"Balancing" the various Archetypes; their Inherents; and their ATOs.

[Maelwys]

OK. It's time to Throw The Cat Amongst The Pigeons.

 




Like most of us, I've played all the ATs.
A LOT.

And I like to think that I have a fairly solid grasp of CoX gameplay and most of its complex underlying mechanics (including those pesky IOs).

But there are some RATHER GLARING (to me anyway) balance issues and performance problems and even a few sheer "WTF that's utterly overpowered/pointless!" things that spring to mind whenever I consider each AT and how its Inherent and its available ATOs improve (or clash with) that AT's typical role and/or playstyle.

So I'm going to list what *I* think the state of each AT is, currently, and what *I* think could/should be done to improve matters.
 

...

But before I get into it:

(i) I realise a lot of people might disagree with some/most/all of my thoughts here; however I suspect that at least certain bits of what I highlight below may get a few people nodding... and I think that having a discussion about overall AT balance that doesn't focus on one particular aspect (like Blaster Nukes) or one particular powerset (like Super Strength) might be beneficial. This is more of an "Invitation for discussion and/or telling @Maelwys how wrong he is"; hence my putting it here in General instead of in the Suggestions subforum.

(ii) I appreciate that some powersets could really do with being rebalanced (like Kinetic Melee) and/or are better on one AT than others (like Staff Melee). That's a discussion for another thread.

(iii)

...

Now, with that out of the way; here comes the flame-fodder:

 

 

 - [BLASTER] -
Inherent: Defiance (Short-duration stacking damage buff for every power activated; T1/T2 attack from the primary and T1 attack from the secondary can be used whilst mezzed)
ATO1: Blaster's Wrath (PPM damage proc)
ATO2: Defiant Barrage (PPM stackable low-mag mez protection)
Summary: IMO this AT is in a good place. The Inherent and ATOs notably raise its damage output and also help to reduce the impact of hostile CC effects without completely negating those effects. The ATO2 is "skippable" at endgame (due to Clarion Destiny) but otherwise can be particularly useful if slotted into one of the T1/T2 powers, so that they can be triggered whilst the Blaster is mezzed... however it only grants Mag1 protection per stack and the stacks expire fairly quickly. Also since the T1/T2 powers have a fast base recharge time, lower-PPM procs have a very low likelihood of activating in them.
Recommendations: Increase the duration of each stack of the ATO2 proc (from ~10s to ~20s) and/or substantially raise its PPM chance.

 

 

 - [CONTROLLER] -
Inherent: Containment (deal double-damage to enemies that are held/stunned/immobilized/feared; or that have been slept within the last 3 seconds)
ATO1: Will of the Controller (PPM damage proc)
ATO2: Overpowering Essence (PPM chance to summon a very short-duration pet with a PBAoE damage aura)
Summary: IMO this AT has gotten substantially better recently (after i28p2's changes to allow Fear and Sleep effects to set up Containment) but their ATO2 is bad. Just like Dominator's "Fiery Orb" ATO2; the Controller ATO2's "Energy Font" pet spawns at your location (not your target's), has a slow movement speed and is extremely fragile. Therefore unless you're already within melee range of multiple foes it can take several seconds (of its 20s maximum duration) to actually start dealing any damage and it is very prone to getting one-shot.
Recommendations: Tweak the ATO2 "Energy Font" pet to be immune to damage ("untouchable") and increase its movement speed.

 

 

 - [DEFENDER] -
Inherent: Vigilance (30% Damage buff when solo, reduces by 10% per teammate. Endurance Cost Reduction when teammate HP bars are low)
ATO1: Defender's Bastion (PPM PBAoE Heal)
ATO2: Vigilant Assault (PPM PBAoE Absorb)
Summary: The ATOs both add a useful non-damage-oriented effect; although their ATO1 is slightly overshadowed by the Corruptor ATO2 (which also grants some +Endurance in addition to +Health). Vigilance is a useful inherent whilst solo; however its effect whilst teamed is downright pathetic - essentially when teamed with at least 3 people it has no appreciable benefit unless the team is constantly sitting with less-than-full HP bars.
Recommendations: Add +Recovery/Endurance to Defender's Bastion. Rework Vigilance's effect to let Defenders keep a little more of their current damage buff on medium-sized teams; and on larger teams have the endurance always apply instead of being HP-bar dependant (as the current implementation rewards Defenders that reactively heal and punishes those that preemptively buff). My suggestion would be to leave the solo damage buff at +30%; then for each teammate reduce that damage buff by 5% whilst adding a flat 10% Endurance Cost Reduction... capping out at 0% damage and +60% Endurance Cost Reduction on a full team.

