Buff Brutes... or Nerf Tanks.

[Bill Z Bubba]

2 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

Yes it as, unless you have a scrapper that can res cap at 90

 

No, it isn't unless you have a brute that can hard cap resistance to all damage types 100% of the time while solo. Which, of course, you can't.

[Leo_G]

2 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

Don't care. Each AT should do its value of damage regardless of the power chosen. Full stop.

 

 

My knowledge of pain far exceeds anything even remotely related to gaming or computers or philosophy, thanks much.

 

You're either complaining that attack modifiers shouldn't exist and each individual power's effects should be separate or that you looked under the hood when you shouldn't have.  The reason caps exist at all is due to modifiers.

 

And jokes aside, I'm not self-diagnosed with OCD so in the real of this game, none of that matters, please and pardon. 

[Arbegla]

5 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

No, it isn't unless you have a brute that can hard cap resistance to all damage types 100% of the time while solo. Which, of course, you can't.

 

But you can't do that with Tankers either.. Granted, you can get closer then a brute can.

[Bill Z Bubba]

1 minute ago, Brutal Justice said:

I’ve been waiting for one of our math gurus to jump in.  Using the math, how long on average does the 45% defense toon with 1500 hp last and how long does the 75% resist toon last?

 

Good question to ask, as long as you also ask how long the 45% defense toon with 2000 hp lasts versus the 90% resist toon with 2000 hp.

[macskull]

"Things that aren't tanks and brutes should have a lower cap on defense" is a poor argument because it completely ignores both differences in resistance caps and differences in base and max hit points. A Blaster with 45% defense is not as survivable as a Tanker with 45% defense, for example. In most cases, the Tanker would be at least 50% more survivable simply by virtue of having a much larger HP pool. 

[Bill Z Bubba]

1 minute ago, Leo_G said:

 

You're either complaining that attack modifiers shouldn't exist and each individual power's effects should be separate or that you looked under the hood when you shouldn't have.  The reason caps exist at all is due to modifiers.

 

And jokes aside, I'm not self-diagnosed with OCD so in the real of this game, none of that matters, please and pardon. 

 

I'm only stating that all AT modifiers should be applied to all powers used by said AT. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Bill Z Bubba]

2 minutes ago, Arbegla said:

 

But you can't do that with Tankers either.. Granted, you can get closer then a brute can.

 

A lot closer. And with a much smaller margin of difference in overall damage output. Thus the OP.

[Bopper]

7 hours ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

Don't care. Each AT should do its value of damage regardless of the power chosen. Full stop.

Full stop on what exactly? I'm just telling you how something works.

Page 4 gave:
Tankers 0.95 melee (from 0.80), 0.80 ranged (from 0.50), and epics swapped to ranged modifiers (0.80 to 0.80).

Brutes 0.75 melee (unchanged), 0.75 ranged (from 0.50), and epics swapped to ranged modifiers (0.75 to 0.75).

 

Your statement also doesn't make sense, are you suggesting there shouldn't be separate melee/ranged modifiers? Or are you suggesting epics for brutes/tankers should still use melee modifiers despite the fact they're all ranged attacks? This would of course buff tankers considerably.

Edited May 21, 2021 by Bopper

[Widower]

Hello. Please be civil with each other. Thanks.

[Brutal Justice]

4 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

Good question to ask, as long as you also ask how long the 45% defense toon with 2000 hp lasts versus the 90% resist toon with 2000 hp.

 

I would love to see this answer as well

 

edit.  With my average it showed them taking exactly the same dps. 50 dps at even level.  101 dps at +4

Edited May 20, 2021 by Brutal Justice

[Bopper]

8 minutes ago, Brutal Justice said:

 

So with Boppers probability numbers you have a 7.55% chance of taking 150dps with 45% defense?

 

Does the 75% resist scrapper have a 50% chance of taking 125 dps?

 

is that right @Bopper?

