Deus_Otiosus
-
Posts
1752 -
Joined
-
Quote:Originally Posted by Nihilii
If my minimum threshold for playing something is a 3, and if something that used to be a 1 became a 2, the improvement is meaningless to me, it's still too weak - and, to paraphrase someone else's argument, I could say it's actually detrimental as that it was buffed once reduces the chance it'll be buffed again.
Drawing (and not even sheating) your sword 50 times per fight does not look good. It looks silly. I'm willing to accept people flying, throwing fireballs or getting superpowers from radiation poisoning but I have to come up with seriously contrived scenarios to explain Fighter McNotMagicDude's sword mysteriously vanishing in air everytime he uses his healing abilities derived from his mutant lineage.
To deride the issue as a minmax-centric one is a misconstruction, unless you define anyone who picks Hasten or mix and match SOs to not go over the ED cap as minmaxing, which, while technically true, is essentially meaningless as this concerns the vast majority of the game's population. Redraw is enough of a problem that it falls into that same threshold of minmaxing ; nobody needs to be a number cruncher to realise it's a pain in the *** to be still in the middle of that Headsplitter animation after popping Recon while the targeted lieut is defeated by SuperBrutorz666 with a well placed Knockout Blow.
What looking at numbers show, however, is that despite this gameplay disadvantage, weapons don't really get a significant numerical advantage for it. Even in theorycraft spreadsheet ST DPS weapon sets tend to be at the bottom of the pole, and only tend to have good AoE in fantasy scenarios assuming the player hits close to the target cap each and everytime without spending even a second positioning himself.
What's my suggestion to improve it? As others said, just get rid of it. There's no sheathing, so why should there be drawing? Or bake it into the power like Fire or Stone melee. There would probably be customisation issues, yadda yadda. Truth be told, I couldn't care less - I'm with Deus on this, I just avoid these sets like the plague ; unless I'm deliberately trying something different than I know won't be a serious concept character nor win any awards for performance.
Quote:Originally Posted by Oedipus_Tex
You pretty much summed up everything I was going to write in response, especially RE: the min-max issue. IMO it is not min-maxing to want powers to function in certain ways. Someone has to draw a line somewhere on their function. I'm not very concerned with DPS, and am much more irked that redraw pushes perverse strategies. For example, the strategy for my Pistols/Empathy Corruptor [EDIT: Oops, Defender] is to the toe the line on health because healing myself or someone else makes me put my pistols away which I need in order to defend myself or use a hold. Using a weapon set with any buff/debuff set with a fast recharging heal just really underlines how silly redraw can get. The "strategy" is not intentional and is just an artifact of a very poorly design weapon mechanic. I'm not attacking any developers over this, because I'm sure this is just one of those things that ended up this way "just because," but it is an unfortunate state of affairs, which is why this topic comes up every couple of days.
And, like you, I avoid weapon sets these days. They're just too irritating to me compared to the smooth gameplay of non-weapon sets.
Quote:Originally Posted by Starsman
My 2 cents in the topic (for me this is actually a big topic with two big points of view)
- First Cent: MixMaxing. I appreciate drastically the effort placed in the last weaponset balancing that improved weapon based powersets when used in synergy, but that I feel was never enough. Although I dont see it as a "penalty" but a "encouragement" to stay within the set, weapon sets are not globally balanced to do more damage if you stay inside it.
From such a balance perspective, if there was a slight damage buff after a redraw was forced on you, in the form of weapon attack proc that made up for the time lost in the redraw, I'd be happy. It also would be the kind of thing you would not involve animation department in, keeping it exclusively in the hands of the power balance team. - Second Cent: From an aesthetic standpoint, I HATE redraws. Most of them anyways (Claws, Spines and Thorns are OK in my book.) They are too slow, horribly slow, or at least look slow.
I personally love when I'm tossing a wave of melee attacks with my Fiery Melee tank and suddenly a sword just shows up in my hand and hits the foe, and I keep shifting between melee and fiery sword attacks.
