Auroxis

So objectively bad the original devs of this game kept it for years. So objectively bad it gives the class a support aspect that sets it apart from the Brute and makes the lackluster T1 attacks decent. So objectively bad it's part of the reason I rolled a Tanker and fully IO'd/Incarnated it out. But apparently I need my head examined for doing that. I'm done giving feedback on this massive patch (which gets new stuff added to the list constantly, except letting me keep what I have). But I thought I needed to say something when I saw that comment.

Those were nerfed to controller levels. And there's the removal of Bruising, so it's still a net loss in support.

The target cap increases are also spread around and do not apply to all attacks.

My Brutes definitely don't reach that consistently on teams unless i'm constantly in combat and getting aggro. And the original statement was about a "modest" amount of Fury.

SS simulates a "moderately buffed" scenario, other powersets need more juice to get there but with only a "modest" amount of Fury to compare it with the gap is quite small.

"Most of the time" is fairly subjective. If you're running on a team with a moderate amount of damage buffs, a Brute with only a modest amount of Fury is definitely going to get out-classed by a Tanker.

I've personally run zero farm tests, all of mine have been in the regular +4x8 gameplay and DPS comparison departments. Keep in mind that in a farm scenario, Tankers get the target cap benefit while Brutes get the max fury benefit. It's an interesting edge case scenario.

With these powersets specifically? Did you try red insp farm runs?

The damage buff isn't necessary when you can just bring back Bruising and tune the damage down. Hitting 16 instead of 10 is a lot less of an issue then since bruising doesn't provide a benefit in AoE.

Radiation Melee+Fiery Aura Brute vs. Tanker farm tests are still up for grabs by the way. I got burned out on my last set of tests.

I wasn't talking about that specific change (obviously I can't without knowing the numbers), just at the prospect of Brutes being buffed being an acceptable answer to tankers being released as overtuned when we can deal with it at this stage (with changes I previously suggested).

That's not the case at all, I suggest you re-read this thread because I'm done repeating myself for Captain Powerhouse's sake.

+200% isn't enough to off-set the AoE advantages. "Just smile and nod"? Is this what this thread has come to?

That's called power creep. Brutes don't need a buff.

Once the changes go live it's a lot harder to pull them back since you're buffing the class and redefining its identity. Once players get used to the numbers and make full use of them with a hefty time investment, It's a lot harder to nerf and invalidate the time they spent with the class due to the changes. That's incorrect if you're trying to describe what I was saying. I don't like repeating myself (which is why I've been abstaining from posting ITT), but I can't have people putting words in my mouth. Firstly, in multiple scenarios where the Tanker is buffed moderately (before becoming "maxed out") It matches the Brute's damage output while having superior AoE and resilience. I've given these numbers multiple times. Secondly, I dislike removing Bruising as a support option for the Tanker as it nerfs an aspect of the class that I enjoy (support) in favor of a boring damage increase that just puts it in direct competition with Brute as a damage class. Lastly, I don't like how inconsistent the AoE changes are (the 90deg rule, 10ft rule and inconsistent target cap increases). Some powersets got a massive buff (like Staff and War Mace), some didn't (like TW and Spines) and that would make the affected sets more difficult to balance in the future as well as making the tooltips confusing to players. Along with the pylon and regular gameplay tests in incarnate builds, I've given number comparisons at multiple tiers of damage buffs which simulate different levels of play. Just because something doesn't break anything doesn't mean it should be a release candidate. Like I mentioned above, it's a lot harder to nerf stuff once the changes go live.

As someone who played a lot of Elec Melee Stalker both back when the servers were live and now on the Elec/SD version, that would fully depend on the damage numbers as you have a plethora of AoE's to use already. Keep in mind Placate is a 60s recharge power, and spending 3x Assassin's Focus on it lowers your Assassin's Strike's potential damage (which AoE sets like Elec Melee rely upon). You're basically giving Stalkers an option to choose between the existing single target DPS from AS or more AoE, it's not just a straight buff. And the problem isn't only with MA and EM, it's also with DB, Kat, BS, Claws, Fire, and DM.

What about re-working Placate into an AoE finisher? Make it an AoE mag 4 Placate, but If you have 3 stacks of Asssassin's Focus it also deals high levels of damage. Would certainly help struggling sets with no AoE on Stalker, while not being a mandatory pick for sets with an abundance of AoE. Placate is unique in that it has no IO sets attached, so there wouldn't be an issue with the cottage rule or with breaking existing builds.

The AoE changes could have been done on a more consistent basis. For example, just buff all arcs, radius, and target caps by 20-50% regardless of their current values. That way it's easier to nerf/buff powersets on all classes without these specific conditions to consider, and the tooltips become less confusing to the player (like the 10 radius one on foot stomp). I feel like a lot of the "if" scenarios are made with powerset balance intentions in mind when the balancing of certain sets like TW and SS is inevitable on a global scale. Some AoE attacks remained at 10 max targets Some AoE attacks were buffed from 5 to 10 max targets Bruising was removed Melt Armor and Weaken Resolve have a slightly higher resistance debuff modifier ToHit debuffs from power pools are higher Brute damage cap lowered from 775% to 700%

Aren't you a bit concerned that the tanker-specific powerset balance changes could limit your design space when adjusting the powersets as a whole later on? For example, what if you wanted to buff the AoE on War Mace but on Tanker it's already a top performer? What if you wanted to nerf radius/arc on Titan Weapons but the Tanker AoE buffs would make them even better? If for instance you wanted to buff Shadow Maul's arc, you'd also have to consider the Tanker's inherent, same goes for every melee AoE you'll ever adjust.

There are already some powerset balance changes, as the arc/radius/target cap buffs do not apply to all sets equally: And the removal of Bruising hurts some sets more than others.

While also giving the Brute a Fury head-start and an attacking foe to maintain it. Regardless this is far from the only scenario where Tanker reaches 90% or more of the Brute's DPS. That'd be fine in a vacuum, but there's also AoE and resilience to consider where the Tanker has a big advantage.

In that case I was correct in saying a bit more damage buffs would put the Tanker even closer to the Brute for DPS(and an even bigger AoE advantage), since you weren't at the Tanker's cap for the majority of the time. But the Brute's cap is also harder to reach than the Tanker's, because even with maxed Hybrid Core, Musculature and double Rage you only hit the Tanker's cap when the gauss proc was active. The Tanker ceiling is not "much" lower either due to the modifiers, in a scenario where both classes are capped the numbers wouldn't change much from your test results.

I'm not quite sure which values you're referring to (including enhancements+musculature? Gauss proc?) but if you were constantly at that sweet spot where the Tanker is just about capped and the Brute isn't, your times should be closer to 97% than 93%. Feel free to refer to the table I posted on page 2.

It can also go even higher in the Tankers favor with a bit of outside damage buffs and less Fury, and it's far from the only scenario where Tankers reach similar levels of DPS while retaining their AoE/Resilience advantages.

90% was just the goal to reach "at cap", not stated to be the goal for regular gameplay. Keep in mind the Tanker didn't need to build up to 70% Fury, is more resilient, and has superior AoE.