Thoughts on the Sentinel (feedback/theorycrafting ahoy)

[aethereal]

All the stuff about party roles are...  true enough, just wildly overstated.

 

Look, let's take a look at a Brute.

 

What's its party role?  Well, it can be a tank, of course, but it's not as good at tanking as a Tanker (less durable, worse aggro management).  It can be melee DPS, but it's lower DPS than a Scrapper or Stalker.  So, that's another way of saying that its party role is kinda bad.  If you were talking, "How do we try to make a tip-top party that can perform at the absolute maximum in the hardest content in the game," you wouldn't put a Brute in that team.

 

It turns out that lots of content in CoH is pretty easy, and you don't need tip-top tanking to be able to handle it, and a Brute is just fine as the main tank for 95% of the content in the game, and, with even minimal support, can indeed handle the rest of the content.  And you also don't need tip-top melee DPS, so even if the Brute isn't being the tank, it's also fine.

 

But people don't agonize about the Brute's party role.  Because approximately 0 people care about making the perfect optimal team in CoH, and the Brute can pull its weight well enough.

 

Teaming in CoH runs a gamut from "we genuinely don't give the tiniest shit about team composition, we'll take literally everyone, it doesn't matter if this team is eight Blasters" to "We'd kinda like to get at least someone able to tank, a couple of people who can DPS, maybe at least one support role, and then we don't really care about what else."  People who care more about team composition than that are a tiny, ignorable subset of the game.

 

The Sentinel's team role is just "ranged DPS."  And all it needs to fulfill that role is a damage boost.  If the Sentinel's damage is more-or-less comparable to other DPS ATs, all this stuff about "omg how do we make sure that we're leveraging the exact balance of its armor sets" stuff will evaporate, and people will treat it like they do all the other characters who , yes, aren't quite perfect for the party composition, but are good enough for the very, very, very loose composition requirements that we actually have.

[Nerva]

1 hour ago, UltraAlt said:

Opinions are often shared.

It's why vanilla is still a flavor.

False equivalency.  You're equating 'vanilla' with 'plain' - it's not.

 

1 hour ago, UltraAlt said:

You don't need taunt. You just blast them and keep them busy until they fall over. Or knock them back toward the melee characters.

Your views seem to be very narrow.

I guess there are no controllers to lock them down before they can advance past the Sentinel(s)?

Again you're bringing up other ATs in a Sentinel thread.  But hey, I'll entertain this one because it's a perfect illustration of my point.

 

Controllers have the tools to operate from midline, by using Control powers (seriously, it's right there in the name!) to stop enemies from advancing.  Meanwhile, Sentinel damage is low, which interferes with just straight up killing strong strays; their target cap is low, which interferes with killing mobs of weak strays; they don't have taunt or control powers, which means they can't distract strays; and only a few powersets actually have widespread access to KB or other soft control tools to 'keep strays busy'.

 

Even if there are Controllers or Doms in a party with a Sentinel, if a Control powers are on a stray mob then the Sentinel is doing nothing to intervene aside from deal damage.  You could replace the Sentinel in this situation with a blaster, a scrapper, a stalker, a corruptor, a brute, a tanker, even a freakin' Defender and either do the job better, or bring more to the table for the party once the crisis is over.  The Controller is protecting the midline, the Sentinel is just another DPS, and not even a particularly good one.

 

And that there is the entire point of this thread.  All of the others either have exceptional damage or something besides their damage to offer a party.  Sentinel doesn't.

 

1 hour ago, UltraAlt said:

You're just against Sentinels, and there is nothing going to change your mind unless things change to suit what you want.

 

I'm fine with the Sentinels.

I don't need to discuss this any further.

I've stated my views.

 

Hey, if you're going to accuse me of something I'm not doing or being, door's that way.

 

I'm not against Sentinels.  If I was, I'd be advocating for the AT to be straight friggin' deleted.  I want to improve Sentinels so that they have a clear role in a party and have the tools to handle that role properly.  I don't care really what that role is so long as it's valuable and welcomed.  I'm not even particularly attached to my initial idea, because a lot of other people have pointed out others that I see equally as valid.  Sentinels could very well be the midline squishy-protectors you see them as, I just want them to have the tools to do it and do it well.  They currently don't.

