Thoughts on the Sentinel (feedback/theorycrafting ahoy)

[Nerva]

Just now, Zeraphia said:

The simple reason is this: there are enemies that are meant to have invulnerability phases such as Reichsman (apologies if I spelled that wrong) in his T9 "god mode." If you applied Tar Patch or what would be this Sentinel's debuff, his resistance would completely flatline. True -resistance flat values are not really something that can be implemented without a lot of overhaul. 

 

I do remember that, actually, but I thought they fixed that by making invulnerable states separate from just bonkers-high levels of resistance.  If I'm remembering right, an enemy that's truly invulnerable is just flagged to be not subject to attacks, the game just skips calculating the effects of a hit calculation entirely.

[Zeraphia]

Just now, Nerva said:

 

I do remember that, actually, but I thought they fixed that by making invulnerable states separate from just bonkers-high levels of resistance.  If I'm remembering right, an enemy that's truly invulnerable is just flagged to be not subject to attacks, the game just skips calculating the effects of a hit calculation entirely.

Even so... just taking your word for it that they did, true -resistance flat values are probably not the way to go with how imbalanced that would actually be for the state of the game. It would turn what is arguably one of the worst inherents in the game into probably the most broken mechanic in the game (especially when stacked...)

 

Honestly, -resistance is a really funky way to bring support to a team (either being way too good in the case of a Tar Patch situation or being "meh" in the current case with the base Sentinel inherent) from an AT that's not really dedicated to it in the way that Cold/Sonic are dedicated to doing that. 

 

To be truthful, I think the best ways to go about it are either a form of "enemy takes bonus total damage" (adding a true 30% bonus damage to all attacks received from a marked enemy that get diminishing returns the more you add it), straight up damage boost increases, or criticals. Of the options, criticals are the tried and true to me and that's why I favor that solution. 

[kelika2]

If you buff one thing, other things will suffer, its best to not meddle and just let be and have fun + being yourself.

Dont take blaster roles

Dont take tanker roles

Sentinels are fine

 

Actually I take most of that back

I do not like how the sentinel inherent does not apply on a miss.  that 5% to miss and waiting to recharge happens as much as you might think it does but the impact is staggering

I take back the taken thing back because Stalkers can miss AS, a single target hold can miss when Domination is up, and a brute can miss a maximum fury t9 attack 5% of the time

Edited December 20, 2021 by kelika2

[Troo]

A common mistake is to think "Sentinels are supposed to be awesome".

 

Sentinels = tempered expectations

[Gobbledigook]

1 hour ago, kelika2 said:

If you buff one thing, other things will suffer, its best to not meddle and just let be and have fun + being yourself.

Dont take blaster roles

Dont take tanker roles

Sentinels are fine

 

Actually I take most of that back

I do not like how the sentinel inherent does not apply on a miss.  that 5% to miss and waiting to recharge happens as much as you might think it does but the impact is staggering

I take back the taken thing back because Stalkers can miss AS, a single target hold can miss when Domination is up, and a brute can miss a maximum fury t9 attack 5% of the time

I agree on don't take Blaster or Tanker roles but i don't think anyone has suggested that really.

 

Buffing a thing does not mean another will suffer. Tankers are better, Stone armour is better, Energy melee is better. Many things have been tweaked and most for the better. Maybe not quite as i would have done some of them, but i am not in charge... thankfully lol.

[Gobbledigook]

8 minutes ago, Troo said:

A common mistake is to think "Sentinels are supposed to be awesome".

 

Sentinels = tempered expectations

They just need a few buffs (damage or increased targets) in my opinion and to be made a little more unique and interesting. They get quite boring very quickly, but that could just be me. Nothing they do stands out. At least a Blaster can destroy mobs very fast which is fun and with a lot more risk which is fun also.

Edited December 20, 2021 by Gobbledegook

[BrandX]

2 hours ago, macskull said:

I'm not a fan of click powers for things like this because it's one more thing the player has to time and juggle with the rest of their powers. Domination is an annoyance as a click power and I'm sure Opportunity would end up the same way.

 

I'm not much a fan of it either, but I know I'm not a fan it's current form even more, as it's linked to taking specific attacks.

 

Could make it easier, I guess, by just linking it to both Tier 1 and Tier 2 attack and giving both a decent offense AND defense all at once.