 

I’ve been waiting for one of our math gurus to jump in.  Using the math, how long on average does the 45% defense toon with 1500 hp last and how long does the 75% resist toon last?

I'll have to look some other time. I got too many things I'm working on at the moment. 

[Bill Z Bubba]

2 minutes ago, Bopper said:

Full stop on what exactly? I'm just telling you how something works.

Page 4 gave:
Tankers 0.95 melee (from 0.80), 0.80 ranged (from 0.50), and epics swapped to ranged modifiers (0.80 to 0.80).

Brutes 0.75 melee (unchanged), 0.75 ranged (from 0.75), and epics swapped to ranged modifiers (0.75 to 0.75).

 

Your statement also doesn't make sense, are you suggesting there shouldn't be separate melee/ranged modifiers? Or are you suggesting epics for brutes/tankers should still use melee modifiers despite the fact they're all ranged attacks? This would of course buff tankers considerably.

 

No, I'm suggesting at no time should any power X AT has access to should use something other than the base AT modifier for range or melee. If I have 1 as my melee modifier, every melee attack I have access to should have a mod of 1. If I have .75 as my ranged modifier, every ranged attack I have access to should be at .75.

[Arbegla]

17 minutes ago, Brutal Justice said:

 

I would love to see this answer as well

 

edit.  With my average it showed them taking exactly the same dps. 50 dps at even level.  101 dps at +4

 

So, because we've over taxed @Bopper I'm just going to steal his guide.

I'm at work, so I can't really tinker with it, but it might help answer your questions about things, and I trust the math underneath to show things correctly.

 

edit: The DPS in this guide is from a single source, not multiple. I'm not sure if Bopper wants to address that or not, as it is very rare you will face 1 single source of damage..

Edited May 20, 2021 by Arbegla

[Bopper]

1 minute ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

No, I'm suggesting at no time should any power X AT has access to should use something other than the base AT modifier for range or melee. If I have 1 as my melee modifier, every melee attack I have access to should have a mod of 1. If I have .75 as my ranged modifier, every ranged attack I have access to should be at .75.

Ok, so you're saying you like how it's now set up? Epic ranged attacks use ranged modifiers. Pool ranged attacks use ranged modifiers. Pool melee attacks use melee modifiers. And primary/secondary attacks use melee modifiers on everything since its a melee AT (unless you want powers like Focus to use ranged modifiers).

[Naraka]

8 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

I'm only stating that all AT modifiers should be applied to all powers used by said AT. Nothing more, nothing less.

Wouldn't that disrupt the balance of ATs that use varying damage modifiers?  Speaking mostly on Blasters, Dominators and Defenders.  I suppose one could just shift everything to their "best" modifier but that seems wholly unnecessary for a push to simplify the game.  If anything, the game is TOO simple.  The whole complexity of the game hinges on having many variables to juggle on the player's part.

[Naraka]

10 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

No, I'm suggesting at no time should any power X AT has access to should use something other than the base AT modifier for range or melee. If I have 1 as my melee modifier, every melee attack I have access to should have a mod of 1. If I have .75 as my ranged modifier, every ranged attack I have access to should be at .75.

Okay, so how it's set up now then.

 

That some ATs were using melee modifiers for ranged attacks was kinda dumb in the first place.  Heck, that some sets in the Primary or Secondary arbitrarily using the melee mod rather than the ranged mod (despite accepting ranged IOs) is the only exception that exist still.

 

Frankly, I wouldn't be opposed to buffing the damage and rech of Focus/Impale/Shockwave/Throw Spines/Focused Burst/Repulsing Torrent/Serpent's Reach/Hurl/Hurl Boulder in exchange for making them ranged attacks.  In certain circumstances, you could buff the ranged damage mod of one of the melee's to give that AT a niche advantage while using specific powers separate from their overall role tier.  Like what if they reversed some of the damage buff on Tanker's melee mod back but boost their ranged instead?  Overall nerf but could add to their niche (what does an actual rl tank even do?).

