Sarrate

Sorry to see ya go, but you have to go where your interests lie. Thanks for all the fun TFs.

Take care!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
HelinCarnate - While the devs will likely go this route, there is a danger with it. The first few months (if not longer) are likely not to be as useful since longtime Hero / Villain players will likely be testing the waters with the opposite side's ATs to see what they're like. It won't be until after the initial testing phase that the true trends will start to show themselves. If a problem is detected/acted upon at this point, there will be an inevitable "Why'd you wait so long to act?" [expletive]fest.

[/ QUOTE ]

The other danger is acting when there is no need to act causing the inevitable "Why did you screw with an AT that had no problmes?" fest.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Personally would rather fix something one time than break something and then try to fix it.

[/ QUOTE ]

No doubt, just saying it wasn't a perfect solution - not that there is one in this case... or most cases. Instead, just many, many shades of gray.

[ QUOTE ]
Originally, no one had a DR cap. One was put in to keep characters from being literally invulnerable. It just so happened that, at the time, Tankers were the ones easily achieving 100% DR. When caps were put it, 75% was chosen as the universal value, with exceptions for Tankers. (I can't remember if Khelds were in yet when we got DR caps.) That's not necessarily explicitly to keep Scrappers from competing with Tankers, but reasonably because it fit the idea that Tankers are a lot tougher than everyone else. Honestly, this was even more likely back in those days, because this sort of conceptual approach was explicitly how the devs approached game design.

[/ QUOTE ]

UberGuy - I'm almost positive Scrapper originally had the 90% resistance cap, the same as Tankers. It was later reduced from 90% to 75% for the express purpose to stop them from stepping on Tanker's toes defensively. (This was ages ago under the old regime and I think Provoke was still the de facto aggro retention tool - so Scrappers could use that, too, if they wanted.)

[ QUOTE ]
For this I would have to say, wait until GoRo goes live and give it plenty of time to see what happens. If suddenly the scrapper population dies and the brute population grows, you will see some changes that will either make scrappers more attractive to play or brutes less attractive or both.

[/ QUOTE ]

HelinCarnate - While the devs will likely go this route, there is a danger with it. The first few months (if not longer) are likely not to be as useful since longtime Hero / Villain players will likely be testing the waters with the opposite side's ATs to see what they're like. It won't be until after the initial testing phase that the true trends will start to show themselves. If a problem is detected/acted upon at this point, there will be an inevitable "Why'd you wait so long to act?" [expletive]fest.

[ QUOTE ]
and because of this, AH procs are super hard to buy now... at least on Virtue.

[/ QUOTE ]

Note: The AH is cross server. There is no "Virtue market." All of us use the same one.

[ QUOTE ]
330% regen, as a comparison, will regen 3.3 bars of health in a minute, or a bar in 18 seconds, or 40% in 7.2 seconds. That's an additional 3.2 seconds of time in that danger zone, plus the Aid Self build is also regain health during that time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, what? 330% regen is nowhere near 3.3 bars of health per minute. With 330% regen, it would take ~72.7s to regen a single bar of health (240 / 3.3). To regen 3.3 bars of health in 60s, you'd need to regen a full bar every 18.18s - that is ~1320% regen.

Am I misreading this statement somehow?

[ QUOTE ]
As far as I know, Taunt mags still stack which means that, in all cases except for single target aggro, the Tanker is actually going to be generating more aggro than the Brute is. Tankers are "Gauntletting out" to 4 additional targets with all of their attacks which means that they're generating greater magnitude taunt effects and getting a greater multiplier than Brutes will. In the realm of multi target aggro maintenance, the Tanker is still king.

[/ QUOTE ]

Taunt doesn't stack like that:

Castle:
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2. Does Taunt stack with itself?

[/ QUOTE ]
Almost all Taunt values in the game are REPLACE instead of STACK type. That means the remaining duration on a given taunt is reset to full when the power is reapplied. Using multiple powers with Taunts is basically a redundancy factor -- it reduces the odds of someone stealing aggro.

[/ QUOTE ]
Castle:
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2) I don't know if the mag replaces, or just the duration, but I think he was just talking about duration. Meaning that you could eventually stack mag if need be.

[/ QUOTE ]
Mag from multiple taunt attribs will stack with one another (in exactly the same way holds do) but they will not stack their durations.

[/ QUOTE ]
Castle
[ QUOTE ]
All magnitude does for taunt is determine if the Taunt is strong enough to affect the target. It's generally not a factor (unless you are fighting +5's and relying only on gauntlet effects or Pool Powers.)

