Bill Z Bubba

That the extra mitigation provided to tanks is much higher than the extra damage provided to brutes. Same thing I said in the OP. You know, the thing folks either say isn't true without backing it up with useful and factual data or simply state that it's meaningless. If it isn't true across the board, prove it. If it's actually meaningless, then let's nerf tank mitigation to be equitable to the brute's higher damage output. Edit: OR put tank's damage back to where it should be. It ain't rocket surgery.

It's not taken as one and I love that guy. What I can do means nothing to me or anyone else. What I do in relation to providing factual data, otoh, means a lot to me. That's why I've never had a problem admitting when I'm wrong. Too bad the whole of humanity doesn't feel the same way.

Fair. But again, if your easier ways of judging survivability never put your brute at risk, then you're not testing in a way that's worthwhile.

And people wonder why I say AT balance is a joke and becoming more so with every change.

I don't know what polk high is but thanks for being somewhat honest.

They nerfed crits for EM on scrappers and stalkers so why not?

What's your brute's time for a Werner rules ITF?

Roger that. Should you give the sound silencing a try, I think you'll find it helps. If you've already tried it to no avail, understood.

Yea, we are. The problem only exists for those that actually give a damn about archetype balance and we're obviously in the minority. So, whatever.

But if the brute never died, then the tank's extra mitigation was never coming into play and thus isn't a valid test, is it?

This implies that the brutal mission simulator is actually, ya know, brutal. The 801s are pretty brutal.

I did it at max diff MoITF rules with my fire/bio sent. I did NOT succeed at the two hour limit.

Sound or visuals? If it's the sounds (I have the same problem with many of the loop noises) silence those farkers! It's easy. I currently have 20 different game sounds permanently gone thanks to this thread and its sister from back before the snap.

I'd absolutely love the scaler to go higher. +5/x10 sound fun. Another option is to get rid of the 2nd and 3rd level shift entirely. Yank them completely from the game and be done with it.

All three of mine do have the same slotting at least on the attack side. Followup uses a full set of AT IO, scrapper with the +crit chance, brute with the +fury set and the tank with the +damres set. Focus is 5 +5 Apocalypse (no dam/rec) and Glad Jav chance for toxic. Slash is 5 +5 Hecatomb (no dam/rec) and the Achiles' chance for -resist. I suspect that for AA's claws, followup is more heavily proced because it needs far less recharge in it for the fu-focus-slash-crosspunch chain and it gets another -res slotted in CP. But I don't have the power picks to spare to pick up kick and CP and even a cursory glance shows what I would have to lose should I try. Then again, I don't build for insp spamming either.

The interview for that was dreadful.

No, I'm suggesting at no time should any power X AT has access to should use something other than the base AT modifier for range or melee. If I have 1 as my melee modifier, every melee attack I have access to should have a mod of 1. If I have .75 as my ranged modifier, every ranged attack I have access to should be at .75.

A lot closer. And with a much smaller margin of difference in overall damage output. Thus the OP.

I'm only stating that all AT modifiers should be applied to all powers used by said AT. Nothing more, nothing less.

Good question to ask, as long as you also ask how long the 45% defense toon with 2000 hp lasts versus the 90% resist toon with 2000 hp.

No, it isn't unless you have a brute that can hard cap resistance to all damage types 100% of the time while solo. Which, of course, you can't.

No. Also, no. Don't care. Each AT should do its value of damage regardless of the power chosen. Full stop. My knowledge of pain far exceeds anything even remotely related to gaming or computers or philosophy, thanks much.

Ugh. Please by the dark and elder gods get this fixed. It offends my OCD to psychotic levels when a power isn't using the right AT modifier. Set them in stone and fix everything for Satan's sake. For the rest, I have zero issues using insps that drop. Go for it. They're there for a reason. (The hoarding of T4 insps in email are a topic that disgusts me on every level.) But doing so while solo still means I'm at neither cap unless I work REALLY farkin hard at it with insp combining macros. Something I don't have on anything but my farmer. Cuz when farming.. fark it, bring all the cheat codes. The "gap" you're talking about is where my focus exists. There is a gap where the brute is better than the tank on damage output. That's 100% true across the board and there's no discussion there. But the same gap between the tank's ability to survive and the brute's is a much larger gap for the vast majority of the game. If the scrapper's extra damage output compared to the brute's compared to the tank's was equitable across the board to the tank's mitigation versus the brute's mitigation to the scrapper's mitigation, I'd have nothing to discuss other than how much persistent mez protection favors those that have it versus those that don't. But it's NOT equitable. The brute does NOT sit between the scrapper and the tank. It's sits far too close to the scrapper on mitigation and the tank on damage output... at least for the post 50 game.

Maybe. But only because I've been informed that I'm always wrong because I'm an outlier. Whatever the bleeding fark that means.

Doesn't this line of thinking completely ignore solo gameplay on the mitigation front? If I'm not at the caps on damage, I'm not gonna be there on mitigation either and so there will come a point when the tank's damage output exceeds the brute's cuz the brute is busy sniffing dirt and thus doing 0 DPS. This said, I fully grok that with the game as it is, the probability of the brute (or even the scrapper) eating dirt starts to reach nil making the whole argument hilarious unless one actively chooses to force added difficulty.