Claws: an accounting of the moon math that makes this set tick

[Vanden]

So maybe you've played a Claws Scrapper and thought, "Hey, this set is pretty good." But how good is it, really? Turns out, if flaunting the damage formulas were a crime, Claws would be Lord Nemesis. I went and ran the numbers on all the Claws powers, and what I found made my head spin.

 

First, a note: all Claws powers have a 20% discount on end cost and recharge time. This is basically Claws' "secondary effect," since this is a set from back when a secondary effect was something that every power in a set was expected to share. That means that the recharge times and end costs of the powers are only 80% of what the math would want... but we'll quickly see that math has little power over Claws to begin with.

 

Scrapper Claws

 

Power	In-Game Recharge	Source Recharge	Expected Damage Scale	In-Game Damage Scale	Difference
Swipe	1.7	2.125	0.7	0.76	▲ ~8.6%
Strike	3.2	4	1	1.08	▲ 8%
Slash	4.8	6	1.32	1.32	0%
Spin	9.2	11.5	1	1.58	▲ 58%
Follow Up	12	15	2.76	0.8	▼ ~71%
Focus	6.4	8	1.64	1.39	▼ ~15.24%
Eviscerate	8.87	11.0875	1.7	1.99	▲ ~17
Shockwave	12.1	15.125	1.099	1.05	▼ ~4.5%

 

Wow, that's all over the place! Obviously Follow Up doesn't do much damage, since the point of the power is the damage boost, but outside of that everything except Slash is a little off the mark. Of particular note is that Spin is way out of line. Keep that in mind if you ever ask why some other PBAoE attack isn't more like Spin; Spin probably cheats on its taxes or something, and other powers don't need that kind of heat.

 

But we're not done yet! Claws is on 3 other ATs as well. Let's see how they look...

 

Stalker Claws

 

Power	In-Game Recharge	Source Recharge	Expected Damage Scale	In-Game Damage Scale	Difference
Swipe	1.7	2.125	0.7	.908	▲ ~30%
Strike	3.2	4	1	1.156	▲ 15.6%
Slash	4.8	6	1.32	1.412	▲ ~7%
Focus	6.4	8	1.64	1.487	▼ ~9.3%
Eviscerate	8.87	11.0875	2.134	2.23	▲ ~1%
Shockwave	12.1	15.125	1.099	1.113	▲ ~1.3%

 

Well that looks nothing like Scrapper claws if you ask me. Now, the reason Claws doesn't quite follow the damage formula is that when it got its rebalance, they adjusted the damage of the powers taking into account animation time, using a different damage formula that no one can seem to agree on what it was. Maybe the reason it's unclear what the new formula was is because they used a different one for the different ATs. I don't have the answer, that's for sure.

 

It looks like since the set doesn't have Spin, all the other powers got buffed in exchange, like the Marvel Zombies devouring Galactus and gaining his power. What's most interesting to me is that this is another set that's arguably better on Stalkers that has a non-Build Up type power outside of Stalkers, but here it's not because Build Up is better than whatever the set otherwise has, the attacks are just plain stronger. Another possibility is that this is a Power Siphon/Staff Mastery situation; the Stalker version of Kinetic Melee loses Power Siphon, but has its -Damage effect on permanently, and Stalker Staff Fighting loses Staff Mastery, but gets to be in permanent Form of the Body mode anyway. So perhaps since Claws lost Follow Up for Build Up on Stalkers, they buffed the base damage of the powers. I prefer the Galactus theory, myself.

 

If there's one thing to take away from this chart, it's this: Stalker Eviscerate should be buffed. They changed it from a cone to a single-target attack when they ported the set to Stalkers, I think to give Claws a decent non-AS attack to use to get a guaranteed critical from Hide, but then the moon math of the rebalance came and apparently messed all that up. Losing its AoE should have made Eviscerate about 25% stronger, but it's only about 12% stronger.

 

Well, two more ATs to go! These last two are the same as each other, however.