It feels fast and dynamic. The claws redraw may be more visible, but it actually looks like something you may do in the middle of a fight.
For the most part, weapon redraws feel as something you would only do if you were 100 feet away from your foe.
Due to this, I would love to have either much much shorter and dynamic weapon redraw animations (for all sets but the 3 listed above) or the ability to entirely interrupt the redraw* if you are already in melee range.
*Note: I recall BABs actually experimented with this posibility and mentioned it publicly, the fact that we don't have it likely means his testing resulted in undesirable or game breaking side effects. This may mean the option may be almost entirely out of the table.
I honestly don't think I could have summed up my feelings on weapon redraw better than these 3 posts have done.
Drawing ideas from these posts, we have three potentially interesting solutions:
- Faster redraw animations. I agree with Starsman that sets like Claws don't have it too bad with redraw. I'd prefer it weren't there at all, but it's much less noticeable on my NW & Claws brute than it is on my Warmace Brute, Bane & Beam Rifle Corr. I don't know how long all of the different redraw animations are, but they feel as long or longer than some T1 attacks.
- "Weapon out of thin air": as Nihilii stated, the weapons already break immersion & aesthetic appeal when they simply disappear out of your hand - they could similarly appear out of nowhere as well.
- Bonus Damage after weapon draw: this is an interesting concept, as I agree that from a number's view the weapon sets do not gain any advantage from staying within the set with their powers/power. Could it be gamed by then forcing redraw on purpose?
For myself, I would highly prefer solution 2, with 1 being the second choice. - First Cent: MixMaxing. I appreciate drastically the effort placed in the last weaponset balancing that improved weapon based powersets when used in synergy, but that I feel was never enough. Although I dont see it as a "penalty" but a "encouragement" to stay within the set, weapon sets are not globally balanced to do more damage if you stay inside it.
-
I think SM/FA (/Soul) is potentially capable of dealing some of, if not the absolute best, ST DPS that a Brute would be capable of.
Your weaknesses are FA's weaknesses, shored up with the added mitigation o that SM provides.
End usage will be fairly heinous for a long time, you will need to cardiac most likely.
The reason I think you don't see more about this combination is because of the following:
- Stone melee has better ST attacks than Super Strength, but Tremor is nowhere near as good as Foot stomp. It has a terrible cast time, and does relatively weak damage (although it has a great radius and secondary effect).
- You are forced to work stone/crystal/lava hammers and fists into your concept/costume - and not just one or the other, you must work both into your concept/costume. (This is usually the tough part for me, I'd be ok with all hammers or all fists but not mixing and matching of both, it's why I dislike fire melee as well).
-
Quote:People aren't complaining about the buff part, they are complaining about the part that is annoying to them.Originally Posted by Arcanaville
What's more, the changes were a major buff across the board for all weapon sets affected, and people still complain about them. When the players complain about a buff, that does not encourage the devs to reexamine the situation as a priority.
I pretty much refuse to play weapon based sets due to redraw. -
Quote:Originally Posted by EricHough
With the way fury generation falls off around 60%-70% fury, I suspect that having a chain of fast activating attacks is going to generate more than having a high recharge and a chain of slower activating, if harder hitting attacks.
Which is a shame, when the Fury change was implemented there was a lot of hope that the slower attacking sets would be compensated for their slower fury generation with some kind of a bonus.
Unfortunately it didn't happen. -
Quote:People keep saying this, and I think it's simply untrue.Originally Posted by Arbegla
Especially when you consider the game is still balanced around SOs, not high end IOs.
Not being balanced solely for IOs is one thing, but if you think there are no considerations at all being given to IOs - I think you are wrong.
If you have a quote from a dev from within the past two years, I'd love to see it. -
Quote:Hmm,Originally Posted by Werner
Ah, good! Is Mids' wrong, or am I reading it wrong? Mids' seems to indicate that it provides taunt protection to self, not that it taunts others. It doesn't show it allowing taunt enhancements. Let's see what in game says... I don't see a taunt or taunt protection when looking at the in game detailed info. Uh... are we sure about this?
