Possible tweak to Corruptors?

[Tad Cooper]

I said something similar in the brute/tanker debates, and it wasn't received well so I'm sure it won't be here either, but I'll say it again anyway. If it were up to me, I'd just combine them. Give corruptors the defender buff/debuff numbers and vigilance. Give defenders the corruptor base damage and scourge. Make the only difference be what powers you get earlier and flavor text for the inherents.

 

Obviously that makes things more samey, but at this point there's an insane amount of overlap anyway. It might be worth it to try simplifying things.

[arcane]

1 hour ago, Tad Cooper said:

I said something similar in the brute/tanker debates, and it wasn't received well so I'm sure it won't be here either, but I'll say it again anyway. If it were up to me, I'd just combine them. Give corruptors the defender buff/debuff numbers and vigilance. Give defenders the corruptor base damage and scourge. Make the only difference be what powers you get earlier and flavor text for the inherents.

 

Obviously that makes things more samey, but at this point there's an insane amount of overlap anyway. It might be worth it to try simplifying things.

So just make sure there’s power creep in every dimension possible, sure 😉

[Tad Cooper]

2 hours ago, arcane said:

So just make sure there’s power creep in every dimension possible, sure 😉

Yep, that extra .1 ranged damage scalar is gonna shoot defenders right into OP town. I can't remember how much the difference is on the buff multiplier right now but I'm sure that would be just too much for corruptors to have. After all, they almost do as much damage as a brute with no rage. And at RANGE which we all know is just a magic fucking I win button.

 

But you're right. Gonna completely ruin the game. Way too easy for everyone. Cottage rule and balance formulas or whatever.

[GraspingVileTerror]

I believe Corruptors have 85% of the Buffs/Heals/Debuffs that Defenders have.

[golstat2003]

On 6/25/2021 at 3:35 PM, Apparition said:

 

Corruptors suffer the same issue Brutes do.  Why play a Corruptor when you can build a Defender with better buffs, better debuffs, better defenses, and then load them up with damage procs to do even more damage than Corruptors?
 

You either need to nerf damage procs hard (preferable), or give Corruptors an advantage over Defenders.  Now whether that should be better debuffs, better damage, or something else is up for debate.

 

Meh I hate RNG. I simply don't use the Proc system. I find it annoying after having tried it and finding the whole thing completely unappealing. Which is why I stick with corrupters over defenders 90% of the time.

[golstat2003]

8 hours ago, Tad Cooper said:

Yep, that extra .1 ranged damage scalar is gonna shoot defenders right into OP town. I can't remember how much the difference is on the buff multiplier right now but I'm sure that would be just too much for corruptors to have. After all, they almost do as much damage as a brute with no rage. And at RANGE which we all know is just a magic fucking I win button.

 

But you're right. Gonna completely ruin the game. Way too easy for everyone. Cottage rule and balance formulas or whatever.

 

Yeah no. I'd like to keep my defenders and corrupters separate. I think it's a dumb idea. Straight up.

 

And you'd never get the playbase to ever agree to this.

[Tad Cooper]

3 hours ago, golstat2003 said:

 

Yeah no. I'd like to keep my defenders and corrupters separate. I think it's a dumb idea. Straight up.

 

And you'd never get the playbase to ever agree to this.

Why? It's a straight buff.

[Marbing]

3 hours ago, Tad Cooper said:

Why? It's a straight buff.

I see your points, but I can't say that I like the idea of them becoming entirely identical. I like that there are differences, the problem is those differences are heavily weighted in favor of one over the other. 

People keep raising the Corruptors get their attacks earlier as if thats all that needs to be different. The problem with that argument is that once you get to 50 it doesn't matter when you got the powers and that is the crux of the problem. If you are going to create a character that is going to be mathematically irrelevant at 50 (9 times out of 10, the exception being primarily Kinetic Corruptors), then why wouldn't you just create the one that is going to be better overall in the end? Corruptors have far less advantage over Defenders than Defenders have over Corruptors. There needs to be something that keeps Corruptors mathematically relevant at lvl 50 and beyond without breaking the game. Keep in mind there are some support abillities that were ONLY for Corruptors at one point. Those powersets were stronger on Corruptors then too, when they got proliferated to Defenders a lot of them became weaker on Corruptors because Dev logic was they didnt want to make the powerset stronger on a Defender but the Defender should have stronger support so lets just make it weaker on a Corruptor. Over time as the powers got proliferated this put Corruptors in a weaker and weaker position. Now they don't have any unique powersets, and the ones that were unique to them are  now weaker on them (not across the board but there were a few).