[/ QUOTE ]

From those quotes (and my experience) stacking MAG is pretty much inconsequential. If all you need is MAG4 worth of Taunt to effect an enemy (which covers 99.9% of all enemies), then having MAG8 does you no good. The splash effect from Gauntlet will add threat to extra targets, but at the same time a Brute's aura (ie: damage dealing ones) will deal more damage and generate more threat than a Tanker's. If you add Taunt the power into the mix, it gets more screwy (as it amplifies damage more strongly, but I don't think it amplifies the threat from taunt effects).

At the levels of threat we're talking about, it will only matter when a Brute and Tanker are competing for aggro - if they're isolated (and I stress playing the same) then I doubt anyone would notice the aggro retention difference between the two.

A hyperbole example - if two ATs (X and Y) can constantly one shot entire groups of mobs, who cares if X deals 50 more damage than Y? The mobs are dead and the extra damage would be wasted anyways. Likewise, if a Brute can command the same nearly aggro retention a Tanker can such that there are no loose mobs, the Tanker being 5-10% better is a meaningless benefit.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, what was the second thing? You only got to one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, the second bit was the the bit about threat multipliers and damage. Basically, if taunt values are the same (point 1) and the only difference is damage, then the one with higher damage wins (point 2).

[ QUOTE ]
Don't crits ignore resistance anyway? Honestly, I never bothered to confirm but I always thought they did.

[/ QUOTE ]

Crits used to ignore resistance in PvP, but resistance always effected crits in PvE. (Crits are resistible in PvP now, too.)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the big difference between the removed badges and the old ones is that the new ones required using the MA to farm. As long as it's not in the MA the Devs don't care about badges that encourage farming.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with your broad generalization there, MG. While I won't argue that some did (Virtual Slayer - 50k enemies in Test Mode), but not all of them were that heinous (To The Rescue - 50 hostages, Cataclysmic - 50 destructible objects). I thought the last ones took a bit of work / playtime, but in no way did they require farming.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't mean that the badges necessarily required farming, I meant that the badges required using the MA, so if one were inclined to farm to get badges quickly, one would necessarily have to use the MA to farm it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, I can concede that point.

Ahh, okay. The only character you mentioned was your Dark/Psi Defender. I have no experience with Psi Blasters, so I'm in no position to comment.

[ QUOTE ]
I think the big difference between the removed badges and the old ones is that the new ones required using the MA to farm. As long as it's not in the MA the Devs don't care about badges that encourage farming.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with your broad generalization there, MG. While I won't argue that some did (Virtual Slayer - 50k enemies in Test Mode), but not all of them were that heinous (To The Rescue - 50 hostages, Cataclysmic - 50 destructible objects). I thought the last ones took a bit of work / playtime, but in no way did they require farming.

[ QUOTE ]
fault has a pretty hefty taunt to it for something that does no dmg

[/ QUOTE ]

It has the same taunt value that all Brute / Tanker attacks have - 13.5 seconds at lvl50.

I'm not sure I understand the relevance of the comment..?

[ QUOTE ]
Tankers are still capable of better unbuffed mitigation and aggro control than any other AT in the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Note: Two things about this statement. First, the only edge Tankers have over Brutes in regards to aggro management is AoE Gauntlet (which I personally think is overrated). Everything else (st-Gauntlet, auras, Taunt, durations, etc) are identical. At the same time, Taunt is just a threat multiplier - since Brutes do far more damage than a Tanker, they'll generate far more threat.

What I'm trying to say is, if a Tanker and Brute play identically, the Brute will generate more threat.


Most Brutes (if the board is any indication) don't play this way and are quick to pass up on some of their aggro tools (Taunt) for more damage. That doesn't mean they aren't capable of it.

[ QUOTE ]
Considering some of the stuff I've done with my Dark/Psi defender, I'd have to say that 25% resistance is outright laughable. I cringe every time I'm expected to do missions with Council/5th Column, Arachnos, or Banished Pantheon with her because even with Tar Patch, it's just plain ridiculous how hard my stuff gets resisted.

I've been on the end of the resistance shaft when it comes to certain enemy groups, so I can sort of understand what you mean, but it's by far not the most damaging thing ever.

[/ QUOTE ]

The only character I have that deals heavy psi damage is my Illusion/Thermal Controller (lvl44 iirc), but I don't play her much. There are situations where psi is heavily resisted, no doubt - I just have more experience with lethal which is why I commented on it.