 

 

 - [SCRAPPER] -
Inherent: Critical Hit (5% chance to deal extra damage vs a Minion/Underling; 10% chance vs anything else. This is usually but not always double the attack's base damage; and unlike Stalkers there is no additional penalty for AoEs)
ATO1: Scrapper's Strike (Global Critical Hit rate buff)
ATO2: Critical Strikes (PPM chance to add +50% Critical Hit rate for a short duration)
Summary: Scrapper damage is "spikey" by design. If the dice fall in your favour then you can get a constant string of critical hits; and the ATOs help make this more likely. However their ATO2 proc is very likely the most complicated thing in the game to "optimize". The buff window is short but doesn't cancel after the first hit; so a min-maxed Scrapper has to work out how to make that buff window appear frequently and also how to cram as many high-damage, low-activation time attacks into that window as possible. Animation Time Before Effect values; Arcanatime roundups; which attacks gain full benefit from Critical hits and which don't (including 'additional damage' combo effects and DoTs). It very much rewards detailed knowledge of the game mechanics and basic math skills; but unfortunately it means that the performance disparity between an "optimized" and an "unoptimized" Scrapper is like night and day.
Recommendations: Make the ATO2 proc effect far less complicated; without overly reducing the AT's achievable average damage. My suggestion would be to have the ATO2 buff simply cancel after the first hit; and then increase the Scrapper inherent BASE Critical Hit chance by a small amount (e.g. 5%) to compensate. The goal here is to lower the current drastic performance disparity between an endgame Scrapper being piloted by a regular Scrapperlocking button masher; and that same Scrapper being piloted by someone with OCD and a spreadsheet.

 

 

 - [TANKER] -
Inherent: Gauntlet (AoE Taunt effect when attacking targets. AoEs have a larger radius and can hit additional targets)
ATO1: Might of the Tanker (PPM stackable Damage Resistance buff)
ATO2: Gauntleted Fist (PPM Absorb)
Summary: The Tanker ATOs are, IMO, both in a good place even though neither ATO increases Tanker damage output. The ATO1 proc in particular is very effective. However Gauntlet is IMO a bit lacking. The recent changes in i28p2 drastically decreased Tanker AoE damage potential - Cones are no longer wider/longer and cannot hit more targets; AoEs are still a bit wider and can hit more targets but in practice the overall damage output of a Tanker vs 16 targets is now less than a Brute hitting 10 targets. The Developers have stated an intention for the Tankers to be "AoE Specialists" amongst the melee ATs but currently they deal less AoE damage than the others; so the most they're able to do is tag a few extra enemies with a "Taunt" effect.
Recommendations: Recent i28p2 adjustments have reduced Tanker AoE damage without notably reducing their Single Target damage. However the Devs have stated a design intent that Tankers should be "AoE specialists among the melee ATs". If "AoE specialists" is intended to refer to "damage output" then IMO their 'overcap' damage reduction should be lowered a bit (so that damage on additional targets is reduced by at most -50% instead of -66%) in order that a Tanker will deal a little bit more damage vs 16 targets than a Brute does vs 10 targets. If it is instead intended to refer to "aggro control" then IMO there should be an increase to the duration of Gauntlet's AoE Taunt effect and/or the Tanker aggro cap (say ~24 instead of 17) in order to allow Tankers to quickly claim aggro over a Brute and/or maintain aggro control on more enemies.

In addition; I would also suggest taking another look at Tanker Cone attacks. A number of Tanker powersets have multiple Cones and fewer pure AoEs - so IMO allowing cones to be widened by the Tanker Gauntlet once more (even if it's just "up to a certain arc size"; like ~120-180 degrees) and keeping their base damage the same as it is currently may make sense (perhaps their target cap could also be increased and appropriate "overcap" damage reductions introduced as well; but even just having Cones gain any benefit at all from the "Tankers are AoE specialists" notion would IMO be appreciated here!).
Finally... IMO there is also an issue with Brutes and Tankers both currently occupying (and constantly clashing with each other over) the same "niche" on teams, which I'll cover in the Brute section below.

 

 

