ScarySai

Called it.

If you are ignorant to how the game works, sure. The crash is already punitive despite ss being a generally mid-tier at best clear performer and was made worse, this is very simple. It's not justified and the devs are making it a way bigger deal than it should be.

It wasn't a fallacy, because follow up has to hit it's target, and the brute tests ston did slotted no/minimal accuracy. That's the problem though. It's proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to not even be that strong, but they're making the crash worse for everyone and not just "equitable for resist armorsets." People are mad because it's stupid. If tanker base damage is that scary to some people, they've never seen a well kitted blaster or scrapper. If they're concerned about porting rage to scrappers, just don't. Easy.

It does give it a slight buff since it increases the damage scales of ss's attacks. At least enough to make SS's st presence less pathetic. Likely will need a buff if proc stacking is ever addressed.

1: Savage, claws and martial should be performing well above ss for brutes with the changes coming up, as they already beat SS for tanks. 2: Trapdoor overvalued smashing damage, as more than half of the mobs were robots, and warwolf spawns made lethal damage dubious.

The lack of drive to provide any evidence is very telling. When I'm 100% right, I record it, so even the devs can't deny it.

Increasing recharge in the current game is probably the most generous tuning knob we have while appeasing those who hold the formula in a far higher regard than the post-jack devs ever have. My main point was more akin to the fact that the devs really didn't hold the formula in as high of a regard as the HC devs (and some incredibly misinformed players) do.

You're more than welcome to prove it wrong. Ston's test still holds for non-um SS, and with the radius buffs, exactly what I said will be the case. Sets like martial and savage will trash SS given the boosted radius, without crutching on double rage.

Your error is assuming the equations are a hard rule and not a guideline. Occams razor applies here: if you were correct, super strength wouldn't be underperforming.

No, not really. In other cases, sure, but not here. If a fire armor brute with soul isnt propelling Ss to the top bracket, NOTHING will, so let's stop pretending this is a valid concern. Cross punch requires two useless power picks to even be worth considering, and the bulk of it's value is to be a proc carrier, which UM hand clap does much better. If you're someone that enjoys cross punch, UM+ hand clap is better in every conceivable way short of maybe overpowering stacking -tohit.

This would bite you in the long run, as most of your time in a given solo clear is to kill the bosses, which can take a while in higher diffs depending on what it is. Ss also has large gaps in its st rotation without gloom, even with recharge buffs. What off-set powers besides gloom and/or an epic aoe, though? Burn is really the only other notable candidate, and it kills chaff just fine with or without rage post-buff. Like the idea doesn't translate to practice. If it did, UM wouldn't be superior to rage, which it is. And that's the biggest mark against the rage debate right now: UM is decisively better than rage. Tanks that six slot procs without any damage % will feel the loss of rage more than a brute, but it doesnt change the fact that the upper limits of UM are ultimately higher than rage.

This thread is cluttered enough without reposting the entire message. You disagreed and used that as the basis. It's fair game. @Shin Magmus DR is often ignored in these calculations too. The benefit drops off a lot after the first 100%. 140% really isnt that big of a swing.

The ATO that carries the entire scrapper class didn't exist at the time, so that's moot.

Dark obliteration buffed by rage isn't going to break any clear speed records, and while gloom is strong, its not enough to bump SS up to the top by any stretch of the imagination, no matter how many procs you slot. What makes ss strong on clear is foot stomp's large radius and soft control. When other sets get that level of aoe coverage, the gap closes FAST. My evidence? Look at how easily martial arts overtook super strength on tanks in spite of rage scaling much better for tanks than brutes, both in terms of normal clear and farming. Many melee aoes in this game are extremely tiny, which is why scrappers without a taunt aura tend to be much slower, among other things. It's also why tanks dominated the game for about two years. When you bump that area of effect up, a lot of problems with certain sets clear speeds go away.

1: Provide your own data, its not my job to provide data for your claims, lol. Current data supports me, so have fun on the grind. 2: With how DRs work in this game past the first 100% slotted in a power the difference is marginal and only serves to highlight how meaningless your fixation on the damage buff rage provides is. This game is 20 years old, its solved, there are no debates.

Why are you ignoring them? Super strength despite double or even triple stacking rage can't hope to beat its peers, so how am I supposed to take the claim seriously that it "breaks the game" and is "unbalanced" when super strength loses to more than half of the other sets? That number may even go up with the radius buffs. A tanker with double rage isn't even top 20. A 200% damage buff doesn't do anything if your scalable damage is half of other sets. As for your question: claws, dark melee and db. UM outperforms rage despite all of that %damage loss, crazy how that works, isn't it? Turns out damage scales are more important. Credit to Ston.

Except that's not how the game works. Damage scales are what determine how strong something is. Or are we going to look at fury and start going "Oh well fury gives you 280% damage just for existing, therefore brute is op" it's meaningless.

Realistically: you take jab to slot absolute amazement, so a better power can rock hecatomb or an ato. I've never seen a single person outside of fight club ever use kick/boxing as part of an actual rotation. Punch and jab have niche use.

Well I don't want to derail this by delving too much into this, but what you enjoy as a character is for the most part irrelevant to balance or a set's status in the power hierarchy. I enjoy warshades, warshades without the anim cancel are one of the worst characters in the entire game.

Not really, unless you completely neglect accuracy and/or the higher multiplier weapon sets have. When one claims rage breaks the game "because of procs" without evidence to farm likes or whatever, such claims deserve scrutiny. The one thing rage's tohit really helps with is something like cimerorans, or having a buffer against cascading tohit debuffs.

Its practical but it typically requires that you know how to build a character. Idk where this idea that only ss can do that came from, though. Rage's tohit isnt neccesary for proc builds, I don't know why people in this thread keeping saying that, its demonstrably wrong.

I just think its rich that people genuinely think removing/fixing procs will magically make battle axe bad and super strength top tier.

Every single dual pistols player would like a word with you. It's honestly insane to me how many years in we are and there's still insane misunderstandings about procs.

The main problem with UM on tanks is you get a sobering taste of just how weak super strength actually is on similar footing to other sets.

On that note, the nerf to damage buffs tanks ate a bit ago should probably be reverted. It's related to super strength and not off topic, because I'm 99% sure that nerf was aimed at rage.