summers

I may not have made myself clear since you continue to make comparisons between Stalkers and Scrappers as defence for Brutes and Tanks. I'm not going to argue their closeness, as that seems to muddy the issue, but instead state my clear objective. ATs should be different, and have their own clear identity. If they are not different, they should be made different. I will argue against (most) suggestions that converge ATs together, and I will give favourable consideration to (most) suggests that diverge them to acquire their own identity. I hope this drops the Scrapper/Stalker discussion and gives you an idea about why I don't want Brutes and Tanks to be so increasingly similar. If we disagree on this, that's fine, but that is why I just don't want to see "Brute" and "Basically another Brute" in the AT selection screen.

I guess I'll just pose the question If Brute and Tanker survivability is so very similar, why would you want the Tanker to gain more damage and essentially become an almost carbon copy of the Brute? I know this is a reductionist argument, but the numbers of 90% damage / 90% survivability float around so much that this is the way it's been going. If they are so similar, there is no need to have two Archetypes. What we have is an opportunity to have the Tanker gain some kind of real identity in the game, instead of the character creation screen saying "Brute again, +/- 10%". I like that idea. (I also think that [some] people secretly recognise there's a more noteable difference in survivability, especially non-IO levels, and want that survivability plus lots of damage.)

Brutes are very clearly not in 'the fundamentally similar camp' as Stalkers, and there are no Developer proposals looking to converge them. I am quite happy for proposals that would diverge them from Scrappers, however. Brutes and Tankers don't need to be merged into the same Archetype. I also believe that readers of this thread know that from the early levels of teaming all the way to 50, there's a big difference in survivability when you have a Brute leading the alpha versus a Tanker. Perhaps our experiences are vastly different, but to me it is an appreciable one. As for the argument of "IOs do exist", while that is clearly true, it is also ignoring the reality that it only applies to a very small and narrow window of the game, which, based on the various character data extracted, appears to only account for a small % of gameplay. I know from my personal experience that once I IO out a character, it still gets some attention, but it starts to hit the shelf fast for my next experiment.

I rail against the idea since I don't think you need two Archetypes that are so fundamentally similar. The main argument for the change is that because Brute survivability is about the same as Tanker survivability, then they should get about-the-same damage. If this were true, then there is absolutely no need to change Tankers, since that exact combination of power (within a 10% margin) exists in Brute. Instead, I think people want the complete invincibility of Tankers (at all levels, not just at IO'd out to the gills levels) alongside loads of damage. I also think the fair minded readers of this thread will agree that Brute survivability at anything except the IO level is significantly poorer than Tanker.

I'll chip in with my two cents around the AOE changes. I doubt any of these are revolutionary... The AOE changes sound simple, but it's really not well communicated. The powers should do what they say, and while the written descriptions are generally poor, the statistics are typically correct. A lot of players don't read the forums, debate on the forums, or go through multiple sources to find their answers. They should be able to find out what the power does simply by right clicking it... and if the arc/radius changes aren't in the power, then that's a problem. The simpler, the better, and I'd rather just see the powers properly adjusted to reflect what they really do. If that affects procs, then so be it. Suggestion: Make the power do what it says it does. You don't have to be 'saturated' to gain benefits from the increased AOE. This should be obvious, however it is sometimes argued so heavily from a saturated/farming perspective that it may be forgotten just how good the AOE size advantages are. You do not need to be above the target cap for the AOE size to be really good! Increased PBAOE radius: Same situation, Increased cone arc: What I like about the increased AOE size: I don't know if this is in the game right now, but increased taunt aura sizes would be a fantastic thing for Tankers and really help them get across their Tanker side. Enemies are often spread out, and sweeping them up with a wider taunt radius is something I'd like to see more of. It would, you know, make them better at being tanks...

It's eyeboggling when someone argues that the game is not balanced around IOs, but in the same thread, asserts that Brutes and Tankers have the same survivability...

Just push this out live is my opinion. I'm ready for more Tanks 🙂

This is where I find the bigger issue - Brutes vs Scrappers and Scrappers vs Stalkers. I don't see many reasons to play a resistance based Scrapper when Brutes exist, and I don't know why you would play a Scrapper for single target DPS when Stalkers exist (ignore Titan Weapons for now!).

Rage doesn't increase judgement damage, so Energy Melee and Super Strength Judgements are the same. Is that close enough to getting back to you? 🙂

Given that the most popular Tanker combination is Invul/SS, more than 2.5x more popular than its next best competition (Fire/Fiery Aura), and for Brutes it's the second most popular powerset (the first, if you dump Spines/Fiery Aura farmers), Super Strength is a very relevant conversation to both archetypes. In fact, it is the most relevant based on popularity, and I'd also say, the most relevant based on what is iconic about being a hero.

