Bastion Booger

35 posts / 0 new
Last post
Criminus
Criminus's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 15 hours ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 06/19/2014 - 04:52
Bastion Booger

Looking at the powers chart, there are two ranged characters that have defense. Gunners (ranged/defense), and Bastion (defense/assault).
Now the gunner is simple to envisage,but what about the Bastion (practically its reverse in power-sets).

What will the Assault power set contain? I assume a mix of melee and ranged attacks, but assumptions don't count for Jack.
For my telekinesis character (defense probably Grit/Willpower, offense being kinetic blast), Bastion gives me a tank version of a DPS gunner.

I'm actually surprised there isn't a dedicated (and pinned) thread about EACH archetype combination. So I decided to make one here.
If Assault is a mix of melee and ranged, will Bastion be a ranged tank that can also mix it in melee, maybe an off-tank that can pick of stray mobs then lock them down, or a main tank that uses ranged attacks as a taunt.
And what if Assault is NOT a mix of ranged and melee, what will that mean?
Also, what does this mean for tertiary powers? would a Bastion even need them?

Any information respectfully given, respectfully received.

Criminus.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Online
Last seen: 14 min 31 sec ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
If the CoT version of an

If the CoT version of an "Assault" powerset is more or less the same as they were in CoH then you'll likely see them provide a mix of melee attacks and PBAoEs. You might get a couple genuine "long ranged" attacks but most of the powers are more oriented towards being either "melee" or "short" ranged.

So a Bastion will not quite be a "Ranged Tank" in CoT. I would think of them more like CoH Tanks with perhaps a few extra medium ranged PBAoE type attacks. And Gunners will basically be Blasters that aren't quite as "glassy" as CoH's glass cannons were.

Bottomline since an Assault powerset is not exactly equal to a Ranged powerset you can't quite say Gunners and Bastions will be "mirrors" of each other.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Criminus
Criminus's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 15 hours ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 06/19/2014 - 04:52
I did compare ranged to

I did compare ranged to assault only because assault might have some ranged powers, thus a more hardy (and melee capable) version of a gunner.
This was in no way a post about Gunners and Bastions being "mirrors" of each other, but if they both have ranged attacks and defense, then a comparison can be fairly made.

I also mentioned melee attacks, I also asked WHAT an assault set would be. I also asked about different assault roles. I also asked about tertiary powers.

If assault is a mix of melee, ranged, and PBAoE, awesome, thats great info, thanks.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Online
Last seen: 14 min 31 sec ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Criminus wrote:
Criminus wrote:

I did compare ranged to assault only because assault might have some ranged powers, thus a more hardy (and melee capable) version of a gunner.
This was in no way a post about Gunners and Bastions being "mirrors" of each other, but if they both have ranged attacks and defense, then a comparison can be fairly made.

Sure some comparisons can be made. But clearly Gunners (ranged/defense) and Bastions (defense/assault) are going to play differently because "assault" and "ranged" sets are not equally interchangeable. Remember you're the one who mentioned that you thought they were "practically reverse" to each other.

TBH I'm not sure how well Gunners are going to work in CoT. They'll have ranged attacks like Blasters but defenses like Scrappers. Since Blasters generally used their ranged attacks to kill enemies at a distance they didn't technically -need- defense so an entire Defense secondary will be mostly wasted on them. And because they'll have fewer melee powers than Blasters they'll suck pretty bad if you try to play them as traditional CoH "Blappers".

On the other hand I think Bastions will work pretty well. They'll basically be CoH Tanks with a few of their melee powers swapped out for a few ranged/PBAoE powers. This means they should be able to control more ground area and pot-shot targets at range as needed.

Criminus wrote:

I also mentioned melee attacks, I also asked WHAT an assault set would be. I also asked about different assault roles. I also asked about tertiary powers.

That's fine. Until we know more about CoT you can always see how CoH did things by comparing Blaster Ranged sets to Dominator Assault sets to get an idea of the model they are likely using as a basis.

Criminus wrote:

If assault is a mix of melee, ranged, and PBAoE, awesome, thats great info, thanks.

