Focused Feedback: Tank Updates

[FUBARczar]

@Haijinx touche, but still no less lousy.

*** Rage as a name has nothing to do with Super Strength per se.  As I have said previously it should be changed to something like "Unleashed," "No Holding Back," etc.

*** Rage as it's currently implemented is antithetical to Super Strength.  There is no reason for character using it's innate strength to tire, to crash relatively more/faster/harder beyond using one's endurance like everyone else.  It was narrow-mindedly designed (They must have been thinking of Hulk, and a bad representation of Hulk to boot.)

*** The new proposed design of allowing 1 stack with no penalty and a crash if doubled stacked is a fair enough compromise I suppose.  C'est la vie.  

 

[Haijinx]

You know I wonder if it actually went down the opposite way. 

 

"We need to have a Super Strength Set for Tankers! What Kinds of powers should it have?"

• "Well Superman does that Hand-Clap thing - cool add that!" 
• "We should have like throwing a car?  Car might be tough, how about a chunk of the sidewalk? -cool add that!" 
• "Totally should add in the way the Hulk gets all mad and SMASHES -awesome we will call it Rage!" 

 

I highly doubt they were trying to be internally consistent with just one Super Strong character, and as such they were 100% consistent with none really.  

 

 

[Auroxis]

10 hours ago, Vanden said:

Yes! Because just as you can’t say “the entire Brute AT should be nerfed because Spines/Fire Brutes are too good,” you can’t say “the Tanker AT should have its damage cap reduced because of this small handful of powers.”

Except we're not nerfing anyone's character here, the patch isn't even live. We're helping Captain Powerhouse decide how far and in what way he should buff the Tanker. 

 

And those small handful of powers are just one part of the equation, they aren't the lynchpin of my argument for lowering the damage cap a bit. Tanker is superior in so many ways that 90% before taking those advantages into account is too high in my estimate. The Pineapple Tanker is superior to the Brute in more ways than one.

 

Quote

What can we gauge it on? Is there something you know that I don’t that makes you so confident that their popularity will increase to the point that it will be a problem? Or are we both idly speculating and my lack of concern is just as valid as your worry?

We can help gauge Melt Armor's post-update popularity by how often the currently most efficient PPP DPS power (gloom) gets picked up on Brutes and Tankers, as well as (but not solely)Melt Armor's current pick-up rate.  As for Assault+Maneuvers, we have Defender's and SoA's Leadership popularity to show how often it's picked up at that power level.

 

And if Tankers become a premier DPS+Team Utility class (which according to my tests they definitely could) you'll likely end up with similar powerset choices of the Scrapper and Brute (like bio armor) as the Tanker's priority shifts from Tanking to DPS.

Quote

Nothing you’re saying here can’t be said about Brutes with the damage and survivability aspects swapped. And unfortunately that already happened and we can’t put that cat back in the bag.

Damage is a factor, as are Survivability, AoE, and Team Utility when deciding on a character you want to invest your time in. People's choices often end up in the grey area that suits them.

 

I'm saying all these things not for the sake of arguing back-and-forth with you Vanden, but to prevent people from commonly hearing "Just roll Tanker, the damage is almost the same and you get better AoE/buffs/debuffs/survivability/endurance/aggro control", as well as to prevent a scenario where too many people regret rolling a Brute.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Auroxis

[Vanden]

1 hour ago, Auroxis said:

I'm saying all these things not for the sake of arguing back-and-forth with you Vanden, but to prevent people from commonly hearing "Just roll Tanker, the damage is almost the same and you get better AoE/buffs/debuffs/survivability/endurance/aggro control", as well as to prevent a scenario where too many people regret rolling a Brute.

I feel like you're still missing the point that all these things already happened with the Brute and Tanker roles reversed, and the changes on beta are intentionally designed to reverse that and bring parity.

[summers]

2 hours ago, Auroxis said:

I'm saying all these things not for the sake of arguing back-and-forth with you Vanden, but to prevent people from commonly hearing "Just roll Tanker, the damage is almost the same and you get better AoE/buffs/debuffs/survivability/endurance/aggro control", as well as to prevent a scenario where too many people regret rolling a Brute.

 

This is exactly what I'll be suggesting people do.

[Auroxis]

49 minutes ago, Vanden said:

I feel like you're still missing the point that all these things already happened with the Brute and Tanker roles reversed, and the changes on beta are intentionally designed to reverse that and bring parity.

Of course parity is the goal, I'm saying that currently there isn't one on Pineapple because the Tanker is overtuned.

[Vanden]

33 minutes ago, Auroxis said:

Of course parity is the goal, I'm saying that currently there isn't one on Pineapple because the Tanker is overtuned.

And I'm saying it's not, and the parity is finally there. You've found, what, two? Three? situations where a Tanker could outperform a Brute.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Vanden

[Tubalcain]

So which attack set benefits the most from these range and arc changes?