 - [BRUTE] -
Inherent: Fury (stacking damage buff; effectively maxes out at roughly 85 Fury which is a +170% damage buff. Single Target Taunt effect when attacking targets)
ATO1: Brute's Fury (PPM increased Fury generation)
ATO2: Unrelenting Fury (PPM stackable increased Regeneration and Recovery for a short duration)
Summary: The Brute Inherent is in a good place. However both their ATOs are total rubbish and a complete waste of an enhancement slot - chasing the Set Bonuses is IMO the only reason to use either of them. Fury generation is already fast and caps out at ~85 regardless of the ATO1 proc; and the +regeneration/recovery granted by the ATO2 proc when the stacks are maxed out provides less benefit than a Panacea Proc in Health.
In practice Brutes are one of the "best" ATs whilst levelling up; especially whilst the player is short of enhancement slots, because Fury reduces the need to prioritise slotting their attacks for damage aspect. However after IOs they become overtaken by Scrappers in terms of damage output (and DRASTICALLY overtaken in the case of an optimized ATO2-using Scrapper). Survivabilitywise Brutes sit in a "sweet spot" between a Scrapper and a Tanker. Due to their inherent Taunt effect they are also almost as good as a Tanker at aggro control; and currently due to Tanker's recently nerfed AoE damage output (see: i28p2) they have begun to become the most popular endgame Tanking AT.
Unfortunately a lack of clear Developer Intent makes it very tricky to propose a solid balance for Tankers, Scrappers and Brutes. In practice; providing that aggro control is sufficient, whichever of these three ATs can inflict the most damage is always going to be the optimal choice for filling an endgame Tanking role. (Disclaimer: whilst all Scrappers have access to "Confront" and some have Taunt Auras... traditionally it is very unusual in CoX for a Scrapper to fulfil a team "Main Tank" role. At most they might situationally hold the aggro of an AV or "off tank". However I am aware of a few cases, including in 4-star "hard mode" runs, where a Scrapper Tank is now seen as the preferred option because they can contribute substantially more on-demand damage than a Brute whilst maintaining a sufficient level of aggro control for that particular scenario!)
IMO Brutes need a Niche on a team that doesn't simply boil down to "keeping aggro whilst dealing damage". Because sometimes the damage a Brute deals will be higher than a Tanker; and sometimes it'll be the other way around (depending on whether Tankers have been buffed or not recently!). CoX having two melee ATs that are effectively both continually competing for exactly the same niche on a team is less than ideal. Tankers having better Survivability than Brutes is mostly irrelevant on mature teams; so unfortunately that's often a non-factor.
Recommendations: Overhaul both Brute ATOs to allow each to provide a mechanically worthwhile boost. And give Brutes a better niche on teams so that Brutes and Tankers are not always competing over the same role of "Survivable Aggro Magnet that deals the most raw damage". I've suggested a few ideas for this niche separation previously - letting Tankers hold the attention of more mobs (via an increased aggro cap); giving Brutes an ATO which grants a PBAoE damage buff based on their current Fury; etc. however the exact shape/form it might take doesn't overly matter. The main thing IMO is that something definitely needs to stop the current situation where as soon as Brute or Tanker damage overtakes the other (due to AT buffs or nerfs) that AT becomes "always the best choice" on teams and the other AT effectively gets dustbinned.

 

 

 - [CORRUPTOR] -
Inherent: Scourge (scaling chance to inflict double damage once the target's current HP drops below 50%)
ATO1: Malice of the Corruptor (PPM damage proc)
ATO2: Scourging Blast (PPM PBAoE Heal and Endurance)
Summary: IMO the Corruptor ATOs are in a good place; and Scourge can potentially be a very powerful inherent. However it often drastically favours fast-cycling lower-damage-per-hit powers (especially "Rains", which perform multiple "checks" of the target's current HP over the course of their duration and so begin benefitting from Scourge as soon as it drops below the 50% threshold) over single-hit-high-damage powers like traditional AoEs and Nukes (which only check the target's HP once; and in practice typically trigger before the target has taken any noteworthy damage at all). This means specific powersets (Ice Blast, Fire Blast, Water Blast) tend to benefit from Scourge more than others.
Recommendations: Realistically Corruptors are one of the most powerful classes so I'd be loathe to buff them; but PERHAPS it'd make sense to alter the Scourge chances for non-rain AoEs so that they gain a small % chance to inflict Scourge regardless of the target's current HP; or maybe even scale it based on the number of teammates. In order that Ice Blast Corruptors aren't always the automatic Gold Medalists.

 

 

 - [DOMINATOR] -
Inherent: Domination (long recharge Clicky buff that refills your endurance bar, provides mez protection and grants additional CC effects for 90s, and a ToHit buff for 15s)
ATO1: Ascendency of the Dominator (PPM stackable Damage Buff)
ATO2: Dominating Grasp (PPM chance to summon a very short-duration pet with a PBAoE damage aura)
Summary: IMO this AT's inherent is amazingly good (it's a very rare Dominator player who doesn't strive for enough Global Recharge to make Domination permanent) and their ATO1 is decent (if a bit attack chain dependant); however their ATO2 is very bad. Just like the Controller's "Energy Font" ATO2; the Dominator ATO2 "Fiery Orb" pet spawns at your location (not your target's), has a slow movement speed and is extremely fragile. Therefore unless you're already within melee range of multiple foes it can take several seconds (of its 20s maximum duration) to actually start dealing any damage and it is very prone to getting one-shot.
Recommendations: Tweak the ATO2 "Fiery Orb" pet to be immune to damage ("untouchable") and increase its movement speed.