Again if CoT follows CoH's model then yes, Assault powersets will be "jack-of-all-trades" in terms of being mixes of melee, ranged, and PBAoE combat powers.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Cyclops
Cyclops's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 40 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/10/2015 - 17:24
Correct me if I am wrong, but

Correct me if I am wrong, but I have never seen "Assault" described as anything BUT melee.
The power sets page https://cityoftitans.com/content/power-sets has no mix of ranged and melee.
None of the melee descriptions include any ranged attacks. https://cityoftitans.com/content/melee-sets

the 'assault" terminology is a couple of years old. Everything I read supports melee only for assault

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Online
Last seen: 14 min 31 sec ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Cyclops wrote:
Cyclops wrote:

Correct me if I am wrong, but I have never seen "Assault" described as anything BUT melee.
The power sets page https://cityoftitans.com/content/power-sets has no mix of ranged and melee.
None of the melee descriptions include any ranged attacks. https://cityoftitans.com/content/melee-sets

the 'assault" terminology is a couple of years old. Everything I read supports melee only for assault

Again I'm going by the terms as they were defined in CoH. The three main types of offensive sets were "Ranged", "Assault" and "Melee" (with "Assault" being a mix of Ranged and Melee). I suppose CoT could always change the meaning of the term "Assault" in this context but I'm not sure why they would.

If you'll note on the main classification and specification chart there are no classes with the "Assault" specification due for launch. Perhaps they simply haven't mentioned anything about the Assault sets yet because of that. *shrugs*

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Cyclops
Cyclops's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 40 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/10/2015 - 17:24
OK, still a mixed set like

OK, still a mixed set like that would be fun. I just haven't seen it presented yet.

Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 hours 53 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
When I think 'Assault', I

When I think 'Assault', I recall the Spines set that Scrappers had in CoH. If you wanted to murderize a million minions, there was nothing quite like it.

Be Well!
Fireheart

Criminus
Criminus's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 15 hours ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 06/19/2014 - 04:52
I did say that Gunners and

I did say that Gunners and Bastions are practically reverse. I did not say exactly reverse or mirror's of each other.
lets say a set of Assault powers has some melee and some ranged, with a portion of both types being AoE. Once you include the defense sets, Gunner and Bastion are 75% similar.
Its like I'm being forced to defend myself on a simple analogy. Nit picking to this level is simply not necessary.

Please, lets get past the typical internet negativity.

Onward and upwards!
The jack of all trades (I typo'd jack-off trades, glad I spotted that) idea is a cool one, hell, its almost Batman., or Green Lantern for that matter.
A tank that can grab agro by having one or two long range powers would be a big boon, as would AoE for those swarms of mobs (anyone for sewers?)

_____________________________________________________________________________

Cyclops
Cyclops's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 40 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/10/2015 - 17:24
No negativity here. Sorry if

No negativity here. Sorry if I came across that way.
I just saw no official power set. Still a mixed set would be cool. Tertiaries make a specific set like this moot though.

Project_Hero
Project_Hero's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 4 days ago
Joined: 10/09/2014 - 11:21
Cyclops wrote:
Cyclops wrote:

No negativity here. Sorry if I came across that way.
I just saw no official power set. Still a mixed set would be cool. Tertiaries make a specific set like this moot though.

I disagree.

While the need for a mixed set is lessened by tertiaries having the option of a mixed set, especially as a secondary powerset, alleviates the requirement to rely on them.

This is compounded if there are other, possibly multiple, tertiaries that you wish to take. Especially as, from my understanding, tertiaries are possibly weaker than secondary sets.

A tertiary is good if you just want a couple of ranged attacks on a melee character. A mixed set is good if you want to be able to do both equally.

"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."

Interdictor
Interdictor's picture
Offline
Last seen: 17 min 48 sec ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/22/2013 - 05:26
Project_Hero wrote:
Project_Hero wrote:
Cyclops wrote:

No negativity here. Sorry if I came across that way.
I just saw no official power set. Still a mixed set would be cool. Tertiaries make a specific set like this moot though.

I disagree.

While the need for a mixed set is lessened by tertiaries having the option of a mixed set, especially as a secondary powerset, alleviates the requirement to rely on them.

This is compounded if there are other, possibly multiple, tertiaries that you wish to take. Especially as, from my understanding, tertiaries are possibly weaker than secondary sets.

A tertiary is good if you just want a couple of ranged attacks on a melee character. A mixed set is good if you want to be able to do both equally.

Basically this - tertiaries are most likely going to be weaker than secondaries, and more limited in scope. While tertiaries might be useful to "fill out" a character or shore up some weaknesses, they will probably not be as potent or as elaborate as a secondary set.

Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 7 min ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
The Assault Sets will be a

The Assault Sets will be a mix of Melee and ranged attacks.

Hioe many have AoEs will vary based on the focused play style assigned to the set when being designed.

The reason why there is nothing “official” on these sets is because they aren’t included for launch.

With regards to comparisons between Bastions and Gunners, they will be similar in certain regards. What will really set them apart is the effectiveness of their primary / secondary and the big difference is their Matery Powers.

Lothic mentioned Blasters not needing defenses using heir ranged attacks to stay alive. Let us not forget that Blasters also had the highest kills to defeat rations in the game. They face planted a lot. Some of the more outrageous builds leveraged as much Defense as possible in order to survive and pull off amazing feats.

