Erratic1

But the statement I was replying to was: Well, considering many of the claims being made only make sense in the context of a fully kitted out build, I am assuming that all of the “brutes are useless lol” supporting data was more or less gathered at 50+3. Is a Tanker useless on teams because they don't do damage? No, because their job on the team is to hold aggro and survive. They will have better survivability the entire time levelling, contrary to the statement above and will have it once IO'd to the gills. So what is the Brute bringing to the table pre-50 or post-50? Less survability? Granted, I don't really feel Brutes are useless on teams but if we're going to explore the claim being made beyond, "Lol, their wrong!" it perhaps pays to actually consider what the case actually is--and the above statement that somehow things are different pre-50 doesn't hold up.

This ignores that people don't always play on teams and that team composition varies considerably. And the question is not if there should have been a buff or not but the extent of the buff.

Which only means something if the Brute IOs and the Tank doesn't, no?

If what you're doing is working for you, who cares if you could get more damage. Its been a while since I've played my Rad/Shield scrapper but hopped on him to grab a chatlog: 2021-02-06 18:39:17 Readying Radioactive Smash. 2021-02-06 18:39:18 HIT Headman Gunman! Your Radioactive Smash power had a 95.00% chance to hit, you rolled a 22.63. 2021-02-06 18:39:18 You hit Headman Gunman with your Radioactive Smash for 41.15 points of Smashing damage. 2021-02-06 18:39:18 You hit Headman Gunman with your Radioactive Smash for 123.48 points of Energy damage. 2021-02-06 18:39:18 You knock Headman Gunman off their feet with your Radioactive Smash! 2021-02-06 18:39:18 HIT Chief Soldier! Your Radioactive Smash power had a 95.00% chance to hit, you rolled a 90.15. 2021-02-06 18:39:18 HIT Infantry! Your Radioactive Smash power had a 95.00% chance to hit, you rolled a 51.30. 2021-02-06 18:39:18 HIT Conscript! Your Radioactive Smash power had a 95.00% chance to hit, you rolled a 66.78. 2021-02-06 18:39:19 You hit Chief Soldier with your Radioactive Smash for 48.45 points of Toxic damage. 2021-02-06 18:39:19 You hit Conscript with your Radioactive Smash for 48.45 points of Toxic damage. 2021-02-06 18:39:19 You hit Infantry with your Radioactive Smash for 48.45 points of Toxic damage. The actual target took the full damage of the attack whereas the nearby opponents took about a third each and in total roughly what was done to the actual target. If you can survive big crowds, that would seem to be worth it in my book. But your mileage may vary.

Assuming Proton Sweep is not part a power you've taken (because it is miserable and should not be taken) you're left with five primary attacks. If Devastating Blow is not part of your set of attacks, what are you doing to fill the time because it is hard to see how Contaminated Strike, Radioactive Smash, Radiation Siphon, and Atom Smasher are rotating quickly enough unless you've invested in some serious recharge.

I would imagine most melee ATs are shooting for more than Melee and S/L at 45 but Melee/Ranged/AoE (or S/L/F/C/E/N+) to 45, so there should not be other mitigations floored (except possibly Toxic/Psionic--and some people build to cover those too). Edit: Not enough sleep last night. You're talking Dark Armor buids. D'oh!

It is going to be different pre-50 while levelling when most Brutes not-IO'd out are going to have the exact same defense/resistance values as scrappers while tanks will enjoy being most of the way to cap?

I PUG exclusively and in the past week or so there have been two occasions where my scrapper was the only melee in the group. Aggro control was never brought up. What they seemingly needed me for, judging by how people would hold back until I leapt in, was to have someone to take the enemy alpha strike. And that was fine by me since my opening attack is an AoE that triggers the scrapper critical buff. I don't feel sorry for scrappers because my mindset (so yes, I am extending from me to the population as a whole unfairly here) on my scrappers is, "Did you see that sea of beautiful crits I just did?"

To clarify, that was not one heal proc total, but one heal proc per power that takes them.