 

Brute/Tanker Claws

 

Power	In-Game Recharge	Source Recharge	Expected Damage Scale	In-Game Damage Scale	Difference
Swipe	2.4	3	0.84	0.83	▼ ~1%
Strike	4.8	6	1.32	1.24	▼ ~6%
Slash	6.4	8	1.64	1.48	▼ ~9.76%
Spin	14	17.5	1.436	1.89	▲ ~31%
Follow Up	12	15	2.76	0.8	▼ ~71%
Focus	8	10	1.96	1.51	▼ ~23%
Eviscerate	12	15	2.199	2.181	▼ <1%
Shockwave	14.4	18	1.281	1.13	▼ ~11.8%

 

Well, now this is almost concerning. Other than Spin, which still beats up other PBAoE attacks for their lunch money, every single attack is weaker than you'd expect. But on closer examination, it's fairly consistent; the stronger an attack is, the more its fast animation results in a decrease in damage. But even Eviscerate, an attack widely considered to be too slow, is lower than expected. Still, the DPA of these attacks is fairly good all around, with the single-target attacks trending upward in DPA as they get stronger.

 

Well, I hope you found this interesting. If you take only one thing away from this post, make it this: buff Eviscerate on Stalkers.

 

Edited August 10, 2023 by Vanden
Got the numbers for Scrapper/Stalker Eviscerate a little wrong

[nihilii]

Very cool. I had no idea Stalker and Scrapper Claws weren't the same.

Weirdly enough, I find Brute/Tanker claws to be the best version. End is always solvable, and it doesn't take much recharge to be animation locked. So every extra point of damage scale with the same animation is a win.

Plus, higher base recharge also raises proc rates.

Don't get me started on the Tanker AoE buff. Spin is truly magnificent with a 12 feet radius.

[Bill Z Bubba]

I just don't know what to do with this information without knowing what frelling equations were used on the big overhaul. I'll admit the messiness of it all is quite a negative.

[Moonlighter]

Not looking at mention animation times is an oversight. I am sure the newer formulas take that into account. Especially with the high levels of recharge we can achieve. It's great that claws recharges faster, but that's only useful if they have select high DPA attacks they can leverage, or in claws case a stacking damage buff.

 

A bad attack recharging very quickly is still a bad attack.

 

Claws has three advantages; the stacking damage buff that gets better with recharge (to compensate for Build Up), Focus, and the fact that Shockwave is part of the single target rotation if you can handle the endurance cost.

 

The other thing about Claws is that its advantage, the stacking damage buff, is also a disadvantage since it means attacks in the set tend to have lower damage numbers and that damage buff dilutes and is diluted by other damage buffs.

 

(I don't know how you can say Shockwave is "down" since it's DPA is on par for a single target attack.)

 

Edit: I spaced and didn't acknowledge Spin as an advantage of the set. It is very good, especially with the damage bonuses.

Edited October 20, 2020 by Moonlighter

[Moonlighter]

While we are talking about claws, has Bill (who is arguably the one of the most knowledgeable about the set) or anyone else gotten a high damage Procpocolypse build to work with claws?

 

[Troo]

might be too high recharge

 

[Slithershot]

1 hour ago, Moonlighter said:

While we are talking about claws, has Bill (who is arguably the one of the most knowledgeable about the set) or anyone else gotten a high damage Procpocolypse build to work with claws?

 

Procs in spin are okay, but not really worth trying to proc monster it imo like you might with...say... rad. Like troo said, the PPM equations that are going on in the background definitely do not work in favor of claws recharge, specially if you have a defensive set that wants even higher recharge. I personally just put a purple set (armageddon) with a proc in spin and called it a day. 

 

I'm sure you could min/max to your hearts content and get something that functions better on certain sets like fire/claws if you really wanted to, though @Sovera would be the one to ask about that. 

 

All that having been said, the devs mentioned they're working on PPM so... who knows what to expect in the future. They could turn everything on its head. 

Edited October 20, 2020 by Pizzamurai

[Bill Z Bubba]

As already covered, my standard claws slotting is definitely not proc-monster guided.

Followup: A full AT IO set.

