Bopper

Since your Proc chance graph and your Proc Damage % graph are basically the same curve, why not combine it into one graph with 2 y-axis? Make the left side show proc chance and the right side show damage %?

No worries, you're actually the 2nd person in the last 24 hours to tell me the numbers look off with Energy Melee. Check out Energy Transfer on a tanker and I bet your jaw will drop. I would fix it, but since Energy Melee is getting looked at in Page 6, might as well wait until then. No point in doing the same work twice.

If they removed all the secondary effects from Energy Melee attacks, you could request that. The rule of thumb was, if a power had no secondary effects you can give it a 20% reduction on the recharge (while retaining full damage). I don't recall on the endurance, but recharge, yes.

If I recall, a lot of Scrapper's Claws have smaller recharge values. Edit: In fact, it looks like all of them. So...Scrapper recharges everything faster, but everything hits softer too. Although, this thread is about Energy Melee so I figured Brute probably fits the best for comparison.

If anyone is saying Whirling Hands getting 18% more damage would make it similar to Spin, they are mistaken. It would make it more like Dragon's Tail or Whirling Mace if you want a good comp. But surely, any damage increase would technically move it closer to Spin (given it's top dog of them all). I pulled these numbers from my spreadsheets and added a Dmg Formula calculation so you can see what various 8 ft radius PBAoE attacks should be doing compared with what they actually do. You'll see I provided an adjusted Spin calculation to accomodate the fact that Spin gets a 20% recharge discount (so it should be treated like a 17.5s recharge, not 14s). You'll see Spin is still more than 30% of what the damage formula would dictate while powers like Whirling Axe and Whirling Hands are producing 15% below what the damage formula would dictate. We could argue the Whirling Axe is actually the worst of the bunch as it has a slower cast time than Whirling Hands, but it makes no difference. Both are badly underperforming. *Edit: These numbers are pulled from Brutes, but should translate to the other ATs as well

Agreed.

I don't know the equations used on claws, if one was used (I have patch notes that suggest they did at one time use it). I do have 4 equations that they might have used and I provided one of them earlier. The others get much more complicated, but in my opinion are better (similar curves, but less radical falloff and diminished gains at the extremes).

The set is not for everyone. The level up process is painful as you don't have the accuracy to have a reliable rotation. You think you have one slow attack followed by 4-5 fast attacks, but that first slow attack misses and now you have another slow attack, and maybe another. Also, endurance is drained quickly with momentum attacks using up considerable amounts of attacks within a short period of time. That's hard to deal with while leveling up. There is also the restriction (mentally induced) that has you wanting to use TW whenever Momentum is up, so you don't want to use powers outside that. This makes for pairing with less clicky armor sets (or find armor sets that are endurance friendly to address the previous paragraph). So, there are reasons for why TW is not popular with everyone. It requires a learning curve and some late level development to start seeing the set blossom into the strongest melee offensive set the game offers (I believe claws and war mace are next in line at the top, but are still far behind TW). There are other reasons too for lack of popularity, but I'm not trying to turn this into a dissertation or anything.

I chuckled.

While on topic with my previous replies of damage formulas, Whirling Hands is simply an underperformer in that area. It does 1.00 scale damage, yet an 8 ft radius PBAoE with a 14s recharge SHOULD be doing 1.182 scale damage. So that extra 18.2% damage would be nice to have added to the set, especially if the set's only AoE is this underperforming attack.

The rule of thumb is if an attack has no secondary effect (which happens to be the case for most claws attacks), they get a 20% recharge reduction discount (so their damage uses the full recharge, but the true recharge is reduced). As for Spin, it is so well above the damage formula, I suspect a typo happened, or an Area Modifier calculation was done wrong. Something. I seriously took every single justification approach to see how they could get its damage to be 1.89 when the damage formula suggests it should be 1.436 scale (using 17.5s recharge, where 14s is 80% of 17.5s). Being 31.6% stronger than the formula appears to be an accident. Afterall, Claws isn't exactly lacking in AoE for the set, so it's not like a 1-AoE only buff up (like Foot Stomp). I thought, well...maybe they are using the experimental formula where they took the animation time into account. There are a few of these formulas out there, but the simplest was a formula of: Damage Modifier = 2 x Cast Time / (1.5 + Cast Time). This formula basically used a 1.5s cast time as a median, and if your cast time was longer you would do more damage. If it was shorter, you would do less damage. Granted, this isn't actually used in design (currently), but if it had at the time, that Damage Modifier would be: DM = 2 x 2.5 / (1.5 + 2.5) = 1.25 31.6% is greater than 25%, so even factoring in an experimental formula that is not used currently in the design formula STILL has Spin doing more damage than it should. So something is off.

Shred does not crit for scrappers, but it's a bug that will be patched no later than page 6 (hopefully sooner). Hemorrhage is complicated because so much of what gets discussed on it is the fact the Stalker version is so messed up (and is nothing like the versions other ATs get). For Stalkers it crits four DoTs in PvE but doesn't crit any in PvP. This is also a bug that will be fixed alongside Shred.