[arcane]

1 hour ago, Wavicle said:

But damage output is more valuable than mitigation, ultimately. And so the fact that the tank is further ahead on mitigation than the brute is on damage doesn’t matter.

 

edit: By doesn’t matter I mean they are still balanced despite it. I don’t mean it’s meaningless.

This has been a point of mine in the past: that we don’t know that the perceived inequity matters because who says the two variables are best interpreted as a linear equation? We don’t know - it just makes some intuitive sense. Your post basically makes this claim (that the relationships between damage and mitigation aren’t perfectly linear because one is of higher value). Problem is: it’s a subjective claim.

 

You may ask: why am I on the other side of the fence now? I’ll tell you why: I’ve been making an awful lot of tankers since Bill first started this argument.

Edited May 20, 2021 by arcane

[siolfir]

4 minutes ago, Naraka said:

Okay, so how it's set up now then.

Not really, because the ranged attacks in melee sets use the melee modifier - and you could make an argument that PBAoEs in ranged sets should use the melee modifier, when they're currently using the ranged modifier, although that's not something I'd worry about.

 

I think Dominators already have this settled since the Assault sets were designed from the ground up as mixed, but I haven't gone through power-by-power to check for exceptions.

[Naraka]

3 minutes ago, siolfir said:

Not really, because the ranged attacks in melee sets use the melee modifier - and you could make an argument that PBAoEs in ranged sets should use the melee modifier, when they're currently using the ranged modifier, although that's not something I'd worry about.

 

I think Dominators already have this settled since the Assault sets were designed from the ground up as mixed, but I haven't gone through power-by-power to check for exceptions.

 

I'm aware (for the most part) of the exceptions.  I just didn't want to go through and list out the specifics like blast set nukes and such.  Like I said, that could be a point of rebalance to make the ATs have more niche advantages without specifically just buffing the AT wholesale.  In the case of the PBAoEs and nukes in ranged sets, if they decided to change them to use melee mods (I always assumed they did but I guess I was wrong there) Blasters wouldn't see much of a change but Defenders, I believe, would see a nerf.  To give Defenders a boost, what if they made their melee mod 0.80 instead while making those particular blast sets with PBAoEs shift to that mod?  You might see a shift in the meta to favor certain blast sets among blast sets that have PBAoE nukes (most of them) and shifting to maximize those powers (although I think Electric and Rad are the only blast sets that have a PBAoE attack and nuke).  Sentinel could also be a point of rebalancing in the damage dept here.

 

On the melee front, would people be opposed to shifting Stalker ranged mod to be equal to Scrapper melee mod?

[Brutal Justice]

29 minutes ago, Arbegla said:

 

So, because we've over taxed @Bopper I'm just going to steal his guide.

I'm at work, so I can't really tinker with it, but it might help answer your questions about things, and I trust the math underneath to show things correctly.

 

edit: The DPS in this guide is from a single source, not multiple. I'm not sure if Bopper wants to address that or not, as it is very rare you will face 1 single source of damage..

 

Thank you for this.  I ran some simple numbers through this tool because it's all I have time for at the moment.  All using 1000dps.

 

A scrapper with 45% defense, 0% res will last 30s at even level.  14s at +4

A scrapper with 0% defense, 75% res will last 11.2s at even level. 5.43s at +4

 

A tanker at 45% defense, 0% res will last 44.42s at even level.  20.15s at +4

A tanker at 0% defense, 90% res will last 44.42s at even level.  20.15s at +4

 

A blaster with 45% defense, 0% res will last 26.79s at even level.  12.58 at +4

 

A scrapper at 40% defense, 0% res will last 14.18s at even level.  6.83s at +4

 

These are the numbers I got putting in 45% defense to melee and 75-90% res to smashing.  The soft capped scrapper lasts almost 3 times longer than the hard capped resistance scrapper.  The 40% defense scrapper lasted 1.4 seconds longer than the 75% resistance scrapper.  The blaster lasted 15s longer than the scrapper.  This also matches my in-game experiences.  