It is according to the patch notes, I also remember Synapse saying as such in the beta forums but with those forums closed I can't post it here.
From the patch notes:
It can be found about 70% of the way down:Quote:Originally Posted by Issue 21: Convergence
Entropy Shield (Brute & Scrapper)
This power has been redesigned to be a taunt aura that will enhance the user's recharge for each target in melee up to 10 targets and will reduce the recharge of nearby foes.
- Renamed to Entropic Aura
- Added Taunt Aura
- Now will boost the user's recharge rate by a moderate amount for the first target in close range with the user and a small amount for up to 10 targets.
- All foes affected by this power will have their recharge reduced slightly.
i21 patch notes
-
Quote:No, you're not.Originally Posted by Reppu
Nah. You're just badly penalized as a Brute for not going Fiery Aura, at an even more massive magnitude than Scrappers for not going Shield Defense.
Bonus penalty if you didn't go Super Strength.
FA provides a high level of offense, but the level of mitigation is on the low end.
SD on the other hand, for a Scrapper, provides a better combination of offense and mitigation. -
Quote:Try not to look at it as being forced to run forward.Originally Posted by Werner
I don't like the fury mechanic because I don't like the game forcing me to keep running forward, but in practice, I almost always keep running forward anyway, and almost always have plenty of fury.
Look at it as a reward for constantly moving forward as fast as possible and fighting as many enemies at once as you are capable of.
It's funny, I have a vaguely similar problem with Scrappers. Sometimes I choose to not make a Scrapper because I feel penalized for not going Shield Defense. The same problem does not really exist with the same magnitude for Brutes and Tankers with regards to that set.
Scrapper Entropic Aura has a taunt component.Quote:Originally Posted by WernerI'm thinking Energy Aura, if only because I've never done one before. I might as well get a feel for two sets at once. I'd be tempted to go Brute in that case, though. More and more, it seems like you need a taunt aura to even partially suppress the horrible running. The horrible, horrible running. -
Quote:Honestly I think a lot of those points should be true.Originally Posted by Sarrate
The same logic can be attributed to a lot (most?) ATs. Scrappers deal more damage, so they should generate more threat. Come to think of it, Blasters deal more damage, too; clearly their threat generation should be even higher. Defenders/Controllers/Corruptors all have potent buffs/debuffs, it would be prudent to eliminate them first. Etc. The tanking role in MMOs is usually very artificial - it makes no logical sense for the AI to go after the toughest player character.
I think Taunt is too strong in this game to begin with, and that the entire threat system could use an overhaul. I think healing and buffs get away scott free, and that they shouldn't.
There should be a better overall system for AI threat recognition and there should be a better way for Tanks/Brutes to pull threat off of others without what we have now, which basically amounts to auto-win threat. (The Taunt power)
At least the devs are starting to add mechanics that make threat balancing a bit more interesting, whether you like them or not, for example the Sequestration mechanic in BAF.
I disagree that the tanker should always be guaranteed to save anyone and anyone as needed. I disagree that Brutes should be allowed to do that as well.Quote:Originally Posted by Sarrate
Imagine that you're the Tanker and you see the Brute taking too much damage and being at risk of dying. With equal builds (ie: no Taunt vs no Taunt, Taunt vs Taunt) a Tanker cannot match the Brutes theat generation. So, their original role - to keep other players safe - becomes impossible.
I think the Brute player in that situation, if they are unable to handle the incoming damage their threat generation brings them, then that's their fault and they should die. They need to learn how to better manage their threat.
That's ok, IMO, see point above.Quote:Originally Posted by Sarrate
Okay, I conceede that a Tanker with Taunt can out threat a Brute without Taunt (which would likely be the case for a 'dps Brute'), but it takes a considerable amount of time to catch up to their threat lead, which may be too late.