It will be interesting to see how well our base assumptions about these Specifications will work and how often we were wrong and what adjustments will need to make along the way.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
Grimfox
Grimfox's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 6 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/05/2014 - 10:17
Some of us blasters stood on

Some of us blasters stood on the backs of our brethren and ate cookies while blasting in order to survive.

(at)Roxanna - Little Sister - Plutonium Bloom - MilkShakes
Triumph
Guardian
Virtue

Dev Tracker: http://cityoftitans.com/forum/fixing-dev-digest
Dev Comments: https://cityoftitans.com/forum/dev-comments

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Online
Last seen: 14 min 31 sec ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Criminus wrote:
Criminus wrote:

I did say that Gunners and Bastions are practically reverse. I did not say exactly reverse or mirror's of each other.
lets say a set of Assault powers has some melee and some ranged, with a portion of both types being AoE. Once you include the defense sets, Gunner and Bastion are 75% similar.
Its like I'm being forced to defend myself on a simple analogy. Nit picking to this level is simply not necessary.

Please, lets get past the typical internet negativity.

I'm not actually being "picky" or "negative" here. I acknowledged the similarities. I'm simply disagreeing with you that they are going to be "practically reverse" in the way they are going to play. As Tannim has pointed out the differences between a given powerset being a primary powerset versus a secondary powerset can be significant. I'm allowed to take up a contrary position with anyone here without automatically being disregarded as "picky" or "negative".

Criminus wrote:

The jack of all trades (I typo'd jack-off trades, glad I spotted that)

It would have been funny at the very least. ;)

Tannim222 wrote:

With regards to comparisons between Bastions and Gunners, they will be similar in certain regards. What will really set them apart is the effectiveness of their primary / secondary and the big difference is their Matery Powers.

Lothic mentioned Blasters not needing defenses using heir ranged attacks to stay alive. Let us not forget that Blasters also had the highest kills to defeat rations in the game. They face planted a lot. Some of the more outrageous builds leveraged as much Defense as possible in order to survive and pull off amazing feats.

I'm not saying that playing a Blaster as a "Blapper" was not a fun thing to do in CoH. I'm sure there were thousands of Blappers in the game.

But I will say that playing a Blaster as a "Blapper" was effectively taking a class that was primarily designed to act as a "long ranged cannon" and doing your best to pretend it was a melee-oriented Scrapper. Is there really any surprise that Blappers tended to suffer the highest defeat ratios in the game when a good case could be made that people were essentially playing them "wrong" that way to begin with? It was like trying to use a Ferrari as a farm tractor and then wondering why it didn't work well as a farm tractor. It really should have been completely obvious why Ferrari's don't make for good farm tractors. ;)

For what it's worth I played most of my Blasters as "Blasters" and I could go multiple hours at a time without any defeats while doing so. *shrugs*

Also the point must be stressed that the only reason Blappers managed to work as well as they did is that their "Off/Mit Manipulation" secondaries tended to have a few melee attack powers that let them pretend to be Scrappers in the first place. If you replace a Blaster's secondary with a Gunner's Defense secondary you might have a character that'd be "more survivable" but without the melee attacks playing them as CoH-styled Blappers is going to nigh-impossible.

Basically a CoT Gunner is going to be a very survivable Blaster but a very ineffective Blapper.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Criminus
Criminus's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 15 hours ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 06/19/2014 - 04:52
*I'm simply disagreeing with

*I'm simply disagreeing with you that they are going to be "practically reverse" in the way they are going to play.*.

At no point did I ever say this. I made a comparison because they both have defense and ranged attacks.
But thats okay, I completely forgive your picky negativity and strawman of my OP

You are forgiven (pats Lothic on the head).

_____________________________________________________________________________

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Online
Last seen: 14 min 31 sec ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Criminus wrote:
Criminus wrote:

*I'm simply disagreeing with you that they are going to be "practically reverse" in the way they are going to play.*.

At no point did I ever say this. I made a comparison because they both have defense and ranged attacks.
But thats okay, I completely forgive your picky negativity and strawman of my OP

You are forgiven (pats Lothic on the head).

And I corrected you because a "Ranged" powerset is not really the same thing as an "Assault" poweset even though they each have ranged attacks.

It's not a "Strawman attack" or "being negative" to point out that you were being lazy in your conclusion that these things are "practically reverse" (your words). You yourself admitted you didn't know what an "Assault" powerset was in this context and I helped you out with that.

Even a Dev (Tannim222) suggested you can't really consider these things like you did because of the differences between the way primary and secondary powersets work. If you don't want to take my word for it you can take his.

