Constant Barrage

[sultryvoltron]

Debuffs to defensive skills should not check the defensive skill they debuff, or if they do it should be a low check.

I'll just leave this here, and wait for someone to present a valid reason why this shouldn't be the case.

On another note, the consideration of soldier debuff perks, while interesting, shows how loltastic the soldier perk actions really are. How about some damage perks? And maybe just leave them with Laser Paint Target with -300ish dodge, low or different check.

[navycut]

I'll just leave this here, and wait for someone to present a valid reason why this shouldn't be the case.

On another note, the consideration of soldier debuff perks, while interesting, shows how loltastic the soldier perk actions really are. How about some damage perks? And maybe just leave them with Laser Paint Target with -300ish dodge, low or different check.

The soldier debuffs can debuff semi-evade profs and can prob even debuff advs in limber, so their perks/FAs/bursts land easier. Is that 'loltastic'?

You want the sold's perks to land on everything right? Yeah guess what, some classes rely on not being perked to survive but no, you don't care.

Oh and tracer has a 75% dodge check btw.

[Djantro]

I'll just leave this here, and wait for someone to present a valid reason why this shouldn't be the case.

On another note, the consideration of soldier debuff perks, while interesting, shows how loltastic the soldier perk actions really are. How about some damage perks? And maybe just leave them with Laser Paint Target with -300ish dodge, low or different check.

I ll repeat, because it could be one of the solution for CB :

- 1 : Say a profession's toolset uses at 95% probabilities based defense checks (NT's nano, not only nukes, but blind/roots/calm/debuff/stuns/etc as well) and the rest are perks

- 2 : Say you worked on your AR and grabbed Mochs (2.9k, possible NT's case in future), and your target is a nr1 soli NT with 2850 NR. According http://pvp.aodb.us/ARDEF/nano_calc.html, you got 65%ish landing rates, taking a 90% def check arbitrary as an average. You cannot afford gambling each of your casts and you are pissed, thinking about makin whine thread in forums.

- 3 : But HO ! GLORIA SANTA MARIA ! you got a 100% def check perk that allow you to debuff your opponent's NR by 500 pts, and thus ensuring a landrate of 80% on 90% def check MC based nanos (over 9 thousand) ! Since you ain't a gimp, and "worked" on your AR like everyone asked you to do (in the past you used to "work" like a chinese on your evade but apparently that wasn't hard work enough, gettin high nanoskills is harder they said, "ha" you said, "ok no biggy i had this CS scout in a bag and this AI hud2 for when i felt like perking nr2 anyway, ok happy now ?"), so, since you ain't a gimp YOU CAN PERK THE *******.

- 4 : After a while you realise 80% still isn't enough, that the stuff you got lower AR on and higher def check totally sucks to land (AI dot, still at 60% after debuffing etc), and you go /rage on forums again trying to grab Klod who argued 500 was largely enough (you won 15% more landrates in our scenario).

On a more general note, in a case of a prof doin almost all its damage with nano program, + usual CC/rest of total with nanoprogram, = NT, a NR debuff *PERK* can be 100%, or 110%, or 120%, or 70%, because it isn't meant for your 5% other perk (on/off tools), but primarly to grant you better landrates (probabilities) for your nano. A perk Def Check has no relation to a nanoprogram def check, thus they ain't dependant of each other. The question you answering when you set the def check on a perk debuff in case of NTs is "what kind of opponents you want NTs to be able to kill/heavely affect". In the case of a 100% def check, this is everyone but enfos, MA and nr2 NT (which shouldn't exist anymore if you introduce such a perk tho). If you go for a 85 or 80% def check, this would be everyone but nr2 MA (rare), enfo with procs up (rare), and nr2 NTs (that doesn't exist anymore).
The question of HOW MUCH it debuffs for is an an other question, and as far as i am concerned i do feel like NT *needs* 100% landrates on their nano, in current NT's state, most specially when taking resistance in count. This is today. Tomorrow, a newer system could be in use. Today, 500 NR isn't enough. Only very high amount of NR are meaningful, thus why CB debuff by 1K, making you win 30% on your landrates quite often, reaching 100% landrates in the most common panel of scenario.