 

1 hour ago, aethereal said:

What's its party role?  Well, it can be a tank, of course, but it's not as good at tanking as a Tanker (less durable, worse aggro management).  It can be melee DPS, but it's lower DPS than a Scrapper or Stalker.  So, that's another way of saying that its party role is kinda bad.  If you were talking, "How do we try to make a tip-top party that can perform at the absolute maximum in the hardest content in the game," you wouldn't put a Brute in that team.

 

It turns out that lots of content in CoH is pretty easy, and you don't need tip-top tanking to be able to handle it, and a Brute is just fine as the main tank for 95% of the content in the game, and, with even minimal support, can indeed handle the rest of the content.  And you also don't need tip-top melee DPS, so even if the Brute isn't being the tank, it's also fine.

 

But people don't agonize about the Brute's party role.  Because approximately 0 people care about making the perfect optimal team in CoH, and the Brute can pull its weight well enough.

 

Emphasis mine.

 

Fair points, but that last line is of particular note.  The Brute can pull its weight well enough.  It's not as good at tanking as a tanker, in terms of durability or taunt generation - that's just a simple fact.  But it's got enough that in most content, you won't notice a difference and the Brute's got extra damage aside, meaning the team as a whole puts down mobs faster.  It doesn't have the damage output of a Scrapper or Blaster, but is more durable and can grab any strays that manage to escape the tank, meaning both it and the whole team is safer.  Finally, the combination of damage and durability means it's easy to play solo and fun if you want to just run up to enemies and smash heads.

 

This is why we're not complaining about Brutes "not having a role."  They have roles - in fact, they're suitable for a couple roles (Melee DPS, tank, offtank) based on what the party needs, and if a party doesn't need one the Brute can switch up roles without even having to change playstyle much.  A Brute can change roles in a party just by switching targets - smash things on the tank when DPS is needed, smash things not on the tank and headed for the backfield when squishies need protecting, smash things attacking you when you are the tank.  Simple, direct, effective.

 

Sentinel, however, is not filling its roles well enough on a team.  Yeah, it can solo, it's fun for that.  But while it could be DPS on a team, its damage is anemic.  It could be a midline squishy protector, but it lacks the damage, soft or hard control, and/or aggro generation to do that reliably through control or tanking. It could possibly be an armored support but only does that through its inherent as it has no powers in either set that readily support allies or meaningfully debuff enemies.

 

Which brings us back around to the driving question of this thread - what is the Sentinel's intended role(s) on a team, and what tools are they lacking to do that job well?

 

Personally, I'm not particularly attached to any given role.  I was originally, but opinions change, especially with some of the better reasoning put forward in this thread.  @aethereal puts forward that they're ranged DPS; I'd be cool with that, if their damage bore out the role and their defense set saw use in typical play in that role.  @UltraAlt puts forward that they're midline squishy-protectors, and I'd be cool with that, if their control or aggro generation were enough to button up strays that peel off the tank due to overaggro by a squishy or failure to maintain aggro properly by the tank. I don't care what Sentinels are supposed to do so long as they do it, and do it well enough to be desired for it.

Right now, the only place a Sentinel performs well enough is in solo play, and if that's all that they're meant to do, fine.  But if that's the case, I just want some dev confirmation that this is all they're meant for.

 

Edited December 26, 2021 by Nerva
Fixing a few typos and omitted words

[aethereal]

@Nerva I certainly agree that the Sent needs a boost, and a significant one, for its team role as DPS.  I just don't think we need to conjure up a complicated mechanic or extremely specific role.

[Gobbledigook]

My view as i have said earlier is just increase their damage closer to Blasters/Scrappers, maybe 1.1 damage scale. Make them a damage class. They will still have lower target caps than Blasters and lower damage due to defiance and scrapper crits.

