Emberly

Nobody is failing to grasp that. What you are failing to grasp is that there is no AT or powerset combo that has "NO regen" and accordingly, your examples are meaningless. I and others have said from the start that regen is one piece of the puzzle, and that as defense and resistance increase, you need less and less regen to make up the slack. You keep responding with "but if you have NO regen then the character with regen wins!" which is not in question. It's also not relevant, because there is no defensive set that has no regen. Even completely unslotted, every character gets the benefit of their base regen + health. Given sufficient defense and resistance, that base regen can be enough to survive.

So yes, in your imaginary world where there exists a defensive set with zero (not even base!) regen, that set is in trouble and can't stand up. Luckily, that doesn't exist outside your convoluted examples, and so the rest of us realize that regen is not the most important factor in a set's survivability.

The reason Regen (the set) was nerfed repeatedly prior to the GDN is not because regen is the be-all end-all of defensive abilities. It was because Regen (the set) was far out of whack with what the devs wanted in the game.

You've got some very strange ideas that make no sense, and I think you overestimate your understanding of how the game actually works. If you can't see why it's worthless to compare sets using situations that literally do not exist, then I guess we will indeed have to agree to disagree.

Hardly quibbling; you're arguing in bad faith.
All that proves is that you can imagine a situation that kills characters of given regen/res/def. Meaningless in game, and it's telling that in your original example, you had to completely negate the Inv's regen to make it look inferior. Do you really think someone can't design such a scenario that would kill any brute? Here's one for you.

Assume ten mobs, all hitting for 500 lethal damage every 5 seconds, with 50% tohit. The Inv brute regens 15 hp/sec, with 70% S/L resist and 45% S/L defense. WP brute regens 100 HP/sec, with 50% S/L resist and 25% S/L defense.

Per volley, the Inv brute takes .5 hits, meaning half the time the volley misses him completely. Averaged out, the Inv brute takes .5 * .3 * 500 = 75 damage per volley. Our WP brute, meanwhile, takes, on average, 2.5 hits per volley, for a total of 2.5 * .5 * 500 = 625 damage per volley. Suddenly, things look bad for our WP. Our Inv brute can handle this; he regens 75 HP back every 5 seconds, so on average he can take this forever. Our WP brute, however, is screwed. He can only heal back 500 hp every 5 seconds, which is nowhere near enough to keep him alive. If these mobs can debuff defense, as is very common with lethal damage, then the WP brute goes down even faster, while the Inv brute has no problem at all.

Does this mean that WP is clearly inferior to Inv? Of course not. It only means that like you, I can dream up situations that paint one powerset to be superior, while ignoring the way the game actually plays out. In actual gameplay, this situation means that the Inv brute can brawl everything do death while doing /e newspaper between swings, while the WP needs to beat some furious *** to kill the baddies before they kill him. That's how the game actually works; you need to live long enough to do unto them before they do unto you. Situations exist for all sets that make this a challenge.
Yes, if you can't outregen the damage, it will kill you eventually. What of it? The same is true to WP; if it can't outregen the damage, it will die eventually. You are overvaluing regen in a vacuum; regen only needs to be high enough to heal back incoming damage, and when resists and defense are high, that incoming damage can be very low indeed.

Cascading defense failure is far more a problem for WP than Inv due to Inv's significant DDR. Standing in a pack of Cims on my Inv brute results in me not getting killed and my def never dropping below cap. Standing in a pack of Cims on my WP brute results in me rapidly hitting single digits of def or less, and suddenly taking a lot of heat. I'm still not sure what you mean by immunity.

Bottom line is, your examples and situations are not useful. The sets are not designed to stand in mobs and do nothing; creating artificial situations where the character does nothing at all proves nothing at all. We do agree that both sets are PvE monsters, and more than up to most tasks. There's no need to artificially disadvantage one set to make the other look better; they both stand very well on their own.

Your example is not useful, because it relies on imaginary circumstances. In fact, the Inv brute, even with completely unslotted Health and without Dull Pain running, regenerates more than enough HP to counteract the damage he would take. On average, the Inv brute gets hit once every 100 seconds for 240 damage. In that 100 seconds, assuming he is unslotted for regen and only has 1500HP, he regenerates 875 hitpoints. So, in fact, the Inv brute could handle three of those Lts you describe indefinitely, with the worst possible (undebuffed) regen and only base HP. If we allow for a 3000 HP Inv brute, the numbers only get better, with the brute being able to handle seven of the Lts. As Rajana Isa notes, the Inv needs much less regen to survive that incoming damage, because there is a hell of a lot less of it. Even the 8.75 HP/sec that a base HP/unslotted Health Inv brute has is sufficient for indefinite survival in the circumstance you describe. Start slotting that brute up, get him a bunch of regen bonuses, and get to an easily-reached 70% resistance to S/L, and things get even better. My Inv brute, in the same 100 seconds, would regenerate 2300 HP, and only take 162 points of damage.

I'm not trying to say that Inv would live and WP would not. I'm saying that ignoring layers of a character's defenses makes for slopping comparisons, and is not useful. The real result is that both brutes survive forever, and the differences in survivability come down to circumstances more complex. Toss in -regen and WP folds like a house of cards. Pure Psi damage and Inv looks like a wet kitten. My WP and Inv brutes handle 98% of the PvE content easily, and the other 2% that is a challenge, well, there's not much overlap between the situations the Inv finds challenging and the WP finds challenging.

Second Tuesday of next week.

One thing more boring than that is seeing someone incessantly posting about the same tired old complaints in every thread they can. These posters invariably claim they are trying to create discussion or give feedback, but it's just a personal axe they are grinding.

No kidding. KM is certainly not a slow set.

my heatsinks!

Heh, I feel the same way about a theoretical secondary that has the same mechanics as Invulnerable but lets me wear a shield.