[-Klod-]

bloody marvelous!


Mocs, go back to WOW and cry there. No matter how you distort it, CB is not game breaking. That is from someone that has been on both sides of it many many times.

Every debuff, that has 90% chance of landing on decently NR equipped toon, that also debuffs the very same defense that it checks, for 1k (up to nine thous... errr three thousands), that can be spammed in short time on several targets, is game breaking and I didn't even have to distort anything.

[sultryvoltron]

Question here:

Could a legitimate solution be to simply increase the requirements on CB so that NR1 NTs can't cast it?

NTs that work on their MC should see benefits from doing so, and these benefits could come from NR debuff nukes.

Also, why do Doubles only check 90%? It seems more reasonable to increase the check of the actual attack nanos, but it makes perfect sense for a nano designed to decrease NR to not check a high amount of NR. A 90% check on CB is stupid.

[Solstiare]

Where'd Mocs' posts go?

[-Klod-]

A 90% check on CB is stupid.

If it stays as it is (1k up to 3k debuff) no, it isn't. But, I hope they will greatly nerf it, debuff amount wise.

[NotDavidBowi]

Ah great read this thread. Brings a smile on my face every time I read it.

[Armus]

The soldier debuffs can debuff semi-evade profs and can prob even debuff advs in limber, so their perks/FAs/bursts land easier. Is that 'loltastic'?.

Naw it does help against defence twinked enfs and such. But egainst evaders it could be a lot better.

You want the sold's perks to land on everything right? Yeah guess what, some classes rely on not being perked to survive but no, you don't care.

First of all lets remember that the soldier debuff perks debuff a grand total of 700 dodge. And they have a total execution time of 2+3+4 seconds.
Tracer has a 15 sec duration which means you have at best 8 secs with -700 running on any target.

Compare that to CB that debuffs 1k in literally 1 second, then another and then another. -3k in 6 seconds and 18 seconds duration leaves you 12 seconds of zero defence for almost every class. Actually my soldier has -1200 Nr. Yeah that's right, -1200

But lets take your average joe uber advie since advies were mentioned here. Mr ranged advie has 2300 dodge and 990 aad. Add to that 200 or 800 at will.

IF I as a soldier get lucky and time my dodge debuffs well I can land it during limber and it will leave the advie with 2800 dodge def.

Compare that to the -800 NR that you WILL have the advie at after a much shorter time.

2800 def vs -800

Sound balanced to you? Oh btw lets not forget that if my perks are resisted I get a hefty recharge while you can just happily spam away until your oppnents nr is in the red, literally.

Oh and tracer has a 75% dodge check btw.

That is true, but it's 75% FA check, not assault rifle! Soldiers have substantially lower FA skill compared to AR.


To sum it up CB debuffs over 4x more than all soldier perks, it will always land, it's spamable and it debuffs a defence skill that is already way, WAY lower on every class except enforcers and it does it for alot longer.

It is simply VASTLY more powerful in every single aspect.

[navycut]

Naw it does help against defence twinked enfs and such. But egainst evaders it could be a lot better.



First of all lets remember that the soldier debuff perks debuff a grand total of 700 dodge. And they have a total execution time of 2+3+4 seconds.
Tracer has a 15 sec duration which means you have at best 8 secs with -700 running on any target.

Compare that to CB that debuffs 1k in literally 1 second, then another and then another. -3k in 6 seconds and 18 seconds duration leaves you 12 seconds of zero defence for almost every class. Actually my soldier has -1200 Nr. Yeah that's right, -1200

But lets take your average joe uber advie since advies were mentioned here. Mr ranged advie has 2300 dodge and 990 aad. Add to that 200 or 800 at will.

IF I as a soldier get lucky and time my dodge debuffs well I can land it during limber and it will leave the advie with 2800 dodge def.

Compare that to the -800 NR that you WILL have the advie at after a much shorter time.

2800 def vs -800

Sound balanced to you? Oh btw lets not forget that if my perks are resisted I get a hefty recharge while you can just happily spam away until your oppnents nr is in the red, literally.