 

 

 - [MASTERMIND] -
Inherent: Supremacy (PBAoE Damage and ToHit buff for Henchmen. Mastermind Henchmen can be issued orders and when in "Defensive Follow" or "Defensive GoTo" mode, a portion of any damage inflicted on their master will be redirected to each henchman)
ATO1: Command of the Mastermind (Global PBAoE buff to "AoE" Defense for henchmen)
ATO2: Mark of Supremacy (Global PBAoE buff to Damage Resistance and regeneration rate for henchmen)
Summary: IMO this AT is in a very, very good place. Whilst I personally do not like taking the ATO1 global (I prefer focusing on all positional defences rather than just one) it definitely has a place on many builds. The only "generic" issue I have is that the T1 and T2 pets spawning at lower-levels compared to the MM themselves means that the Purple Patch hits them very hard whenever you're fighting enemies higher than +3 to you.
Recommendations: Allow the T1 and T2 henchmen to spawn at even-level to the MM themselves in all content. The base damage of their powers could be reduced by ~20% and ~10% to compensate if required, but realistically these pets already spawn at even-level to the MM in Incarnate content, so it's likely that just leaving their damage scalars as-is will not overly upset things. (Some specific Primary powersets could also do with a balance pass; but that's beyond the scope of this thread!)

 

 

 - [STALKER] -
Inherent: Assassination (When "hidden" - Critical Strike 100% activation for Single target attacks and 50% for most Cones and AoEs. When NOT hidden; 10% base Critical rate plus 3% for each party member. Primary powerset attacks also grant "Assassin Focus" stacks which drastically increase the Critical hit rate of Assassin's Strike; becoming guaranteed with 3 stacks)
ATO1: Stalker's Guile (PPM chance to enter "hidden" state. Can activate at most once every 10 seconds)
ATO2: Assassin's Mark (Global that gives most attacks a chance to make the "Build Up" power recharge)
Summary: Stalkers are IMO in a rather good place. Their Assassination inherent looks complex but in practice works well to boost their damage beyond the first whack from a hidden state (especially whilst teamed). Their critical chance is reduced for AoEs and Stalkers in general also have less AoE abilities and Cones available to them; so they tend to be better at Single Target Damage - IMO combined with the Stealth and Placate mechanics it makes their playstyle sufficiently unique that Scrappers and Stalkers are both valuable to a team without always stepping on each other's toes.
Their ATO2 is powerful and does not require any complex calculations or build tweaks. Their ATO1 is powerful but has an annoying lockout period that means you really need to plan the duration of your attack chain cycle to get the most out of it.
Recommendations: Lose the 10s lockout period on the ATO1 proc; in order to reduce the need for a "perfect" attack chain cycle.

 

 

 - [SENTINEL] -
Inherent: Opportunity (Slight resistance to ToHit and Perception debuffs. Bar builds up over time and when >50% full "Vulnerability" can be triggered, which inflicts a large damage resistance debuff, defense debuff, status effect resistance debuff and stealth debuff for 15s)
ATO1: Sentinel's Ward (PPM Absorb)
ATO2: Opportunity Strikes (PPM increased Opportunity generation)
Summary: Sentinels have come a long way since their original implementation; and their inherent is now decent; but their ATOs are not.
Recommendations: Change the ATO1 to work off your current "maximum HP" rather than be a flat value; and raise its activation chance (the Tanker ATO2 is very similar but uses MaxHP and is a substantially higher PPM). The ATO2 should either have its increased Opportunity generation value drastically raised or become a Global (can be triggered by all attacks) rather than a PPM (can be triggered only by the attack it's slotted in) so that is is less dependant on specific power placement and/or attack chain cycles.

 

 

 - [PEACEBRINGER / WARSHADE] -
Inherent: Cosmic Balance/Dark Sustenance (Buffs to Damage, Damage Resistance, CC protection and recharge debuff resistance based on the Archetypes of their teammates)
ATO1: Kheldian's Grace (Global that applies a short-duration buff to damage when in Nova Form, damage resistance when in Human Form; and MaxHP when in Dwarf Form)
ATO2: Essence Transfer (Global that grants most attacks a flat 18% chance to heal you)
Summary: Kheldians are broken. There is a well-known exploit (which tends to be referred to as "Changeling") that lets them drop out of one form into another and trigger a new attack before the previous attack finishes animating. However WITHOUT leveraging that exploit; their damage output can IMO be generously described as "mediocre". Many players do not enjoy taking all (or even any) of the additional non-human forms; and so will not gain the full benefit from their ATO1. The Cosmic Balance/Dark Sustenance inherents can be powerful but unfortunately both require a specific (and different!) team composition to really shine.
Recommendations: Rework Cosmic Balance/Dark Sustenance so that it is less dependent (or not at all dependent) on specific team compositions. Prevent the "Changeling" exploit (my suggestion would be to prevent shifting out and then back into the same form immediately - a lockout period of ~5 seconds before being able to reuse the same form should do it!) whilst at the same time adjusting the AT's damage scalars upwards in all forms (particularly Human) and reviewing some of the animation times (e.g. Incandescent Strike; which is effectively Total Focus with a 24% longer cast time) - these ATs should IMO cap out at very roughly the same average damage ballpark as a Brute. Allow Epic and Patron Pools. Amend the ATO1 so that if Dwarf Form and/or Nova form are not taken then a smaller bonus is granted to the other form(s).