 

I want to see a thematic change that keeps Corruptors in the mix mathematically, and I think buffing their de-buff abilities does this without making Defenders irrelevant.

 

Another cool idea presented here was giving them higher contribution from their Power Pool choices, like Defenders have (yet another advantage to Defenders). This would give them better build flexibility.

 

Another idea presented was to make Scourge a sliding scale that can go off at any time, not just after 50%, and gets stronger the closer the target gets to death.  For example: at 100% health they have a small chance for a 10% crit but at 10% health they have a large chance for a 100% crit.

 

Any one of those could be just enough to nudge Corruptors in the right direction without erasing the need for Defenders. In my opinion, of course. 

 

Edited June 27, 2021 by th0ughtGun

[GraspingVileTerror]

I almost wonder if the problem isn't actually Corruptors, but it's that damned patchy implementation of Vigilance on Defenders.

Ship has sailed, and all that, but Vigilance has always had the shakiest implementation of any of the Blueside Inherents, as far as I'm concerned.  Even more-so than Desperation, when that was a thing.  But I absolutely acknowledge the difficulty in changing what was meant to be a team-only Archetype in to one which could effectively solo even for new or casual players.

 

Maybe the ATOs could also use some work.  None of the four ATO Procs for Defenders or Corruptors really scream "this is my identity" to me.  I mean, Scourging Blast and is a Defender's Bastion with some of the Heal swapped for Endurance, and the PPM dropped down.  Vigilant Assault is just that, but with Absorb instead of Heal.  And Malice of the Corruptor is just a super basic Negative Energy Damage Proc.

 

Maybe that's the place to refine things a little.  Malice of the Corruptor especially.
What interesting things could we supplement that NegDam Proc with?  

[Marbing]

5 minutes ago, GraspingVileTerror said:

I almost wonder if the problem isn't actually Corruptors, but it's that damned patchy implementation of Vigilance on Defenders.

Ship has sailed, and all that, but Vigilance has always had the shakiest implementation of any of the Blueside Inherents, as far as I'm concerned.  Even more-so than Desperation, when that was a thing.  But I absolutely acknowledge the difficulty in changing what was meant to be a team-only Archetype in to one which could effectively solo even for new or casual players.

 

Maybe the ATOs could also use some work.  None of the four ATO Procs for Defenders or Corruptors really scream "this is my identity" to me.  I mean, Scourging Blast and is a Defender's Bastion with some of the Heal swapped for Endurance, and the PPM dropped down.  Vigilant Assault is just that, but with Absorb instead of Heal.  And Malice of the Corruptor is just a super basic Negative Energy Damage Proc.

 

Maybe that's the place to refine things a little.  Malice of the Corruptor especially.
What interesting things could we supplement that NegDam Proc with?  

You raise a very good point! The ATO's would be a good place to help drill in that difference. Maybe Malice of the Corruptor could work similar to the Window ATO that makes all their attacks have a chance to proc Toxic damage? But in this case it would be Neg damage? IDK, you have me thinking...


And yes, the probably biggest change IMO that hurt Corruptors was giving Defenders a +30% damage bonus while solo, it was an insane and stupid change that never should have happened. 

Edited June 27, 2021 by th0ughtGun

[srmalloy]

2 minutes ago, GraspingVileTerror said:

Maybe that's the place to refine things a little.  Malice of the Corruptor especially.
What interesting things could we supplement that NegDam Proc with?  

Make the six-piece set bonus for the Corruptor ATOs include raising the HP threshold at which the server starts doing scourge checks.

[Marbing]

1 minute ago, srmalloy said:

Make the six-piece set bonus for the Corruptor ATOs include raising the HP threshold at which the server starts doing scourge checks.

Oooooo ... hmmmm... interesting out of the box idea! Or, similar to the Scrapper ATO, increase the global chance to Scourge after 50% by some set amount. 

Edited June 27, 2021 by th0ughtGun

[arcane]

18 hours ago, Tad Cooper said:

Yep, that extra .1 ranged damage scalar is gonna shoot defenders right into OP town. I can't remember how much the difference is on the buff multiplier right now but I'm sure that would be just too much for corruptors to have. After all, they almost do as much damage as a brute with no rage. And at RANGE which we all know is just a magic fucking I win button.

 

But you're right. Gonna completely ruin the game. Way too easy for everyone. Cottage rule and balance formulas or whatever.

I don’t think you understand what the “creep” portion of “power creep” means. It refers to something that becomes a problem incrementally, not some overnight implosion of a game. So this is a straw man.