[Auroxis]

1 hour ago, Vanden said:

And I'm saying it's not, and the parity is finally there. You've found, what, two? Three? situations where a Tanker could outperform a Brute.

 

 

I've shown that Tanker can come very close to the Brute's raw damage with moderate levels of damage buffs, stay there with maximum levels of damage buffs, while also having access to superior buffs/debuffs/AoE/survivability/endurance at its disposal. Not sure how you deduced that to "two/three situations".

 

[Vanden]

16 minutes ago, Auroxis said:

I've shown that Tanker can come very close to the Brute's raw damage with moderate levels of damage buffs, stay there with maximum levels of damage buffs, while also having access to superior buffs/debuffs/AoE/survivability/endurance at its disposal. Not sure how you deduced that to "two/three situations".

You've shown that the changes achieve exactly their goal. But you haven't shown that it makes the Tanker too good.

[Replacement]

45 minutes ago, Tubalcain said:

So which attack set benefits the most from these range and arc changes?

Probably still Dark Armor.

 

@Auroxis Good analysis so far.  I'm curious to know - do you happen to already have some numbers about what it would take from a team to get to the point where melt armor is allowing the tanker to outperform the brute?

 

In essence, what does the party lose to get here?  If one /kin Corruptor is enough to get both to a point where Melt Armor starts pushing Tankers over the edge, that's a problem.  If it instead requires losing party damage, and the slight tanker advantage hedges the gap, I don't know that it's a bug and not a feature.

 

Like DreadShinobi has mentioned -- the damage caps themselves are their own problem and they are generating a lot of noise on these tanker changes.  Lots of ATs have screwed up caps and it deserves its own test cycle.

 

I think at this point, it's probably best to view the 550 cap as simply the easiest way for Captain Powerhouse to see what a Tanker's potential looks like.  Having a cap so low that parties are regularly hitting it definitely gets in the way of "real" numbers.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Replacement

[Captain Powerhouse]

1 hour ago, Auroxis said:

I've shown that Tanker can come very close to the Brute's raw damage with moderate levels of damage buffs, stay there with maximum levels of damage buffs, while also having access to superior buffs/debuffs/AoE/survivability/endurance at its disposal. Not sure how you deduced that to "two/three situations".

Although not invalid, the data slice you showed is a bit over-simplified. It is based entirely around the 0.95 damage scale and 5.5 damage cap, this means it never can consider the use of Epic Pools to improve damage in any way. Remember: Epic Pools operate at a 0.8 modifier. Some of the best melee farming builds incorporate heavy use of these pools to maximize AoE damage output, plus do less chasing around.

 

This is why I want to strongly encourage full build testing and analysis.

 

42 minutes ago, Vanden said:

You've shown that the changes achieve exactly their goal. But you haven't shown that it makes the Tanker too good.

 

I understand having differences on opinions but please, allow everyone to post their views. If you disagree, point  your own views once  but don't get stuck on a couple days long loop trying to counter each other. It makes it harder for everyone to catch up with the thread, me included.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Captain Powerhouse

[Auroxis]

42 minutes ago, Replacement said:

Probably still Dark Armor.

 

@Auroxis Good analysis so far.  I'm curious to know - do you happen to already have some numbers about what it would take from a team to get to the point where melt armor is allowing the tanker to outperform the brute?

 

In essence, what does the party lose to get here?  If one /kin Corruptor is enough to get both to a point where Melt Armor starts pushing Tankers over the edge, that's a problem.  If it instead requires losing party damage, and the slight tanker advantage hedges the gap, I don't know that it's a bug and not a feature.

 

Like DreadShinobi has mentioned -- the damage caps themselves are their own problem and they are generating a lot of noise on these tanker changes.  Lots of ATs have screwed up caps and it deserves its own test cycle.

 

I think at this point, it's probably best to view the 550 cap as simply the easiest way for Captain Powerhouse to see what a Tanker's potential looks like.  Having a cap so low that parties are regularly hitting it definitely gets in the way of "real" numbers.

As my table showed a few pages back, it takes about 300% to reach the 90% mark against a high fury Brute. 100% can come from enhancements, 100% can come from the tanker buffs itself(Rage/AAO/Soul Drain/Musculature/Build Up/Gauss proc/Assault/Hybrid), which leaves about 100% to get from the party which is obtainable from a lot of sources (one /kin would certainly be enough).

 

100% more would push the tanker above the 90% mark to 94%

50% above that (should've included that earlier) would push the tanker to 96%

Anything above that starts getting the tanker down to 90% where it stays.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Auroxis

[Auroxis]

39 minutes ago, Captain Powerhouse said:

Although not invalid, the data slice you showed is a bit over-simplified. It is based entirely around the 0.95 damage scale and 5.5 damage cap, this means it never can consider the use of Epic Pools to improve damage in any way. Remember: Epic Pools operate at a 0.8 modifier. Some of the best melee farming builds incorporate heavy use of these pools to maximize AoE damage output, plus do less chasing around.