Sorry I upset you with this... *shrugs*

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Criminus
Criminus's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 15 hours ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 06/19/2014 - 04:52
No, Lothic, you did not upset

No, Lothic, you did not upset me with anything.
However, you are still misrepresenting other peoples words.

For example, you just said I was *being lazy in my conclusion that these things are "practically reverse"*
I wasn't a conclusion. It was the start of the post, and I then went on to ask about the particulars of the assault set and the various roles.

Just in case you don't know what words mean, I'll help you out.
conclusion
noun
1. the end or finish of an event, process, or text.
2. a judgement or decision reached by reasoning.
Please learn what words mean before you attempt to use them.

You also didn't help out with anything, as you falsely claim.
1) You had no clue what an assault power set was, saying it was mainly melee and PBAoE, and then Tannim222 said it was melee and ranged, which is what I said in the first place.
2) You also deemed it necessary to lecture me on what a gunner was, for no apparent reason.

You also suggested I should take Tannim222 words, if not yours.
Tannim said the difference between Gunner and Bastion is in the effectiveness of primary/secondary sets (which I think we all agree on), and the big difference in 'Matery" powers (I assume 'Mastery'). I'm happy for you to characterise that as 'significant', if you wish.
However, as already pointed out:-
You said Assault will Likely be a mix melee and PBAoE
I said I assume it will be a mix of melee and ranged.
Tannim222 said "The Assault Sets will be a mix of Melee and ranged attacks."
Great, I'll take Tannim222's words on that one. Actually I think Tannim was being very diplomatic, which is great.

See, its all fairly simple. In my OP, I made a comparison, then went on to clarify and ask questions.
You ignored everything except the comparison and used it as an excuse to be picky and negative.

BTW, putting "shrugs" after a apology, ranks up there with putting the word "but" after "I'm not racist".

_____________________________________________________________________________

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Online
Last seen: 14 min 31 sec ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Criminus wrote:
Criminus wrote:

No, Lothic, you did not upset me with anything.
However, you are still misrepresenting other peoples words.

For example, you just said I was *being lazy in my conclusion that these things are "practically reverse"*
I wasn't a conclusion. It was the start of the post, and I then went on to ask about the particulars of the assault set and the various roles.

Just in case you don't know what words mean, I'll help you out.
conclusion
noun
1. the end or finish of an event, process, or text.
2. a judgement or decision reached by reasoning.
Please learn what words mean before you attempt to use them.

You also didn't help out with anything, as you falsely claim.
1) You had no clue what an assault power set was, saying it was mainly melee and PBAoE, and then Tannim222 said it was melee and ranged, which is what I said in the first place.
2) You also deemed it necessary to lecture me on what a gunner was, for no apparent reason.

You also suggested I should take Tannim222 words, if not yours.
Tannim said the difference between Gunner and Bastion is in the effectiveness of primary/secondary sets (which I think we all agree on), and the big difference in 'Matery" powers (I assume 'Mastery'). I'm happy for you to characterise that as 'significant', if you wish.
However, as already pointed out:-
You said Assault will Likely be a mix melee and PBAoE
I said I assume it will be a mix of melee and ranged.
Tannim222 said "The Assault Sets will be a mix of Melee and ranged attacks."
Great, I'll take Tannim222's words on that one. Actually I think Tannim was being very diplomatic, which is great.

See, its all fairly simple. In my OP, I made a comparison, then went on to clarify and ask questions.
You ignored everything except the comparison and used it as an excuse to be picky and negative.

BTW, putting "shrugs" after a apology, ranks up there with putting the word "but" after "I'm not racist".

Well at least someone has a lot of time on their hands. You ought to channel your skill with excess verbiage and false pretenses into something more productive like wiki page illumination or some such. Good luck to you in what whatever vocation you choose to pursue in the future.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Criminus
Criminus's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 15 hours ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 06/19/2014 - 04:52
You have beaten me sir, you

You have beaten me sir, you are far better at projecting that I.

Anyway, onwards and upwards, again.
I was wondering about masteries and tertiary powers.
Lets say I make my planned character, grit/willpower primary, and secondary is kinetic assault (if thats an available choice).
This gives me a mix of invuln and regen in Grit defense, and both melee and ranged (and hopefully some aoe) in the assault.

So why would I need masteries and tertiary powers?
I assume (hope), maybe wrongly, that masteries are uber big versions of the basic power set with a long cooldown, like maybe a 100% defence for 6 seconds, once per minute.
Also what champions online had for the level 35 powers, one big power each, max. Thats totally fine.
Its the tertiary power set that the odd one out.
Of course there can always be answer. Anyone with a bit of quantum mechanics knowledge could stretch that a bit
Using telekinesis to manipulate the probability waves of particles, COULD produce teleportation, but at much less efficiency.
Hay, theres my second travel power, woot.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Safehouse
Safehouse's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 3 min ago
kickstarter
Joined: 10/15/2013 - 12:03
Criminus wrote:
Criminus wrote:

You have beaten me sir, you are far better at projecting that I.