 

Opportunity will give them a damage boost in some way allowing them to equal or excel Scrapper/Blaster dps for a short time. Use the same mechanic but let it affect all attacks could be an easy option.

[A Cat]

1 hour ago, UltraAlt said:

 

It seem to be throwing out the baby and keeping the bath water to me.

 

 

I use placate all the time to set an assassin strike, but I think it is the long execute you use as you act as though you are hidden to the target.

Basically, slow AS is not worth it on teams since it actually has bad damage per animation time, and your team is generally not going to give you time to execute it, and with a whole teams worth of controls, buffs, and debuffs, the fear/tohit debuffs won't be helpful since they will be taunted/controlled/debuffed/dead in an instant anyway. Solo it is helpful for your own survivability and the juicy partially unresisted burst damage to quickly delete a threat but it is rarely a helpful factor on a team vs just doing more overall damage in the same time instead. Not to mention slow AS is interruptible and fiddly to get to work in a chaotic battle. If the boss you are trying to AS gets taunted and runs to the tank while you are trying to AS, then it will fail when they get too far out of range. With assassin's focus stacks you are doing a huge amount of damage with a tiny animation time with fast AS. AS turns from bad damage per animation attack to an insurmountably good one with the assassin's focus stacks. 

 

Even with placate I'd still crit with a non AS attack if I'm trying to maximize DPS. Fast AS + stacks of assassin's focus is just that good. 

[Gobbledigook]

I think the stalker talk has gone as far as needed for this thread guys.

[Glacier Peak]

Maybe the farther away or closer the Sentinel is to the target the less damage bonus they get? With the current damage modifier as the lowest baseline of the spectrum and 1.1 damage modifier as the top boost from specified distance. Folks keep talking mid-range skirmisher, so that could entice a playstyle.

 

I'm just not sold on the idea of static close, mid-, or long range as being a required playstyle. What about kiting and range boosting modifiers? This is a tough conundrum.

[aethereal]

My wish-list for the Sentinel doesn't just include a damage bump, btw: I just think that's all it needs for its team role.

 

The other thing I think Sentinels need -- which its inherent currently provides -- is a little bit of a mechanic for play.  Some decision making.  Something that keeps Sent gameplay from being just "press button 1, 2, 1, 3 over and over again."

 

I'll note that some players may really like this.  Willpower is a popular set.  But it's not to my preferences, and I think it's overkill for an entire AT to be mostly very mechanical gameplay.

 

Why should the Sentinel add interest through its inherent?  Most ATs don't have that dynamic.  In general, most inherents are pretty forget-about-it.

 

That's true, but I think that Sentinel powers lead to particularly mechanical gameplay.  Here are my reasons:

 

1.  Blast sets are pretty mechanical over all.  Other ATs with blast sets have lots of tradeoffs to make between using their blasts and using their other powerset (buff/debuff for corruptorss/defenders, manipulation for blasters, all of them very active).  Sentinels, by contrast, have very passive armors as their secondary sets.

 

2.  To the extent that blast sets aren't mechanical, the Sentinel versions often are.  Blasters may choose to tactically use a low-damage mez to remove a combatant, for example, if they're using Electric Blast, Dual Pistols, or others.  The Sentinel versions of mezzes are high-damage, short-duration attacks that will be routinely used in the mechanical rotation.  Similarly, while snipes these days are always pretty mechanical, Sentinels just get a high-damage main rotation attack instead of the snipe.

 

3.  Compared to other armored classes, Sentinels shouldn't have to worry as much about positioning/tactical movement -- their ranged powers and large cones are pretty forgiving of that.  Also, since we've been working on the mechanical nature of melee sets for a long time, there are now plentiful options for melee powers that have mechanics attached to them (combos in DB/StJ, momentum in Titan, Energy Whatever in Energy Melee, all of the Stalker mechanics), while there are fewer in blast sets (Water and now Electricity are the only real options).

 

So the result is that I think we should be looking more towards the inherent to provide a level of tactical decision-making for Sentinels than we do for other ATs.

