Another nail in the Brute coffin

[Paragon Vanguard]

2 minutes ago, WindDemon21 said:

As a standpoint, i think brutes really just need to have their defense/resist values to be in between tanks and scrappers, and maybe less reliance on fury by increasing base damage and lowering the fury bonus/max damage cap.

Which would change what Brutes are, albeit minutely, and that is the point of my above post. Once you start changing that, then another class will complain that they are no longer worthy, and where does it end? I have no problems with my brutes. I play many different combinations with them, and utilize them in different ways. They are one of the most versatile classes to be honest. It is why I always say, play a tank if you want to play a tank, when people complain that tanks are more uber ( I dont think so). Your suggestion would not be class breaking, but it would change it a bit. 

[Erratic1]

43 minutes ago, Paragon Vanguard said:

I just dont get why complain. If you like the tank class, then play it.

 

I just don't get why Sentinels complained so much. If they wanted to do ranged damage they should have just gone ahead and played a Blaster, right?

 

Doubt the above would have resulted in the changes currently being reviewed on the test server. Presumably people were playing Sentinels for the combination of things the class was advertised as having.

[Paragon Vanguard]

6 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

 

I just don't get why Sentinels complained so much. If they wanted to do ranged damage they should have just gone ahead and played a Blaster, right?

 

Doubt the above would have resulted in the changes currently being reviewed on the test server. Presumably people were playing Sentinels for the combination of things the class was advertised as having.

Think of your statement. What were brutes advertised as? Not tank in the real sense of tanks. They were not meant to match tanks in survivability, because they put out more damage (which can be survivability as well). Brutes are in fact brutes. I play them, prefer them over tanks for the most part. Sentinels were not performing as the class advertised from the start, though you could build them to be close, with lotsa cash. The OP complaint is that the brute cannot handle ranged attacks like a tank. Why should it? Truthfully, it can, but never the less, why should it? 
Now, with that said, it is my opinion as much as yours. My real point on any of these threads is where does it end? I see no problem with brutes, but I see problems arising when you start nerfing. Sentinel complaints were about sentinels not being what they were advertised as, not that they were not being blasters. 

[Erratic1]

1 hour ago, Paragon Vanguard said:

Think of your statement. What were brutes advertised as? Not tank in the real sense of tanks. They were not meant to match tanks in survivability, because they put out more damage (which can be survivability as well). Brutes are in fact brutes.

 

I have not asked for them to be Tanks. So bringing that up is meaningless.

[Arcadean]

It'll be fine. As all things, conquer the inane, overcome the challenge. If cautionary is not your thing on a brute, just work on other ATs. By the way, git gud is nonsense talk. Get weird, get - "creative". Take care!

[Paragon Vanguard]

6 hours ago, Erratic1 said:

 

I have not asked for them to be Tanks. So bringing that up is meaningless.

That is literally what the OP compared brutes to, and why brutes were dying. I literally mentioned tanks in the thread you quoted from. Can't get any more literal than that! Literally! 

So you seriously just wanted to talk about complaining and why it benefits people, out of context of what I posted about? That's strange on a thread about brutes being overshadowed by tanks, but okay. I agree, the squeaky wheel gets the oil. I have never been much of a complainer, and always see pointless complaining as people trying to vent against their own shortcomings in one form or another, but then, we can see other people's complaining as pointless even if the other person does not. It runs into something of a psychological study, and can bring up.....are we really doing this here?   

 

Just messing with  you, its all good. 🙂 

[Erratic1]

2 hours ago, Paragon Vanguard said:

That is literally what the OP compared brutes to, and why brutes were dying. I literally mentioned tanks in the thread you quoted from. Can't get any more literal than that! Literally! 

 

The conversation has moved a bit over the last 11 pages. Most of my objection has been to the damage Tankers put out.

 

Quote

So you seriously just wanted to talk about complaining and why it benefits people, out of context of what I posted about?

 

No, I  wanted to talk about where the conversation most recently was, not where it got started. 😛

[kelika2]

11 hours ago, Erratic1 said:

I just don't get why Sentinels complained so much. If they wanted to do ranged damage they should have just gone ahead and played a Blaster, right?

Blaster is ranged damage/melee damage

Scrapper is melee damage/armor

Sentinel is ranged damage/armor

There is also the target limits on sentinels wait what board am i on

[Erratic1]

7 minutes ago, kelika2 said:

Blaster is ranged damage/melee damage

Scrapper is melee damage/armor

Sentinel is ranged damage/armor

There is also the target limits on sentinels wait what board am i on

 

Amazingly, I am aware of what set categories the various ATs get.