Anyway, onwards and upwards, again.
I was wondering about masteries and tertiary powers.
Lets say I make my planned character, grit/willpower primary, and secondary is kinetic assault (if thats an available choice).
This gives me a mix of invuln and regen in Grit defense, and both melee and ranged (and hopefully some aoe) in the assault.

So why would I need masteries and tertiary powers?
I assume (hope), maybe wrongly, that masteries are uber big versions of the basic power set with a long cooldown, like maybe a 100% defence for 6 seconds, once per minute.
Also what champions online had for the level 35 powers, one big power each, max. Thats totally fine.
Its the tertiary power set that the odd one out.
Of course there can always be answer. Anyone with a bit of quantum mechanics knowledge could stretch that a bit
Using telekinesis to manipulate the probability waves of particles, COULD produce teleportation, but at much less efficiency.
Hay, theres my second travel power, woot.

Good questions.

My understanding of masteries is that they were less “big beefy buttons of OPness” and more akin to the traits from CoH archetypes (eg Rage for Brutes). They’re more like passive abilities. The difference is there are more of them than there were in CoH and you can pick and choose which one(s) to take. That said there might be “big beefy buttons” among those masteries that I did not see.

Regarding tertiaries, I kind of think of them like the ancillary power pools, but ones that draw from existing power sets. As always, like CoH, but with more variety and customization. So you could use them to flesh out your character a bit more by giving them “super strength” or more ranged capabilities. But I believe down the road there will be tertiaries not covered by the existing power sets - such as, for example, stealth.

Name: Safehouse
Magical Ranger - Gunner
Primary: Lethality (Energy)
Secondary: Invulnerability
Tertiary: Super Strength
Travel Power: Parkour
Status: Traveling. Following rumors of a huge city in Massachusetts that is teeming with supers.

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Online
Last seen: 14 min 31 sec ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Criminus wrote:
Criminus wrote:

You have beaten me sir, you are far better at projecting that I.

Anyway, onwards and upwards, again.

Indeed...

Masteries are explained under the How it Works: Masteries article on the home page of this site and are further detailed under the Characters -> Mastery Sets menu item also at the top of this webpage.

Tertiaries are briefly covered in the How it Works: Powerset Design article.

Gods forbid I suggest you could look some of this stuff up for yourself so you don't have to keep asking very uninformed basic questions about this game but I suppose that would be me being "negative" again...

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Interdictor
Interdictor's picture
Offline
Last seen: 17 min 48 sec ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/22/2013 - 05:26
Criminus wrote:
Criminus wrote:

You have beaten me sir, you are far better at projecting that I.

Anyway, onwards and upwards, again.
I was wondering about masteries and tertiary powers.
Lets say I make my planned character, grit/willpower primary, and secondary is kinetic assault (if thats an available choice).
This gives me a mix of invuln and regen in Grit defense, and both melee and ranged (and hopefully some aoe) in the assault.

So why would I need masteries and tertiary powers?
I assume (hope), maybe wrongly, that masteries are uber big versions of the basic power set with a long cooldown, like maybe a 100% defence for 6 seconds, once per minute.
Also what champions online had for the level 35 powers, one big power each, max. Thats totally fine.

Masteries are like the old COH Inherent powers, like a Tank's Gauntlet and Bruising, a Brute's Fury, a Defender's Vigilance, etc. They are more like global passive abilities/bonuses to your character or team, sometimes only appearing under certain conditions (positioning, momentum level, etc). They help determine how you approach combat.
Look in the bar above under CHARACTERS to see some descriptions of some mastery abilities.

Quote:

Its the tertiary power set that the odd one out.
Of course there can always be answer. Anyone with a bit of quantum mechanics knowledge could stretch that a bit
Using telekinesis to manipulate the probability waves of particles, COULD produce teleportation, but at much less efficiency.
Hay, theres my second travel power, woot.

Tertiary powers are there to "fill out" your character, maybe to shore up some of the weaknesses that your primary and secondary don't address, or maybe even to emphasize certain aspects of your build. How you justify those selections for your character it is completely up to each player.

Criminus
Criminus's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 15 hours ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 06/19/2014 - 04:52
Thanks for the links Lothic,

Thanks for the links Lothic, really helpful, I'll bear that in mind in future.
I especially like the bit in your second link that said :-
Assault Sets: Designed by pairing ranged and melee attacks by pairing thematic mechanics, these sets will offer plenty of flexibility in how to engage your opponent in combat.