 

What if, you need to use one of those attacks to use Opportunity.  Now, players would of course always use it (unless they ignore tier 1 and 2 attacks) and it could put a -Resist on the target and a give the player a defense bonus of some sort.

 

-Resist that lasts a decent length of time and does a decent amount of -Resist to be noticeable, while also giving a 3-5 second Huge Defense bonus.  Sort of a critical hit and critical defense.

[Wavicle]

3 hours ago, macskull said:

The rub here comes from the survivability-to-damage relationship. The four melee ATs sort of have this figured out already though there is some muddying of the waters between Scrappers and Stalkers if you aren't factoring in the ATO procs. The powers guy has gone on record as saying Sentinels will not get increased target caps and a damage scale increase to anything more than 1.0 (maybe 1.05 if someone's feeling lucky) is probably off the table as well. They weren't really intended to compete directly with Blasters but that's how it's shaken out. The question then becomes "what is good enough?" and I'm not sure there's a good answer to that question. The mechanics of the game ensure that you'll always be able to bring a Blaster up to Sentinel survivability levels but you'll never be able to bring a Sentinel up to Blaster damage levels.

 

Clearly, just adding more damage isn't the answer. Sentinels have been intentionally kneecapped in too many different ways to be able to compete on an even footing with other damage-centric ATs, so they need to bring something else to the table. Like you said: they don't need to be a tank, and they don't need to be real support, but if they can offer some support ability they'll at least be more desirable as a "damage dealer/force multiplier" than "damage dealer that deals less damage than the other damage-dealing ATs and doesn't bring anything else."

 

But they do offer Some support.

 

They're clearly tough enough for a DPS or a Support. So Armor does not need to be increased.

Either damage or support or both need to go up.

IMO, bringing Support up is pushing them towards being Armored Corruptors, and I think most people who play them do so because they wanted Armored Blasters. That's why I think increasing Damage over Support is the better idea. Again, IMO, with higher damage the lower target caps (although I wouldn't object to the 3s at least becoming 5s) and lower range would be acceptable.

[Troo]

3 hours ago, Wavicle said:

IMO, bringing Support up is pushing them towards being Armored Corruptors, and I think most people who play them do so because they wanted Armored Blasters. That's why I think increasing Damage over Support is the better idea. Again, IMO, with higher damage the lower target caps (although I wouldn't object to the 3s at least becoming 5s) and lower range would be acceptable.

 

armored Corruptors is fairly accurate.

 

armored Blaster, well, that's was not ever going to happen.

 

having Blaster anywhere near a Sentinel description is the mistake.

 

 

Here, I've fixed it:

The Sentinel is a powerful ranged combatant with moderate protective powers and protection against control powers. Sturdier than a Blaster Corruptor, it also has the ability to distract enemies to avoid being overwhelmed.

[Ignatz the Insane]

7 hours ago, macskull said:

 They weren't really intended to compete directly with Blasters but that's how it's shaken out. 

Agreed.  I also agree that a straight damage buff probably isn't the right way to go.   I see them as a more hybrid AT.  How about giving them a kindof reverse Cosmic Balance to aid teammates?  Every Blaster in the team gives a bit of Mez Resistance (protection?  I dunno), Tanks give damage, Defenders give Defense, and so on.  Obviously these values would be small, but it would give Sentinels value in teams.

[Nerva]

7 minutes ago, Ignatz the Insane said:

How about giving them a kindof reverse Cosmic Balance to aid teammates?  Every Blaster in the team gives a bit of Mez Resistance (protection?  I dunno), Tanks give damage, Defenders give Defense, and so on.  Obviously these values would be small, but it would give Sentinels value in teams.

 

This would put their inherent uncomfortably close to the performance of the HEAT inherents without actually being HEATs themselves.

 

BTW, as a reminder of how the HEAT inherents work:

 

Peacebringer - Cosmic Balance

Tanker, Mastermind, Corruptor, Defender = +DAM

Scrapper, Brute, Stalker, Blaster = +RES
Controller, Dominator = +MezProt

HEAT/VEAT = +SlowRes

 

Warshade - Dark Sustenance

Tanker, Mastermind, Corruptor, Defender = +RES

Scrapper, Stalker, Brute, Blaster = + DAM

Controller, Dominator = +MezProt

HEAT/VEAT = +SlowRes

[Ignatz the Insane]

2 minutes ago, Nerva said:

This would put their inherent uncomfortably close to the performance of the HEAT inherents without actually being HEATs themselves.

