[Review] [Engi] Blunderbuss - Corporeal Damage

[CptPiggy]

yes it would be nice to change into coro im full grenade engi and I use alot blunderbuss when other skills are on cool down... it would work great. ST engis dont ise this skill at all maybe just for lvling. I hope it will be someday corp dmg.

[Ramasee]

I wasn't sure if the ab changelist was correct on that. Good to know!

I, too, also believe that a engineer should be able to be a primary dps rather than a utility one by changing tactics.

Changing blunderbuss's damage to corporeal would definitely do this; but its damage would have to be scaled back significantly to keep balance externally but also internally. Best way would be removing the weapon dps modifier from the ability after changing it to corporeal. For reference, tooltip value for my blunderbuss is 445, while static discharge is 291 and gun blast is 784 (ST!). Heres how much different there is between the two without weapon dps (47.4 gun, 50.0 spanner, and 82 ballistic skill difference): 317 blunderbuss; 279 static discharge.

Roadkillrobin and catholicism198 make excellent points about the duality of engineer tinkering spec paired with the magus daemonology. Also still wondering what we would do with static discharge if blunderbuss is corporeal?

So if we are going to improve blunderbuss's damage output, I believe the best sort of action would be to create armor penetration on the ability tied to the tactic Trench Fighting perhaps? Or just give engineers access to some more weaponskill by increasing their base amount or via a tactic.

-----Break for skill discussion swap-----

However, I do not believe what holds engineer's back from the AoE DpS role in warbands is Blunderbuss. It is fragmentation grenade, which we are allowed to talk about! There are a few more compelling reasons to turn this into corporeal damage.

Fragmentation grenade deals physical damage, unlike everything else in the grenadier tree outside of strafing run (which has been established already in the thread as a non-rotation, non-dps tool in orvr.) For quick reference, all path of changing abilities are one element: spiritual. So considering the mirror doesn't block this change to corporeal.

Fragmentation grenade has 0.5 ballistic skill modifier towards damage. Pandemonium has a 0.625 intelligence modifier towards damage. (HUGE shout out to the destro magus Fassdeku for taking time to provide me this information; I have been asking all day!)

Fragmentation grenade also already creates a larger chunk of the AoE damage an engineer deals over blunderbuss.

A change to fragmentation grenade does not disrupt any internal balance changes in the engineer and would require less overall tweaking of the class because of this.

-----Conclusion-----
We should change fragmentation grenade to corporeal damage. Then monitor the engineer's overall viability as a primary dps. If it is still lacking, then come back to the blunderbuss change.

editted for coloring and silly mistakes!

[Komode]

I would agree with Ramasee and Roadkillrobin. Would suggest to not touch BB, its completely OK according also to my experience in regular guild warbanding.
If you dont like to stack WS for spamming BB, you should ask for Whispering Wind SM to your party just and go with Static Discharge. Thats it.
Also, changing frag gren dmg type would be good experiment if small ballistic skill modifier makes sense and also no crit tactic in 2nd tree (magus similar one). Before unshakable focus nerf it was balanced like that i believe. Magus has more crit and all dmg is magic type, but engi got m2 +100% dmg and has opportunity to stack WS. Now its a bit different, i guess. Mentioned just in case.

[Crumbs]

Hear me out, I’ve got a lot to say and there’s a bit of confusing detail in there so read through it carefully please

I disagree, anything weaponskill for tink/Corp related is not the best idea, the tree deals Corp damage and is usually combined with Grenade which is also supposed to deal Corp damage. The whole purpose of this is so that engi doesn’t have to waste stat points on weapon skill just to remain viable damage wise ( and that’s a lot of WS needed considering we don’t even have Armor debuff) and have no stat points left for a half decent defence.
Meanwhilst magus do as they please, their change spec fully synchronises with their daemonology spec plus they can dedicate their extra stats towards toughness and defends. Engis can’t (we’re talking about 500+ points worth of stats here). You don’t see magus breaking the game with their complete arsenal and you won’t be seeing it from engineer either. It’ll just be less useless as aoe.
If you’ve ever seen a decent aoe engi, it’s because they use friction burn, lightning rod, and napalm effectively, nothing more. All of which magus already has equally as powerful. We don’t need weird finicky stuff, just try what we already know works.

