Brainlocked so hard I can't come up with a title... build issues

[Bill Z Bubba]

There are three BZBs on Excelsior right now. Scrapper, Brute, Tank.

Their builds are fundamentally identical besides AT IOs, the scrapper got afterburner where the brute/tank took taunt and the scrapper/tank getting conserve power where the brute got superior conditioning.

This makes comparing their pylon times/general dps really easy and somewhat accurate.

 

But is it right? Guess what happens when you push a scrapper build for great mitigation over to a tank? Wasted mitigation. The tank sits at over the incarnate softcap to all three positions 100% immortal in 95% of the game's content. Should he, especially, be rebuilt/rebalanced to push out more damage?

Does this work? Absolutely. I love playing all three of them as is but I keep wondering if they should each be rebuilt with the archetype in question at the forefront of the build rather than simply adjusted for.

 

Then there's the build itself. It's geared toward balance between damage and mitigation. CP/SC are in there to sustain the attack chain while being backed by rebirth or barrier, musculature and assault.

But I could go another way. I could ageless with soul mastery for gloom/moonbeam. But I'm not even sure what that would do to my single target attack chain's overall DPS.

 

This isn't so much a build help question as it is one of build philosophy. I can easily make the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" argument with myself but should I? We have multiple build slots. The inf to buy everything is easy to come by, hell, we've got a test server for things like this, so it's not a matter of can it be done... it's just the question of what are yall's thoughts? Any of you run into this?

Anyone else "suffering" (yea, I know, superhero world problems) with too many build options that leave too many alts sitting there with basic IOs and maybe a perf shifter set?

[Doomguide2005]

Yes and it's a wonderful problem to have, a "gee I have a bazillion dollars what to spend it on?" problem.  So yes especially where it concerns my favorite(s) I'll make use of our multiple builds.  There's a whole lot of potential options ... exemplar friendly, solo vs team, damage vs mitigation vs recharge builds, specially built for s specific challenge (thinking about my i19'ish Empath build for RWZ challenge) and on and on.

Edited July 1, 2020 by Doomguide2005

[Redlynne]

3 hours ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

But is it right? Guess what happens when you push a scrapper build for great mitigation over to a tank? Wasted mitigation. The tank sits at over the incarnate softcap to all three positions 100% immortal in 95% of the game's content. Should he, especially, be rebuilt/rebalanced to push out more damage?

CAN it be rebuilt?  Sure.

SHOULD it be rebuilt?  That's a purely subjective question that depends on your priorities as a Player.

 

Just because the builds are nearly identical (as you've mentioned) doesn't mean the same build will hit the same balance points when ported over to different Archetypes.

Ideally speaking, the excess mitigation you're talking about CAN be exchanged for investment in other priorities, rebalancing the build to the specific "virtues" and strengths of each Archetype.

[Bill Z Bubba]

Reran +4 ITF with the scrapper using hybrid melee and rebirth. Still wasn't enough to keep me from faceplanting but I got the job done with 5. Will probably run it again with the tank using hybrid assault and rebirth. Starting to think he'll get it done faster which is kinda fucked up.

Edited July 1, 2020 by Bill Z Bubba

[Mister Mass]

6 hours ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

Anyone else "suffering" (yea, I know, superhero world problems) with too many build options that leave too many alts sitting there with basic IOs and maybe a perf shifter set?

Heh.  I have definitely suffered from “paralysis by analysis” on a few builds, wanting more information before deciding on a path, when doing anything would be better than doing nothing - especially nowadays when INF & respecs are plentiful- but I hate to make a move before garnering enough information to ascertain what is the “best” choice.  So I continue to play with a clearly suboptimal build, because I’m not sure which better build is the “best.”  Smart! 🙄

[Bill Z Bubba]

9 minutes ago, Mister Mass said:

Heh.  I have definitely suffered from “paralysis by analysis” on a few builds, wanting more information before deciding on a path, when doing anything would be better than doing nothing - especially nowadays when INF & respecs are plentiful- but I hate to make a move before garnering enough information to ascertain what is the “best” choice.  So I continue to play with a clearly suboptimal build, because I’m not sure which better build is the “best.”  Smart! 🙄

That's precisely what I'm talking about. Thanks for saying it better than I did.

[marcussmythe]

Id start by leaning in, or at least respecting, what the AT already does.  Scrappers crit, lets do damage.  Tankers AOE, lets throw some and be tough enough to handle what comes.  

 

Each is going to have a temperature point.  Each point of RES or DEF in a set 'costs more' in build space (powers, slots, IO bonuses, Incarnates) than the one before.  (Consider - some DEF is free.  Some is cheap.  But if your trying to cap Ranged or Energy or Toxic or Psi, those last few points require more and more sacrifice out of your build) Same for each point of plus damage.  At the same time, each point of RES or DEF is worth more than the one before in terms of 'time to live' - until you hit the value 'wont die before I can defeat it' or 'wont die ever', beyond which further investment is value 0. (Unless you decide that ITF is no longer enough, and you want to solo Tinpex, or something - suddenly all you already invested in DEF or RES may have almost NO value unless you stack more on!)

 

So my general thought is to build for 'enough to do what I want to do' and then layer on as much from the other category as I can.  

 

In -your- case, Id build the scrapper for just as much damage as I can get, and just enough survivability for teaming and soloing not-super-damaging things (Your SR, right?  So maybe aim your scrapper for softcap and go for ALL THE DAMAGE).  Similarly, Id be tempted to take the tank for 'Incarnate Softcap AND lots of RES', again stopping before I WRECK my offense.  Play to each ones strengths.  Go for a comfortable middle with the brute, I suppose.