 

 

 - [ARACHNOS SOLDIER / WIDOW] -
Inherent: Conditioning (Regeneration and Recovery bonus - this is baked into the AT's base attributes and it's a flat +5% to each.)
ATO1: Dominion of Arachnos (PPM Terrorize and Damage debuff)
ATO2: Spider's Bite (Global that grants most attacks a flat 12% chance for additional Toxic damage)
Summary: VEATs are very powerful; particularly since the changes to Fortuna and Night Widow Lv1 powers in i27p7. Whilst their Inherents aren't mechanically striking; they do slightly increase overall sustainability (VEATs tend to gobble endurance) and their various specialization trees each provide Lv1 Auto abilities that are effectively more powerful inherents ('Fate Sealed', 'Pain Tolerance' and the Bane and Wolf spider 'Armor Upgrades'). Their ATO2 is EXTREMELY good. The ATO1 provides a useful damage debuff; although the Terrorize only affects minions. 
Recommendations: IMO not much is needed here. Perhaps tweak the ATO1 proc so that it effects Lieutenants out of the box (Mag3 rather than Mag2) or so that it can stack with itself rather than overwriting. And MAYBE buff the "Conditioning" inherent slightly so that it provides a larger boost to Regeneration/Recovery (+10% base rather than +5%; for example). I would also quite like to see them being given access to Epic Pools - having only Patron Pools might be thematic; but more choice is always good. Really though the main thing is that I think they need some kind of Recovery/Endurance buff to be available to them (likely via their Inherent or Epic Pools) in order that optimized VEATs (especially Widows!) don't need to rely so hard on Ageless Destiny. "Crabberminds" not having control over their pets is IMO a feature, not a problem!

 

_{(Heh-heh-heh-hee-hee-hee-heh-heh-heh-heh...)}

 

Edited Tuesday at 06:25 PM by Maelwys

[tidge]

My responses will be 1-AT-at-a-time, because I think it is less important to compare inherents and ATO across ATs, because otherwise everything trends towards "waah, look what ___ gets!"

 

Having played a large number of VEATs... the inherent is pretty bad considering that the Fitness pool is inherent to every AT, and that every AT can get +MaxEnd and +MaxHP accolades. Once 'diminishing returns' for Regeneration and Recovery start kicking in from set bonuses, it is typically the case that Conditioning is doing almost nothing for my builds. 

 

My immediate guess (because, no numbers were crunched) for VEATs is that Conditioning should give +MaxEnd instead of +Recovery, simply to avoid "hitting the Recovery wall" with the side effect of improving actual recovery without having to explicitly slot for recovery (in something like Stamina).

 

Regeneration bonuses are pretty easy to come by, so it wouldn't hurt my feels if the Regeneration part of Conditioning was changed to something else like extra Scaling Damage Resistance, +MaxHP, whatever.

 

 

[Maelwys]

22 minutes ago, tidge said:

My immediate guess (because, no numbers were crunched) for VEATs is that Conditioning should give +MaxEnd instead of +Recovery, simply to avoid "hitting the Recovery wall" with the side effect of improving actual recovery without having to explicitly slot for recovery (in something like Stamina).

AFAIK the "Regeneration/Recovery" bonus granted by VEAT's Conditioning inherent isn't actually granted by their inherent... instead it's coded as a +5% base value buff.

Look at the Attribute Tables for a Widow or a Soldier and you'll see the "Base" value listed as 30% for Regeneration and 105% for "Recovery".
Compared to all the other player ATs who each have a "Base" value listed as 25% for Regeneration and 100% for "Recovery".

Unfortunately most of the buffs to regeneration/recovery out there (like Health) work off "Melee_Ones" which just adds a flat value rather than being influenced by those increased base values. So swapping the VEAT inherent to grant +5% MaxEnd instead of +5% Recovery (and the same for +MaxHealth/+Regeneration) would indeed scale a lot better. I had a quick look at my current VEAT pile and the closest to reaching the HP Cap is a Crab who sits at ~2208HP (about +18.5% MaxHP below the cap).

 

Edited Tuesday at 01:47 PM by Maelwys

[Ukase]

Being naturally obtuse, I enjoyed your thinking and sadly, am not math savvy enough to know if some of the suggestions are too much or too little, with regards to the Veats suggested recovery/regen buff. 

 

2 hours ago, Maelwys said:

current drastic performance disparity between an endgame Scrapper being piloted by a regular Scrapperlocking button masher; and that same Scrapper being piloted by someone with OCD and a spreadsheet.

I know at least one of these players with the spreadsheet. I don't know what their position on this would be. But since while I do have the spreadsheets - they track inf and merits...not dps and proc odds. I don't have OCD. So, yeah, making things straightforward would be a good thing. I haven't played a scrapper in a long time because of my own internal pressure to get the most out of the ATOs. Looking at other players suggested attack chains is always helpful, until you realize you're solo and are never going to have the recharge buffs they get from their kin teammates. I finally just said to heck with it and made one anyway. The dps is poor up to 25, then suddenly things are a lot better. Must be something to do with Total Focus. But that's neither here nor there. 

