?

Ok, if I had to pick the weak sisters:

Dominators (instances in which controls are really important are rare IMO, and a controller does more as a force multiplier than a fairly meh damage secondary)

Khelds

Sentinels

 

Every other AT does a decent job of contributing to a team IMO (if I was picking for something actually hard, if not that, then it doesn't matter at all).

[Bill Z Bubba]

8 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

Solo performance has very little, if any, bearing on these discussions.

 

Everybody acknowledges that sentinels are fine solo. The issue is that they do not contribute enough to a team compared to other archetypes.

 

Interesting. I find that being able to solo means I'm even more valuable to a team due to not wasting time being 100% worthless while being faceplanted.

 

6 minutes ago, drbuzzard said:

Have you compared a EM/SD scrapper on that pylon time? You know as well as I do that ATs aren't even close to balanced across power sets. Isn't EM king of single target now?

 

Honestly, I think the ship you mention has sailed. I would suspect the idea is to make all the ATs playable  on teams and solo. This is still a work in progress. I rather doubt any real balance is ever likely to be in the cards. That's probably fine for a legacy game which never really did balance worth a damn.

 

The em/sd scrapper will, of course, have a much better pylon time but won't be able to survive a hardcore TF.

 

3 minutes ago, siolfir said:

That same argument could be used to invalidate nearly all of the archetypes.

 

Truth.

 

1 minute ago, Wavicle said:

I don’t agree at all. Most ATs are actually pretty well balanced (not talking about individual powersets).

 

When it comes to teams, it doesn't matter the makeup. At all. If you absolutely fail at the task, then everyone is running below level with crap builds, bad tactics and an unwillingness to get the job done.

[siolfir]

Just now, Wavicle said:

I don’t agree at all. Most ATs are actually pretty well balanced (not talking about individual powersets).

I thought about editing after I posted, but decided to just let it ride - I was going to add "depending on where the line for 'enough' is."

 

You see this in forum discussions about how Brutes are useless because Scrappers do more damage, Tankers tank better and (when saturated) do more damage with AoEs; Corruptors being worse than Defenders because of lower buff/debuff modifiers and procs allowing Defenders to do as much or more damage until Scourge kicks in; "nobody needs control because everything dies too fast" and so on.

 

And if you look at the (admittedly arbitrary) numbers earlier in the thread, the -resistance from Opportunity helps the team damage more than the Scrapper's individual contribution helps on hard targets, so they really just need to provide a similar contribution for the small fries, and they can nuke them.

 

Like I said before, I think it's really just a small tweak here or there.

 

[Wavicle]

1 minute ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

I find that being able to solo means I'm even more valuable to a team due to not wasting time being 100% worthless while being faceplanted.

Anyone dying enough for this to be the case is experiencing a player issue. Even Blasters are now tough enough that this shouldn’t come up much in team situations.

[drbuzzard]

Just now, Bill Z Bubba said:

The em/sd scrapper will, of course, have a much better pylon time but won't be able to survive a hardcore TF.

Until there's actually something gained by doing hardcore TFs other than bragging rights, I'm quite sure they won't be a balance consideration.

 

Heavy mitigation is only really important at extremes. For most of the game, it's just a shiny trapping.

[Wavicle]

1 minute ago, siolfir said:

Like I said before, I think it's really just a small tweak here or there.

Agreed.

[Bill Z Bubba]

6 minutes ago, siolfir said:

Like I said before, I think it's really just a small tweak here or there.

 

Agreed.

 

5 minutes ago, drbuzzard said:

Heavy mitigation is only really important at extremes. For most of the game, it's just a shiny trapping.

 

I wish I could disagree but I can't.

[Coyotedancer]

1 hour ago, siolfir said:

Honestly, just getting rid of the range penalties and target cap decreases on the AoEs is probably enough with the existing inherent and modifiers, but the inherent requiring T1 or T2 for the full effect just reeks of what people complained about with Bruising and Tankers.

 

I'd really like to see how Sents handled with the Opportunity effects as mutually-exclusive toggle picks, sort-of like Bio's Adaptations or Staff's Stances... Pick the one you like, and when the bar fills that's what fires. Or just adjust the effects to be a constant thing rather than going for the gimmicky "fill the bar" mechanic in the first place.

 

That wouldn't solve all of Assault Rifle's issues, and I still think some of the other damage sets really need a balance pass... But I'm really curious how tinkering with Opportunity's mechanics would change the way they play. 

[Underfyre]

1 minute ago, Coyotedancer said:

 

I'd really like to see how Sents handled with the Opportunity effects as mutually-exclusive toggle picks, sort-of like Bio's Adaptations or Staff's Stances... Pick the one you like, and when the bar fills that's what fires. Or just adjust the effects to be a constant thing rather than going for the gimmicky "fill the bar" mechanic in the first place.

