Buff Brutes... or Nerf Tanks.

[Bill Z Bubba]

1 minute ago, Infinitum said:

Because they arent

 

Truth. Just like sentinels, brutes are superior on the way up to the top, and just like sents, once there, become surpassed by their cousins completely because of IOs.

[ScarySai]

I still consider competently built brutes better than tanks overall.

 

That said, I'd love to see that very strange damage cap nerf undone. Reducing it because fury was easier to cap is weird, because well played brutes don't have fury issues, especially solo.

[Infinitum]

1 minute ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

Truth. Just like sentinels, brutes are superior on the way up to the top, and just like sents, once there, become surpassed by their cousins completely because of IOs.

Only they aren't surpassed in reality and demonstration.

[America's Angel]

I would be very surprised if a global proc nerf happens. Implementing something like that would show a tremendous lack of understanding of granular game balance. (Plus, as @Sovera said above, a blanket nerf to procs doesn't seem in keeping with how the devs typically operate, which is to look at new ideas in incredible detail.)

 

What's more likely is that a few problem combos (burn and double/triple-proccing, build up and gaussian, etc) will be looked at. Possibly also the use of AoEs to guarantee self-buff procs. But ST damage procs? Numina/miracle/etc procs? Performance shifter procs? Power Transfer procs? -Res procs? LOTG procs? They're all performing fine as they are, in that they allow for diverse building options. Nerfing any of them would make the game worse (by reducing building options, and therefore increasing build hegemony at level 50).

 

The only genuine balance issue with damage procs is how they interact with you at the damage cap. If your well-made blaster eats 3 or 4 big reds, they hit the damage cap, and damage procs let them go over this. The solution here isn't to nerf procs. The solution here is to make it harder to hit the damage cap. Procs are only a "must have" if you can self-cap your damage bonus. If you can't do this, then procs become a tradeoff - you either pick procs or you pick set bonuses. Tradeoffs are good. They're balanced. The issue right now is that red inspirations are skewing the balance of that tradeoff towards procs.

 

In short...

 

Your friends:
 

 

Your enemies:
   

[arcane]

Yeah I mean if niche circumstances or fun factor or roleplay scenarios mean an AT isn’t obsolete, sure. If you’re using the word loosely to express the overarching truth that brutes lose the pro/con analysis against their closest relative archetype a solid majority of the time? Yes, they are obsolete.

[PeregrineFalcon]

10 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

And maybe the most important part of the discussion that's come out is that the game itself may have been broken across the board with IOs.

To be specific, I think the problem is that IOs really benefit some ATs and not others.

 

Add IOs to a squishy Blaster and he becomes as tough as a Sentinel but with twice the damage. But can a Sentinel focus on +damage and raise their damage to Blaster level? NOPE. Can a Tanker, who doesn't need more mitigation, raise his damage? NOPE.

 

The Scrapper, oddly enough, can both significantly increase their damage and their mitigation with IOs, and they're the only AT that can do that. Brutes, because of their low damage scalar, are even less affected by IO damage buffs that every other AT, except Masterminds.

 

My Empathy defender can get IOs that will increase the strength of her heals, but can my bubbler get an IO set, or special IO, that will make her bubbles stronger? NOPE. Dark defender special IO to increase their debuffs? NOPE. But that dark defender can get perma-Hasten or get soft-capped.

 

So the problem is that some ATs have problems that IOs can address while others do not. AT specific IO sets could fix that, but so far that hasn't been done. Except for Scrappers.

[ScarySai]

1 minute ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

To be specific, I think the problem is that IOs really benefit some ATs and not others.

To be more accurate, it benefits certain powersets more than others.

 

An ice blaster gets way more out of procs than a fire blaster, but the fire blaster also doesn't really need them to do scary things.

[Brutal Justice]

18 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

Add IOs to a squishy Blaster and he becomes as tough as a Sentinel but with twice the damage. But can a Sentinel focus on +damage and raise their damage to Blaster level? NOPE. Can a Tanker, who doesn't need more mitigation, raise his damage? NOPE.

 

Add a defense hard cap to prevent the blaster from getting there.  

[Brutal Justice]

30 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

And then there is this... Lets see how many crazy notions we can fit in one thread.  Whats the record?   Anyone??

 

Some notions are actually based around numbers.  

[ScarySai]

 

[arcane]

7 hours ago, America's Angel said:

I imagine it would do even better with a dedicated PvE build.

Also wanted to point out this is likely the opposite of the truth since PvE builds actually, ya know, spend power choices and slots on AoE's. PvP builds are the supreme single target builds.

[Apparition]

2 hours ago, ScarySai said:

To be more accurate, it benefits certain powersets more than others.