[Snarky]

What you said: wall of text

 

what the devs heard: buff Tanks

[Maelwys]

24 minutes ago, Ukase said:

So, yeah, making things straightforward would be a good thing. I haven't played a scrapper in a long time because of my own internal pressure to get the most out of the ATOs.
...
I finally just said to heck with it and made one anyway. The dps is poor up to 25, then suddenly things are a lot better. Must be something to do with Total Focus. But that's neither here nor there. 

FWIW, my Energy Melee Scrapper's chain very roughly gains about 29% extra damage output purely from the ATO2 being placed into Energy Transfer.
(Part of that is because of the increased chance of 2x stacks from a "Critical" Total Focus; which more often than not will let me use "Fast ET" twice in a row; but still!)

Before (Proc chance manually set to 0% e.g. "no ATO2 buffs active"):


After:


To my mind that is an insane amount of additional DPS from just one IO (and it's very likely still not quite "optimized"; since that toon intentionally sacrifices proc activation rate for recharge aspect to get the attack chain seamless without any incarnate/external sources of global recharge!) 🤯

[Maelwys]

2 minutes ago, Snarky said:

What you said: wall of text

 

what the devs heard: buff Tanks

You forgot "Nerf Brutes" 😛
_{(hey, at least we're not still memeing "nerf regen" any more...)}

[Nutation]

I see no call for nerfs. (Hint: Corruptors) An honest and dispassionate look at ATs that differ in performance would call for some buffs and some nerfs.

[laudwic]

1 hour ago, Snarky said:

What you said: wall of text

 

what the devs heard: buff Tanks

 

Funny, I heard Nerf Regeneration

[MoonSheep]

i’m here simply to throw out disparaging words about dominator’s fiery orb

 

i wouldn’t pick fiery orb even to light a barbecue

[Glacier Peak]

Fun read! 

[tidge]

4 hours ago, Maelwys said:

 - [BLASTER] -
Inherent: Defiance (Short-duration stacking damage buff for every power activated; T1/T2 attack from the primary and T1 attack from the secondary can be used whilst mezzed)
ATO1: Blaster's Wrath (PPM damage proc)
ATO2: Defiant Barrage (PPM stackable low-mag mez protection)
Summary: IMO this AT is in a good place. The Inherent and ATOs notably raise its damage output and also help to reduce the impact of hostile CC effects without completely negating those effects. The ATO2 is "skippable" at endgame (due to Clarion Destiny) but otherwise can be particularly useful if slotted into one of the T1/T2 powers, so that they can be triggered whilst the Blaster is mezzed... however it only grants Mag1 protection per stack and the stacks expire fairly quickly. Also since the T1/T2 powers have a fast base recharge time, lower-PPM procs have a very low likelihood of activating in them.
Recommendations: Increase the duration of each stack of the ATO2 proc (from ~10s to ~20s) and/or substantially raise its PPM chance.

 

In a vacuum, I agree that the ATO2 proc duration seems way too short to be meaningful... yet considering the inherent Defiance, and that Blasters typically get sustains (IIRC, with no detoggle if mezzed) that other ATs would kill for, not to mention the favorable changes to the primary T9s, I wouldn't make any improvements to Blaster ATOs. IMO ATO2 only seems like a poor performer because of everything else that Blaster's have got going for themselves.

 

 

[BasiliskXVIII]

In general I agree with everything you say. I do tend to think that Dominators really do suffer from "feast or famine" with domination. Just the mez protection by itself is reason enough to go permadom, since there's so many shitty little incidental mez effects that will take you from rolling happily through a mission to stopped, dead. Having the damage buff taken out of domination and applied as a flat buff was a good start, and made them a lot of fun to play, but I really do wish the difference between perma-dom and non-perma-dom weren't still so stark. On the other hand, though, with so many powerful effects with big recharges, even without perma-dom as an option doms would be highly incentivised to build high recharge builds.

 

Also, if the devs aren't going to do anything about Kheldians, I wish they'd at least give us the option to block them out of the character creation screen so that I stop getting tempted to make one and then spend a week suffering through the most miserable play possible while swearing to myself "this time I'll make it work and this will become fun" before finally giving up and taking the worthless lump of character out behind the woodshed.

[Yomo Kimyata]

It's nice to see someone talking about balance.  Admittedly, it's difficult to balance across ATs through regular play as well as endgame god play.  It's also difficult to compare across ATs unless they share similarities (scrapper/brute/tanker, defender/corruptor).  I don't think that ATOs should be considered mandatory (who said that?!?) for either regular or endgame play, and thematically I'd like it if they either did more of what makes the base AT great, or compensated for their great weaknesses.  

 

That said, I'd wield the nerf bat a lot more than the buff bat, but that should come as no surprise to long-time listeners.