 

Creep is also an engineering term describing how a structure fails due to very gradual deflection over a long period of time.

 

You also mentioned giving Defenders Scourge etc, so acting like I was only criticizing the multipliers proposal is called moving the goalposts. All around shoddy performance tbh.

Edited June 27, 2021 by arcane

[arcane]

7 hours ago, Tad Cooper said:

Why? It's a straight buff.

Why not give all melee AT’s scrapper damage modifiers, tanker mitigation modifiers, and stalker controlled crits? It’s a straight buff.

 

Do you review your own thoughts before posting?

[Marbing]

9 minutes ago, arcane said:

Why not give all melee AT’s scrapper damage modifiers, tanker mitigation modifiers, and stalker controlled crits? It’s a straight buff.

 

Do you review your own thoughts before posting?

I hesitate to say it, because I could be wrong and if I am that would technically be sort of insulting and I mean no insult: BUT, he could have been being sarcastic... maybe....

 

17 minutes ago, arcane said:

I don’t think you understand what the “creep” portion of “power creep” means. It refers to something that becomes a problem incrementally, not some overnight implosion of a game. So this is a straw man.

 

Creep is also an engineering term describing how a structure fails due to very gradual deflection over a long period of time.

 

You also mentioned giving Defenders Scourge etc, so acting like I was only criticizing the multipliers proposal is called moving the goalposts. All around shoddy performance tbh.

 

I think this is precisely how we landed at this discussion, via creep. Small changes over time:

-Vigilance gets +30% dmg buff solo
-Going Rogue, now Defenders and Corruptors can play both sides!
-Poison, Pain Dom, etc proliferated over to Defenders (and vice versa for some of the traditionally Defender powersets)
-Procs, procs, procs, procs....

Over time this is how we went from Corruptors serving a clear role, to where we are now. 

 

 

Edited June 27, 2021 by th0ughtGun

[Tad Cooper]

42 minutes ago, arcane said:

I don’t think you understand what the “creep” portion of “power creep” means. It refers to something that becomes a problem incrementally, not some overnight implosion of a game. So this is a straw man.

 

Creep is also an engineering term describing how a structure fails due to very gradual deflection over a long period of time.

 

You also mentioned giving Defenders Scourge etc, so acting like I was only criticizing the multipliers proposal is called moving the goalposts. All around shoddy performance tbh.

I'm perfectly aware of what power creep is. I'm also aware that we're talking about two ATs that are at basically the bottom of the balance heap and that whenever anybody talks about doing anything to them the first response is "power creep".  So forgive me for not taking you seriously, because there's plenty of power creep in the game already, and one man's power creep is another man's necessary balance adjustment.

 

As for my performance, well, I'm certainly willing to take criticism from a master. I mean, look at you! Listing out logical fallacies like that somehow constitutes an argument. Truly you have a dizzying intellect.

 

35 minutes ago, arcane said:

Why not give all melee AT’s scrapper damage modifiers, tanker mitigation modifiers, and stalker controlled crits? It’s a straight buff.

 

Do you review your own thoughts before posting?

Classy. It's almost like different concerns merit different arguments. *sigh* I need an eyeroll reaction so badly, but fine, I'll bite. We don't give them those things because they're different enough to define a niche. Corruptors and defenders are not.

 

Why did we buff tankers? Because there was no point in making one when you could make a brute. Why are people already asking for the bat to go the other way? Because now there's no point in making a brute when you can make a tanker. tho0ghtGun here is saying that there's no point making a corruptor when you can make a defender. See where I'm going with this?

 

Even if you come up with a unique role for both, as the devs tried to do with tankers, the complaints will begin. As far as I see the only solution is to make them equal, and to not take away anything in the process, or you just end up back at step one with "There is no point to making <x> when <y> exists." So yes, my response to "I think it's a stupid idea and I like them separate," was, "Why? This can only make characters better. No one is getting nerfed, or surpassed."

 

For that matter, if someone's toes were to be stepped on we'd catch it before it went live and discussion would happen about what to do. Off the top of my head, the 30% solo bonus would probably cease to be necessary at corruptor damage levels. So that might have to go or be reduced so solo corrupt-fenders don't somehow surpass blasters as the damage kings. Had you responded with an example likes this, I'd have taken your concerns more seriously. Or at least, responded more politely.

 

27 minutes ago, th0ughtGun said:

Over time this is how we went from Corruptors serving a clear role, to where we are now. 

