Focused Feedback: Tank Updates for December 6, 2019

[Infinitum]

4 minutes ago, Replacement said:

Bewildering that it's this low. The .95 change should be almost exactly the same as built-in bruising (.96 would be more perfect), except unresistable.

 

I realize you're just reporting your findings, I'm not trying to overturn these results. More, I want to know what's missing.

Those are the live numbers.

 

Are you talking about the bewildering part that those numbers are low?

 

Or the beta numbers I posted?

 

And what do you mean by what's missing?

[Brutal Justice]

46 minutes ago, Replacement said:

Bewildering that it's this low. The .95 change should be almost exactly the same as built-in bruising (.96 would be more perfect), except unresistable.

 

I realize you're just reporting your findings, I'm not trying to overturn these results. More, I want to know what's missing.

You might be missing the decreased +dam modifier from 1.00 to .8.  He’s shield/stj so he’s picking up some +dam from aao and the +dam from combat readiness.  Both of which are adding significantly less damage on test than live.

 

if he wasn’t stj it would likely be worse since combat readiness trades some of that +dam for straight damage through the combo system

[Replacement]

@Infinitum Sorry, not much, I think I figured it out now.  I looked at your page 7 results again and they make perfect sense if you maintained around +100% damage bonus (including +dmg enhancements). That would be enough for Mot to cause the rest of the distortion.

 

And yeah, the conclusion for me is that the current pineapple changes push the Bruising numbers to all hits, and replaces a tanker' ability to buff team damage with the ability to reasonably have their damage buffed. The largest increases in kill speed will be proportionate to the number of aoes in your kit affected.

 

While there are still people who hate the idea of giving tankers any amount of +damage, I am getting concerned about it not being sufficient for my purposes (party size 1-3).

[Haijinx]

1 hour ago, Replacement said:

Bewildering that it's this low. The .95 change should be almost exactly the same as built-in bruising (.96 would be more perfect), except unresistable.

 

I realize you're just reporting your findings, I'm not trying to overturn these results. More, I want to know what's missing.

What's missing is those are with combat readiness, the part strength build up power.  Which was nerfed by this latest patch. 

 

At least I'm pretty sure that's what Inf has been posting. 

[Vanden]

On 12/7/2019 at 9:32 PM, csr said:

Ignoring the rest of the issues with this, which were addressed by others, you've miscalculated the Rage buff with the current Beta patch.  It should be 100 * 0.95 * 0.6 (not 0.8) = 57 (not 76).

That's my mistake. So the total with the new numbers is in fact 237.25, versus the old numbers' value of 264 with Bruising. Without Bruising, it's 220, for a total increase of 17.25, barely noticeable.

 

In the interest of getting some numbers that more closely represent actual gameplay, here's what the same attack (100 damage base, 95% damage enhancement, 1 stack of Rage) would be after some purple patch on higher level foes:

 

Old Values, no Bruising

+1 (90% effective): 198

+2 (80% effective): 176

+3 (65% effective): 143

+4 (48% effective): 105.6

 

Old Values, with Bruising

+1: (220 * 0.9) * (1 + (0.2 * 0.9)) = 233.64

+2: (220 * 0.8) * (1 + (0.2 * 0.8)) = 204.16

+3: (220 * 0.65) * (1 + (0.2 * 0.65)) = 161.59

+4: (220 * 0.48) * (1 + (0.2 * 0.48)) = 115.7376

 

New Values:

+1 (90% effective): 213.525

+2 (80% effective): 189.8

+3 (65% effective): 154.2125

+4 (48% effective): 113.88

 

At this point, a Super Strength Tanker has absolutely nothing to look forward to with this patch any more. No more extra endurance, no getting to skip Jab, worse single-target damage, and AoE damage only better by an unnoticeable amount.

Edited December 11, 2019 by Vanden

[Haijinx]

Against a single target at a time, insofar as the bruising goes.