That's the best laugh I've had all week.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Online
Last seen: 14 min 31 sec ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Criminus wrote:
Criminus wrote:

Thanks for the links Lothic, really helpful, I'll bear that in mind in future.
I especially like the bit in your second link that said :-
Assault Sets: Designed by pairing ranged and melee attacks by pairing thematic mechanics, these sets will offer plenty of flexibility in how to engage your opponent in combat.

That's the best laugh I've had all week.

Lothic wrote:

If the CoT version of an "Assault" powerset is more or less the same as they were in CoH then you'll likely see them provide a mix of melee attacks and PBAoEs. You might get a couple genuine "long ranged" attacks but most of the powers are more oriented towards being either "melee" or "short" ranged.

I guess I'm happy for you that I was able to quote from CoT's own source material. When incorporated with what CoH did with Assault sets (mixing melee, PBAoEs and longer ranged single target attacks) it was actually not that challenging to tell you what most of us have known for years now.

If you're extremely interested in how the Assault sets are likely to be organized in CoT you can study the Assault sets as they appeared in CoH. There you'll see how they are various mixes of melee, PBAoE, short-ranged cones and long ranged attacks. There's no reason suspect that the CoT Assault sets will be significantly different from these examples.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Empyrean
Empyrean's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 6 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/16/2014 - 07:51
Empyrean is a quintessential

Empyrean is a quintessential Bastion. In CoH (since they didn't have Bastion), he was a Fire/Energy/Pyre/Pyronic Tank. I thought of him as sort of a modern SHAZAM (formerly Captain Marvel) but with solar fire instead of lightning--and golden pom poms!

Hard to kill, able to do excellent burst damage at a range and spectacular burst damage up close, but (because you have to be fair) only decent sustained DPS. Not able to put out constant sustained DPS like a blaster, scrapper, or Brute. But he was SO fun to play because even though he was a tank, he could hit like a boss at range or melee--but of course I couldn't keep it rolling like the DPS classes. That would have been nuts.

Still, I could solo great (+4x8 Radio Mission any enemy--Cimmerorans, Rularuu, Malta, Carnies--pulling two groups at a time BEFORE Incarnate), and leading a team, I could unload on a group at range and do enough aggro-boosted damage that they would ignore everyone else, and then I would just attack any mob who did start attacking members of my team till it was time to drop the melee hammer on the boss at just the right moment. It was a tank that didn't feel like just a meat shield.

Man I miss that playstyle. Just a freaking blast every time. Every single time.

FIGHT EVIL! (or go cause trouble so the Heroes have something to do.)

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Online
Last seen: 14 min 31 sec ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Empyrean wrote:
Empyrean wrote:

Empyrean is a quintessential Bastion. In CoH (since they didn't have Bastion), he was a Fire/Energy/Pyre/Pyronic Tank. I thought of him as sort of a modern SHAZAM (formerly Captain Marvel) but with solar fire instead of lightning--and golden pom poms!

Hard to kill, able to do excellent burst damage at a range and spectacular burst damage up close, but (because you have to be fair) only decent sustained DPS. Not able to put out constant sustained DPS like a blaster, scrapper, or Brute. But he was SO fun to play because even though he was a tank, he could hit like a boss at range or melee--but of course I couldn't keep it rolling like the DPS classes. That would have been nuts.

Still, I could solo great (+4x8 Radio Mission any enemy--Cimmerorans, Rularuu, Malta, Carnies--pulling two groups at a time BEFORE Incarnate), and leading a team, I could unload on a group at range and do enough aggro-boosted damage that they would ignore everyone else, and then I would just attack any mob who did start attacking members of my team till it was time to drop the melee hammer on the boss at just the right moment. It was a tank that didn't feel like just a meat shield.

Man I miss that playstyle. Just a freaking blast every time. Every single time.

Sounds like Empyrean re-rolled as a Bastion would be a fun choice for you. By going from a Tank (Defense/Melee) to a Bastion (Defense/Assault) you'd likely swap out 2 or 3 melee attacks for a few new PBAoE and/or shorter Ranged attacks. This means he would probably lose a bit of the Melee burst damage in favor of a bit more sustained short/medium Ranged DPS.

The only problem of course is that it doesn't appear Bastions will be ready by launch time. I'm basically in the same boat as you on this - I'd love to try out an Executor (Control/Ranged) but they aren't slated for launch either. :(

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Safehouse
Safehouse's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 3 min ago
kickstarter
Joined: 10/15/2013 - 12:03
Lothic wrote:
Lothic wrote:
Empyrean wrote:

Empyrean is a quintessential Bastion. In CoH (since they didn't have Bastion), he was a Fire/Energy/Pyre/Pyronic Tank. I thought of him as sort of a modern SHAZAM (formerly Captain Marvel) but with solar fire instead of lightning--and golden pom poms!