Sometimes dying can teach a player how to play a bit better.
The problem is that you see it as impeding on the Tanker's role.Quote:Originally Posted by Sarrate
That's only part of it. I'm also looking further ahead. Before GR/IOs/etc, it didn't seem like much of an issue to me. Tankers never had to compete for the same role with them, and buffs/debuffs were less prolific, so it was harder for Brutes to realize their potential. Now, however, it's much easier for Brutes to impede on the Tankers' role.
It's not solely the Tanker's role. Other ATs share their roles, but I see this sentiment from die hard Tanker players who often feel like their role has been bestowed upon them from the almighty and is theirs alone. (I'm not directing this directly at you, but it is part of the sentiment you're expressing).
iTrials have massive waves of enemies. Having a core of various ATs who can handle this role is good.
I also think that people often mistake the Tanker's specialty as threat generation, the Tanker's specialty is mitigation.
Tankers will still have more HP when comparing equivalent powersets.Quote:Originally Posted by Sarrate
The amount of +def/+res available from IOs, Incarnate abilities (Cardiac Alpha for more +res, Destiny), the increase of team sizes, single target buffs being made AoEs, etc. I can only see this problem getting worse as time goes on, not better. Tankers are already getting super saturated with mitigation, where Brutes can keep growing until the difference becomes a wash. At that point, the only thing Tankers will offer over Brutes is Bruising (which doesn't even stack).
Tankers will still have much greater build freedom due to higher base resistance and defense bonuses.
Tankers will still have a vast mitigation advantage throughout the rest of the game.
I also don't think being resistance capped is a given. -
Quote:Originally Posted by Grey Pilgrim
Actually, that's a -20% resist... big difference.
Heh, if Tanker RC granted -20% resist we'd see A LOT of StJ Tankers. -
Quote:I think whatever the original concept and design intent was, Stalkers effectively ended up as a Scrapper variant through (IMO) a poor execution of whatever the original goal was.Originally Posted by Arcanaville
The problem is that however superficially similar stalkers and scrappers appear to be, stalkers are, or at least were originally designed to be melee blasters not stealthed scrappers. To the extent that the devs keep conceding ground on the initial design and balance them by comparing them to scrappers themselves, they increase the redundancy of stalkers altogether. The game doesn't need a scrapper archetypal variant.
Stalkers seem less like a Melee Blaster and more of an AT that was designed around a single, very limited and not very useful trick - a melee range snipe.
I still think there is room to improve them without stepping on the Blaster's toes.Quote:Originally Posted by Arcanaville
When actual blasters have numbers higher than that, maybe. So long as the melee blasters have near-scrapper survivability their modifier numbers can't be higher than the other kind of blasters with no defense and no mez protection.
I see no reason why they can't out threat Tankers.Quote:Originally Posted by Sarrate
A few thoughts at no one in particular:
*) Another area Brutes trump Scrappers is threat generation. They trump Tankers, too, for that matter, much to my frustration.
Dealing more damage then a Tanker, they actually are a greater threat to mobs.
Another reason would be that this presents issues for Brutes who are not built to survive that aggro - I know here on the forums everyone is IOd to the nines and is buffed so hard they shine from space, but this is not the case all of the time in game. So this threat generation presents a threat to the Brute themself, this is good. The Tanker equivalent will almost always handle that incoming damage better.
I also disagree with the sentiment that Brutes trump Scrappers in a lot of areas.
I'd like to see crits be the focal point for Stalker improvement as well.Quote:Originally Posted by Sarrate
*) For Stalkers, I keep toying with the idea of designing them more around their controlled crits than a raw damage boost. For example, crits out of "Pure Hide" deal 3x damage, "Placate Hide" crits deal 2.5x damage, AoEs always crit, and Assassin's Strike instantly recharges Placate.