 

What I did was a version of that, but on a single character (I suppose you could do -3- builds on -each- of your three... but that might be a bit much!)

 

Build 1:  Built for comfort, not for speed.  Does everything reasonably well, and is the most -fun- to play.   Designed to exemplar well and then, at 50, to generate decent AOE and Single Target, while also having the def/res to survive clearing out solo task forces.  This lets me exemp down and task force/mission smoothly, and still run high setting missions for EXP/INF/Fun, and for clearing up to the AV on solo TFs.

 

Build 2:  The same build that has enough AOE and survival to clear efficiently up to the AV on a solo TF couldn't kill it - too much single target lost.  Thus build 2.  Tough ENOUGH (just.. barely) to survive the TFs/AVs Ive met, just barely - but having gone all in on single target damage, supported by incarnate choices and temp powers.  Its not a sub-2-minute pylon-buster Mastermind/Titan/Crabber/Whatever, but its enough for AVs and GMs.  I clear the TF with build 1, and switch to build 2 for the big bad if need be.  Or I switch to build 2 to hit Adrenaline Boost+Buildup (w/Buildup Proc)+Gloom (w/Buildup Proc)+Energy Transfer and glory in numbers that I havent seen since long before ED.

 

Build 3:  Sometimes, 'generally tough enough' isnt tough enough.  The current version of Build 3 is Softcap with 1 in range, Incarnate Softcap when saturated, 90% Resist to Smash, Lethal, and Energy - and thats before incarnate buttons get hit.  Build 3 isnt slotted out yet (winter sets are pricey!) but the idea is to be able to be as survivable as possible.  Offense is sacrificed here - no procmongering, some attacks wear less than 6 slots... but offense isnt what that build is FOR.

 

It seems to me you would be well served to do a more-damage scrapper, a more-tough tank, and a balanced brute.. and then reassess from there.  I anticipate the builds will merge a bit over time, but it should give you something fun for whatever you want to do.

[marcussmythe]

27 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

That's precisely what I'm talking about. Thanks for saying it better than I did.

 

37 minutes ago, Mister Mass said:

Heh.  I have definitely suffered from “paralysis by analysis” on a few builds, wanting more information before deciding on a path, when doing anything would be better than doing nothing - especially nowadays when INF & respecs are plentiful- but I hate to make a move before garnering enough information to ascertain what is the “best” choice.  So I continue to play with a clearly suboptimal build, because I’m not sure which better build is the “best.”  Smart! 🙄

Been there.  Done that.  Have T-Shirt. 

 

What I tell myself is nothing will ever be perfect, and it certainly wont be perfect before it is played.  So I like to spend a day or two fiddling in mids, shopping other peoples ideas, copying some of the better builds I see on the forums and taking the parts that work best for me, and then hammering out a V1 that gets slotted and played.  Generally V1 will get respecced a couple of times, but after a month the build is usually settling down.   Also, Im finding second and third builds very freeing.  Build 1 doesnt have to do everything.  Hell, it doesnt have to do anything.  Build 1 should be FUN, full of powers that make me giggle and want to use them when I log in.  Ill use builds 2 and 3 for performance focused tasks.

[Troo]

Keep your build and use the alt builds to experiment. You ARE friggin demon, you can afford it!

[Bill Z Bubba]

24 minutes ago, Troo said:

Keep your build and use the alt builds to experiment. You ARE friggin demon, you can afford it!

Devil. 🙂

[Shred Monkey]

Ah.. the age old question.   "How do you define winning?"

 

Is it, I can solo 4x8 ITF in under 60 minutes?   Is it I bring the most (damage/support/taunt/control) to a team?

 

Do you want to run MsLTF solo?  or as a team in under 15 minutes?  Do you want to maximize inf/min? ..or xp/min?

 

Do you want to maximize fun?  And what the heck does that mean?

 

Ok.. that's the qualitative discussion... let's talk quantitative.... and by gosh if we're going to do this right, we need visual aids.  Take a look at the graph below.   I would propose that most of these questions bowel down to this model.  As you increase Damage you decrease Surviability.  And as you increase Survivability, you decrease Damage.   But the relationship is not a straight line it is an arc where at the highest extremes you give up a lot of one to gain a very little of the other.   And similarly, there is a point on the curve where you have the best of both worlds, maximizing the area of the rectangle defined by this equation: 

 

Awesomeness = Damage X Survivability 

 

 

Damage is pretty easily quantifiable, although there are a few variations.  Solo damage is not the same as Team damage.  AoE damage is not the same as Single Target damage.   And damage to a -1 Pylon is certainly not the same as damage in a 54x8 double spawn of Arachnos.

 

Survivability is more complicated.  Again there's a difference between team survivabilty and solo survivability.   You can quantify incoming damage that is mitigated with formulas and and calculations.  Some people have done this quite well.  But how do we account for enemy makeup, soft controls, hard controls, movement, and range?  

 

We also need to get a fix on mitigation from damage.  My tank can stand in the middle of a spawn of 54x8 badguys all day without taking a scratch, but my blaster can flatten that spawn in under 5 seconds.   So do we care at all about mitigation?   What about AV fights.   That same blaster has solo'd Babbage GM (with no -regen) but even level Infernal will beat him if no inspirations are used because he just hits too hard.  But with inspirations the fight will be under 2 minutes long, so who cares if i burn 2-4 inspirations out of a tray of 20?  The tank will take 7-10 minutes but not need inspirations.

 

I think the best test is purely empirical.   Someone comes up with a challenge, and we try it.  If we can't do it, we tweak our builds until we can.  Then someone comes up with a new challenge, and we try that.  Continue forever or until we get bored and or split into multiple challenge trees.