Hard to kill, able to do excellent burst damage at a range and spectacular burst damage up close, but (because you have to be fair) only decent sustained DPS. Not able to put out constant sustained DPS like a blaster, scrapper, or Brute. But he was SO fun to play because even though he was a tank, he could hit like a boss at range or melee--but of course I couldn't keep it rolling like the DPS classes. That would have been nuts.

Still, I could solo great (+4x8 Radio Mission any enemy--Cimmerorans, Rularuu, Malta, Carnies--pulling two groups at a time BEFORE Incarnate), and leading a team, I could unload on a group at range and do enough aggro-boosted damage that they would ignore everyone else, and then I would just attack any mob who did start attacking members of my team till it was time to drop the melee hammer on the boss at just the right moment. It was a tank that didn't feel like just a meat shield.

Man I miss that playstyle. Just a freaking blast every time. Every single time.

Sounds like Empyrean re-rolled as a Bastion would be a fun choice for you. By going from a Tank (Defense/Melee) to a Bastion (Defense/Assault) you'd likely swap out 2 or 3 melee attacks for a few new PBAoE and/or shorter Ranged attacks. This means he would probably lose a bit of the Melee burst damage in favor of a bit more sustained short/medium Ranged DPS.

The only problem of course is that it doesn't appear Bastions will be ready by launch time. I'm basically in the same boat as you on this - I'd love to try out an Executor (Control/Ranged) but they aren't slated for launch either. :(

Man, this conversation has me hungry for bastion to come out. I’ve mostly been holding out for Gunner - another one that won’t be around at launch - so the other archetypes haven’t been on my radar. Now I have another thing I’m going to have to eagerly await!

Assault is such a cool combat type. It would be cool if one day, far down the road, they introduced an archetype that has assault as the primary. I would also like to see the entire chart get filled out, but that doesn’t seem feasible as just looking at it shows me some combos that would be super broken, either OP or unplayable.

Name: Safehouse
Magical Ranger - Gunner
Primary: Lethality (Energy)
Secondary: Invulnerability
Tertiary: Super Strength
Travel Power: Parkour
Status: Traveling. Following rumors of a huge city in Massachusetts that is teeming with supers.

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Online
Last seen: 14 min 31 sec ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Safehouse wrote:
Safehouse wrote:

Assault is such a cool combat type. It would be cool if one day, far down the road, they introduced an archetype that has assault as the primary.

The main class chart doesn't even have a row for an "Assault primary" which is kind of weird. It's like they don't even think they would ever even want to try to make a class based on that. Perhaps the Devs believe Assault as a primary would be too powerful no matter what the secondary is.

But if you think about it the HEATs and VEATs from CoH (Peacebringers, Warshades, Arachnos Soldiers and Arachnos Widows) were all basically uniquely weird combinations of what you could call "Assault" and other types of powersets so maybe if CoT offers up some kind of Epic classes like that we'll get something that approaches having an Assault primary.

Safehouse wrote:

I would also like to see the entire chart get filled out, but that doesn’t seem feasible as just looking at it shows me some combos that would be super broken, either OP or unplayable.

Yeah for "completeness" sake it might be cool if they could fill in every slot on the chart but like you say many of them would either be very over or under powered.

You'll notice that on the chart they already have a good number of the slots marked off with dashed lines that indicate classes they will never implement. For instance we'll never get a "double offense" class (like Melee/Ranged) nor will we get something like a Support/Defense which would be the perfect "team buff/debuffer" but would have no serious offensive capability of their own.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Interdictor
Interdictor's picture
Offline
Last seen: 17 min 48 sec ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/22/2013 - 05:26
Safehouse wrote:
Safehouse wrote:

Assault is such a cool combat type. It would be cool if one day, far down the road, they introduced an archetype that has assault as the primary. I would also like to see the entire chart get filled out, but that doesn’t seem feasible as just looking at it shows me some combos that would be super broken, either OP or unplayable.

Yeah - Assault primary (and maybe even Manipulation primary) would be kinda cool - might even be kinda Kheld-like. But yeah - some of those possible unfilled combos on the chart either don't make sense or would be too unwieldly. In addition to ineffective and too-effective combos and doubling up, we are unlikely to see something like full Control sets and Pet sets as secondaries - they might be a bit too difficult to properly "balance" in that slot.