 

The current inherent is actually pretty good for this -- but it's a pretty terrible inherent on a mechanical level.  We should want something that gives a similar level of rewarding attention (keeping an eye on it to see when it can be used) and has some kind of choice in use.

 

I don't know what that mechanic is, and frankly I see very little sign that the developers of Homecoming are interested in people's specific suggestions even if I did have a great mechanic perfectly thought out.  I think it's more productive to orient on what the problem is than provide detailed suggestions for solutions.

[Aoide]

Just a random idea I had while reading this thread:

 

What if Sentinels current inherent was replaced with something akin to a Brute's Fury of a Blasters Defiance, but with a demerit attached to it.

 

I mean something like a Sentinel who has no 'Fury' would have near Blaster range for their attacks, but as they attack they don't just get extra damage, BUT their Range for their attacks is actually decreased (maybe half range when their bar is full?).  That way, possibly by the time they have a full 'Fury Bar' they are pumping out NEAR Scrapper/Blaster damage numbers (but not as high), thus meaning they're more likely to be in melee range (and thus get use out of their secondary), but at the beginning of a fight they might have a bit more use 'thinning the heard' of oncoming enemies at range.  This way, instead of being able to pump out large numbers in their initial attacks (like Blasters and Stalkers can) they'd be more of an AT that shines more in longer fights (like Brutes and non-perma Dominators).  That way they'd have a bit more of a defined roll (i.e. ranged damage that does it's best in long fights).  Heck, it might change the way their Nukes are used from a 'Use on Alpha to thin the heard' to something more like 'use later in the fight to finish the mob'.

 

As I see it, this idea not only gives Sents a defined role (something that people say they need) and a damage boost (which again, some people say they need) but doesn't make them over powered from the get go.

 

Also, please note that I am using Fury/Defiance as an example, I don't know what the damage cap for Sents currently is, but it shouldn't be at Brute level either, since that would take away from Brutes.

[Luminara]

42 minutes ago, Aoide said:

something like a Sentinel who has no 'Fury' would have near Blaster range for their attacks, but as they attack they don't just get extra damage, BUT their Range for their attacks is actually decreased (maybe half range when their bar is full?).

 

People on the forums already talk about skipping cones simply because they dislike the idea of moving forward to use them.  Variable range on all attacks would be a counter-intuitive mechanic likely to spawn a lot of bug reports and furious posts.

[Wavicle]

I do think that "Scout" is the vaguely appropriate team role term. Opportunity represents the "scouting report" as it were.

 

Simplify and improve Opportunity and raise damage a little bit. Done.

[Lazarillo]

Thinking on it, playing on the idea of Sentinels working as "jack of all trades"-types, here's what I think would probably work best to make them not just feel like inferior Blasters/Scrappers while not also making them step on the toes of those other ATs:
 

1. No changes needed to damage or defensive numbers.
2. Target caps should probably be put in-line with other ranged ATs.  Due to the fairly low damage, there's no reason to reduce these.  Similarly, bring attack ranges in line with the other ranged ATs, too.  It's not necessary but would help for cones, especially.
3. Significantly buff the secondary effect numbers of the damaging attacks.  I'm not sure exactly the most efficient way to go about this, but overall, debuffs from attacks should be better than Corruptors, maybe even on par with Defenders.  This would allow some potent but not overwhelming Support from Sentinels (again, similar to VEATs...if kind of the opposite side of the coin...VEATs buff the team by activating their defenses...Sentinels support by attacking).
4. Decouple target-marking form Opportunity.  Give Sentinels' t1 and t2 powers an effect like Bruising was for Tankers.  No stacking from the same user, but stacking from multiple Sentinels would be okay and mechanics-appropriate, IMO...if it could also be made that applying the debuff to one enemy removed it from others.  Alternatively, replace Aim in the blast sets with a target-market toggle.  This could prevent spread while still allowing stacking...however it breaks cottage rule and could cause trouble for sets like Dual Pistols where there's already a vital utility replacing Aim.
5. Turn Offensive/Defensive Opportunity into their own click powers (just like Domination, which apparently inspired the mechanic, does).  Extend the benefit to the entire team.  This would give better control of the mechanic and making it a team buff balances its current lack of potency.

