Erratic1

If you cannot back up your claim by giving names and pointing to posts, then just say you were making things up.

Who?

You do know you can fully delete (well, hide) a post via the drop down on the upper right side of a post (assuming of course you're not just being performative)?

If Brutes don't appeal, no need to play one. Life it too short to waste on things which are not enjoyable.

The Protean story arc is probably my favorite solo mission, so I do it on every character (even red side). While I know how the double's costume colors are chosent, I am not infrequently impressed enough to steal the the coloration for my character. But this time.... NO! ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!! What was he thinking? OMG, his costume is hideous. And he dyed his hair white?!?!? For those who want to know what my costume looks like from the front, it can be seen here: ]

You are right, against a single target a Brute, for the most part, is likely good enough. Not sure I want one as the sole tank on an ITF (though to be honest, I might have done that in the not too distant past...hard to remember). The hard mode people I am aware of tend to think as you do from what I have seen. Not sure if that involves building differently on the Brute or it emerges from how those doing so build as a group.

Tankers lost none of their survivability and only lost damage on a team to the extent they were reaching saturation--something merely jumping into the middle of a spawn does not necessarily equal, particularly if there are quick-fingered controllers about. Again, I do not think Tankers have generally been on a team because of trash. They are there as a punching bag for Romulus/Jurassik/Babbage/etc.

No they don't. Hence all those times where people ask for a Tanker and reluctantly accept a Brute....or Scrapper...or Sentinel...or pets when a Tanker isn't available. I can punch one guy with a single-target attack on a Tanker and see other nearby foes being taunted. That doesn't happen for a Brute. So those other foes peel off far more easily, and that is meaningful to the health of those dealing damage and getting aggro. It is also somewhat frustrating for the Brute.

I explained it quite clearly. And the fact that you note others hold the position and understand it really bolsters the consideration. Still, I will apologize for the suggestion.

Except Brutes do not tank as well as Tankers. They are inherently not as survivable and more importantly to a team, they do not hold aggro as well.

I did not insult you. I put out the possibility when not only did you fail to understand the first time around (your own words), but then when it was spelled out in detail you still failed to understand. Everyone doing damage and everyone being there to do it are two different things. Everyone on the ITF my Pyro/Dark controller ran last week dealing damage, but I assure you, my character was not there to be dispatching things but rather making sure others did not get hurt, keeping them up when they did, and buffing their damage output. He was not there because he was going to make anything fall over quickly.

Tanker is not coming to a team to do damage. So yes, you fundamentally misunderstand the premise of the question (or are incapable of understanding it).

It is a slow motion game of Tetris. Delete things you do not use or save them up until you get three-of-a-kind and then convert to something useful.

Corrupters are the superior damaging buff option--they do more damage than Defender and Controller while still providing compelling buffs. So your premise is off.

If you want someone to take a pounding and hold the AV/Elite Boss/horde of attackers, presumably you want the toughest character (as well as the one who holds aggro the best). There is a reason Scrapper are not called upon to be Tankers. If you want damage dealt as quickly as possible, you are not packing in a bunch of Sentinels. What is so hard to get? At what point does it actually make sense to bring a Brute given either a Tanker or Scrapper is available to fill the slot? Either you do not need the survivability, in which case your group will clear faster by adding the Scrapper, or you do need the survivability, in which case a Tanker is the better choice. Then why were Brutes nerfed to guarantee Scrappers top billing? And why can Brutes not get increase survivability?

No, I am not. That has been the question. There is quite literally a thread in these, THE BRUTE FORUM, asking the question: Stalkers do far close to Scrapper damage than Brutes do and have better survivability options than Scrapper too. Unless you've read all my posts, perhaps less speculation on what I have done and what I have not done is in order? Actually your whining in this thread started in regards to others posts noting the difference between Brute and Scrapper damage. Morever, someone who tosses out the line about some spreadsheet jockeys and goes with it should not be talking about anyone doing work. Something which (a) every Tanker in these, the Brute forum, insisted would be both a return to Brute Uber Alles and make Tankers utterly unplayable, and (b) could arguably be said to come about because nothing was done to boost Brute so--going by your logic--something had to be done about Tankers. Oh, and I will note, my first 50 post the previous patch was a Tanker. So I think I can say something about how things actually turned out in reality.