Project_Hero
Project_Hero's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 4 days ago
Joined: 10/09/2014 - 11:21
Being able to get a pet or

Being able to get a pet or some pets as a tertiary would be nice.

Perfect for those who want a Robin to their Batman.

"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."

Safehouse
Safehouse's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 3 min ago
kickstarter
Joined: 10/15/2013 - 12:03
Interdictor wrote:
Interdictor wrote:
Safehouse wrote:

Assault is such a cool combat type. It would be cool if one day, far down the road, they introduced an archetype that has assault as the primary. I would also like to see the entire chart get filled out, but that doesn’t seem feasible as just looking at it shows me some combos that would be super broken, either OP or unplayable.

Yeah - Assault primary (and maybe even Manipulation primary) would be kinda cool - might even be kinda Kheld-like. But yeah - some of those possible unfilled combos on the chart either don't make sense or would be too unwieldly. In addition to ineffective and too-effective combos and doubling up, we are unlikely to see something like full Control sets and Pet sets as secondaries - they might be a bit too difficult to properly "balance" in that slot.

I’ve actually thought a lot about Kheldians. I really loved Peacebringers in particular. They were a nice “spacey” class and had good well rounded powersets that meshed defense and offense with a lot of unique support skills. I’ve been trying to suss out what it would take to create a CoT analogue of the peacebringers.

Name: Safehouse
Magical Ranger - Gunner
Primary: Lethality (Energy)
Secondary: Invulnerability
Tertiary: Super Strength
Travel Power: Parkour
Status: Traveling. Following rumors of a huge city in Massachusetts that is teeming with supers.

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Online
Last seen: 14 min 31 sec ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Safehouse wrote:
Safehouse wrote:

I’ve actually thought a lot about Kheldians. I really loved Peacebringers in particular. They were a nice “spacey” class and had good well rounded powersets that meshed defense and offense with a lot of unique support skills. I’ve been trying to suss out what it would take to create a CoT analogue of the peacebringers.

Unless CoT ever offers a true "shapechanging" class (to account for the way the Nova and Dwarf forms worked) I doubt you could simulate a Kheldian in CoT exactly.

But maybe if you started with a class we know will be in the game at launch like a Partisan (Ranged/Support) or a Gladitaor (Melee/Defense) and then used your teriatary to make up for the extra offensive powers you were missing (either Ranged or Melee) you could probably come close to simulating a "human-form only" Peacebringer.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Safehouse
Safehouse's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 3 min ago
kickstarter
Joined: 10/15/2013 - 12:03
Lothic wrote:
Lothic wrote:
Safehouse wrote:

I’ve actually thought a lot about Kheldians. I really loved Peacebringers in particular. They were a nice “spacey” class and had good well rounded powersets that meshed defense and offense with a lot of unique support skills. I’ve been trying to suss out what it would take to create a CoT analogue of the peacebringers.

Unless CoT ever offers a true "shapechanging" class (to account for the way the Nova and Dwarf forms worked) I doubt you could simulate a Kheldian in CoT exactly.

But maybe if you started with a class we know will be in the game at launch like a Partisan (Ranged/Support) or a Gladitaor (Melee/Defense) and then used your teriatary to make up for the extra offensive powers you were missing (either Ranged or Melee) you could probably come close to simulating a "human-form only" Peacebringer.

Yeah I’ve given up the shape changing as lost, so have been focusing on human form only. One of my favorite characters was a human form only actually :)

Did like the lobster form though!

Name: Safehouse
Magical Ranger - Gunner
Primary: Lethality (Energy)
Secondary: Invulnerability
Tertiary: Super Strength
Travel Power: Parkour
Status: Traveling. Following rumors of a huge city in Massachusetts that is teeming with supers.

blacke4dawn
blacke4dawn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 16 hours 59 min ago
Joined: 03/28/2015 - 03:02
Interdictor wrote:
Interdictor wrote:
Safehouse wrote:

Assault is such a cool combat type. It would be cool if one day, far down the road, they introduced an archetype that has assault as the primary. I would also like to see the entire chart get filled out, but that doesn’t seem feasible as just looking at it shows me some combos that would be super broken, either OP or unplayable.

Yeah - Assault primary (and maybe even Manipulation primary) would be kinda cool - might even be kinda Kheld-like. But yeah - some of those possible unfilled combos on the chart either don't make sense or would be too unwieldly. In addition to ineffective and too-effective combos and doubling up, we are unlikely to see something like full Control sets and Pet sets as secondaries - they might be a bit too difficult to properly "balance" in that slot.

Actually, from a specific PoV we already have "manipulation primary" and "control secondary". MWM has stated that Control was too powerful as is to be made into secondary sets so they created manipulation in its place for secondaries and tertiaries.