By focusing Sentinel buffs on things that Sentinels currently can't do, essentially, but that their clear-VEAT-inspirations can, we end up with a similar sort of AT that can jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none without the enforced theme, and which overall should feel more welcomed on teams.

[aethereal]

2 hours ago, Lazarillo said:

Thinking on it, playing on the idea of Sentinels working as "jack of all trades"-types, here's what I think would probably work best to make them not just feel like inferior Blasters/Scrappers while not also making them step on the toes of those other ATs:
 

1. No changes needed to damage or defensive numbers.
2. Target caps should probably be put in-line with other ranged ATs.  Due to the fairly low damage, there's no reason to reduce these.  Similarly, bring attack ranges in line with the other ranged ATs, too.  It's not necessary but would help for cones, especially.

 

Being low damage but having high target caps isn't a completely unworkable role, but it's very, very specialized in a way that I think is less appealing than having the current target caps but better damage.

 

2 hours ago, Lazarillo said:

1. Significantly buff the secondary effect numbers of the damaging attacks.  I'm not sure exactly the most efficient way to go about this, but overall, debuffs from attacks should be better than Corruptors, maybe even on par with Defenders.  This would allow some potent but not overwhelming Support from Sentinels (again, similar to VEATs...if kind of the opposite side of the coin...VEATs buff the team by activating their defenses...Sentinels support by attacking).

 

This is a flawed idea and people should drop it.  Corruptor/Defender numbers make sense for those ATs who have a buff/debuff set and can choose their blast set to compliment it.  But Sentinels do not have the toolkit to make good use of even better secondary numbers, and in fact their blast sets have been altered to have even fewer tools than other blast sets.  There are also sets like Archery and Fire that simply don't have a debuff associated with their blast powers.

 

Some kind of bonus to their current abysmal secondary scales might be fine as little bonus along with a rework.  Trying to make it central to their team function is really awkward and bad.

[Lazarillo]

27 minutes ago, aethereal said:

Being low damage but having high target caps isn't a completely unworkable role

This is confusing to me, because Corruptors have lower damage than Sentinels even now, but higher target caps.  Should they therefore get the Sentinel target treatment?

 

28 minutes ago, aethereal said:

Corruptor/Defender numbers make sense for those ATs who have a buff/debuff set and can choose their blast set to compliment it.  But Sentinels do not have the toolkit to make good use of even better secondary numbers, and in fact their blast sets have been altered to have even fewer tools than other blast sets.

I mean, I'm not sure that's really an effective argument?  Sentinel sets have been altered to do less damage than other blast sets, too.  The whole point reason we're having this discussion in the first place is that Sentinels are underpowered by design, and that such is rather heavy-handed. The intent here is not to build around such sets per se, but to allow a moderate level of support from their sets, just as you wouldn't build a VEAT around the leadership abilities, but nonetheless, they're a vital part of what that AT brings to a team (since Sentinels, presently, bring basically nothing to a team that wouldn't be better served by anything else).

 

31 minutes ago, aethereal said:

Some kind of bonus to their current abysmal secondary scales might be fine as little bonus along with a rework.  Trying to make it central to their team function is really awkward and bad.

Well, uh, yeah, that's why there were three other buffs mentioned that could all work together to give and fill a niche for the AT.  Any one on their own would probably not be meaningful.  All of them together could potentially allow Sentinels to be reasonable teammates without trivializing some other AT.

[aethereal]

Just now, Lazarillo said:

This is confusing to me, because Corruptors have lower damage than Sentinels even now, but higher target caps.  Should they therefore get the Sentinel target treatment?

 

People read too much into damage scalar.  Corruptors have lower damage scalars than Sentinels, but they have Scourge, and they have their buff/debuff set.  A Corruptor has a lot of ability to fine-tune whether they're AoE or single-target oriented, and probably do more damage overall than Sentinels (to some degree depending on their buff/debuff set and their priorities).  They also have a role that's not damage.