I have just recently levelled an Inv/Staff Fighting Tanker to 40, probably about 50% solo (90% solo in terms of actual time spent, 50% in terms of experience), and with the state of levelling in Homecoming it was quick and easy. I never felt that my damage was awful, it was certainly lower than others, but comfortable enough to me. I can only state that in my opinion, I was satisfied with the damage but would love if I brought some more interesting mechanic to teams instead of being "more like a Brute". If I wanted to be more like a Brute, I would have created her as a Brute! As for Scrappers and Stalkers, they play very differently and their sets are not precise mirrors of one another's, so that's why people don't make the argument you suggest. Finally, for 20:1, this is manifestly wrong. There are 134,126 Brutes and 71,003 Tankers as at about a month ago, so that's less than 2:1. If you look at Brutes doing actual CoX content and eliminate Spines/Fire, they drop to 121,357 vs 71,003. Finally, if prevalence strictly related to effectiveness, Regeneration would not be the most popular Secondary in the entire game, and Empathy defenders wouldn't be nearly triple the count of the next common powerset (Kinetics).

This is where I feel the biggest changes actually are. Having larger AOEs and target caps is going to make Tankers better for AOE, which is something like 90% of the content. My opinion remains the same, which is: Buffing Tankers on the damage axis just pushes them closer to Brutes, and IMO, overtakes them in many situations Buffing Tankers on a different axis - increasing team survivability, providing some other benefit to the team, whatever it is, would prevent needless convergence of the ATs to the point where you can start looking at just deleting one or the other Since the direction seems to be pretty well set, I'll just be rolling Tankers in the future instead of Brutes, since the AOE potential is just so much greater and they are nigh invincible out of the gate.

My experience is that Brutes run almost universally at 70ish% Fury. 100% Fury is never happening. Brutes are also at their lowest damage at the start of any engagement, when there are target rich environments and instead you'd like to be at the highest.

My SS/Fire Brute is now double nerfed by the Tanker changes! Was this really necessary...?

This is exactly what I'll be suggesting people do.

One of the first things I notice is that the secondary feels very demanding but doesn't really return a lot of value. The numbers are relatively low and there's not a lot of interaction happening there with the environment. It feels like a drag to buy so many powers and toggles to get moderate levels of survivability, while a Blaster can for instance have a much more interactive and interesting secondary and do a roughly similar job of defence with IOs. Of course, these develop late and at a high cost, but it feels uninspiring when I'm picking powers, like I'm not being rewarded when it should be a much more positive experience.

I don't have any suggestion on what to do, but I can say that my experience is that level 50 content is very bland. A lot of people can solo +4/x8, nukes are on short timers and everyone has their judgement. The best levels IMO are around 20-40, where debuffs matter, resistances and defences aren't soft capped on everybody including the squishy, and you have to work as a team to get things done. Remember when Radiation Infection was worth casting? Or Fearsome Stare? Don't bother at 50, just nuke and steamroll.

As far as I know there is no comic book character that can fight for 2 minutes before being exhausted and totally unable to fight back for 10 seconds. I think we can probably just settle that it is not exactly in the theme of a super hero game to be that way.

That's all I know so far; I am assuming that the auras are larger but the cap is the same.

Can anyone tell me if, for cone attacks, it's just the arc that is being doubled, or is it the arc and the radius that is increasing?

I of course support something for Brutes, since IMO the breakdown I provided on page 5 is a pretty fair review of what the result of the changes will be.

Is it possible that we can get a real melee defender tank AT, since I hear those kinds of requests regularly in Discord and Reddit? They'd come with baked in identity and individuality instead of the increasing convergence we're about to have between Brute and Tanker? By the way I really appreciate that there is a lot of thought and time being put into this, even if I disagree with the choices, I think it shows we are heading in exciting directions! I am especially a fan of larger taunt auras for Tankers (20' sounds delicious), which IMO would give them a very significant boost over Brutes for aggro control.

I did a breakdown of damage for Super Strength Tankers vs Brutes here: To make Tankers deal 75% of the damage of a Brute, they Brute would need to deal 33% more. They don't. To summarise it, the Brute deals 18% more damage single target with 1 Rage, <10% more damage with double stacked Rage, and ~6.5% at the damage cap. In most AOE situations (which IMO is most of the game experience), the expanded AOE size and target cap means the Tanker will comfortably deal more damage; they turn previously mediocre cones into excellent attacks, and their PBAOEs are have a 60% larger radius (or, more than 2.5x in area of effect). I also look into the relevant effect of the Rage crash which IMO further pushes the decision to play Tankers over Brutes for this iconic set, but won't repeat those here.

How often does Superman or the Hulk collapse into exhaustion in the middle of a fight? Every 60 seconds or so?