 

It appears to me that the 40% hard cap would actually bring some balance.  

[Arbegla]

6 minutes ago, Brutal Justice said:

 

Thank you for this.  I ran some simple numbers through this tool because it's all I have time for at the moment.  All using 1000dps.

 

A scrapper with 45% defense, 0% res will last 30s at even level.  14s at +4

A scrapper with 0% defense, 75% res will last 11.2s at even level. 5.43s at +4

 

A tanker at 45% defense, 0% res will last 44.42s at even level.  20.15s at +4

A tanker at 0% defense, 90% res will last 44.42s at even level.  20.15s at +4

 

A blaster with 45% defense, 0% res will last 26.79s at even level.  12.58 at +4

 

A scrapper at 40% defense, 0% res will last 14.18s at even level.  6.83s at +4

 

These are the numbers I got putting in 45% defense to melee and 75-90% res to smashing.  The soft capped scrapper lasts almost 3 times longer than the hard capped resistance scrapper.  The 40% defense scrapper lasted 1.4 seconds longer than the 75% resistance scrapper.  The blaster lasted 15s longer than the scrapper.  This also matches my in-game experiences.  

 

It appears to me that the 40% hard cap would actually bring some balance.  

 

Though, that is from a single source, which basically never happens. And that is the pitfall of the guide, and the math used.

 

Multiple sources makes things really scary for defense. Single sources, not so much.

[Mezmera]

I think there's just a mindset of competition between the two AT's that once one gets a leg up on the other they get envious, which brutes had for a longer time, tanks now are a bit better overall imo because if we needed a tanky toon on the team I'd rather have the tank that's likely to do better with something like say Lord Recluse with less of a build than a Brute would require.  

 

I only hop on my tank once in a while when the team specifically needs the tank.  I also have a brute I haven't touched in ages, but when I did play it I'd run ahead of the tank and they'd get mad "I'd kick you because you're endangering the team, but you're not dieing", eventually I'd get kicked because I want to keep my engine running but being still in the map I just finished the mission for them.  Now when I play my dom that way what do they have to say when the dom is out-tanking the tank?  Nothing, they just need to up their game.  

 

Being aggressive and staying fighting is what keeps the brute engine running where it's just easy to be the tank.  I definitely don't think Brutes need buffed and I don't have any Tanker envy so I think this whole topic is moot when there's other things needing addressed.  

 

And no to the idea of nerfing defense caps.   

Edited May 20, 2021 by Mezmera

[Infinitum]

1 hour ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

No, it isn't unless you have a brute that can hard cap resistance to all damage types 100% of the time while solo. Which, of course, you can't.

Some can get as close as the equivalent tanker - close enough to not matter.

[Infinitum]

15 minutes ago, Brutal Justice said:

It appears to me that the 40% hard cap would actually bring some balance.  

And you would be just as wrong as the previous 10k times you have posted it.

[Naraka]

10 minutes ago, Mezmera said:

I think there's just a mindset of competition between the two AT's that once one gets a leg up on the other, which brutes had for a longer time, tanks now are a bit better overall imo because if we needed a tanky toon on the team I'd rather have the tank that's likely to do better with something like say Lord Recluse with less of a build than a Brute would require.  

 

 

For the most part, I agree with your premise.  The only issue I have with current Tanker, as I pointed out during the beta changes, is they shifted its meta toward DPS.  With the damage buff (sacrificing the AoE and target caps, in some cases), they facilitate making brutish Tankers.  If they decided to just reign back the damage mod to 0.75 or 0.7 but increase their AoE back to a square % across the board (even the 15ft PBAoEs), would Tankers still have some niche while keeping Brutes in the same realm of DPS-focused tank that differentiates both ATs?