 

An ice blaster gets way more out of procs than a fire blaster, but the fire blaster also doesn't really need them to do scary things.

 

It is both.  What you said is true, but it is also true that Defenders and Tankers can much more easily load up on damage procs without compromising (or at least not greatly compromising), their personal defenses than Corruptors and Brutes.

[PeregrineFalcon]

1 hour ago, Brutal Justice said:

Add a defense hard cap to prevent the blaster from getting there.  

Look, I realize that this is your thing. The thing that you reflexively post in response to anything. But, this has literally nothing to do with what we're talking about.

 

This thread, just in case you missed it, is about buffing Brutes or nerfing Tanks. Blasters, and the defense hard cap, has nothing to do with this.

 

Try to stay on target, Red Five.

[Brutal Justice]

6 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

Look, I realize that this is your thing. The thing that you reflexively post in response to anything. But, this has literally nothing to do with what we're talking about.

 

This thread, just in case you missed it, is about buffing Brutes or nerfing Tanks. Blasters, and the defense hard cap, has nothing to do with this.

 

Try to stay on target, Red Five.

 

Uh... I was responding to you talking about blasters and sentinels.  

 

My initial post was about scrappers and their tankiness squeezing brutes out of their roll.  I see that as more of an issue than buffing brutes or nerfing tanks.  Even before the tank buffs, once you reached that tipping point of durability on a scrapper, you generally had to jump to a tank to complete the next level.  Unless teamed of course because brutes can be buffed close to a tank.  The tank buffs put more of a squeeze on from the top that wasn’t there before, but scrappers have always squeezed more from the bottom.  

 

If a tank used to occupy the top 10% and after the buffs now occupies the top 20%, and a scrapper occupies the bottom 75%, leaving the brute with a mere 5%, then the scrapper is too high.  The tank buffs encroached on the brutes leaving them little space, but it’s the scrappers who encroach the most.  At least with super reflexes.  

 

I believe the numbers to be much more balanced in a resistance setting.  Which is why I advocate for a defense cap to balance across archetypes and within scrapper/stalker secondaries.  

 

Its just convenient that blasters and sentinels are having the same issues and can be addressed with the same response.  

[ScarySai]

That idea is terrible and you genuinely need to give up on it, especially in a totally unrelated thread like this.

[Ukase]

17 hours ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

Yea, seriously. When you're down to "well, they rock in AE" but might as well go with one of the other two for everything else, there's a problem that needs fixin.

 

There need be no nerf to tanks if brutes get the buffs requested.

Who says this, though? Brutes are excellent outside of AE as well as within them. You just have to be creative in the slotting. No one size fits all, of course, but brutes are fantastic as is. And so are tanks. I really encourage you to not listen to these people, whomever they are, because they clearly are only using anecdotal evidence, which can't be trusted anymore than a pylon test. Pylons don't move. They don't do much of anything. Heck, I don't even think they debuff. 

And you can't just look at a brute or a tank at incarnate levels. What about level 15? Level 35? Level 27? Level 40? I am growing weary of all these folks looking at an AT fully incarnated and making a judgement call when that's only a fraction of the equation. You can't discount the folks that play non-AE content to level 50. Their experience with any given brute or tank counts, too. And because most everyone slots differently, the experiences will be different, as will the judgement calls. 

Neither brutes, nor tanks need adjustment. Scrappers could use some more aggro management, but it's clear from some dude named powerhouse they're not gonna get it. I just won't play them much anymore. Problem solved. 

[Bill Z Bubba]

To be fair, many of us have veered of into "well, crap, is ANYTHING around here balanced" land as we often do in these threads.

 

I have, I admit, a pretty damn rigid view of game balance when archetypes are involved. But that was born from when this game was, to me, "I'm the scrapper and my brother's the tank." This is how we roll. I'm fine with him being a ton tougher cuz he can't even come close to the damage I dish out.

 

Then the IO system was thrown in and the sudden power leap (no creep here, it was immediate and insane) it provided shook things up.

 

And then Going Rogue came along and the insane turned into full tilt, gassed up WTF land. I actually moved my main and beloved BZB Scrap to another server and rebuilt him as a brute because the brute was far tougher and its damage output was so close to the scrapper that the brute had to win. Had nothing to do with playstyle difference or feel... it was just the facts, man. How was that fixed? Scrappers got 2 AT IOs that buffed their crit rate. More power creep. They could have fixed brutes and dropped their damage level putting them closer to the halfway mark between scrappers and tanks. And then tanks get buffed. More powercreep. They get buffed to the point that leaves me in identical position that the previous bad decisions left me in. Sure, my tank is slower than my brute but he gets to survive things that the brute can not. And the difference between those two states are not equitable. Yea, this is a problem for me and it doesn't look like it's a problem only for me.