And for aoe Corp damage firebomb is not the skill, because like I said magus has a spirit Blunderbuss and a spirit firebomb.

To person saying that magus version gets disrupted more often, it may be true but only if you have lower INT, I’m aware it’s still tough, and vs healers and tanks it’s a pain, but it’s still far more effective as engineers version does not bypass armor, it’s horrid vs tanks and some mdps and doks, truly. Imagine the damage output possible through stacking all of your dots as change/daemon, everything minus infernal blast dealing heavy spirit damage which is also debuffed by 370+ resist.

One big thing to point out is that engineers group buff does not buff the group against spirit damage, it’s vs elemental. Magus’ version buffs the group against Corporeal, which is engineer’s main aoe damage type. By default 80% of engineer’s aoe damage abilities are nullified vs magus version, the only argument that can be made is that magus have to go through disrupt.

Also I’ve never heard of anyone stacking ws for B.B. that’s just bs. That build doesn’t work and if it did, it isn’t because Blunderbuss is doing worthwhile damage.

I played Krumbo an engi from the past and I’ve played with WBs, 6mans all as tinkerer from rr30 all to way to 70 when I deleted him. I know this classes’ aoe potential better than most. I don’t know why the big scandal or having to scale damage back because it’s going to be too high. Magus already has all of this and more and its not game breaking.

Stacking WS can only be seen as an opportunity for an engi that’s decked to the floor in crit and BS, AKA rr60+ and even then it’s not to take advantage of it but rather again, to remain viable.

Also frag grenade is not a game changer it’s an OK dot, just look at magus’ version for reference. And static discharge deals barely more/the same damage/worse vs no Armor vs Blunderbuss because it has such a low base damage. (another idea could be to make this deal more damage)

To that guy saying that magus aoe deals elemental and spirit, yes they deal elemental but only on the aoe elemental 3sec channel skill which is bad as an aoe and made obsolete by daemonic lash. It is not used

[Karast]

An important point that I forgot to mention,

If blunderbuss stays as is, or if it is adjusted to get more armor pen, the current gear meta will largely remain the same.

To effectively stack WS on engi is no easy matter if you want to maintain crit, BS, and some semblance of survivability. This often means investing into renown, splitting sets with BL / Conq to get double bonuses, and passing up on better jewelry or weapons to squeeze out enough WS to be meaningful.

Due to this and the lack of AoE armor debuffs it is generally accepted that the new PQ set is now BIS since it provides the armor debuff proc which in a WB setting could potentially provide better armor debuff coverage for better AoE.

This essentially dooms the usefulness of other gear sets since the armor debuff will become paramount, where a corp blunderbuss could push more engi's to other endgame options, and create some interesting gearing options in the process.

[CptPiggy]

agree blunder needs to be corporeal or give us armor debuff on grenades and frag grenade must be alos corp. Im playing pure grenadier +keg. and Im using blunder alot and it lacks the dmg coz of high armor stacking. give use corp for frag and blunder.

[catholicism198]

Hear me out, I’ve got a lot to say and there’s a bit of confusing detail in there so read through it carefully please

I disagree, anything weaponskill for tink/Corp related is not the best idea, the tree deals Corp damage and is usually combined with Grenade which is also supposed to deal Corp damage. The whole purpose of this is so that engi doesn’t have to waste stat points on weapon skill just to remain viable damage wise ( and that’s a lot of WS needed considering we don’t even have Armor debuff) and have no stat points left for a half decent defence.
Meanwhilst magus do as they please, their change spec fully synchronises with their daemonology spec plus they can dedicate their extra stats towards toughness and defends. Engis can’t (we’re talking about 500+ points worth of stats here). You don’t see magus breaking the game with their complete arsenal and you won’t be seeing it from engineer either. It’ll just be less useless as aoe.
If you’ve ever seen a decent aoe engi, it’s because they use friction burn, lightning rod, and napalm effectively, nothing more. All of which magus already has equally as powerful. We don’t need weird finicky stuff, just try what we already know works.

And for aoe Corp damage firebomb is not the skill, because like I said magus has a spirit Blunderbuss and a spirit firebomb.

To person saying that magus version gets disrupted more often, it may be true but only if you have lower INT, I’m aware it’s still tough, and vs healers and tanks it’s a pain, but it’s still far more effective as engineers version does not bypass armor, it’s horrid vs tanks and some mdps and doks, truly. Imagine the damage output possible through stacking all of your dots as change/daemon, everything minus infernal blast dealing heavy spirit damage which is also debuffed by 370+ resist.

