Fire/Nrg vs. Nrg/Nrg

[FiveDiamondJack]

Had a debate with another blaster while on a team today on "Why didn't you choose Fire/Nrg instead?"

 

I'm leveling an Nrg/Nrg (46 now) and having a ton of fun with the concept, and I actually had designs on building a Fire/Nrg next when this one is kitted out. Just wondering what everyones opinions are on which one over the other and why you may think that way. 

Food for thought: I do have a buddy who has a Fire/Fire blaster that he's slotted KD for most of his attacks on. If the tactic is to KD them and kill them on both toons, is the Fire Blaster a better choice then?

[Haijinx]

Fire will do more damage, by a fair amount.

 

Nrg has a lot of active mitigation.  Though to make it work without scattering groups put KB->KB in the AOEs.  So there are times NRG will live when Fire dies.  

[Aurora_Girl]

How has a fire blaster slotted knockback?

[FiveDiamondJack]

Not Knockback...Knockdown (KD)

[Haijinx]

12 hours ago, Aurora_Girl said:

How has a fire blaster slotted knockback?

I meant the NRG/NRG needs to use kb to kd in the AOEs to really take advantage of NRG/ active mitigation without losing damage.

 

The FIRE/NRG of course does not. 

 

I left the secondary out since both were the same.  Sorry for any confusion.

[Sirius.Games]

15 hours ago, Haijinx said:

Fire will do more damage, by a fair amount.

 

Nrg has a lot of active mitigation.  Though to make it work without scattering groups put KB->KB in the AOEs.  So there are times NRG will live when Fire dies.  

This sums up the situation. That being said you can swap nrg for any primary and fire will win out when it comes to damage (thanks blaze).

 

The question you have to answer is what do you want to play and what your hero does. Do you want to min max from the creation tool or after? I usually end back on fire however I usually don't care about damage mitigation and IO out the hero immediately to softcap range def. If I want to mitigate damage I play my dominator or corruptor.

[roleki]

I have both En/En and Fire/En, and while my preference is for the En/En, that preference is  almost 100% based on nostalgia, since En/En was the first thing I played on Live.  Through that lens, I feel En/En sounds better, looks better, and feels better than Fire/En.  

 

That said, while En/En *does* get some mitigation with KB, that point eventually gets canceled out somewhat since all Blasters have access to KB/KD through Bonfire from the Flame Mastery pool, or they can slot procs from Avalanche, Ragnarok and/or Overwhelming Force.

 

Meanwhile, Fire's secondary effect is more raw damage; beyond having less damage by the numbers, all of Energy's damage is split between Energy and Smashing damage, and Smashing damage is more commonly resisted by mobs. You're more likely to run into situations where your En/En's output is getting nerfed by damage resistance than running into things that resist Fire.  

 

Further, if you opt to enhance KB (or mitigate it with KB:KD) on that En/En, you're more than likely doing so at the cost of a damage enhancement AND a set bonus, putting more distance between what damage/survivability the En/En can muster and what the Fire/En can.

 

Furthermore, in the grand scheme of things, Fire attacks generally have quicker animations/arcanatime, recharge faster, cost less endurance per activation, and in the case of AoEs, have more range and hit more targets than Energy attacks.  That's not true of every power T1 to T9, but if you lay them out side by side in CoD, Fire comes out ahead in most of those metrics.

 

All THAT said, I make it sound like Fire blows Energy out of the water, but honestly, it doesn't feel that way.  In general content, Energy's output kills things just as easily as Fire, and there are a lot of times all that extra DPS/DoT is just wasted on already-dead things.  Also, when levelling up, Energy has a built-in survival trick that Fire does not... there are many occasions where the ability to piss something off even more pales in comparison to the ability to knock that thing on its ass and keep it there. 

 

Plus there's the aesthetics of it... in comparison to Energy, Fire sounds boring, looks boring, and even though you're lighting something on FIRE, it's somehow not as satisfying as sending that thing flying across the room - or, pinning it to the ground, if that's your persuasion.

 

In the grand scheme of things, you get 1000 slots per server per account, might as well have one of both and use them as the mood strikes; they're both cromulent Blasters and have their strong points.

[FiveDiamondJack]

@roleki Easily the best answer I could have gotten. Thank you! I'll build both and play as I feel.

[Haijinx]

1 hour ago, roleki said:

 

All THAT said, I make it sound like Fire blows Energy out of the water, but honestly, it doesn't feel that way. 

 

It sort of does.  But Energy Torrent is wider and MUCH faster than Firebreath, so when tossing around AOEs it doesn't feel quite so behind in the thick of things.

 

And when Energy Blasting everything keeps getting knocked down like you are the Super Bowler, which feels powerful. 

 

That and all Blasters are pretty damn good at wiping out baddies in job lots.  I think on Galaxy Brain's sheet Energy is pretty high on the list too, but definitely behind Fire.

[Renergy]

I think the damage difference is largely contextual, which makes comparison difficult.

 

I've levelled an Energy/Energy blaster and am now working on incarnates. Really enjoying it and feel the build is able to a make a difference on a single target or AOE basis. Those sweet, sweet Novas!

 

This is the build I've been following. Though I took Total Focus over Energy Punch. Total Focus's animation time has been cut since that guide was written.

 

 

 

[roleki]

3 hours ago, FiveDiamondJack said:

@roleki Easily the best answer I could have gotten. Thank you! I'll build both and play as I feel.

I don't know if it's the best answer you could have gotten, I just know it's the best answer you could have gotten from me.