 

But yeah, the +dmg nerf basically looks like it is too nerfy.  

 

And the longer your +dmg is up, the more you got Nerfed.  

 

Making SD/SS tankers cry.  (Or BIO/ or \Claws, etc.)

[Kanil]

so in my completely unscientific testing of 'throw myself at pylons and see what the general time to kill is' it's roughly about a 30-45 second loss (as in, slower) on pylon times for bio/ss tankers on test vs live for ST damage using a non-jab string (on test) vs jab-included string on live on a proclord build. i don't know why it's such a drastic loss but yep. maybe i need to optimize my string more, but honestly on my live tests i was just freeballin it throwing jabs as gap fillers anyways

 

so yeah that's cool

 

 

 

Edited December 11, 2019 by Kanil

[Infinitum]

21 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

Against a single target at a time, insofar as the bruising goes.

 

But yeah, the +dmg nerf basically looks like it is too nerfy.  

 

And the longer your +dmg is up, the more you got Nerfed.  

 

Making SD/SS tankers cry.  (Or BIO/ or \Claws, etc.)

wth powers like against all odds which add +dmg the more thats in range it would increase the nerfiness with each one added to the aura.  havent even tested that yet.

[csr]

On 12/9/2019 at 9:57 PM, Kanil said:

i really don't get how people are like 'yeah but bruising sucks because of the level gap' like it's not also applying to every other source of -res in the game and good in the hands of other folks like that. maybe i just don't understand the -res system, like does it work differently for bruising on tanks or something?

One issue is that Bruising doesn't stack.  Effectively making it 1/2 as good with 2 tanks, 1/3 as good with 3, and so on.  I think that is one of the main reasons Captain Powerhouse wants to get rid of it.

[Haijinx]

1 hour ago, csr said:

One issue is that Bruising doesn't stack.  Effectively making it 1/2 as good with 2 tanks, 1/3 as good with 3, and so on.  I think that is one of the main reasons Captain Powerhouse wants to get rid of it.

That is a pretty big one

[Major_Decoy]

1 hour ago, csr said:

One issue is that Bruising doesn't stack.  Effectively making it 1/2 as good with 2 tanks, 1/3 as good with 3, and so on.  I think that is one of the main reasons Captain Powerhouse wants to get rid of it.

If it's just that, you could keep bruising and give tanks a damage bonus when there are other tanks on the team to make up for the lack of stacking. Or proc extra damage when you would bruise an already bruised target.

[Infinitum]

2 hours ago, csr said:

One issue is that Bruising doesn't stack.  Effectively making it 1/2 as good with 2 tanks, 1/3 as good with 3, and so on.  I think that is one of the main reasons Captain Powerhouse wants to get rid of it.

Well, what would letting it stack do then?

 

Would there be a way to stack it with a diminishing return per stack so it wouldn't be OP?

 

On a side note we did the Katie Hannon TF last night and I had it set to +2 .  on round 8 9 and 10 bruising didn't matter.

 

The pylon is a yellow con, macomber was a +5 on round 10.

 

+ 3 and purple is likely what we need to find a way to test as a better representation of what we normally face.

[Roderick]

1 hour ago, Infinitum said:

Would there be a way to stack it with a diminishing return per stack so it wouldn't be OP?

Yes, you'd split the debuff into two parts. The first, and probably larger, would be flagged "Does not stack", while the remainder does.

 

So, if, for example, 75% doesn't stack and 25% does, for one tank you'd have 100% of the base debuff, two would apply 125%, and so on, up to a full team applying a 275% debuff. I would leave it up to someone better versed in balance mechanics as to how much would or wouldn't stack.

 

Whether stacking (or partially stacking) Bruising would solve any problems is also something I can't answer. 

[drbuzzard]

2 minutes ago, Roderick said:

Yes, you'd split the debuff into two parts. The first, and probably larger, would be flagged "Does not stack", while the remainder does.