One big thing to point out is that engineers group buff does not buff the group against spirit damage, it’s vs elemental. Magus’ version buffs the group against Corporeal, which is engineer’s main aoe damage type. By default 80% of engineer’s aoe damage abilities are nullified vs magus version, the only argument that can be made is that magus have to go through disrupt.

Also I’ve never heard of anyone stacking ws for B.B. that’s just bs. That build doesn’t work and if it did, it isn’t because Blunderbuss is doing worthwhile damage.

I played Krumbo an engi from the past and I’ve played with WBs, 6mans all as tinkerer from rr30 all to way to 70 when I deleted him. I know this classes’ aoe potential better than most. I don’t know why the big scandal or having to scale damage back because it’s going to be too high. Magus already has all of this and more and its not game breaking.

Stacking WS can only be seen as an opportunity for an engi that’s decked to the floor in crit and BS, AKA rr60+ and even then it’s not to take advantage of it but rather again, to remain viable.

Also frag grenade is not a game changer it’s an OK dot, just look at magus’ version for reference. And static discharge deals barely more/the same damage/worse vs no Armor vs Blunderbuss because it has such a low base damage. (another idea could be to make this deal more damage)

To that guy saying that magus aoe deals elemental and spirit, yes they deal elemental but only on the aoe elemental 3sec channel skill which is bad as an aoe and made obsolete by daemonic lash. It is not used

So this is a whine proposal.

You keep spreading misinformation, and selective information...
Infernal Blast also deals Elemental Damage, which is not 'obsolete'
Even at soft capped intelligence disrupts are high- not just at low intelligence
An AM/RP/ZE/SH can all provide resist buffs- not just limited to corporeal/elemental
I could go on...
I'm over it.

[Renork]

Hear me out, I’ve got a lot to say and there’s a bit of confusing detail in there so read through it carefully please

I disagree, anything weaponskill for tink/Corp related is not the best idea, the tree deals Corp damage and is usually combined with Grenade which is also supposed to deal Corp damage. The whole purpose of this is so that engi doesn’t have to waste stat points on weapon skill just to remain viable damage wise ( and that’s a lot of WS needed considering we don’t even have Armor debuff) and have no stat points left for a half decent defence.
Meanwhilst magus do as they please, their change spec fully synchronises with their daemonology spec plus they can dedicate their extra stats towards toughness and defends. Engis can’t (we’re talking about 500+ points worth of stats here). You don’t see magus breaking the game with their complete arsenal and you won’t be seeing it from engineer either. It’ll just be less useless as aoe.
If you’ve ever seen a decent aoe engi, it’s because they use friction burn, lightning rod, and napalm effectively, nothing more. All of which magus already has equally as powerful. We don’t need weird finicky stuff, just try what we already know works.

And for aoe Corp damage firebomb is not the skill, because like I said magus has a spirit Blunderbuss and a spirit firebomb.

To person saying that magus version gets disrupted more often, it may be true but only if you have lower INT, I’m aware it’s still tough, and vs healers and tanks it’s a pain, but it’s still far more effective as engineers version does not bypass armor, it’s horrid vs tanks and some mdps and doks, truly. Imagine the damage output possible through stacking all of your dots as change/daemon, everything minus infernal blast dealing heavy spirit damage which is also debuffed by 370+ resist.

One big thing to point out is that engineers group buff does not buff the group against spirit damage, it’s vs elemental. Magus’ version buffs the group against Corporeal, which is engineer’s main aoe damage type. By default 80% of engineer’s aoe damage abilities are nullified vs magus version, the only argument that can be made is that magus have to go through disrupt.

Also I’ve never heard of anyone stacking ws for B.B. that’s just bs. That build doesn’t work and if it did, it isn’t because Blunderbuss is doing worthwhile damage.

I played Krumbo an engi from the past and I’ve played with WBs, 6mans all as tinkerer from rr30 all to way to 70 when I deleted him. I know this classes’ aoe potential better than most. I don’t know why the big scandal or having to scale damage back because it’s going to be too high. Magus already has all of this and more and its not game breaking.