You misunderstand the question. Scrappers get to deal the most damage because, "that is all they do". Tankers get to have the best survivability, in theory in exchange for less damage. The question is: Why bring a Brute ever? The Brute will not do more damage than the Scrapper and will not survive as well as the Tanker (who due to area consideration is actually turning out damage far more comparable to what the Brute does overall than the Brute survive in comparison to the Tanker. And keep in mind, it was once possible for, in an edge case with sufficient buffs (more than one damage buffer on the team) for the Brute to exceed the Scrapper, but that was nerfed out of existence. So you do not even have that, thin possibility (thin because on a team which had say a Tanker, 3 Blasters, a Scrapper, a Defender, a Controller, and a Brute enough buffs did not exist to get there) because Brute damage cap was lowered to keep that FROM EVER HAPPENING. I do not think anyone here is advocating Brute do more damage than Scrapper, but rather that perhaps some of the gap which now exists be narrowed. I do no think that is in the cards, but still thought I would put you on the proper track of looking at things.

Been a while since I posted. Got several new characters (alt-itis, you know), but this one I just made has what I think is the most standout costume of the lot. I admit, the leftmost image has been run through AI, so to be honest, here is the original:

Can definitely see the merit to that. Given my guy is WM/Nin, I could "rely" (70% chance I think) on the crit from stealth to Shatter into groups and have a bit more oomph to drop on bosses.

Was I wrong to stick the proc in Clobber? I want it in place so I can then use Shatter: Hmmm...maybe I should invert them?

That is just the amount you get from the portion with is ED impacted. You still get 60% on the power. Overall, on my planned build for my Regen Tanker, it is worth about 16%. On the other hand, Musculature is not really providing all that much either in terms of damage. It is going to act the same way with regard to caps, and you damaging powers are almost certainly going to be ED capped from your slotting. Vigor, however, will also boost Accuracy iirc.

I am betting it is (a) 45% of the base of whatever powers are providing Regeneration, and (b) per the wording, only 2/3rds of the boost ignores ED caps. So the exact amount you get overall will depend on where each power providing you Regeneration is towards its ED cap via your slotting. Per Mids, Vigor Core Paragon pushes Health, which I have no enhancements slotted, from its unmodified (base) value of 40% to 58%--that 18% boost being 45% of 40%. Reactive Regeneration, with nothing slotted, is worth 200% without Vigor, at 290% with it--with 90% being 45% of 200%. However, with Reactive Regeneration slotted with a full set of Numina and proving 394.98%, Vigor boosts it to 459.48%--a gain of 64.5. 30% of 200% is 60%, so the remaining 15% of Vigor Core Paragon gets wasted pushing again the ED cap to get only 4.5% more.

That is determined empirically by no changes occurring. An honestly, if Kinetic Melee cannot be changed to be better than it is, I am dead certain doing an ATO pass for one AT, let alone all ATs is so low priority as to be indistinguishable from nonconsidertion.

I think there is a significant difference between the bolded words above and the ones below: Brutes and Scrappers are roughly on par when you consider the 0.7 scalar of Brutes and the base damage of Scrappers starting higher and factoring in crits. (100% base + 95% from Enhancements + 170% from Fury) * 0.7 = 255.5% versus (100% base + 95% from Enhancements) *1.05 = 204.5. Yes, that is lower for the Scrapper, but the Brute enters combat at 0 Fury and until the streak breaker gets involved, randomly good things can happen for the Scrapper ala: The Scrapper ATOs both permanently increase the base chance to 7/8%-9/11% depending on target and give a temporary boost on top of that of 50%. Non-fully leveraged, the temporary boost is, as noted above, a sea change which swamps all other considerations for the AT.

Yeah, it might be as hysterical as the Tanker reaction after this last patch, with people asserting damager reductions in areas which were untouched. On the upside, it probably wouldn't reach the levels of removing Tankers--which if we're removing an AT seems to be an equally valid choice.