[MTeague]

My hot take is that there are too many Archtypes to make true AT balance achieveable except by neutering them all. (which is undesireable). Slice it no matter how you want, a few AT's are going to be regarded as a bad choice by the min-maxers. Because players are really, really, really, good at finding any possible item to leverage/exploit/build upon, whatever phraseology  you prefer, often far better than game content designers.  Despite the devs best intentions, we WILL find a way to make some subgroup of AT's outperform others. Always.

[tidge]

May I add to this?

 

2 minutes ago, MTeague said:

My hot take is that there are too many Archtypes to make true AT balance achieveable except by neutering them all. (which is undesireable). Slice it no matter how you want, a few AT's are going to be regarded as a bad choice by the min-maxers. Because players are really, really, really, good at finding any possible item to leverage/exploit/build upon, whatever phraseology  you prefer, often far better than game content designers.  Despite the devs best intentions, we WILL find a way to make some subgroup of AT's outperform others. Always.

 

I find it really doesn't help discussions of "balance" in City of Heroes because no one agrees on what content makes sense to try to look for "balance". I appreciate that players can do testing on some specific things, but it isn't as if the Pylon testers (for example) are using level 24 characters to do their testing.

[Championess]

I wouldn't touch Blasters, Stalkers, Scrappers, Corruptors, Defenders, Tanks and Veats.  These are all in a pretty good spot with the last two getting their tweaks recently.  The only thing I could see needing looked at is nukes which'll hurt the top performers.

 

Brutes could use a little love in their ATO's and maybe massaging fury a little.  Sentinels I don't know what you can do anymore to a ranged armored class without stepping on the toes of squishies.  Heats probably could use some reworking for their exploitable form changing and yeah that'll piss off some influential players so I don't know what you do here.

 

Masterminds could probably use the most looking into going forward as their pets aren't very well suited for endgame content and it would be neat to get to customize the look of their t1 and t2 pets.  

 

Control got a real good look into this last update but they could use some finishing touches.  The ATO2 for both should be adjusted certainly, its trash in comparison to the bar the Stalker ones set, it doesn't need to be that good but shoot for something better.  I'd like to see dommies damage cap raised 100% more and maybe some adjustment to melee damage modifiers.  Controllers maybe a base hp buff.

Edited Tuesday at 06:04 PM by Championess

[skoryy]

I do think that Brute ATOs need a buff and that Domination needs some looking into now that Blasters have a much better sustain that isn't dependent on global recharge. 

 

But that said, I'm with @MTeague and @tidge.  There are just too many ways to play the game for any "one size fits all" balance to work.

[ZemX]

I'll just pull the pin and leave this here....

 

We don't have the data needed to balance the ATs.  The devs do.  What data is that?  Popularity.  First, last, and only measure of whether an AT needs "balancing" is popularity.  It's not clear times or what we think of their ATOs.  We each have individual opinions but popularity is every one of those opinions put into a blender, mixed up, and then measured.

 

Why should we aim for equal popularity?  Because in a game where you have 'n' choices of what to play, you don't really have 'n' choices if some of those are simply not desirable.  The more choices that are viewed as desirable, the more GAME there is.  This is why giving us a reason to visit Kallisti Warf was such a good idea. It was there.  It was a choice.  But it was a choice nobody wanted to make before.  Now it is.

 

More of this.  But with ATs and powersets this time!

[skoryy]

22 minutes ago, ZemX said:

First, last, and only measure of whether an AT needs "balancing" is popularity.

 

To a certain extent, yeah, but Superman and Captain America aren't dominators or Kheldians. Relative AT balance isn't the sole factor in AT popularity, especially in a comic book inspired environment like ours.

[Neiska]

I do really appreciate all the time thought and effort that you put into this @Maelwys, and I agree with most of your points and overall presentation. But a few things do kind of stick out to my mind that usually remains un-addressed in any balance discussion. (But not for any part of us the posters, but mostly because they are questions that really can only be answered by the Dev's).

 

1. A side-by-side comparison of ATO's and Inherent really isn't complete. Some ATs have perks certainly, but often some ATs with what's considered the worst ATOs are often the best. Lets take Brutes for example - Brutes are still provide one of the best newbie-friendly ATs, and are easily capable of soloing +4/8 and most if not all power pairings, despite having objectively bad ATO's.

 

2. If they went and just changed the ATOs and didn't change anything else, I fear we might encounter another instance of over-correction like they did with tankers, or worse, over-nerfing things. Some things they might break entirely.

 

3. In order to properly "balance" things, then we have to know where the finish line is, or what their metric is for the finish line. A few subpoints here - 

 

3a. I think we all agree that it isn't balancing on +4/8 difficulty. At a guess, I would presume they balance more around 2/8 or 3/8 because pretty much everyone can complete those even on a budget. (And to me any who couldn't, would be the spotlight for who/what needs improvement) But that is just me musing. I believe they put their "bar" below max difficulty, and balance on that. Anything that goes beyond that is ignored... up and until a certain point. Anything that goes too far past that gets, well, let's call it "laterally demoted."

 

3b. Also if they are balancing on solo vs team play. Things that are strong or very desirable for teams, may not be the best solo, and vice versa.