Stacking WS can only be seen as an opportunity for an engi that’s decked to the floor in crit and BS, AKA rr60+ and even then it’s not to take advantage of it but rather again, to remain viable.

Also frag grenade is not a game changer it’s an OK dot, just look at magus’ version for reference. And static discharge deals barely more/the same damage/worse vs no Armor vs Blunderbuss because it has such a low base damage. (another idea could be to make this deal more damage)

To that guy saying that magus aoe deals elemental and spirit, yes they deal elemental but only on the aoe elemental 3sec channel skill which is bad as an aoe and made obsolete by daemonic lash. It is not used

So this is a whine proposal.

You keep spreading misinformation, and selective information...
Infernal Blast also deals Elemental Damage, which is not 'obsolete'
Even at soft capped intelligence disrupts are high- not just at low intelligence
An AM/RP/ZE/SH can all provide resist buffs- not just limited to corporeal/elemental
I could go on...
I'm over it.

This ^.

Majority of the posts on this thread reflect a lack of wanting to preserve balance and more of "MAGUS HAS IT, SO I WANT IT AND IT'S ONLY FAIR".

One of the main rules of the balance forums states DO NOT APPEAL TO YOUR MIRROR. Yet...here we are?

The only person that posted a very reasonable solution was Peter with his tactic proposal. I'm going to repeat what I told Crumbs in another thread: you simply want the best of both worlds. You want to keep the PRDPS aspect because it does give you the ability to assist the mdps/armor debuff train. You also want BB to complement your aoe/pbaoe rotations to achieve the maximum dps potential.

A little ludicrous, no? Why not ask for ALL of your attacks to be corporeal? This way you can also suffer the tragedy of facing the disrupt party, just like your fellow mirror class the "magus". Also, magus does not have M1 concealment, which engies use frequently to get off their ST rotations on a regular basis. It would be beautiful to glean/lash + pop concealment, but surely you can see how silly that would be, no? So, why should you have access to this? You literally would outperform your mirror in every aspect, but that's balance? The whole "armor meta" is a moot argument, this is a team game so go group and assist each other. You can at the very least target healers, which is not an option for magus.

TLDR, there are plenty of things engies have that I wish I had on my magus, but that's not enough to justify a buff to the class.

[Darosh]

[...]
A little ludicrous, no? Why not ask for ALL of your attacks to be corporeal? This way you can also suffer the tragedy of facing the disrupt party, just like your fellow mirror class the "magus".
[...]

Just a sidenote:
Damage type does not dictate avoidance check. Take SMs as an example, most of their stuff is spirit based but faces parry checks, or SW Flame Arrow-thingy (elemental damage) facing dodge checks ~ and so on. A BB that deals coporeal damage would still prompt a dodge check, unless manually adjusted by the devs.

Abbd.:
To clarify my point: You could argue for a change to avoidance check as a drawback to any changes proposed, if you fancy it. But considering the very minimum of logic... bullets shouldn't prompt disrupt checks. *cough*

[Renork]

[...]
A little ludicrous, no? Why not ask for ALL of your attacks to be corporeal? This way you can also suffer the tragedy of facing the disrupt party, just like your fellow mirror class the "magus".
[...]

Just a sidenote:
Damage type does not dictate avoidance check. Take SMs as an example, most of their stuff is spirit based but faces parry checks, or SW Flame Arrow-thingy (elemental damage) facing dodge checks ~ and so on. A BB that deals coporeal damage would still prompt a dodge check, unless manually adjusted by the devs.

Abbd.:
To clarify my point: You could argue for a change to avoidance check as a drawback to any changes proposed, if you fancy it. But considering the very minimum of logic... bullets shouldn't prompt disrupt checks. *cough*

It would be absolutely logical for your aoe damage to face the same avoidance checks. The proposal and discussion focused on "appealing the mirror", with mostly "well magus can X and do X". Again, you can't have your cake and eat it too. None of you have looked at the synergy with other abilities or morales available to you (already mentioned one, which you happened to ignore). I'm sure it would be extremely fun for you and your crew to pop that m1 and aoe the crap out of everyone, but it would only be fun for you and not the players on the receiving end.

I'm not saying bb doesn't need a tweak, but to change its damage type with zero drawbacks is way more than it needs. If stacking WS is a problem, then add a tactic that increases your WS somewhere in the tree.