 

Just now, Lazarillo said:

 

I mean, I'm not sure that's really an effective argument?  Sentinel sets have been altered to do less damage than other blast sets, too. 

 

That appears to be basically an accident.  Their sets weren't designed for this, it seems like the designers of Sentinels just overestimated how useful Opportunity was and probably underestimated the power of Scrapper crits as a basis for comparison.

 

In contrast, the actual blast sets that Sentinels use were changed to have very short-duration mezzes that aren't very useful as tactical tools (though they're usually very solid ST attacks).

[Lazarillo]

7 minutes ago, aethereal said:

People read too much into damage scalar.  Corruptors have lower damage scalars than Sentinels, but they have Scourge, and they have their buff/debuff set.  A Corruptor has a lot of ability to fine-tune whether they're AoE or single-target oriented, and probably do more damage overall than Sentinels (to some degree depending on their buff/debuff set and their priorities).  They also have a role that's not damage.

Even with that, Corruptors on their own are really about even with Sentinels, I'd imagine.  And that's assuming Corruptors are playing a secondary that allows them to consistently maintain that extra damage (most have some level of this, but not all, and for some, Recharge times and the like mean they can't be maintained completely).  The added damage from a Corruptor tends more to come in the form of what they do to their teammates' damage.

 

The general question remains, as well, that needs to be solved by any hypothetical Sentinel fixes:

"Why would I want a Sentinel on my team instead of a Blaster/Scrapper?" (and the somewhat related "From a non-concept perspective, why would I want to play a Sentinel instead of a Blaster/Scrapper?")

and it needs to do so without simply replacing that with the other question:

"Why would I want a Blaster/Scrapper on my team instead of a Sentinel?" (and the somewhat related "From a non-concept perspective, why would I want to play a Blaster/Scrapper instead of a Sentinel?"

 

You basically can't accomplish that by changing damage numbers.  You end up either leading to the replacement question, or you still end up with them getting passed over because they don't do the right "kind" of damage.

[aethereal]

2 minutes ago, Lazarillo said:

The general question remains, as well, that needs to be solved by any hypothetical Sentinel fixes:

"Why would I want a Sentinel on my team instead of a Blaster/Scrapper?" (and the somewhat related "From a non-concept perspective, why would I want to play a Sentinel instead of a Blaster/Scrapper?")

 

I disagree.  The question isn't "why would I want a Sentinel on my team instead of a Blaster/Scrapper."  It can just be, "is a Sentinel pretty close to a Blaster/Scrapper"?  They don't need a unique competence that they're better at.  Just like there's really no reason to have a Brute on your team rather than a Tanker or a Scrapper -- but they're close enough, and that's fine.

[Lazarillo]

14 minutes ago, aethereal said:

I disagree.  The question isn't "why would I want a Sentinel on my team instead of a Blaster/Scrapper."  It can just be, "is a Sentinel pretty close to a Blaster/Scrapper"?  They don't need a unique competence that they're better at.  Just like there's really no reason to have a Brute on your team rather than a Tanker or a Scrapper -- but they're close enough, and that's fine.

I mean, if that's the case, then the entire thread is kinda moot.  Sentinels are also "close enough" and fine.  There's no reason to make any changes to them at all. But the premise of "here's what should change" is kinda predicated on the idea that they need to change.

[Wavicle]

33 minutes ago, Lazarillo said:

I mean, if that's the case, then the entire thread is kinda moot.  Sentinels are also "close enough" and fine.  There's no reason to make any changes to them at all. But the premise of "here's what should change" is kinda predicated on the idea that they need to change.

No, they’re not fine. They don’t do enough on teams.

[Lazarillo]

16 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

No, they’re not fine. They don’t do enough on teams.