[ QUOTE ]
Even heavily lethal-resistant EBs, I've torn through on my Scrappers. It just takes me a while longer then I normally could otherwise, and I'm usually gasping for breath at the end of it. Often times, it can be a closer thing then I'd like. I don't doubt, however, that I could likely achieve the same feat on a Blaster or Defender (in the case of the defender, eventually; Probably after I stop crying about the prospect).

Psi-resistant EB, though? Screw that, I'd rather go solo Tyrant with an empty Insp tray.

[/ QUOTE ]

See, here you're comparing a Scrapper vs a lethal resistant EB to a Defender vs a psi resistant EB. I'm sure if you swapped the ATs (psi Scrapper vs a psi resistant EB, lethal Defender vs a lethal resistant EB) it would seem like lethal is getting the shaft more that psi.

That's why I mentioned Scrappers not being the only lethal dealing AT. As the difference between your dps and enemy regen shrinks, kill speeds go through the roof. (When I ran my partially IOed Fire/Stone Tank through Tina / Maria's arc, any EB she fought with Unstoppable was a 3 minute time out. It was impossible to out damage their regen. Not sure if a Scrapper could have beat them through it, but I wouldn't be surprised.)

[edit: I know that last anecdote was smashing, not lethal, but Unstoppable has equal resistance to both.]

[ QUOTE ]
Fair enough there, but if Lethal was near as bad off as people claim it is, then Scrappers wouldn't be doing nearly as hot as they are.

It's frequently over-stated.

[/ QUOTE ]

In general, you're right. However, I will say that when lethal resists are bad, they can be really bad:

<ul type="square">[*]Malta - all their lethal resistances are either 25% or 50%, averaging at 32%. Smashing (second most resisted) varies between 20% and 30% averaging at 22%.[*]Anti-Matter/Neuron's minions - they all have 25% res to lethal.[*]Psychic Clockwork - all resist lethal between 15% to 30% (avg 23%)[/list]
Granted, those are the most extreme examples that I could come up with off the top of my head, but I hope you understand what I'm saying. Full missions (or heaven help you, arcs) with nothing but highly resistance enemies is where "lethal sucks" really rings true.

(Man do I hate Tina Macintyre's arc on lethal characters. Ungh...)

[ QUOTE ]
Considering that a large portion of Scrapper primaries (Claws, Broadsword, Dual Blades, Katana, Spines*) do Lethal damage and most people state that Scrappers solo exceptionally well, often to the point of being broken (Werner, BillZBubba, Shredmonkey [Though I somehow think Shred's DM, isn't he?])...

We can reasonably conclude that Lethal damage is fine, it's the poor mobs you should be feeling sorry for. &gt;.&gt;

[/ QUOTE ]

Scrappers aren't the only AT to deal Lethal damage. The lower you go on the damage totem pole, the bigger a problem this becomes.


As for the Armor Breaker system - I don't like it. If a critter is designed to be hard to kill, this can completely circumvent that. (ex: Recluse with the Red Tower up.) That reduces the options a developer has for designing content.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Second run I gave up at 6:22 when the pylon was barely at 50% health.

This chain sucks and isn't getting anywhere near what our calculations are showing.

I'm beginning to seriously doubt the belief that the two different types of DR debuff procs stack.

[/ QUOTE ]

Get either a Bane Spider or a Blaster to observe the status of the Pylon for you with Surveillance. If they're not shown to stack for a least 5 minutes, I'm pretty sure that's decent evidence that they don't.

[/ QUOTE ]

Another way to snoop on enemy stats that anyone can use: Power Analyzer MkIII

I never thought some of those badges were bad at all. I mean, rescuing 50 hostages (for the final badge)? That really wasn't bad at all, easily obtainable through regular play. (Which is how I got pretty much all of my MA badges.) Yes, there are some extreme cases like the Virtual Slayer (50k kills in test) that needed to be nixed...

The biggest thing that irritates me is the loss of titles. I'm very bummed that Brimstone-Preacher will be losing the Savior badge title. It was just perfect for him.


I hope they either 1) keep the badges but reduce the requirements or 2) give use some mechanism to keep the titles (even if one badge awarded 5 titles, for example).