Yea, ok, I know that claws is a ... unique set due to just how far away from the standard powerset equations it sits, but between the brute/scrap/tank versions, it is in no way dramatically different. The ST chain is still Followup->Focus->Slash->repeat and needs the same amount of recharge in FU to pull it off. The AoE chain is one attack different, FU->Spin->Shockwave->repeat on the scrapper, FU->Focus->Spin->Shockwave->repeat on the brute and tank. (Yes, I know, better attack chains exist due to either loading up with damage procs, and on a scrapper, putting eviscerate into the mix due to its higher than normal crit rate, but they ain't as sexy.) It IS apples to apples but it is also a study of Granny Smith, Fuji or Red Delicious apples. And that study still applies to every other combo shared by the three archetypes.

 

Is my view myopic on archetype balance? I would actually say yes if it weren't for the 10+ other full IOed/T4/etc characters I run. Across all ATs. I'm not coming into this blind of the capabilities of other powersets. You can call me many things and probably be right, but I ain't no n00b.

[Bill Z Bubba]

5 minutes ago, Ukase said:

Pylons don't move. They don't do much of anything. Heck, I don't even think they debuff. 

 

AVs do. And I fight a ton of them regularly. Guess what? The performance I see against a pylon on the overall is mirrored fighting AVs. Imagine that.

[Myrmidon]

4 hours ago, arcane said:

Oh I’m not the kind of guy to imply that any of my characters are being rendered useless. That’s just hyperbole. But the number of respecs and rebuilds I could have to go through could be staggering and tiresome.

As someone that just went through a respec for every single active character, I can definitely relate.

[Brutal Justice]

3 minutes ago, ScarySai said:

That idea is terrible and you genuinely need to give up on it, especially in a totally unrelated thread like this.

 

Its not unrelated.  I have given the numbers in support of my proposition.  All I have received in return is “no”.  You want me to give up on it?  Then show me where my math was wrong.  Show me how any toon with 45% defense takes only 101 damage at +4, while a scrapper at 75% resistance takes 252 damage under the same circumstances.   How a 40% defense hard cap increases that 101 to 202, which is still lower than 75% resistance.  Show me the math that balances 101 to equal 252.

[Wavicle]

I’m sorry, anybody who thinks that brutes are obsolete because tankers now do acceptable damage has a really twisted way of looking at the game and should just be ignored. Brutes are fine. They were always monsters and they still are.

[Bill Z Bubba]

22 minutes ago, Ukase said:

I just won't play them much anymore. Problem solved. 

 

Sounds like problem caused to me. But I get the point, don't like X play Y and move on. But if I like 10 things about X and only have 1 thing I don't like, what's wrong with trying to get that 1 thing dealt with?

 

8 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

I’m sorry, anybody who thinks that brutes are obsolete because tankers now do acceptable damage has a really twisted way of looking at the game and should just be ignored. Brutes are fine. They were always monsters and they still are.

 

I'd kinda agree but that's not what's being discussed here by most of us. Edit: How can brutes be obsolete when I'm using one to PL another right now?

Edited May 20, 2021 by Bill Z Bubba

[Bopper]

 

Black lines are at 95% (3 SOs) and 175% (3 SOs + Build Up).

Brutes at 80% Fury do 44% and 25% more damage than Tanks at those lines, respectivley.

At the caps, the Brute is 10.5% more damage than Tanks. Granted, the only way to hit those numbers are by eating inspirations and/or have teammates buffing you like crazy. In these scenarios, the Tanker's AoE is likely superflous as the trash will quickly be dead anyways, and the extra survivability is likely superflous as the insps/buffs will have you close to or over most of the needed thresholds (same for brutes, you're likely over these thresholds if you're eating insps or have massive team buffs).

 

There are some exceptions to getting close to the cap without outside help based on powersets and incarnates like double stacking rage, cycling meltdown and adrenal booster, and having Assault Core Hybrid. However, those are mostly exceptions.

[Bill Z Bubba]

hey, @Bopper ... can you do a similar graph for mitigation?

[Bopper]

Just now, Bill Z Bubba said:

hey, @Bopper ... can you do a similar graph for mitigation?

Maybe. But it's a lot of variables and inverse relationships, so it would be a lot of work (especially trying to visualize it for you in a graph, at best I can maybe show something with 4-D representation). But at the caps it's pretty simple, Brutes can hit the same Defense/Resistance thresholds, so the capped HP is the main difference which is about 90% of a tank's.