In that case, we come back to:

1 hour ago, Lazarillo said:

The general question remains, as well, that needs to be solved by any hypothetical Sentinel fixes:

"Why would I want a Sentinel on my team instead of a Blaster/Scrapper?" (and the somewhat related "From a non-concept perspective, why would I want to play a Sentinel instead of a Blaster/Scrapper?")

and it needs to do so without simply replacing that with the other question:

"Why would I want a Blaster/Scrapper on my team instead of a Sentinel?" (and the somewhat related "From a non-concept perspective, why would I want to play a Blaster/Scrapper instead of a Sentinel?"

 

[aethereal]

40 minutes ago, Lazarillo said:

In that case, we come back to:

 

But we don't.  The problem sentinels have is that they do much less damage than other DPS-oriented ATs.  If they did a little less damage than scrappers or blasters, they'd be fine.

[Wavicle]

1 hour ago, Lazarillo said:

In that case, we come back to:

 

No, we don't.

Athereal is right, there's already lots of overlap among ATs, some more is fine. Corruptors, for example, are also not the best there is at any one thing, but they are good enough at a couple things that it works out. Scrappers are also not the best there is at any one thing, but they are good enough at a couple things that it works out.

What we are back to is "what does a Sentinel have to be able to do to be good enough?" and the simple answer is "a bit more".

Edited December 27, 2021 by Wavicle

[Lazarillo]

4 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

What we are back to is "what does a Sentinel have to be able to do to be good enough?" and the simple answer is "a bit more".

No, see, that's the thing.  Sentinels are already "good enough".  You can do whatever content with one, or with a team, or whatever.  They don't need any more, from that regard.  They'll be worse than any other options, but that will still be the case even if you buff their damage (unless you buff their damage enough then make it so that whoever they got buffed past are always the worse option).

[Wavicle]

26 minutes ago, Lazarillo said:

No, see, that's the thing.  Sentinels are already "good enough".  You can do whatever content with one, or with a team, or whatever.  They don't need any more, from that regard.  They'll be worse than any other options, but that will still be the case even if you buff their damage (unless you buff their damage enough then make it so that whoever they got buffed past are always the worse option).

No, they’re not. We are operating with different definitions of good enough.
 

Also, this is a silly way of looking at it. Buffing Sentinels does not make anyone else worse. They are the only AT that is so far outside the norm.

Edited December 27, 2021 by Wavicle

[Nerva]

Let's see if I can organize some of the points being talked about.

1. Overlap between ATs is fine. Being objectively underpowered at your role(s) isn't.
2. Having an underdeveloped role is not alright. Having multiple fully-developed competent roles is.
3. Soloing ability is outside the consideration of this thread. An AT that can solo well but performs badly on teams is not well-balanced, since this game is generally team-based and advancement at the endgame is tied to team-oriented activities.

Some things I've observed in teaming, on Sentinel and other ATs:

• It's very rare for any AT to be flatly rejected.  This doesn't necessarily mean that an AT isn't poorly performing, it just means that the other ATs are good enough for it not to matter for the bulk of the game's content.
• Some ATs are preferred for their specialist nature, others for their broad range competence.  Brutes, Scrappers, and Controllers are chosen for broad competency; Blasters, Stalkers, Tankers, and Defenders are chosen for being specialists in their fields.  Dominators, Corruptors, and Sentinels occupy an odd gray area, whose properties I haven't quite identified - if there's even a common gray area between those ATs at all.
• HEATS and VEATs are intensely difficult to compare to regular ATs.  It'd be a good idea to avoid comparisons involving them when possible,

So what does the Sentinel do as it stands?

• Deal moderate damage, from modest range, to a limited number of targets simultaneously
• Is durable, but lacks aggro control mechanisms common to other durable ATs (taunt/challenge/hide/placate)
• Has little to no capacity for hard control; has minor capacity for soft control, but only on some powersets
• Lacks sniper powers on its Blast set, but has a fast-recharging T9 nuke on most of its Blast sets
• Generally lacks stacking-per-enemy-in-range toggles on its Defense sets, but often has an extra click self-buff or toggle
• Has a damage-oriented inherent with minor self-buffing and team support abilities

Does this sound like a fairly correct analysis?  If not, what have I got wrong here?