 

So, if, for example, 75% doesn't stack and 25% does, for one tank you'd have 100% of the base debuff, two would apply 125%, and so on, up to a full team applying a 275% debuff. I would leave it up to someone better versed in balance mechanics as to how much would or wouldn't stack.

 

Whether stacking (or partially stacking) Bruising would solve any problems is also something I can't answer. 

But wouldn't this also allow a tank to just spam the T1 by himself to the same effect? Is there a mechanic for 'not stack from the same source'?

[Roderick]

1 minute ago, drbuzzard said:

But wouldn't this also allow a tank to just spam the T1 by himself to the same effect? Is there a mechanic for 'not stack from the same source'?

There is a "Does not stack from same caster" tag. That's why a defender can't spam bubbles on you to the cap, but two different defenders, even with the same set, can stack their shield on the same target.

[csr]

On 12/7/2019 at 10:59 AM, Captain Powerhouse said:

Because the set already has too much AoE. Similar story to Titan Weapons and Claws. All 3 sets might be reviewed in the future, but without heavy re-balance that is what they get for now.

The problem with this is that they get less from the Inherent than other sets.  You seem to be basically saying that the AoE heavy sets shouldn't benefit from the Inherent at all.  Still, Claws gets as much as most due to Spin being so good, but Spines gets too little (4 AoEs and only the one that benefits is the least affected) and Titan Weapons gets nothing.  Here are the changes I would suggest so that each set gets at least something from the arc/radius buff, and that the set-to-set variance isn't too large:

• Dark Melee - Dark Consumption made to do DS 1 with a 60s recharge.  Like Energy Absorption and similar powers it becomes dual use, in this case damage and +END.
• Kinetic Melee - Make Repulsing Torrent ignore the buff.  Increase Burst's radius to 10'.
• Spines - Both Spine Burst and Quills should get the buff.  Review the set as a whole later.
• Staff Fighting - Both Guarded Spin and Innocuous Strikes should ignore the buff.  Eye of the Storm, like Spin for Claws, is good enough to carry the set with regard to the Inherent buff.
• Stone Melee - Make Fault do damage.  Perhaps in the DS 0.5 range.
• Super Strength - Make Hand Clap do damage.  Perhaps in the DS 0.75 range (it has 50% longer recharge than Fault, no range and Foot Stomp didn't get a damage boost as Tremor did).  Rework the set later.  [Note:  I don't really like either this or the suggestion for Stone Melee, I just couldn't think of any other simple fix.]
• Titan Weapon - All three melee cones get reduced to 90 degrees but use the buff.  The set needs to be reworked for all ATs.  Don't nerf it just for Tankers, let it get a reasonable boost from the new Tanker Inherent's main buff, and then decide what needs to be done with it for all ATs at a later date, a la Super Strength.

This would mean that all sets would get something significant from the Inherent while none would be insanely blessed (as KM and SF are now).

Edited December 11, 2019 by csr
Numerous grammatical errors

[csr]

1 hour ago, Infinitum said:

Well, what would letting it stack do then?

 

Would there be a way to stack it with a diminishing return per stack so it wouldn't be OP?

 

On a side note we did the Katie Hannon TF last night and I had it set to +2 .  on round 8 9 and 10 bruising didn't matter.

 

The pylon is a yellow con, macomber was a +5 on round 10.

 

+ 3 and purple is likely what we need to find a way to test as a better representation of what we normally face.

I don't remember Captain Powerhouse's exact comment, but I believe he thinks that stacked Bruising would be massively OP.  I'm not going to dig back through that old thread to find the post, maybe somebody else will.

 

AE can provide testing opportunities.  Just make a simple mission with a +3 Boss/EB/AV with no noticeable powers and beat on it.