I'll reiterate: Reverse Cosmic Balance.  In other words, rather than increasing values for themselves, they increase values for team members.

[Nerva]

11 minutes ago, Ignatz the Insane said:

I'll reiterate: Reverse Cosmic Balance.  In other words, rather than increasing values for themselves, they increase values for team members.

 

My apologies, I missed the "to aid teammates" in there when I read it.  I read it and I thought, "reverse cosmic balance already exists, it's Dark Sustenance."  My mistake.

 

Kinda wondering if it's bit too strong, given how powerful it'd be compared to HEAT inherents, but then again, basic ATs tend to have stronger inherents than Epic ATs to begin with.

[DreadShinobi]

8 hours ago, macskull said:

The rub here comes from the survivability-to-damage relationship. The four melee ATs sort of have this figured out already though there is some muddying of the waters between Scrappers and Stalkers if you aren't factoring in the ATO procs. The powers guy has gone on record as saying Sentinels will not get increased target caps and a damage scale increase to anything more than 1.0 (maybe 1.05 if someone's feeling lucky) is probably off the table as well. They weren't really intended to compete directly with Blasters but that's how it's shaken out. The question then becomes "what is good enough?" and I'm not sure there's a good answer to that question. The mechanics of the game ensure that you'll always be able to bring a Blaster up to Sentinel survivability levels but you'll never be able to bring a Sentinel up to Blaster damage levels.

 

Clearly, just adding more damage isn't the answer. Sentinels have been intentionally kneecapped in too many different ways to be able to compete on an even footing with other damage-centric ATs, so they need to bring something else to the table. Like you said: they don't need to be a tank, and they don't need to be real support, but if they can offer some support ability they'll at least be more desirable as a "damage dealer/force multiplier" than "damage dealer that deals less damage than the other damage-dealing ATs and doesn't bring anything else."

 

I'm not a fan of click powers for things like this because it's one more thing the player has to time and juggle with the rest of their powers. Domination is an annoyance as a click power and I'm sure Opportunity would end up the same way.

 

Thing is if Sentinel damage modifiers and target caps are left alone they absolutely need some form of increased team utility. There are only 3 archetypes in the game that have singular roles on teams - sentinels, stalkers, and blasters, which sentinels are not going to be competing with in the dps department, if they are not competitive with other single role archetypes they need to have some tertiary function which would either be some aggro control capabilities, or stronger/more consistent buff/debuff function likely tied to their inherent.

 

As others have mentioned their secondary is very lacking in purpose in a team environment because they have little way to leverage their higher survivability compared to other armored archetypes that can leverage their survivability with taunt functions and compared to non-armored ranged archetypes that have powerful support sets. dps/armor without taunt works for stalkers because they're stuck in melee range to dish out their damage and their single target damage is high enough to make that singular team role valid. Sentinel dps is in a good place when you consider the extreme safety provided by being an armored archetype that also has a range advantage, but it is not in a good place when your survivability is no longer creating any or minimal advantage for you or your team members - ie balanced solo, function lacking in teams.

[Ignatz the Insane]

14 minutes ago, Nerva said:

 

My apologies, I missed the "to aid teammates" in there when I read it.  I read it and I thought, "reverse cosmic balance already exists, it's Dark Sustenance."  My mistake.

 

Kinda wondering if it's bit too strong, given how powerful it'd be compared to HEAT inherents, but then again, basic ATs tend to have stronger inherents than Epic ATs to begin with.

Oh, no worries!  I agree that the values and additions would need to be relatively small.  But look at the name of the AT itself: Sentinel.  A guardian for the team.  The vast majority of complaints are related to team utility.  

[Gobbledigook]

We have Arachnos widows/soldiers, are they not support/dps?  They are on a higher damage scale than sentinels. They hit more targets than Sentinels. They have better support skills than Sentinels and they are durable also. They even have better Range.

 

Why do the Sentinels get the shaft compared to these?

 

Durable Support/dps role is filled also in my opinion.

 

I think a durable Blaster type with good damage, close to Blaster but lower targets and range is fine. Reduce the range even more if needed to actually make use of that armour. More durable than blasters but less damage. Opportunity was meant to give the Sentinel some spikes in damage to rival or even beat scrappers/blasters i am sure the developers have said somewhere. It clearly isn't working.