The Pure Hide crits are rare (openers only) and would help in environments where setting up AS may not be practical. Placate Hide crits are to emphasize Stalkers' controlled damage (and make up for the time spent animating Placate). The AoE buff is there because the lack of AoE is (imo) a serious design flaw. (Yes, I understand sets like EM are still hosed.) The Assassin's Strike -> Placate recharge is to reward Stalkers who do use AS.
These ideas are interesting to me on a conceptual level, but I fully admit they could break solo play for Stalkers. I'm thinking more of the average player leveling up, mind you. They could do evil things like AoE -> placate -> AS -> attack.
Front-loading the crit chance bonus from allies to give a larger up front bonus from the first ally and a smaller bonus for additional allies (similar to Invincibility, AAO, etc) is one idea, as would be increasing the radius that grants that bonus from allies.
I also think improvements could be made to AS itself, if AS is going to be one of the important play aspects of Stalkers it needs to function less like a melee snipe with extremely long cast and interrupt times into something that actually meshes well with the fluid and fast nature of this game's combat. -
Quote:Rather look at it this way, putting the GSFC proc into tactics means it will randomly proc but may often proc when you don't actually need it and not proc when you do.Originally Posted by ZenLOSER
Guassian build up in a non 0.5 sec refresh toggle makes me sad
. But I can see the point. Many of the changes are well thought out; thank you for this. I continually learn things from these perspectives.
On the other hand, when it does proc from BU you will definitely be making good use of it at that time, most likely for Shield Charge.
-
This isn't necessarily how I would build a BS/SD (I'd take hasten).
I took a look at what you were trying to go for and went off of that, I built it from scratch because frankly I thought it would work out a lot better.
You don't need tactics, and Taunt is better than Provoke.
Code:| Copy & Paste this data into Mids' Hero Designer to view the build | |-------------------------------------------------------------------| |MxDz;1509;698;1396;HEX;| |78DA6594596F125114C7EF308314184AB174B3C542A17B9D42DAC4C41793DAD6D4B| |4A60D71892F645A6E61944033D005DF8C717FF3C52FE0FAE277F0D55DBF87CBBB56| |3CCCF953893329F9DD7B66CE39FFF9DFD3593B58D45F9FBF755628C17325B35ACD2| |DD8BB35E9BB68D6766DB3A40ABA7CF4EB73C2B9355992D258B02B663E97DDAFD8F9| |218E2FCA6D59AE4A235BB46429DFDA4656CA4569CB72CD682DF4F54AA564AC4A73C| |72A1742CE66D92A146BB40BB76EE5A55D2D5A3B1167BF52DEB3AAD6A655B26AF581| |A51D6BCB582A4BBB50CFAD99D59AB4EB2CB79F144ED2EF7654E06A788549C868627| |C13DC624EE69953127CE311A25B136F75DA2B4EAE267A14E7DE589439DEC59C9D20| |8E1353CC3B51A4503F658FEB79F6C10366679DD9751344BF77D44FE57E5E35C0F5B| |520A8334F85C04E30CC7C4FB95E68F55EE2D8B10D30CBCC4063069AEF459B27A938| |FD7CF0A603DE74C01B1DDEE8F0A6133E7CA07E7EEEE7F19F2168AA08FCC75E1A932| |03FA30491370BFF14BA17629F44A84197F84815C38AA3468413DCED01298CC0CDC8| |2F8F133BFE1B3C6446FF800DE698501D7EA27ADDDC5D741F12629A50A96B0F54F7C| |CB392DE343807A7E9993E3CD307D5FD50DD8F537F48BA06A06B609BB59E288045E6| |90055E678EDD607E265D83D03588FA77A95E0CF5624FF93D4E3E039F832F988997C| |CD42BE623CA1D46EE30262E8E898B63E2E298B804262E8189FB425A46903B027F93| |F037097F93F037057F53F0F73EF51DC5098E3A271821E726E0DC04DE6CF234CF428| |B7E3ACE69BCFDF413AEA853CC40CC40EC2B294B737525DD3C8E58737E59FDB700FD| |8FE179C5E9FCE35FC4A35CE0E99E59012FB392EFAEAC9FED598FB9EF14FACFC4717| |ADAD1F783FE9A5953AE48DA15C9B82273AEC8BC2BB2AC1D7D6F1AABAEBBEBDAD197| |05FAFD5D42A81C696C049A4EF1FA4ADBFA6ADBFA5ADBFA2F6DF1FED4| |-------------------------------------------------------------------|
-
Quote:I think a freespec is pretty much a forgone conclusion if the devs actually do change it, I don't think they will change it - I just disagree strongly enough that I'm still posting about it.Originally Posted by Test_Rat
Um, I just spent 10-15 Bio on a Build for my Street Justice scrapper. My Spining Strike uses Ragnarok.