That is true, but it's 75% FA check, not assault rifle! Soldiers have substantially lower FA skill compared to AR.


To sum it up CB debuffs over 4x more than all soldier perks, it will always land, it's spamable and it debuffs a defence skill that is already way, WAY lower on every class except enforcers and it does it for alot longer.

It is simply VASTLY more powerful in every single aspect.

Nah I wasn't saying it's better than CB, I was just saying it's not useless, CB is obviously much better (overpowered even ) heh

[schloops]

To sum it up CB debuffs over 4x more than all soldier perks, it will always land, it's spamable and it debuffs a defence skill that is already way, WAY lower on every class except enforcers and it does it for alot longer.

It is simply VASTLY more powerful in every single aspect.

To sum it up:
- it does not debuff for over 4 times since only enfos require multiple CB. That 3 times stacking is just people blurring reality to try and get their view adopted.
- it does not always land since twinked enfos resist it more often than a blue moon.
- since cb is a spell, we can't move while casting it, and it stops us from casting while casting it+recharge, which perks don't.
Also, nts dmg doesn't increase when lowering their opponent defense... it does allow safer landing and using some perks... but so does ar for soldiers.
So no, it isn't more powerful in every single aspect.
- the defense it debuffs is NOT way, WAY lower on every class except enforcers. On most, surely... on the other hand, nt offense is not as high as soldier offense, before the debuff(s).

[-Klod-]

So, it's fine, just because... ENFS COUNTER IT, ONCE IN A BLUE MOON?!!

[Hellrule]

*snipped*
- the defense it debuffs is NOT way, WAY lower on every class except enforcers. On most, surely... on the other hand, nt offense is not as high as soldier offense, before the debuff(s).

How isn't it?

Compare a fully MC based NT to a fully AR based Soldier
NT can hit 2800/2900 MC
Soldier 3.5k/3.6k

IU has 53% check, 4 263
Doubles/Tripples has 90% Check, 3 190

Just because you chose to go full defensive setup and use NR does not mean you don't have high offense. Professions constantly sacrifice for max ar, yet you NTs defend it to the end saying its not fair to have to sacrifice evades to land your nanos/perks.

edit: soldiers can probably hit more, doesn't change anything.

[Shrubberyman]

How isn't it?

Compare a fully MC based NT to a fully AR based Soldier
NT can hit 2800/2900 MC
Soldier 3.5k/3.6k

IU has 53% check, 4 263
Doubles/Tripples has 90% Check, 3 190

Just because you chose to go full defensive setup and use NR does not mean you don't have high offense. Professions constantly sacrifice for max ar, yet you NTs defend it to the end saying its not fair to have to sacrifice evades to land your nanos/perks.

edit: soldiers can probably hit more, doesn't change anything.

Yea, because it's sucha sacrifice for sols to go AR when they could go teh infamous evade setup instead, right? Gimme a break.
Land our perks? Yea, I'm sure given the feeble amount of AAD out there, we would have no problem at all landing our perks if we only would make the effort to go max nanoskill... I mean, the rest of the profs using the same perks have no problem, have they?

So, it's fine, just because... ENFS COUNTER IT, ONCE IN A BLUE MOON?!!

Nah, it's fine just because we are supposed to have the means to land each and every nano we want, each counter being both an offence and a defence wasted.

[Hellrule]

Someone compared soldier AR to NT ar, i was simply giving the numbers. And every profession still has to decide between the sacrifices in there setup. A soldier could go pure AR but that doesnt mean its the only option. Enforcers could go full off or def, so do keepers, shades, agents, ma's, or go for a balance between survivability and offence. Just give me on example of how an nt sacrifices anything

[-Klod-]

Yea, because it's sucha sacrifice for sols to go AR when they could go teh infamous evade setup instead, right? Gimme a break.
Land our perks? Yea, I'm sure given the feeble amount of AAD out there, we would have no problem at all landing our perks if we only would make the effort to go max nanoskill... I mean, the rest of the profs using the same perks have no problem, have they?