 

Which was.... what, exactly? Buffing/blasting, right? What's a defenders clear role? Oh, buffing/blasting. Unless you manage come up with another niche in a game that is already overstuffed, I don't see how any mechanism we could implement doesn't result in some defender six months from now making the same exact complaints you did in the OP. Even if we nerf damage procs (which I believe is already on the table, so you may get what you wished for) you'll just get people complaining that THEIR thing can be supplanted by the existing set bonuses when other people's can't. There have been tons of posts like that already.

 

At any rate, I'm eager to see what, if anything, you all come up with. Expanding scourge is certainly interesting.

[arcane]

4 minutes ago, Tad Cooper said:

I'm also aware that we're talking about two ATs that are at basically the bottom of the balance heap

I’m not aware of that because it sounds false (slash unsupported at best).

Edited June 27, 2021 by arcane

[Marbing]

1 hour ago, Tad Cooper said:

Which was.... what, exactly? Buffing/blasting, right? What's a defenders clear role? Oh, buffing/blasting. Unless you manage come up with another niche in a game that is already overstuffed, I don't see how any mechanism we could implement doesn't result in some defender six months from now making the same exact complaints you did in the OP. Even if we nerf damage procs (which I believe is already on the table, so you may get what you wished for) you'll just get people complaining that THEIR thing can be supplanted by the existing set bonuses when other people's can't. There have been tons of posts like that already.

 

At any rate, I'm eager to see what, if anything, you all come up with. Expanding scourge is certainly interesting.

First, a Corruptors role was the support class for villains. Masterminds did this as well, but their modifiers are actually slightly lower so a Corruptor was better if you simply needed pure support. The twist that they did more damage helped them also semi fill the role of a blaster for ranged damage, a role that was also semi filled by Dominators at the time. Then, they allowed for Defenders and Corruptors to play together. And the line still was that there were certain buff/debuff sets you could only get on a Corruptor: Poison, Thermal, Pain Domination, Cold Domination. So again they still had a role, if you wanted one of those sets you had to play a Corruptor (or a Mastermind). There was a clearer line, or reason to create a Corruptor over a Defender. Then they proliferated all the powersets together among Defender/Corruptor. Including Fire Blast, Ice Blast, etc etc so that a Defender is essentially able to do everything a Corruptor could previously do and vice versa. On top of this, when they proliferated certain sets over to Defenders, they actually went ahead and made them weaker on Corruptors. An example of this I believe was Thermal Radiation's Melt Armor. It used to be -30% res on a Corruptor but after proliferating it to Defenders, they gave the Defenders the -30% res and dropped the Corruptor version to -22.5% (IIRC I could be wrong on the exact numbers). In the middle of all of this there was still the argument that Corruptors could do more damage solo and thus they were better/easier to play solo (which is niche role but still it was something to their advantage). But they messed that up when they added +30% damage to Defenders through Vigilance when they are solo. 

So, you see, there were a multitude of changes over time that reduced the necessity or need for a Corruptor to almost nothing. My argument is that you can make a small change to reverse this by adjusting their de-buff modifiers to match or surpass that of a Defender (preferably match, because I don't want to swing the pendulum too far). That way there is a clearer line that, Defender = Buff and Corruptor = De-buff. Though they can still do both if needed. Does where I am coming from make sense? 

I will admit my solution may not be the best. But I would like to see SOMETHING done to help Corruptors and I know I am not alone in this. 

Edited June 27, 2021 by th0ughtGun

[Sancerre]

9 hours ago, th0ughtGun said:

You raise a very good point! The ATO's would be a good place to help drill in that difference. Maybe Malice of the Corruptor could work similar to the Window ATO that makes all their attacks have a chance to proc Toxic damage? But in this case it would be Neg damage? IDK, you have me thinking...


And yes, the probably biggest change IMO that hurt Corruptors was giving Defenders a +30% damage bonus while solo, it was an insane and stupid change that never should have happened. 

 

i agree ATOs could be an interesting way to approach making defender/corruptor more unique from each other, but that wont necessarily keep corruptors out of the 'mathematically irrelevant' jail.
 

i otherwise agree with Tad Cooper's, more well thought out, statement about the pendulum swing of balance.  in your mind, there will _ALWAYS_ be one AT that is 'mathematically superior' and the other will be 'mathematically irrelevant'.  even if it is only a 1% difference.  nobody wants nerfs, but you cant buff each other in rotations and keep the rest of the game exactly the same.