With sufficient protection you obviously would need no healing at all. But we can't all playing Granite. 😛 I suggest the following from the standpoint of having played a DM/Inv Scrapper and DM/Electric Brute back on live. Invulnerability can be pretty tanky, regardless of AT. It might pay to get your protection in place then back up off it by adding only one heal proc to see if that tradeoff both gets you extra survivability without losing damage.

I dislike grinding and have generally felt the economy made IOs prohibitive, so 50 has traditionally been the end for my characters, though perhaps with a bit of a foray into Incarnation here and there. However.... Having come back to Homecoming after a year away, I worked a character I had left hanging in his low 30s to 50, laid out what I thought would be a relatively cheap IO build geared less towards dominating +4/8 play and more towards reaching defense caps with good resists, and quite literally put most of the pieces (44 of 67 slots) together last night after two weeks of buying IOs on the cheap. It wasn't horrible, though when I look at what I might want to accomplish on other characters it looks like a more expensive endeavor--at least double the cost. So things may have shifted from 50 being an end to 50 being the gateway to the strange, new, wonderful and terrible land.

You can give homes to the others in your remaining 9 costume slots. 😀

I cannot take credit for the choice because it was driven by luck and prior work. I was headed toward Vanguard leggings (I think) and as I drug the pointer down the legs came up and seemed to match with the chest you'd chosen (one I do not think I've ever noticed before). Like you, I have never found an overall design using those legging that I have ever liked.

Love what you did. Of course that only inspired me to do a ripoff. What is it? Plagiarism is the sincerest form of flattery? BetaComRev.costume

Commander Beta.costume

Fine, you've voiced your opinion. Others feel differently. And for anything else on the topic, I'll be in the thread in the Brute forum

Most teams are not going to notice. They want you to take the alpha. The group I just got out of before posting this? I was the only melee, and my scrapper was leaping in first.

Its less the formatting change then selective replying to portions of entire sentences, as if the phrase is not within a context. As example... Replied to in the following fashion: In fact the sentence is not false, but the formatting makes it appear what said was something about how defenders uniformly must play the game when what was said was that if a defender wants to get maximum damage they have to spend time setting it up all the blather about agreeing to terms of service in the game and being free to play the game your own way notwithstanding.

This presumes the Brute survives the 16 minions and the boss as well as the Tank does. What...the extra hp and higher resists/defense stopped meaning anything?

The entire "raw" damage bit is nothing the game says. But tell you what...since it is only raw damage, how big the hit is, that counts then let's give Brute's unlimited area of effects--they hit everything in the map (or zone if outside). Since that does not impact their damage standing relative to other ATs by your claim, nothing will have changed vis-a-vis Brutes and any other AT. I am imagining Brutes will take to hovering and farming entire zones by just repeatedly spamming their area attacks, but hey...damage will not have changed. The raw hit is not the only consideration. Why would it be? Again, infinite range for Brutes.

Being able to hit more through AoE is still doing damage. Increasing AoEs is meaningful to damage considerations. And if you are going to say it isn't, then fine, increase Brute's area of effects too. Edit: Obviously one could simply increase Brute survivability to be within 8% of a Tanker's. Of course at that point, probably easiest just to do away with one AT or the other.

I am pretty sure the below shows Brutes doing more damage than Tankers and not just barely. Curiously, if you compare 10 to 8 its a 20% greater value--in line with Bubba's post. But if you compare 9 to 7...well, 8% ain't anywhere near 28%.

I think you have this reversed. It pitted the Tanker against the supposed Brute strength of greater damage and the Brute barely coming out ahead is one of those things that in college football happens from time to time where the favored team does win but does so by so close a margin that their standing drops in the polls the following week. 8% is so close as to be meaningless.

Certainly. And before I would advocate any sort of change I would want a careful examination of Bubba's setup, examples from other powerset combos, and careful analysis of why the results are whatever they turn out to be. My pushback was with the notion that, "Supperior aggro management, superior survivability (more hp and higher defense/resistance) and 92.5% of the damage output of a Brute" is equitable.

The game is not fighting pylons, at least not for most people. Shouldn't the consideration be performance in the realm where most people play?