Nah, it's fine just because we are supposed to have the means to land each and every nano we want, each counter being both an offence and a defence wasted.

So, in general, you agree that this nano should go, after the rebalance.

I'm glad we cleared that one up.

[Shrubberyman]

Someone compared soldier AR to NT ar, i was simply giving the numbers. And every profession still has to decide between the sacrifices in there setup. A soldier could go pure AR but that doesnt mean its the only option. Enforcers could go full off or def, so do keepers, shades, agents, ma's, or go for a balance between survivability and offence. Just give me on example of how an nt sacrifices anything

I sacrifice a lot of %nanodamage increase for my defence. Remember we have no MBS, no crits, just the dmg inc to boost dd.
I sacrifice a good chunk of PvM survivability to keep my hps in check for PvP.
I sacrifice a third of my ncu slots to cap my nanos in speed and range.

But like everyone else, if I do it, it's because I consider the advantages gained to more than offset the hindrances.

So, in general, you agree that this nano should go, after the rebalance.

As I said several times already i think, if the rebalance is done in such a way this nano is not needed any more, why would I want it to stay at all cost? Doesn't make any sense. If the rebalance puts us in a situation where a counter once in a while is an occurence we can cope with (like, through a review of our defences and a nerfage of immunities, or an unlikely access to heals), I will be more than happy to have one less nano to cast.

[schloops]

So, it's fine, just because... ENFS COUNTER IT, ONCE IN A BLUE MOON?!!

Nope, was just pointing that the claim that it always land is wrong. And it was "MORE" than a blue moon.
Common .

How isn't it?

Compare a fully MC based NT to a fully AR based Soldier
NT can hit 2800/2900 MC
Soldier 3.5k/3.6k

IU has 53% check, 4 263
Doubles/Tripples has 90% Check, 3 190

Just because you chose to go full defensive setup and use NR does not mean you don't have high offense. Professions constantly sacrifice for max ar, yet you NTs defend it to the end saying its not fair to have to sacrifice evades to land your nanos/perks.

edit: soldiers can probably hit more, doesn't change anything.

Lets forget IU (with which a nt can't kill any opponent 1 vs 1, that knows what it is doing (most don't know, whatever the number of grey aliumz they killed... which makes a def focus nt fun... killing peeps that should kill you ). Anyway, cb isn't needed to land IU, so not really relevant here.
So we got LE nukes... which are way lower AR, even in a maxed mc setup than soldiers, as posted by you. So I'll stand behind what I said. MC is by far our higher ar... roots, blinds, etc rely on way lower nanolines.

My post wasn't even defending cb... what it was doing is removing some wrong affirmations from a post. And it had nothing to do with what setup we use.

[Hellrule]

I sacrifice a lot of %nanodamage increase for my defence. Remember we have no MBS, no crits, just the dmg inc to boost dd.
I sacrifice a good chunk of PvM survivability to keep my hps in check for PvP.
I sacrifice a third of my ncu slots to cap my nanos in speed and range.

what?

Your nukes ignore hp caps as it is, your sacrificing %nano damage in exchange for Combined Scouts which gives you more evades/ar?
PVM/PVP setups are supposed to be different, this goes for every profession.

A third of your ncu slots to cap nanos in speed and range? Which professions don't use a compiler? And you have nano range increasing nanos? Many professions use those also, like my crat, fixers, some agents, etc?

Yet again I ask, where are your sacrifices?

[Armus]

How isn't it?

Compare a fully MC based NT to a fully AR based Soldier
NT can hit 2800/2900 MC
Soldier 3.5k/3.6k

IU has 53% check, 4 263
Doubles/Tripples has 90% Check, 3 190

Yup, and lets not forget that nanos don't check aad or that there are no perks that add a boatload of NR with no sacrifices, such as dof/limber and all the different other perks that add evades and aad.

AR vs defence NT's are easily among the best IG without any debuffs. Which is why this nano needs a hefty nerf.

90% check

-400 nr the first time
-250 the second
-150 the third

Voila. Nerfed by a factor of 3.75 and still the most potent debuff IG.

Shanx.