 

The same could be said for killing lots of things quickly, vs killing the big things. Builds that are great at bursting lots of things down, are not the best at soloing AVs, GMs and so on. And the things that are the best at soloing the biggest of things, are not the best at killing quickly or even for team play. And to me, this is honestly a good thing. No one should be the best at everything or multiple things. So a good build is really about picking what you want to be really good at, and doing the best you can at everything else.

 

3c. Also some things that some people say are "strong" are only strong in certain contexts or situations. For me a good example is Crabbermind. They do fantastic, both alone and on teams. ....To a certain point. But if you like to solo hard difficulty alone, you are going to have a bumpy time. Not the worst mind you, others are far worse off, but soloing +4/8 EBs on my crabber was very tedious. After several (20+) different builds and attempts, I did finally make one that is decent at soloing that difficulty. But it really requires outside the box building for a VEAT. And so far she works quite well. 

 

Point is, I hope people take their "strong in what contexts" into account when saying X or Y thing is Good or Bad.

 

4. Honestly, if it was up to me, the first order of business wouldn't be balancing the AT side of things, it would be balancing the enemy side of things. Even on the hardest difficulty, I don't feel like most things hit very hard. The Alpha strikes can bruise sure, but after that, if I can survive the alpha strikes then 9 out of 10 times I know I got the fight in the bag, the only real question after that is how long it takes.

 

But yea, IMO the hardest difficulty doesn't hit hard enough. Not talking Hardmodes or special mechanic fights mind you, I am talking just random +4/8 missions. The raids and such require knowledge and practice. If you know the fight you can pretty much do it with almost any team if everyone is just doing it correctly.

 

5. I hate to bring it up, but it's almost always brought up in some circles about balance - Pylons. Personally, I use pylon times as a ball-park figure or a rough idea, not something to bet the farm on. Some treat it like its unquestionable or selective in its controls/tests though. And while I am no big brain, at a guess I would say that Devs at least take pylon times into some consideration when they change damage stuff. Again, also not something I agree with personally, but it wouldn't surprise me if they did. It is free data after all.

 

6. And as others before have mentioned that I also agree with, I think what they balance things around the MOST is simple popularity. What is played the most? Thats what they change, for good or bad. The squeaky wheel gets the grease, but in this case the squeak is the most popular things being played. Think back to 5 years ago, what did we see quite literally everywhere? Titan Weapons/Bio of various ATs - Tankers, Brutes, Scrappers. Still see some now and then, but not nearly as many as there once were. Lots and lots of Spines/Fire too, but this was mostly due to the farmers. And after the changes, I have pretty much given up any hope of Spines ever being competitive in any manner, no matter how much I like the style and feel of the set. Don't hardly see any Spines or Fire Armor outside of farming while out and about doing random team stuff. Pretty much the only time I see it is in the AE.

 

But yea, if something gets too popular or too overplayed, they are going to change it. Usually make it worse in some manner. As far as what's currently bottom? Well, I am not sure if they honestly care. Or at least, I very much doubt its in their top-10 todo list, much less a priority. Some things that are bottom have been on bottom for a very long time now, or are only bottom in certain circumstances, and that seems to be enough reason to leave it alone. Again, just me musing after seeing how they change things after 5 or so years of playing on HC.

 

Anyway, just my two cents. Comparing ATOs and Inherent is a good start, but not the only things I would want everything to be balanced around. And before any re-balancing would have to be seriously done, we would have to know what the devs point of reference or "finish line" is.

[Xalon]

I always laugh when people say balance like it's ever possible to have all the powersets and combos with different classes, all balanced perfectly. lol. I've seen people do great with all types of sets and usually comes down to the player's skill, experience and timing to play them right. 

[golstat2003]

The amount of changes needed to balance all the ATs against each other would probably result in a version of City of Heroes that a majority of players would not want to touch with a ten foot pole. That and the amount of dev and tester resource time needed to achieve it, would mean such a game would see life near the time of the heat death of our sun. lol

Edited Tuesday at 08:29 PM by golstat2003

[Neiska]

6 minutes ago, Xalon said:

I always laugh when people say balance like it's ever possible to have all the powersets and combos with different classes, all balanced perfectly. lol. I've seen people do great with all types of sets and usually comes down to the player's skill, experience and timing to play them right. 

 

Don't forget Inf spent/budget. That matters as well. A 20m build is not going to be anywhere close to one that's 600m, no matter how skilled the player might be.

 

[MTeague]

re: popularity.   If any kind of benchmark is to be used for that, I hope they consider hours spent logged in on the character, or the number of missions completed on the character, not the simple number or characters that exist of a given archtype. Characters powerlevelled to 50 and rarely touched again, are not something that should influence this. 

 

Also, if popularity is to be used, I think it is best used to refine things down to specific powerset combinations. If there's 6x as many Marine Affinity characters getting actual playtime as there are Empaths getting actual playtime, that may inform some decisions as well.