Slash: Hecatomb without the damage only and plus Achilles' Heel CF Res Debuff

Focus: Apocalypse without the damage only and plus Glad Jav CF Toxic

Shockwave: Ragnarok without the damage only plus KB-->KD (The scrapper currently has 5X Sup Scr Strike and a KB-->KD)

Spin: Armageddon without the damage only plus CF KD

 

I still don't use SW in my ST attack chain. End cost is just too high. FU, Focus, Slash, Repeat is always my goal.

Edited October 20, 2020 by Bill Z Bubba

[Vanden]

56 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

I still don't use SW in my ST attack chain. End cost is just too high. FU, Focus, Slash, Repeat is always my goal.

Didn't you say in some other post that you've never actually built a character that had enough recharge to pull this off?

[InvaderStych]

1 hour ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

Slash: Hecatomb without the damage only and plus Achilles' Heel CF Res Debuff

Focus: Apocalypse without the damage only and plus Glad Jav CF Toxic

Shockwave: Ragnarok without the damage only plus KB-->KD (The scrapper currently has 5X Sup Scr Strike and a KB-->KD)

Spin: Armageddon without the damage only plus CF KD

 

Wait.  That's a lot of varieties of Purple, I never new that Shockwave was marked as targeted AoE.  Not that I gave it much thought, but I would have assumed regular melee cone.  That might make Claws the most "Purple-Able" of the Scrapper Primaries.  Sure, a couple can double dip in a single power - like Greater Psi Blade taking Melee/Holds can double dip the Epic dmg Procs - but I can't think of another primary that gets a Ranged power and a Targeted AoE power.

 

Interesting.

 

[Vanden]

5 minutes ago, InvaderStych said:

I can't think of another primary that gets a Ranged power and a Targeted AoE power.

Kinetic Melee

[Bill Z Bubba]

48 minutes ago, Vanden said:

Didn't you say in some other post that you've never actually built a character that had enough recharge to pull this off?

Sort of. It takes 313% in Followup to do it 100% seamlessly. I currently have 286.12% without any other recharge buffs. Mids is showing that FU recharges in 3.11 and needs 2.904. So I currently have a .2 sec gap.

 

Edit: Which, since I silenced the Not Ready sound, I can live with.

Edited October 20, 2020 by Bill Z Bubba

[aethereal]

1 hour ago, Vanden said:

Kinetic Melee

I believe that Spines does too.

[BrandX]

2 hours ago, aethereal said:

I believe that Spines does too.

It does and I couldn't believe it was forgotten and Kinetic Melee was mentioned first.  😛

[Vanden]

Spines? Is that new?

[InvaderStych]

22 minutes ago, BrandX said:

It does and I couldn't believe it was forgotten and Kinetic Melee was mentioned first.  😛

 

Ugh, freaking Throw Spines.  I should have remembered that.  Kinetic, ok, I only played that for a minute so easy to forget what could go where, but I spent an embarrassing number of hours with a Spines/DA scrapper back in the Long, Long Ago.

 

😛

 

[Bill Z Bubba]

Correction from earlier, Thanks to Time Lord's Boon, I've got 196.25% global + 99.87% slotting recharge buff. Still short a bit but even closer!

Hit another pylon. 2:50 with assault enabled.

Edited October 20, 2020 by Bill Z Bubba

[Bill Z Bubba]

So they completely nerf stalker claws' aoe down to a single cone but stalker savage melee gets a cone, a pbaoe and a tport pbaoe? Ummmm, what?

[ClawsandEffect]

Bill, just food for thought here. 

 

I went Spiritual Alpha on my main Claws/WP brute and my recharge in Follow Up is around 124% enhancement. 

 

Pretty sure with your other slotting that would make your desired chain completely seamless. 

 

It would slightly bump your passive Regen too. 

[Bill Z Bubba]

13 hours ago, ClawsandEffect said:

Bill, just food for thought here. 

 

I went Spiritual Alpha on my main Claws/WP brute and my recharge in Follow Up is around 124% enhancement. 

 

Pretty sure with your other slotting that would make your desired chain completely seamless. 

 

It would slightly bump your passive Regen too. 

True but overall DPS would suffer due to lack of musculature.