I don't think I would take it well if 5 slots in my build are disabled by a future patch, unless I got a respec to compensate me. -
Quote:IMO yes, on a top end build DB Scrapper has the potential to generate about 20-30% better ST DPS.Originally Posted by Kioshi
That's what I thought also, but Claws is great on Brutes. Sure it has different formulas for end/rech compared to scrappers but... Does DB really 'vastly' overperform on Scraps the way XX/SD does? I'd guess it could be worse but not to the extent of /SD.
Claws was adjusted for the Brute AT, and I don't believe that DB was.
You'll need to provide a quote.Quote:Originally Posted by Kioshi
About Fiery Melee, Bill Z Bubba said it was way superior -
Quote:Ragnarok is inferior to Armageddon anyway (I'll concede that you'd still want Armageddon in SC if you're goal is to incorporate that into a ST chain, however that doesn't appear to give that much advantage).Originally Posted by Lazarillo
I might just be missing some sarcasm here, but when the solution to a situation is "slot purples", then that situation should kinda be seen as a problem.
But yes, suggesting a purple set because the rest of the TAoE options are at best mediocre, isn't really a great solution. I also think the Ragnarok proc is a waste there.
Spinning Strike should not be in your single target attack chain.Quote:Originally Posted by GavinRuneblade
Not necessarily. Some top-end builders consider it an advantage to have access to more than 2 purple sets in an attack chain as not all primaries do.
This is a discussion on IOs sets, and if you don't think there is any balancing in this game on what is possible with IO sets, you really need to take a closer look at the game.Quote:Originally Posted by Issen
I've seen maybe ONE post that notes the game is NOT balanced around IOs, so regardless of the preferences people have as to which IO sets a move should accept, it's most likely NOT going to change.
Not balanced solely on IO sets is not the same as not balanced for IO sets at all.
This is also the entire point of the post by the OP, so you've really missed the point of the thread.
Now explain how this attack is functionally different from Thunder Strike.Quote:Originally Posted by Issen
The moves acts like a TAoE attack, even if it is melee. This is (from what I've seen in the U-stream and the guide posted up) the intended effect. -
Quote:Except they aren't.Originally Posted by Sailboat
If they're better in all respects than Scrappers, what sense does that make?
I don't have time at the moment to give you all of the reasons why.
In general, Scrappers do more damage, and Brutes are slightly more resilient.
There are some very specifc combinations where one AT or the other might have a truly superior advantage compared to the exact same combination on the other AT.
But for the average player, in the typical way this game is played - no brutes are not better in all respects than Scrappers.
And yet that disparity exists between Stalkers & Scrappers in many respects.Quote:Originally Posted by SailboatIf they're better in all respects than Scrappers, what sense does that make? Good game design requires that choices can be made between differing elements, not between "this element is better in every way" and "this element is weaker in every way but exists so you can make the mistake of choosing it." -
Quote:Did you take Bruising into consideration? Also, it's minor but Tanker RC grants -10% Res.Originally Posted by Combat
These calculations should also be valid for tankers, albeit at lower levels of damage.
