Bill Z Bubba

No, because this thread is about the current balance point between brutes and tanks.

The ITF isn't regular play? It is for me. I use it as my primary test for every character I have. Solo and teamed. Running into AVs isn't regular play? How do you think I get the passive accolades? That's not my definition but you will see MANY posters around here, even in this thread, imply that the game is balanced around SOs and therefore the average is balanced around SOs. Personally, I find that argument pretty much horseshit. *MY* average build is a mix of basic IOs and some sets. *MY* end builds are fully purpled, pvped, AT IOed, Wintered, ect and cranked to whatever balance I can find between damage output and mitigation.

Interesting and horribly wrong. The situation comes up every time I solo the ITF. Or STF. Or Maria's arc. In other words the situation comes up every time I run into an AV and monster or any other hard target. Nobody plays an "average character?" Really? So why are there threads about running TFs with SO only builds? Sounds like someone out there is running "average" builds.

LOL. Yea, no. I don't die against +1s on any of my BZBs. So being max diff with +3 incarnate shifts makes that crap a consistent cakewalk.

Now see... I like this. If that's the case, then the fury mechanic itself must be taken into account and adjusted for when attempting to balance the three ATs. My argument is that, currently, the three are NOT in balance. Granted, this is especially true when solo since brutes share tank caps but don't share tank base values. If brutes are supposed to be between tanks and scrappers, then they should be. They should do more damage than tanks and have better mitigation than scrappers in ALL areas of the game regardless of solo or team makeup.

Ok. So running, say, 5 DA repeatables from Ephram, knowing that I fight the same way on all three ATs, timing them, and comparing the time between the three ATs, would be a useful data point to you all?

You're a kind man. Sadly... I'm sick in the head enough to enjoy it.

Again, we're dealing with the same buff over the same amount of time. The decrease in DPS caused by having to fire off buildup, and the corresponding increase in DPS, is the same across the board in exactly the same way that having to use followup for that triple stack of +damage on focus is the same across all archetypes.

In this case, I'm only losing the set bonus from the 6th slot which means resistance to toxic and psi in 1 case or defense to psi in the other. Neither affect DPS.

Again, I can easily replace the chance for +toxic with a standard lvl 50 recred IO which will in turn reduce the number of times the proc from the purple set goes off. Would yall like to see this data? If not, I'd rather not spend another hour killin pylons....

Ummm, no. Not when I'm sitting between 95 and 100% fury while solo.

Doesn't that imply that if I'm nowhere near the caps, being solo and not using insps, that an 86% damage ratio seems a bit out of whack?

So back to "the game is balanced around SOs?" Ok, fine. Does a SOed brute have 66.67% the mitigation of a tank? Focused Fighting: Tank: 18.5% base + 60% (ignoring ED) = 29.6 Brute: 13.88 base + 60% (ignoring ED) = 22.208 Brute has 75% tank mitigation values. With health base at brute having 80% the HP of the tank. But the tank in actual gameplay is up to 86% the damage of the brute. So what are we actually going for here? Balanced around SOs or balanced around the actual game as played? Should the brute be sitting at the same base SO enhanced mitigation values as the scrapper when the brute is only pushing out 75% of the same damage?

But @Bopper that's at the caps. We don't live at the caps. Even on my brute farmer, combining insps to reds and eating them CONSTANTLY, I've seen the damage cap a handful of times. The same is easily said for teaming. I'm not running around at the mitigation caps all the time. And DEFINITELY not while solo.

Look... I'm not actually trying to get rid of the recent tank buffs. I just think if they're gonna be in play, thus drastically reducing the damage output difference between the two ATs, then perhaps the base mitigation values for brutes shouldn't be at scrapper levels and should instead be somewhere between scrappers and tanks.

I can retest. Yall want me to get rid of the Chance for +toxic? Easy to do because I keep the AT IO +selfbuff procs (+regen/end for the brute and +absorb for the tank) in my trays and have unslotters on hand. But... math being math, I fully suspect that the ratios will remain the same.

