Another nail in the Brute coffin

[Sovera]

9 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

I honestly think that both Brutes and Sentinels are suffering from the same problem. The devs don't know what to do to fix them that won't completely invalidate their adjacent ATs.

 

How do you fix a Brute without invalidating Tankers and Scrappers? How do you fix a Sentinel without invalidating Blasters and Corruptors? Frankly, I don't know. And I suspect that the devs don't either.

 

Brutes are fixed by being removed.

 

Okay, okay, put down the torches and pitchforks and hear me out:

 

We all know the problem we currently have is that we have an amalgamation of ATs all stepping on each others toes. Brutes fighting for room against Scrappers and Tankers, Stalkers fighting for room against Scrappers and Brutes. Scrappers ahead by a paper thin margin thanks to their ATOs. I predict if Stalkers had had a small buff putting them ahead this thread would be from the Scrapper crowd in the Scrapper forums, same as we have here.

 

The problem is simple: ATs were not supposed to mingle. Mingling added nothing to the game and only created headaches since then in terms of balance. As pointed out in this thread if playing a Villain then there would be no Tanker available so only a Brute could be used. Devs could now balance Brutes in term of damage and survivability in a Villain-side-only vacuum. There are no toes to step since Stalkers are not going to be a contender for the Brute's role and Stalkers would remain the top damage melee AT.

 

 

 Ranged seem to enjoy a clearer distinction:

 

Controllers will focus on CC and buffing, but Dominators will focus on CC and damage. Simple enough, the person who wants to CC and buff picks a Controller.

 

Defenders focus on buffing with a side of blasting. Corruptors focus on blasting with a side of buffing. Again it's a pick on which the person wants to play

 

Blasters focus on blasting. Sentinels... well, they focus on... being a good class for first players 🙂 (I have one and play it, so take that in the jest it was meant to).

 

 

So this is the actual solution to all these problems: remove the mingling of ATs. Red side ATs only play in redside and Blue side ATs only play in blue.

 

This is a solution no one wants though, and for good reasons.

 

A) Red side does not have enough of a population.

B) Mingling sides for the end game TFs is good but might bring these balancing woes again.

 

But despite not being wanted this is the solution the game needs for the long term because as it is devs need to be on a knife's edge balancing survival of one AT versus damage of another AT and this one heck of a card castle all because specialized roles were blurred by introducing hybrids.

 

The more extreme solution would be scorched earth: actually remove the ATs, but this is dumb, and a waste of time and effort put in making the ATs.

 

 

But in the end my belief is that only the min max minority is fussed. I'm nearly 100% sure that the average player simply picks their Scrapper because they like their big crits, the Brute because they like the ramping damage and no crit RNG (like I do), or their Tanker to be big and strong (and fly, and have laser vision, and have a cape).

[Gobbledigook]

The community is certainly split on this. AT's were mingled together that were not meant to be. Provide some positive feedback on how to correct the issues rather than going in circles and bickering/moaning.

 

Good idea's can spring from bad idea's, so all idea's are good.

[The_Warpact]

29 minutes ago, Gobbledegook said:

The community is certainly split on this. AT's were mingled together that were not meant to be. Provide some positive feedback on how to correct the issues rather than going in circles and bickering/moaning.

 

Good idea's can spring from bad idea's, so all idea's are good.

There were actually a few, Billz said rollback tank changes, Infinitum said fix ATOs, I said increase Brute damage/fix fury. They are there you just have to pick through.

[Infinitum]

42 minutes ago, The_Warpact said:

There were actually a few, Billz said rollback tank changes, Infinitum said fix ATOs, I said increase Brute damage/fix fury. They are there you just have to pick through.

 

I think the ATO is a must because it truly is crap - unless Fury was altered to do more even if it comes as a greater cost to need to workaround - at least give us the chance to work around it.

 

But the days of brutes outdamaging blasters and scrappers with no cost should never return.

[The_Warpact]

1 minute ago, Infinitum said:

 

But the days of brutes outdamaging blasters and scrappers with no cost should never return.

Actually there should have been no back and forth between ATs would have solved this. But that's another thread.

[Infinitum]

5 minutes ago, The_Warpact said:

Actually there should have been no back and forth between ATs would have solved this. But that's another thread.

 

Right, that ship has sailed - which overlap IMO isn't bad.  I have fun on my Brutes - I love the way they still melt everything they face - especially boss and higher.

 

No other AT gives you that kind of sense of power wrapped in tanker esque security.

 

I also love my tankers - I love knowing that in just about every engagement - I will not fall.  I do not worry with kill speed because they will not drop me.

Edited August 30, 2022 by Infinitum

[Erratic1]

47 minutes ago, The_Warpact said:

Actually there should have been no back and forth between ATs would have solved this. But that's another thread.

 

While that is not an unreasonable stance it does lock out a familiar comic trope of the reformed bad guy and its less common mirror the fallen hero.

[The_Warpact]

21 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

 

While that is not an unreasonable stance it does lock out a familiar comic trope of the reformed bad guy and its less common mirror the fallen hero.

True, maybe get rid of the option on the flying rat and once again go through the missions to rise to glory or fall from grace.