Quote:Originally Posted by Combat
However, brutes and stalkers may need to reconsider, especially brutes. Heavy blow should be exchanged with gloom, and I would use a chain that consisted of RB-SB-Gloom-RB or SB-RC-Gloom-RC, or Gloom-SB-Gloom-RC-SC, etc, because gloom is great for brutes.
Any reason you left CU out of those chains?
I haven't really played around with StJ chains yet (or even purchased it), but my first thought was a chain similar to the one I use for my SS Brute.
KO Blow > Gloom > Haymaker > Punch > Gloom > Haymaker
And subbing StJ attacks (order is presented differently to allow for combo stacking)
SB > RC > Gloom > SB > CU > Gloom
No idea how well that works out though, or if a more optimal chain is possible. -
Quote:Won't you be embarrased when the coming storm turns out to be endless waves of Pylons teleporting in from space!Originally Posted by Obitus
because at the end of the day the game really isn't about soloing Pylons.
I agree on the ways that EA allows you to build for Musculature & Assault, but its not the only set that can do this.Quote:Originally Posted by Obitus
Second, I think maybe you're underselling EA as an offensive-slanted Scrapper Secondary. It ain't as obviously offensive as Fiery Aura or Shield, but you made a very compelling case earlier in the thread that EA is unusually well-suited to allow the player to pursue supplemental offensive bonuses (native endurance management, native +recharge, easy to soft-cap, native healing/regen bonuses). The build we've been discussing, for example -- the one with Assault and Musculature Core and more procs of various shapes and sizes than you can shake a stick at -- seems to me to be about as offensive a Scrapper build as you're gonna find short of rolling */FA.
Ela can also do this, along with better Rech to build off of as well as a damage aura which will be a DPS improvement that will often outdo straight +damage slotting.
WP can also run Musc if you can build for enough rech & SR can also squeeze in a sizeable chunk of +Damage bonuses from IOs (Iggy posted a build with over +40% global damage bonuses).
I like EA's overall package though. -
Quote:Originally Posted by Lazarillo
I approached things as a Defender, but went Radiation Blast, and the sets definitely have a synergy that I could see working for Corruptors too. Time's Juncture + Irradiate makes me giggle. The set just generally plays like a tank unless/until I get mezzed, at which point it plays like a trip from the hospital. But those moments are reasonably few and far between.Quote:Originally Posted by Silas
Aye, mez protection is the one hole in Time. But the thing is, with Farsight giving so much defense you don't really need to carry purples, Time provides you with 2 self heals so you don't really need greens either, so you've got lots of room for BFs. Or Clarion, once you're 50.
Being softcapped to all three positions also helps because a lot of the mezzing stuff just won't hit you in the first place.
Just to add to what Silas is saying.
If you are doing incarnate content, you should have Clarion (and a case can potentially be made for Raidal as well as Core, although I will be going Core) and your mez issues are gone.
If you are not doing incarnate content, you don't need lucks and can load up on break frees.
QFTQuote:Originally Posted by SilasNo such thing as enough Fire/ Corruptors. -
Quote:I'm not comparing solely to Obliteration though.Originally Posted by Dispari
But it gives RES, recov, better endurance reduction than Oblit... I'm sure it could be better, all I'm saying is it's different. Which is good or bad depending on who you ask. I think it's good. I'm also WP so I wouldn't be going to Oblit for +DEF anyway.
You have Obliteration for +Damage, 5% Rech (win for Posi) & 3.75 Melee or 1.88 SM/L DEF.
You can 3 Slot Eradication + 3 Cleaving Blow for 4.38 Ene/Neg Defense as well as an End Bonus & recovery Bonus. Or you could 6 Slot Eradication for Ranged & AoE or Energy/Neg Fire & Fire/Cold as well as a meaty 2.25% HP Bonus.
Scirocco's is not the greatest set, but it is a nice place to pick up AoE Defense.
Obviously for WP, positionals don't mean much - on the other hand that kind of Ene DEF is hard to find somewhere else and Obliteration's 1.88 SM/L Def might be small, but that's still a larger bonus than you get from reactive armors. If you want to build for SM/L Cap on a WP, you might actually need an Oblit set or two.