In a recent thread I'm attempting to avoid hijacking: @Captain Powerhouse said: Brutes are not meant to be 90% of tanks, they are meant to cap at 90% of tanks, with the help of external buffs (or inspiration spam.) Me: Does this mean that tanks weren't supposed to be buffed to 90% brute damage? @drbuzzard said: Not sure where you get the idea that tanks are at 90% of brute damage. Back in the rikti pylon thread: @Bopper said: I don't understand. The design with the buffs were to have Tanks be 90% of Brutes damage and Brutes be 90% of Tanks survivability. So I got it from Bopper who seems quite knowledgeable but may have been paraphrasing. But, the whole thing has led to some confusion in my mind regarding the tank buff and how it seems to have greatly and negatively affected their performance in relation to brutes, with the brutes getting the short end of the stick. The testing: SR/Claws Tank and Claws/SR Brute. There are currently some minor discrepancies between the builds leading to the tank having +8% damage while idle where the brute has +11% damage while idle. Both use attack chain: Followup, Focus, Slash, repeat. Hybrid Assault Core was used on both, clicked after timer starts and again when up again. Hasten is on auto and Practiced Brawler is clicked after hasten fires off. Tank Followup: Full set of Superior Might of the Tanker Brute Followup: Full set up Superior Brute's Fury Tank and Brute Focus: 5 Apocalypse (missing damage enh) and Glad Jav Chance for Toxic Tank and Brute Slash: 5 Hecatomb (missing damage enh) and Achilles' Chance for DR debuff BZB Tank 1: 342 secs BZB Tank 2: 359 secs BZB Tank 3: 392 secs Average time: 364 secs or DPS of 233 BZB Brute 1: 252 secs BZB Brute 2: 262 secs BZB Brute 3: 286 secs Average time: 267 secs or DPS of 271 DPS 233 is 86% of 271 Does anyone want to try to tell me that brutes are on average running around with 86% of the mitigation that tanks have? Cuz I ain't seeing it. Something seems amiss here. Please share your thoughts.

Does this mean that tanks weren't supposed to be buffed to 90% brute damage?

next step, @Captain Powerhouse, make brute mitigation actually equal 90% of tanker mitigation, cuz it ain't there. 🙂 And thanks for your reply. It was a good one.

I have no argument against this set of goals.

As do I, completely. But as a long-term player of said game, I hope he and the other devs continue the trend of listening to the players before decisions are finalized as some of the prior devs did.

I read that. Still don't know who's original goal that belonged to? Dude runnin the SSPS that made the AT live? Why do we need to listen to him? At all. Ever. His views on game balance were obviously skewed all to hell and back.

I don't know where the "sentinels should be ranged scrappers" thing came from but it's an incredibly stupid idea unless the value for their mitigation sets are drastically reduced. For those that don't believe that range = mitigation, go hover above any faction at max diff and compare the incoming damage to being in melee with that same group. You are wrong. Full stop. To give sentinels scrapper level damage on top of scrapper level mitigation and the mitigation that comes from being at range is ludicrous. I hope that the HC devs understand that.

Just for the record, I compared a fully attuned (not purples or PvPs, those were boosted) against a fully +5ed build for my main. The difference at 50 was negligible on all fronts. This implies that it's a complete waste of inf to +5 everything AND you get screwed when exemplaring.

Seriously... when the discussion veers into "blasters are ok cuz you can buy temp powers" it just spirals into the ridiculous. By that logic, sents are ok cuz I can craft warburg nukes and be constantly loaded up on base crafted temps. Or defenders or whatever. Temp powers... man, if that's your excuse you have to lean on for "x AT is better than y AT" then your argument sucks. I mean... hell... with all three amplifiers, envenomed daggers and my lore pets, my claws/bio scrapper pylon time is 1:24. That's ludicrous. Cheating to win is no way to look at game balance.