A damage buff and rework Opportunity completely would be enough.

Edited December 21, 2021 by Gobbledegook

[Luminara]

Remove the T1/T2 requirement on Opportunity, and change what Opportunity does to applying a sizeable -Special debuff, or a PBAoE +Special buff, or both.  Archetypal design adhered to, team role significantly improved, no-one's toes stepped on.  Every teammate benefits if the sentinel is improving the values of debuffs/controls on targets, or improving the buffs on nearby teammates, and the sentinel benefits as well, to a lesser degree, even in a solo environment.

 

Alternatively, merge the existing Opportunities into one, make them both AoE (AoE -Res and PBAoE Heal/+End), and remove the T1/T2 constraint.  Takes some pressure off of support, allowing them to participate in combat more, and adds value to damage dealers without restricting them to a single target (which is likely to be defeated within a couple of seconds for anything below AV HP).

[Wavicle]

5 hours ago, Gobbledegook said:

We have Arachnos widows/soldiers, are they not support/dps?  They are on a higher damage scale than sentinels. They hit more targets than Sentinels. They have better support skills than Sentinels and they are durable also. They even have better Range.

 

Why do the Sentinels get the shaft compared to these?

 

Durable Support/dps role is filled also in my opinion.

 

I think a durable Blaster type with good damage, close to Blaster but lower targets and range is fine. Reduce the range even more if needed to actually make use of that armour. More durable than blasters but less damage. Opportunity was meant to give the Sentinel some spikes in damage to rival or even beat scrappers/blasters i am sure the developers have said somewhere. It clearly isn't working.

A damage buff and rework Opportunity completely would be enough.

This is my take as well.

[Zeraphia]

3 hours ago, Luminara said:

Remove the T1/T2 requirement on Opportunity, and change what Opportunity does to applying a sizeable -Special debuff, or a PBAoE +Special buff, or both.  Archetypal design adhered to, team role significantly improved, no-one's toes stepped on.  Every teammate benefits if the sentinel is improving the values of debuffs/controls on targets, or improving the buffs on nearby teammates, and the sentinel benefits as well, to a lesser degree, even in a solo environment.

 

Alternatively, merge the existing Opportunities into one, make them both AoE (AoE -Res and PBAoE Heal/+End), and remove the T1/T2 constraint.  Takes some pressure off of support, allowing them to participate in combat more, and adds value to damage dealers without restricting them to a single target (which is likely to be defeated within a couple of seconds for anything below AV HP).

I like this approach, it differs from mine as mine comes from a place of "how do we get Sentinels to be worth selecting over other ATs for their role." This wouldn't step on toes, Sentinels wouldn't be crazy or anything but it would be a large QOL improvement. This said, I still would advocate for a higher damage buff to some specific primary sets and rework some of the "nuke" cooldowns, otherwise fine. Possibly even a small base damage scale increase, but this would be a great step.

[Gobbledigook]

 @Luminara I am not sure some support players would be happy if they were not needed as much or feel they contribute less to a team. They enjoy being that support role, healing/buffing etc. If they wanted to dps i guess they would just roll a dps class. I'm not against what you say though, just thought i'd mention that.

 

We have lots of support classes already. defenders/corruptors, controllers, Veat, MM's etc. Not to say your idea won't work though. I just wouldn't want to lessen the supports roles.

 

Sentinel is in an awkward position.  A Scrapper like blaster type with some sort of reworked Opportunity is not a bad place. Reduced range/targets but good dps.

Edited December 21, 2021 by Gobbledegook

[aethereal]

Guys.  Sentinels have blast set, not a support set.  Their role can't be support because they don't have support powers.  Increasing the scale of their debuffs (for those sets which have them, which is not all of them) might be nice icing on the cake, but it's not the cake.

[Luminara]

2 hours ago, Gobbledegook said:

 @Luminara I am not sure some support players would be happy if they were not needed as much or feel they contribute less to a team. They enjoy being that support role, healing/buffing etc. If they wanted to dps i guess they would just roll a dps class. I'm not against what you say though, just thought i'd mention that.