I don't think that's true. Spin isn't even supposed to do damage similar to Spin. Even if you factor in the 20% recharge reduction most claws attacks get, Spin outperforms the design formula by a considerable amount.

Spring 2021 All predictions wrong, or your money back.

It's funny. After months of people clamoring for an update on what is in Page 6 and with just a small teaser and some forthcoming discussion on future plans, this thread shows proof once again why things are held close to the chest before releasing any information about possible changes. Way to go guys.

Those are examples of "whataboutism". Instead of discussing a change on its own merits, you're pointing to something else and saying "but what about this? this needs a change more". It's not a valid argument and the devs will not listen to it. If you want to suggest Rage should get looked at, make that argument (I would point you to the Suggestions and Feedback Forum). But if you're saying Titan Weapons shouldn't be looked at because Rage should first, that's not gonna happen. The developers will prioritize buffs and nerfs on their terms, and seeing as how there have been more buffs than nerfs on Homecoming, I would trust their judgement.

Popularity does not matter. Performance does. As for TW, all single target attacks do 10% more damage than the design formula dictates, all cones do 18% more damage, and WS does 44% more damage. Everything overperforms. Not to mention the DoTs that FT and WS gets. Add to that, it is an outlier in both clear time tests and single target damage tests. It beasts. And it outperforms the next best sets by a considerable margin... I'm talking the gap between #1 and #2 is similar to the gap between #2 and an average set.

+5 your DMG/END. It should get your endurance reduction into the 42% range.

Certainly, but it all would have to be factored into overall balance of a set. Make the T1-T3 too strong, you will have to take away from ET and TF. So I am thinking the devs won't go that route...atleast not fully, but who knows. This thread is for suggestions, so it's a perfectly valid one to make.

Siolfir already hit it on the head. Due to the design formula, any increase in damage will be accompanied with an increase in recharge. Energy Punch, Barrage, and Bone Smasher already have recharges of 4, 6, and 8 seconds, respectively. I don't see Barrage getting buffed to Bone Smasher level of damage, which really only leaves it with the 7s recharge option for 1.48 scale damage, which would be a 12% increase from the 1.32 scale damage it does now. You could maybe do a global damage increase to all 3 of these attacks, make it a 5/7/10 second for a 1.16/1.48/1.96 scale damage, which certainly would be strong, but it would make for some big gaps in early level attack chains.

Perhaps this topic has ran its course. If nobody wants to discuss Page 6 predictions, the thread can probably be locked. In an effort to get back on track, here's a prediction: new Control power set, Sonic Control, with its signature T9 "Pied Piper" a mass confuse

Just a quick update on this. @Omega-202, RubyRed fixed her tool, so it now shows the proper damage for Spring Attack. The issue also seemed to impact things like Martial Arts and Radiation, so lots of good updates there. However, due to finding out how CoH handles things like Spring Attack has made me realize I need to overhaul my program to better handle these Requires conditionals. So I'll be spending time redesigning the code structure and hopefully will create a tool that is a bit more robust. So, no updates in the mean time, but for folks who want accurate data, use RubyRed's API tool (link in my signature, also can be found in the tools forum).

It technically is a DoT, but it's a 2 tick dot (it applies both ticks before the animation ends, too). Some powers do the same thing, but instead of a DoT, it's two separate damage effects, but one has a delay. You're right though, it used to do half the damage. Now it does 1.33 damage in 1.32s, while Energy Punch does 1.00 damage in 0.83s. Personally, I would love to see Energy Punch become the T1 and make Barrage the T2 so that Tankers can skip it like the other ATs.

There's not necessarily a rhyme or reason for the choice of the time hit. Powerhouse can probably tell you the reason why, but from my looking at it, my guess is lines up with the impact of the animation or some other sequencing. The game uses animation frames, which at 30 fps, is what calculates the cast time. Mind you, the cast time in the game is rounded to the nearest hundreth, so there are two cases where calculating Arcanatime is possibly wrong due to the cast time being rounded (one of those times is not used in the game, but the other is 3.17s, which is really 3.166667s and should have a 3.3s arcanatime, not 3.432s). But I'm going incredibly off topic (like this thread). So the powers have AttackFrames and InitialFramesBeforeHit. Those frames are divided by 30 to get their cast time and "time hit" as I called it. Some powers have alternative animations that have their "time hit" altered. So again, there's no real rule of thumb on what the time hit will be for a given cast time. Generally, it's a little bit less than the cast time, but not necessarily. For example, I believe Shadow Maul, because it is a DoT, has its "time hit" really short, that way damage is started while you're flailing.

I recall that being 1s cast, but I have no knowledge of what the hit times were back then. I don't think City of Data even reported that, and it wouldn't have been mentioned in-game.