 

So, you had already claimed that defenders do more damage than corruptors even in a team environment.   So, by your words, vigilance could be entirely taken away and defenders would still be stronger.  i would say if that is your stance, vigilance is not the problem.  vigilance is then only compounding on the greater problem.  so again, lets just take a very quick swing and buff corruptor base damage to offset the real problem in a more direct manner -- what do you think that 'mathematically irrelevant' number is and propose that as the change.  or perhaps you think defenders are overpowered and should be nerfed?  or, if damage proc IOs are the heart of all this... then why are we talking about corruptor vs defender specifically -- just to draw an example?

[Sunsette]

what i'm mostly getting from this thread is that damage procs are a problem, which I think is a wider issue than corrs vs defenders

[Marbing]

1 hour ago, Sancerre said:

 

i agree ATOs could be an interesting way to approach making defender/corruptor more unique from each other, but that wont necessarily keep corruptors out of the 'mathematically irrelevant' 

It absolutely could. 
 

1 hour ago, Sancerre said:

 

i otherwise agree with Tad Cooper's, more well thought out, statement about the pendulum swing of balance.  in your mind, there will _ALWAYS_ be one AT that is 'mathematically superior' and the other will be 'mathematically irrelevant'.  even if it is only a 1% difference.  nobody wants nerfs, but you cant buff each other in rotations and keep the rest of the game exactly the same.

 

Semantics. I am not talking about a 1% difference here. There is always going to be some mathematical differences, I am aware of that. The issue I am talking about bout is: Corruptors are better than Defenders at WHAT exactly? Right now, very little. I just want there to be a few more situations where a Corruptor shines over a Defender, period.

 

1 hour ago, Sancerre said:

So, you had already claimed that defenders do more damage than corruptors even in a team environment.   So, by your words, vigilance could be entirely taken away and defenders would still be stronger.  i would say if that is your stance, vigilance is not the problem.  vigilance is then only compounding on the greater problem.  so again, lets just take a very quick swing and buff corruptor base damage to offset the real problem in a more direct manner -- what do you think that 'mathematically irrelevant' number is and propose that as the change.  or perhaps you think defenders are overpowered and should be nerfed?  or, if damage proc IOs are the heart of all this... then why are we talking about corruptor vs defender specifically -- just to draw an example?

Not always no, but they can and often do. I never said Vigilance was the problem for team play nor was it the main problem for solo play, it simply makes the problem more glaring for solo play. I used Vigilance as an example of A PROBLEM not as THE PROBLEM. I also mentioned power proliferation and de-buffs to certain Corruptor sets that you didn’t comment on. As I mentioned earlier there were a lot of changes over time that got us here.

 

A straight damage buff has been talked about before and shot down, awhile ago. So I was trying to approach this from a different angle, I am not entirely opposed to one. If we wanted a Corruptor to do more damage than a Defender with Vigilance then the Corruptor would need to be at at least .85, they are at .75 now. AT LEAST, and I am not confident that would put them enough beyond to really mean anything. But that’s not including how de-buffs like extra -res fit as that will vary by power set. The problem is a straight damage buff may put them too close to Blasters or Dominators. Idk, I’d have to do the math on that. 
 

To be clear I am not looking for mathematical equivalence, I am looking for relevance. I want there to be more power set combinations that favor the Corruptor than currently exist but not so much that they are then better. I have said before in this thread I am worried about the pendulum swinging too far. So we are at least both on the same page there. But we can’t just keep using that argument to mean let’s just do nothing, or let’s nerf everyone (proc nerf) to make a few AT’s happy. Like the Devs have said, let’s find that happy medium.

 

 

Appreciate the feedback as always! 🙂 

 

 

Edited June 28, 2021 by th0ughtGun

[arcane]

Corruptors are, on average, definitely regarded as more useful than Defenders in PvP. Be nice if someone could comment on that and why.

[Marbing]

I guess everyone agrees this is simply a proc problem. Maybe it is. It is clear however that no one likes the idea I presented, haha. That is fine, I figured it was a reach. Well I guess we will see what happens when procs are “rebalanced”.

Peace out y’all. Thank you all for the feedback!

Edited June 28, 2021 by th0ughtGun

[Marbing]

6 minutes ago, arcane said:

Corruptors are, on average, definitely regarded as more useful than Defenders in PvP. Be nice if someone could comment on that and why.

You bring up a good point and this may have to do with build flexibility favoring the Corruptor in PvP since you don’t really need to worry about defense because of DR. 

[arcane]

Just now, th0ughtGun said:

You bring up a good point and this may have to do with build flexibility favoring the Corruptor in PvP since you don’t really need to worry about defense because of DR. 

It might just be that people are primarily favoring corruptors for team pvp where vigilance is no longer leveling the playing field at all.