 

Which is why the post began with a suggested +/-Special change to Opportunity, which would improve the contribution of all characters, and raise the potential value of support characters without urging players to alter their style.  +Special would emphasize support's contribution by increasing the effectiveness of various buffs, such as Heals, Regeneration and Endurance Modification.  -Special would be less of an emphasis specifically on support's debuffs and more of a general "sentinels make teams better all around" improvement by increasing the effectiveness of everyone's secondary effects and support's debuffs/controls.

 

The latter half of the post, which was what you appear to feel would present an issue, was, as noted in the opening word, an alternative.  Specifically, it's proposed as an alternative because it's the least work-intensive approach to making the archetype contribute to teams more than it currently does and simultaneously improving the experience of playing one.  In other words, if they can't be bothered to do anything else, they could do that with a few keystrokes and call it a day, and we'd have something, however slight, to offer to teams beyond second-rate damage output and occasional off-tanking.

 

+/-Special would be my preferred approach, as it reflects the concept behind sentinel design, and it's both team-friendly and of some value solo.  It would create a real, appreciable role for the archetype, and resolve the Opportunity issue.  Make everyone on the team better just by being on the team and doing what you do (hit things until they stop moving).  Everyone wins, no-one's obviated (or forced to pew-pew when they don't want to).

[Gobbledigook]

1 hour ago, Luminara said:

 

Which is why the post began with a suggested +/-Special change to Opportunity, which would improve the contribution of all characters, and raise the potential value of support characters without urging players to alter their style.  +Special would emphasize support's contribution by increasing the effectiveness of various buffs, such as Heals, Regeneration and Endurance Modification.  -Special would be less of an emphasis specifically on support's debuffs and more of a general "sentinels make teams better all around" improvement by increasing the effectiveness of everyone's secondary effects and support's debuffs/controls.

 

The latter half of the post, which was what you appear to feel would present an issue, was, as noted in the opening word, an alternative.  Specifically, it's proposed as an alternative because it's the least work-intensive approach to making the archetype contribute to teams more than it currently does and simultaneously improving the experience of playing one.  In other words, if they can't be bothered to do anything else, they could do that with a few keystrokes and call it a day, and we'd have something, however slight, to offer to teams beyond second-rate damage output and occasional off-tanking.

 

+/-Special would be my preferred approach, as it reflects the concept behind sentinel design, and it's both team-friendly and of some value solo.  It would create a real, appreciable role for the archetype, and resolve the Opportunity issue.  Make everyone on the team better just by being on the team and doing what you do (hit things until they stop moving).  Everyone wins, no-one's obviated (or forced to pew-pew when they don't want to).

Yes i actually mentioned  similar quite a while back about +special. I just wanted to state how some may feel to all as others have mentioned them being more a support class.  But i have no issues with it.

Edited December 21, 2021 by Gobbledegook

[Zeraphia]

I think this is one of those things that we'll just have to wait and see what happens. We know that there will be buffs to the Sentinel. They could go the route of improving the damage and changing the inherent to make the AT more damaging, or they could make the supportive functions (+special magnification is still support-oriented) re-emphasized. While I suspect there is anti-meta sentiments on the forums, the real on-game players who don't post on the forums will likely prefer the former over the latter. 

[MHertz]

I’ve been thinking about the whole aggro position — that due to their weak damage, Sentinels don’t generate enough of it. Until I get a chance to run copious tests in AE with a fixed set of testing characters, I’ll make do with numbers we know of and try to predict what I think the data would say.

 

What I tried to calculate was the total amount of Threat generated by each AT over the course of a single fight. This meant coming up with a formula:

Melee_DPS = Base_Dam * AT_Melee_Dam_Scale * AT_%Melee

 

Ranged_DPS = Base_Dam * AT_Ranged_Dam_Mod * AT_%Ranged

 

Avg_DPS = Melee_DPS + Range_DPS

 

((where Base_DPS is 50, for the sake of argument;

AT_Melee_Dam_Scale is B 1, C 0.55, D 0.55, Scr 1.125, T 0.8, Sent 0.95;

AT_Ranged_Dam_Scale is B 1.125, C 0.55, D 0.65, Scr 0.5, T 0.5, Sent 0.95;

AT_%Melee is the proportion of time spent using melee powers: B 0.4, C 0, D 0, Scr 1, T 1, Sent 0
AT_%Ranged is B 0.6, C 1, D 1, Scr 0, T 0, Sent 1))
 