[ QUOTE ]
<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre> * 55.61 Negative damage PvE only

* ToHit -5.625% for 6s

* 55.61 Negative damage PvE only, If not Hidden

* 55.61 Negative damage PvE only, If Hidden</pre><hr />

This is what it looks like in City of Data (with PvP info removed). To me this indicates that it always does 111.2 damage and doesn't deal extra damage when hidden. All patron pool attacks look like this, so is this an issue for all Stalker patron pools?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have a 40+ Stalker (mine is ~37, iirc), but I think what you're seeing in CoD is Stalker's new crit chance. So, those four bullets would look like this:

* Dark Blast will always deal 55.61 ne damage. (PvE)
* Dark Blast will always debuff tohit. (PvE and PvP)
* Dark Blast has a chance to crit out of Hide. (PvE)
* Dark Blast will always crit in Hide. (PvE)

Since my Stalker isn't high enough, I decided to check a power that I have used, Havok Punch (removed PvP specific effects):

[ QUOTE ]
* 0.8 Smashing damage PvE only
* 0.52 Energy damage PvE only
* 8.00000 Melee_Sleeps Sleep (mag 2) (after 0.25 second delay) (30% chance) PvE only
* Endurance -0.10000 Melee_Ones PvE only
* Recovery -1.00000 Melee_Ones for 4s (30% chance)
* 1.32 Energy damage PvE only, If not Hidden
* 1.32 Energy damage PvE only, If Hidden

[/ QUOTE ]

* Havok Punch always deals smashing damage. (PvE)
* Havok Punch always deals energy damage. (PvE)
* Havok Punch always has a chance to sleep. (PvE)
* Havok Punch always has an endurance drain. (PvE and PvP)
* Havok Punch always has a chance to debuff recovery. (PvE)
* Havok Punch has a chance to crit out of Hide. (PvE)
* Havok Punch always crits in Hide. (PvE)

It most certainly doesn't always have two energy damage ticks, so the out of Hide must be the critical chance (just not specified). I think the reason they had to specify "Hidden" and "Not Hidden" is to avoid double crits like this or this. (Check the combat log.)

One other point that hasn't been mentioned - SR has top of the line (ie: almost unparalleled) def resistance (95%), so defense debuffs (rad attacks, Cimerorans, etc) are next to ineffective. To put it in perspective, SR characters resist def debuffs stronger than AVs.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


[edit: Not to be the party pooper, but honestly, I don't see Scrappers needing more damage.]

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless I misunderstood the discussion, it's not so much about scrappers needing damage, but rather striking a balance between brutes and scrappers. I have no opinion as to whether such a balance is needed, but given the choice between increased resistances and increased damage, damage seems like the only likely alternative. Increases in resistance would place us back into the category of stepping on Tankers toes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think this analysis is enough to conclude that Brutes or Scrappers necessarily need a change. As I said before, this is very narrow in scope, and not really an accurate depiction of how the vast majority of the game is played (ie: in missions where AoEs are incredibly important). These chains are very gimmicky and good at one thing: single hard targets. (I don't think bosses you'd fight in normal gameplay last long enough to outweigh other build compromises necessary to create these ST monsters.)

Heck, if went straight off these charts, one could conclude Spines needs a buff...

It's interesting to point out a major outlier (Gloom), but not the Brute / Scrapper balance as a whole. (I've never used Gloom, but it's possible the rooted time is longer than the activation time, meaning it's not as strong as this analysis concludes. It'd likely take demo analysis to know for sure.)
[edit: Also, as noted, Gloom is a dot, and pure dot attacks do tend to get some discounts. Take a look at Incinerate's dmg/rech/end ratio - it's discounted.]

For a moment, let's assume that Scrappers do under perform Brutes... I don't seriously think that Scrappers are the ones that would need the upward tuning - they already perform admirably in both SOs and IOs. If there is a discrepancy, then I think it'd be Brutes that should be taken down a peg, not Scrappers buffed up. (Btw, it may be entirely possible for people to keep Fury between 70%-90%... but it's also possible that more people cannot. Just food for thought.)


[edit: For the record, I think Brute performance is more variable than a Scrapper, and as such, it's possible for certain combos / playstyles to consistently underperform Scrappers while others always overperform. That's another danger I could see in trying to balance Brutes.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Or scrapper's resistance caps to be raised to 80% or even 85% &gt;_&gt;

Nah I want more damage.

[/ QUOTE ]

Plus, other than Invuln and S/L I don't think any of my builds are even close to the cap.

[/ QUOTE ]

Eh, neither are Brutes, but they still have the higher caps. The big point of distinction is that it would allow Scrappers to actual distinguish themselves as being hardier than Blasters, Controllers, Defenders, etc. by some mechanic other than higher hp (and only 30% more at that).