 

That wouldn't solve all of Assault Rifle's issues, and I still think some of the other damage sets really need a balance pass... But I'm really curious how tinkering with Opportunity's mechanics would change the way they play. 

 

I don't see that being bad. Just constantly doing more damage, or healing/end. The damage boost is already fairly low anyway, so I'm sure it won't be breaking anything. Then maybe keep the Opportunity mechanic for the -res part.

[Wavicle]

Even just changing the 5% -Res on all attacks to 1.0 base damage would help considerably, imo. It wouldn't address the clunkiness of the inherent, but it would improve burst and "feel" a bit better.

[Wavicle]

That's for the base damage and "bruising" effect.

 

For the inherent, a lot of ideas have been tossed around, several by myself...right now I'm thinking about this idea (I have no idea if this is possible):

 

Opportunity - Inherent Timed Toggle Single Target 25% Def and Res Debuff.

 

0 Activation Time.

 

Up to 60 seconds duration.

 

Cooldown unaffected by global recharge, but instead...

Recharge varies based on duration used.

 

If toggled off before 16 seconds duration, recharges in 5  seconds.

If toggled off between 16 and 30 seconds duration, recharges in 10  seconds.
If toggled off between 31 and 45 seconds duration, recharges in 15  seconds.

If toggled off between 46 and 60 seconds (auto shut off) duration, recharges in 20 seconds.

 

Toggles off automatically if target dies before full duration or manual toggleoff.

Edited May 17, 2021 by Wavicle

[Teirusu]

6 hours ago, ZemX said:

Good?

 

Why should a Sentinel ever even equal a Scrapper in damage?  or a Stalker for that matter?  I see in some of the past posts the idea that a Sentinel was supposed to be a ranged Scrapper but if there ever was such a thing what would be the reason to play a melee scrapper then?  And don't anybody even think about bringing up Sentinel hit points because (a) You inherently get some additional survivability just from being able to avoid melee combat when you choose, (b) the convenience of attacking from range,  and (c) I play Stalkers, who have the same hit points, and despite forum wars much longer and bloodier than this one were never allowed to do much if any more damage than Scrappers outside of maybe bursting a single boss.

 

I get that Sentinels might currently be TOO low in damage, but I also get the feeling reading here and from all the comparisons that a lot of people feel it's justified for Sentinels to have at least Scrapper level damage if not something approaching Blasters.

 

Or am I misreading it?

 

 

And this is why I really -dislike- the whole 'Ranged Scrapper' idea that Powerhouse had brought up.  'Ranged Scrapper' will always mean that Sentinels will be compared to Scrappers (And by proxy Stalkers) whom, logically, will have to do more damage then Sentinels due to them being in melee while Sents have the option of playing at range.  You don't hear this comparison as much when talking about VEATS or Khelds and that's because they bring other stuff to the table other then just 'Range Damage'.  'Other stuff' would help better define Sentinels and give them more of a role/identity on teams then just being weaker then either blasters or scrappers.

 

 

I did some Trapdoor mission runs on 3 of my characters the other day; doing two runs apiece.  I ran them how I'd normally run a mission and not necessarily speed through them, I did not try to drag bosses with me to the next spawn.  Also, my builds are defensive-leaning then offensive-leaning.  (So, they don't have many procs in them.  Generally aiming for set bonuses and the like.)  So, all three were able to do the mission at +4/x8 comfortably.

 

Energy/Energy/Elec  -  Sentinel

Ware Mace/Shield Defense/Body Mastery  -  Scrapper  (No attacks from epic)

Super Strength/Willpower/Energy Mastery  -  Brute  (I only used one stack of Rage and has no attacks from the epic but does have Spring attack with 3 procs.  Also has Cross Punch)

 

WM/SD scrapper was in the 6:30-ish 

Nrg/Nrg/Elec sentinel was at the 8:30-ish

SS/Will brute clocked in at 9:30-ish.

 

The Trapdoor mission is very scrapper focused as all the mobs are willing to run towards you to melee (While already being in tight quarters) so it's easy to get them within melee AOEs, so it doesn't surprise me to see the scrapper pull so far ahead.  SD already has a Sentinel-like nuke with Shield Charge and War Mace is a pretty good set so it's a really decent damage combo.  Not the highest-end, but very good.  I'm sure people whom are waaaay better at speeding things can get better times then I could.  It makes me feel it's the actual sets themselves that make more of a difference but that's just my limited experience through these 3 characters.