Dam_Output = Avg_DPS * AT_%Att

((where AT_%Att is the proportion of time the AT spends attacking and not managing their secondary set, as follows: B 1, C 0.8, D 0.6, Scr 0.9, T 0.8, Sent 0.9))

 

Time_to_Defeat (solo) = Crowd_HP / Dam_Output

 

((the ideal number of seconds it takes to defeat a group of enemies, not accounting for overkill DPS; where Crowd_XP is the total HP of a group of enemies; for the sake of argument, there are 3 enemies X 120 HP for 360 total; the actual number here isn’t essential because all we care about is the percent of damage each AT contributes))

 

Time to Defeat (duo) = Crowd_HP / (member1_Dam_Output + member2_Dam_Output)

((the time to defeat a group of enemies on a duo, with each member bringing their respective damage outputs))

 

Threat_Gen = Time_to_Defeat (duo) * Dam_Output (member1) * AT_Threat (member1)

 

((the amount of Threat generated by each member, discounting Taunt and any applied debuffs — just imagine all attacks are Fire, and have no secondary effect; where AT_Threat is assumed as follows: B 1, C 1, D 1, Scr 3, T 4, Sent 1. Edit: I could not find a figure for Sentinel AT Threat, so I am going with 1. If the real figure is closer to 2 or 3 that would help manage group aggro, but it doesn’t seem to match with what I’m seeing.))

 

%_Threat = divide total Threat_Gen of the team by the Threat_Gen of the individual

 

So yeah.

 

What I got was this:

 

Estimated Amount of Damage-Based Aggro of Given AT Based on AT of Teammate:

 

Blaster. C 66.2%, D 66.2%, Scr 24.2%, T 25.1%, Sent 53.1%

Controller. B 33.8%, D 45.8%, Scr 14.0%, T 14.7%, Sent 36.7%
 

Defender. B 33.8%, C 54.2%, Scr 16.1%, T 16.9%, Sent 40.6%
 

Scrapper: B 75.8%, C 86.0%, D 83.9%, T 51.3%, Sent 78.0%
 

Tanker: B 74.8%, C 85.3%, D 83.1%, Scr 48.7%, Sent 77.1%
 

Sentinel: B 46.9%, C 63.3%, D 59.4%, Scr 22.0%, T 22.9%

I think these calculations are pretty close. It shows Blasters get lots of aggro when teamed with another squishy; but they benefit when there’s a meat shield around.  When there’s a Sentinel on the team, the Sent takes some aggro off the Blaster’s shoulders, taking about half of the total — but that still means the Blaster takes the other half of the aggro without armor.

 

Controllers grab more aggro when teamed with Defenders. They get about as much aggro teamed with either a Blaster or a Sentinel; and of course they benefit from melee guys. A Controller’s secondary set doesn’t do much good when paired with a Sentinel; the Controller can’t protect herself and the Sent doesn’t need much.

 

Defenders take the most aggro when teamed with Controllers (54.2%), and second most with Sentinels (40.6%). Defenders can also protect the Sentinel, who doesn’t need it; but the Sentinel doesn’t do much for protecting the Defender, whose self-protection is often minimal.

 

Scrappers and Tankers are not significantly assisted by the presence of a Sentinel over any other AT, because Sentinels are incapable of peeling away aggro from either of them.

 

Despite having very good armor, Sentinels rarely take anything like Scrapper or Tanker levels of aggro. The most aggro Sentinels take is when paired with Controllers or Defenders who can offer even more protection to them.

 

If these calculations hold up when debuffs are accounted for, then it doesn’t seem like most ATs benefit (in the survivability/aggro sense) from having a Sentinel around. Only a Blaster does better with a Sentinel, but is still splitting the aggro evenly with an armored ally, despite having no armor themselves.

 

So, you might ask, what happens if we increase the damage scale for Sentinels?

 

You could scale Sentinel damage as high as 1.08 before it matches Blaster aggro generation (at least by this crude calculation). This would mean the Blaster gets 49.9% of aggro when paired with a Sentinel (and still has no armor, so a modest improvement at best). This is the break even point, at which Sentinels become as good as Blasters at dealing damage and siphoning aggro from teammates, while being much more durable.

 

That, to me, is the problem with Sentinels. They can withstand more damage than they naturally attract, so their team presence is a wash at best.

 

Now to do actual in-game testing to see if this model is borne out by the data.

Edited December 21, 2021 by MHertz