[/ QUOTE ]

Fiery Aura - Fire Resistance
Electric Armor - Energy Resistance
Electric Armor - Power Surge (all but Tox/Psi)
Invuln - Unstoppable (all but Psi)
WP - Can hit &gt;75% s/l res with Tough + SoW


[edit: Not to be the party pooper, but honestly, I don't see Scrappers needing more damage.]

Some things to keep in mind when using Bill's numbers:

<ul type="square">[*] While the math seems is sound (haven't gone over it myself to double check), keep in mind it's all averages of sustained combat vs a single target. It doesn't factor in things like AoE potential nor the granular effects of things like BU or missing.[*] This is approaching the tip top damage output possible for these secondaries. Not all secondaries can even attain this level of +recharge without sacrificing other important things.[*] It assumes that the Brute has 90% Fury. &lt;Insert generic Fury debate here.&gt;[*] All the non-weapon Brutes use Gloom. I suspect they'd deal substantially less damage without it. (In other words, it's not that Brutes or their mechanic is superior, they simply get access to a superior attack.)[*] Speaking of Gloom, most of the Brutes must be lvl41 or their chains break.[*] It doesn't state whether a chain is sustainable or not. Take a long hard look at Stone Melee - its end drain is a whooping 5.2 eps (granted could be lower with more end reduc), if you're not Elec or EA that's impossible to sustain. (Of course, any Scrapper can get Conserve Power, a huge boon in this category.)[/list]
For my 2 inf, I think that these super charged ST attack chains are overrated for the majority of the game. It's great for big game hunting (AVs, Pylons, +4 Rikti Bosses), but that's about it. For the other 90% of the game, I'd rather have a more standard build with more effective AoEs and more utility/fun powers. I can't see myself ever making an AV soloer for that reason - far too specialized for my tastes. (Besides, I'd rather have more fluidity / choices in combat than just press the same 4 keys in the same order over and over.)

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone got an SS chain without pool powers?

[/ QUOTE ]

Bill: If you're going to allow GLOOM for Brutes, then there is no reason to exclude pools from Scrappers.

[ QUOTE ]
And thank you. Just found another error. Brutes only get 80% buff on buildup.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't forget that all damage buffs for Brutes will be weaker than on a Scrapper. ie: Blinding Feint (37.5% vs 30%), Soul Drain (60% for 1 targ vs 48% for 1 targ), etc. They're all only 80% that of a Scrapper.

[ QUOTE ]
Sarrate,I haven't figured out EPS on the chains yet, but I'll get that done before I post this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okey doke. You may want to factor in some form of end reduc too... not sure what a fair amount would be, ~50%?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You shouldn't put the Steadfast Protection in Earth's Embrace. It only lasts 120 seconds, which is to say it won't be very reliable. Stick it it something like Stone Skin that you'll have running all the time, and that will benefit from the resistance. I went ahead and made that swap before calculating. I also gave you High Pain Threshold.

[/ QUOTE ]

Untrue, good sir! The steadfast +3% Def IO functions as a set bonus, not a proc. (It has no 120s duration and shows up in your set bonuses window.) As such, it's always on, whether the power is on of off.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ooh! Sick burn! :P

[/ QUOTE ]

We do not burn our fellow scrappers! We assist when they is confuzzled!

[/ QUOTE ]

I blame taking on Scrappers habitually taking one too many hits to the head... by purple conning enemies... and liking it...

In all honesty, I didn't mean for it as a burn, so I hope you didn't take it like that, Werner.

[ QUOTE ]
Just had a PVP match against a friend of mine. He has a Stone Melee/SR Brute while I have a Stone Melee/Elec Armor brute. Both level 50s. Even with my Tier 9, I just couldn't take him down.

There you go. That's about as straight forward as you can get. Defense wins.

[/ QUOTE ]

That example doesn't show a clear win for defense, namely because it was a PvP example which is wildly divergent from PvE (which is what most people in this thread were talking about). I mean, in PvP...

*) ...there is no status protection (so Seismic Smash would hold you through your status protection, albeit briefly)
*) ...there is diminishing returns, so Power Surge isn't operating at full strength.
*) ...SR gets Elusivity.

Those are just a couple points off the top of my head. It doesn't factor in other variables, either. (Did he have Aid Self? Did you? Did either of you have an IO advantage? etc)

I don't think either one always wins - there is good and bad with both.