And, IMO, Armageddon is a better set than Ragnarok.
I tend to prefer PBAoEs, but I'm fine with Spinning Strike being like Thunderstrike.
What I'm not ok with, is the devs putting what is really a ranged attack set into a melee power. Thunderstrike does take PBAoE sets, and so should Spinning Strike.
I'm all for "different" when it adds value, the entire set of Street Justice is fundamentally different in design and play (and it's got a great feel to it) - but different for the sake of it with no real improvement to the set feels like
Did you run into the Law of 5s on 5% bonuses on a WP character?Quote:Originally Posted by Dispari
Yeah I could dip into other pools and devote slots to a power (not that I would), but this means I don't have to. I like having it provided for me, in my primary.
The rule of five thing is also a nuisance. Since so many sets melee characters have gives those exclusively -
Quote:I'll generally dip into patron/epic pools for Ranged/TAoE attacks if I need those kinds of recharge bonuses.Originally Posted by Dispari
I'm personally glad I can get a +6.25% recharge instead of having to go Oblit for +5%. I always have to juggle sets around on melees who have far too easy access to +5% and not the others. ST Melee, AoE Melee, DEF, and Heal all do +5%. Something different, please!
Also, the PBAoE sets overall offer much better variety of sets as well as a better variety of set bonuses (especially +def options).
For spinning strike Posi Blast on the other hand has a useless range enhancement and only grants 26% rech enh. -
Quote:Your comments were about a concern for lack of personal defense.Originally Posted by 3dent
Actually Soul is much more tempting... Power Boost instead of PBU (Build Up aspect being lost is compensated by Soul Drain) Fortunata as a patron pet... Not very concept-fitting though, and the whole rigmarole of switching sides twice will take time. Buit worth thinking about.
Scorp Shield on a Defender will give you around 23% SM/L Defense and 15% Ene Defense.
It's also a spot for an LoTG 7.5, for more recharge. -
Quote:Brutes and Scrappers have the same base Defense numbers as well as the same soft and hard cap (which is equal among all ATs).Originally Posted by Mint
Do brutes and scrappers have much of a difference in their defense power sets, basically what im asking is brutes defense better than a scrappers defense?
Brutes have a higher resistance cap (90%) than Scrappers (75%) but they have the same base numbers. Only a handful of Brute secondaries can get to the 90% cap on their own, and this usually requires the use of special (Tier 9 "godmodes") powers or inspirations, or is limited to 1 type of damage (for example, FA can get to 90% simply through enhancement slotting).
12% More.Quote:Originally Posted by Mint
Do brutes have a big difference on Hp vs a scrapper?
Scrappers have better damage dealing capabilities over Brutes in general.Quote:Originally Posted by Mint
Do brutes have reach some kind of cap in something that scrappers dont that allow scrappers to excel in a certain field over a brute?
Scrappers have fairly consistent performance as well as a type of burst damage effect from criticals.
Specific high end (read: expensive, well designed and well played) builds that choose specific powerset combos can break the mold on both sides.
DM/SD, KM/SD, DB/XX, for example will all see the Scrapper version pull much farther ahead vs. the Brute version than other sets do in general.
FA is also an outlier in offense potential. Its not that FA for scrappers does less damage, but a lack of taunt aura and FA's generally squishier nature both make the set a bit more appealing on a Brute so we don't see as many FA Scrappers running around.
I'd love to see some pylon times for a top end KM, DM, or StJ /FA Scrapper. -
Defender.
Support ATs, especially powerful debuff sets like Rad, are always very useful.
Also, no one expects you to pull or break spawns/hold aggro.
Get some BAFs under your belt before you give Lambda a try, and avoid "speed Lambda" runs if possible.
You can also grab a solid chunk of defense in the Scorpion Patron Pool if you're open to that route (SM/L/E).
It's enough defense to build off of, but leaves a lot of room in the build for rech.