 

Yes, but my previous tests cover the usage of these power pools as well as the tanker's inherently higher debuff values for DPS. Reminder, those allowed my Tanker to reach Brute times at the 200% mark. Besides those buff+debuff values contributing to DPS there are other advantages the Tanker has as I mentioned before.

 

As for farming, Tanker can also go for red insp runs which would certainly help reach 90% on non-epic/patron AoE's, after which the AoE increases could give Tankers an edge. Tests need to be run on that though.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Auroxis

[Sovera]

36 minutes ago, Captain Powerhouse said:

(...)

I understand having differences on opinions but please, allow everyone to post their views. If you disagree, point  your own views once  but don't get stuck on a couple days long loop trying to counter each other. It makes it harder for everyone to catch up with the thread, me included.

God yes.

[Captain Powerhouse]

10 minutes ago, Auroxis said:

Yes, but my previous tests cover the usage of these power pools as well as the tanker's inherently higher debuff values for DPS. Reminder, those allowed my Tanker to reach Brute times at the 200% mark. Besides those buff+debuff values contributing to DPS there are other advantages the Tanker has as I mentioned before.

 

 

I have a question about that test: did both, the tanker and the brute have similar builds? Did your brute also use Melt Armor?

[Auroxis]

14 minutes ago, Captain Powerhouse said:

 

 

I have a question about that test: did both, the tanker and the brute have similar builds? Did your brute also use Melt Armor?

No, the test isn't an accurate benchmark for a tanker-brute as it compares the top recorded brute time and not my own. I'm leaving room for a 10% margin of error which better fits the numbers using identical builds, once you add up the following:

 

1. 11% more -res from Melt+Rend+Evolving Armor

2. 8.25% more +dam from Assault

3. Damage Procs not benefiting from Fury

Edited September 25, 2019 by Auroxis

[Myrmidon]

6 hours ago, Haijinx said:

You know I wonder if it actually went down the opposite way. 

 

"We need to have a Super Strength Set for Tankers! What Kinds of powers should it have?"

• "Well Superman does that Hand-Clap thing - cool add that!" 
• "We should have like throwing a car?  Car might be tough, how about a chunk of the sidewalk? -cool add that!" 
• "Totally should add in the way the Hulk gets all mad and SMASHES -awesome we will call it Rage!" 

 

I highly doubt they were trying to be internally consistent with just one Super Strong character, and as such they were 100% consistent with none really.  

 

 

 

This one is definitely where to money is on the betting sheet:

[Myrmidon]

15 minutes ago, Auroxis said:

No, the test isn't an accurate benchmark for a tanker-brute as it compares the top recorded brute time and not my own. I'm leaving room for a 10% margin of error which better fits the numbers using identical builds, once you add up the following:

 

1. 11% more -res from Melt+Rend+Evolving Armor

2. 8.25% more +dam from Assault

3. Damage Procs not benefiting from Fury

 

So, is this more of a “Bio/TW is OP” idea than actual testing the entirety of each AT?

[Auroxis]

19 minutes ago, Myrmidon said:

 

So, is this more of a “Bio/TW is OP” idea than actual testing the entirety of each AT?

TW isn't the only -res secondary, and Tanker still has advantages in Melt Armor, Assault, Survivability, AoE, and Endurance while Fury's advantage is made close to irrelevant in certain damage buff or build scenarios.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Auroxis

[Leogunner]

19 minutes ago, Myrmidon said:

 

So, is this more of a “Bio/TW is OP” idea than actual testing the entirety of each AT?

That's why I was pressing people to challenge those charts rather than try to dismiss them.  I want to know if someone can find a combo that works opposite and benefits Brute or Scrapper disproportionately compared to beta Tanker.  There's also the need to run an identical Brute build along a Tanker build and collect more data (preferably, without Incarnate abilities).

 

 

[ParagonKid]

I suspect very little thought went into crafting Super Strength, just due to priorities being elsewhere.

The animations for Jab, Punch and Haymaker were all recycled from the weapon sets. Even the alternative animations that were added later were swiped from elsewhere.

[Captain Powerhouse]

22 minutes ago, ParagonKid said:

Even the alternative animations that were added later were swiped from elsewhere.

 

That is not true, those were new animations made by Back Alley Brawler (if i recall correctly) with the goal that the Jab actually looked like a Jab, for instance.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Captain Powerhouse

[Vanden]

42 minutes ago, ParagonKid said:

The animations for Jab, Punch and Haymaker were all recycled from the weapon sets.

This part isn't true either.

[Tater Todd]

I wish I could join in and provide the much needed data for testing...but when it comes to melee I feel like a fish out of water.  All I can do is cheer everyone on and hope someone tests and helps the Devs find all the answers.  It just kills me that I can't contribute 😕