Edited December 11, 2019 by csr

[Captain Powerhouse]

Stacking -Res can be extremely dangerous, but in the next iteration I'm going to be doing a quick experiment with -regen instead of -res. That is a stat that has a lot more predefined scope and is a lot more controllable.

[Infinitum]

33 minutes ago, Captain Powerhouse said:

Stacking -Res can be extremely dangerous, but in the next iteration I'm going to be doing a quick experiment with -regen instead of -res. That is a stat that has a lot more predefined scope and is a lot more controllable.

That could be very useful and definately interesting. 

 

Is there any chance you could adjust the +dmg up higher also?

[Captain Powerhouse]

1 hour ago, csr said:

The problem with this is that they get less from the Inherent than other sets.  You seem to be basically saying that the AoE heavy sets shouldn't benefit from the Inherent at all. 

 

Every set gets some benefit at least from the increased target cap.

 

4 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

Is there any chance you could adjust the +dmg up higher also?

 

It's being increased a tad for next patch. But keep in mind: if you compare bruise + old base damage + build up, to test, you will get less damage on that one click regardless. The question is: how much total DPS you get through the fight now that the windows outside build up do higher damage, and the T1 is not mandatory in any attack chain.

 

 

[Infinitum]

25 minutes ago, Captain Powerhouse said:

 

Every set gets some benefit at least from the increased target cap.

 

 

It's being increased a tad for next patch. But keep in mind: if you compare bruise + old base damage + build up, to test, you will get less damage on that one click regardless. The question is: how much total DPS you get through the fight now that the windows outside build up do higher damage, and the T1 is not mandatory in any attack chain.

 

 

On sets lile sj it almost is mandatory because its a combo builder, and thematically I love it anyway.

 

How would you suggest I test to compare?

Edited December 11, 2019 by Infinitum

[Replacement]

13 minutes ago, Captain Powerhouse said:

 

It's being increased a tad for next patch. But keep in mind: if you compare bruise + old base damage + build up, to test, you will get less damage on that one click regardless. The question is: how much total DPS you get through the fight now that the windows outside build up do higher damage, and the T1 is not mandatory in any attack chain.

It's looking more and more like the issue isn't the Build Up window as much as every other source of self +damage. Shield and Bio (though I'm not keen on making offensive adaptation the best stance for tankers) are the primary examples.

 

Of course, these sets are already in a weird spot, being armor sets that greatly affect the performance of the melee sets they're paired with.

 

It may be worth simply adjusting the base numbers of the tanker versions of these powers?

 

And SS still doesn't exist, of course. I don't even know what it stands for.

[Infinitum]

Use bruising kinda like envenomated daggers works.  I like the -regen idea.  If you are beating someone to a pulp their health is not going to stay static.

Edited December 11, 2019 by Infinitum

[Caulderone]

21 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

Use bruising kinda like envenomated daggers works.  I like the -regen idea.  If you are beating someone to a pulp their health is not going to stay static.

Agreed.  I like the idea a lot.

[Replacement]

Agreed. This seems like a dimension of support that could really work... Without just stealing a Support's bacon.

 

I have... A lot of words in this topic and none of it is really on-topic until that build is real. Short version: Bruising as -regen fixes a lot of stuff.   Shoot, I love bulleted lists. I guess here I go:

• Removing unbalancable hyperniche (Individual sets either have it or don't. Doesn't occur often enough to balance around)
• Situational reasons to use your t1, even if you regularly have a better attack chain.
• More "good" party comps
• Adds a party scalar component to offset the loss of -resist.

I want to emphasize where we currently stand on that last bullet point, though:

People dreading the loss of Bruising are not liking the idea of losing something that multiplies party damage. I think this is a valid concern but I also feel the logic for removing needs laid out clearly:

 

Increased base numbers and increased cap means the tankers' contribution to team damage is shifted to the benefits provided to the Tanker. This change makes it worth using +dmg and +recharge buffs on your tanker.  Additionally, anything worth Bruising is something that is resisting Bruising.