[Brutal Justice]

I’ve run probably six 3 star ITFs since the issue dropped.  I have never had a stalker on a team.  I think I’ve had 2 scrappers.  One of the scrappers was, unfortunately, only running common IOs.  It was floor paste more time then not.  The second scrapper was leaps and bounds better but still dead quite often.  Typically they were not in the middle of the main melee scrum and were skirting the edges instead.  

 

In these hard mode TFs there is so much to hit that defense sets are getting hit.  There is also so much damage behind those hits that when they get through you better have high resists.  

 

The resistance cap and hp cap on stalkers and scrappers has become a real liability at these diffs.  The tankers are still the tankers but they are not able to dps build and be that tanker in this content.  This has given brutes more of a role of melee dps.  

 

Scrappers do more dps but are too soft.  Tanks are more durable but have to focus on that durability instead of dps.  The gap between scrapper and tank is much wider in this content.  Brutes fill that gap nicely.  

 

I wanted to nerf defense to achieve this very goal.  Give brutes more space to fill.  This appears to be the route the devs have chosen to achieve that sort of thing.  

 

Which do do you feel is more valuable on these hard mode TFs, scrappers or brutes?   Which do you see most often?  Which do you see performing at higher levels?   All questions regarding hard mode TFs.  

[Gobbledigook]

3 hours ago, The_Warpact said:

There were actually a few, Billz said rollback tank changes, Infinitum said fix ATOs, I said increase Brute damage/fix fury. They are there you just have to pick through.

The ATO certainly needs something.

As for rollback that would be just bad. The community wanted something done with the Tanker. To roll that back would be a slap in the face to them and we would be back right where we were and more complaints.

Increasing Brute damage could seriously upset scrappers lol if there weren't any trade offs.

 

I think the Brute needs the option of choosing like i said earlier. Dps stance gives more max rage/dps at a cost. Tank stance gives lower fury so less damage but they also gain mitigation with that Fury. They would be a flexible AT willing to fill the role of what the team needs but not quite as good as the main dps/Tank AT, closer than what they are now to them. though. No stance selected and the Brute stays like it is now.

 

That's my idea submitted 😛

 

Where do Peacebringers/Warshades even fit into this lol, they can be Tanks also. How well do they handle new content?

Edited August 30, 2022 by Gobbledegook

[Erratic1]

I really do not see a direct damage increase in the cards given last time Brutes were touched it was to lower their damage potential. Nor do I think improving Brutes or securing a niche for them has to come at the expense of other ATs. 

 

Indirectly, how about a "focus" mechanism which increases To-Hit, either via ATO proc or class mechanic judging the targeted foe has not changed? "YOU GOT MY ATTENTION...NOW I'M GONNA SMASH YOU!"

[Snarky]

14 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

I really do not see a direct damage increase in the cards given last time Brutes were touched it was to lower their damage potential. Nor do I think improving Brutes or securing a niche for them has to come at the expense of other ATs. 

 

Indirectly, how about a "focus" mechanism which increases To-Hit, either via ATO proc or class mechanic judging the targeted foe has not changed? "YOU GOT MY ATTENTION...NOW I'M GONNA SMASH YOU!"

And Super Strength would be like….why do I need A to hit bonus?   I pay for a huge one every two minutes or so….

[Erratic1]

2 minutes ago, Snarky said:

And Super Strength would be like….why do I need A to hit bonus?   I pay for a huge one every two minutes or so….

 

SS at that point laughs at the Purple patch. +6? Bring it on!!!

[Without_Pause]

On 8/27/2022 at 9:31 AM, Gobbledegook said:

Obviously some of you are struggling with your Brute then. Maybe read a few forum posts and educate yourselves a little more.

"I'm not saying you guys need to git gud, but you should really git gud."

[battlewraith]

20 hours ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

Ummm, point of order, I suggested a while back that the emp to reward merit conversion should be removed when I was reminded that it existed, having never utilized it. They are listening. It's arguable that what they choose to listen to is highly subjective.

That's actually even worse than if they didn't listen at all. They listen to someone completely unrelated to the issue.

 

It's like coming out of your house one day and you have a ticket because the law changed and you parked your car facing the wrong direction. The law changed because legislators listened to feedback from somebody in a different city, who hasn't ever been to your neighborhood, and who doesn't own a car.

[Gobbledigook]

16 minutes ago, Without_Pause said:

"I'm not saying you guys need to git gud, but you should really git gud."

I think that conversation has been done and dusted. The conversation had deteriorated quite a bit at that point. The developers said leave it so i suggest you leave it.

[Spaghetti Betty]

4 hours ago, Brutal Justice said:

Scrappers do more dps but are too soft.  Tanks are more durable but have to focus on that durability instead of dps.  The gap between scrapper and tank is much wider in this content.  Brutes fill that gap nicely.  

 

Wanted to quote this for emphasis. I've been observing how 4-star ITFs are being ran faster and the current prevailing strategy is shifting towards 1 Brute and 7 Corrs/Defs. Having a Tank in that spot was dropped in favor of the Brute's better potential growth from massive buffs. Which, just from my own observations, is just history repeating itself when it comes to new, tougher content being released. Tanks set the standard, but Brutes push the limit.

[PeregrineFalcon]

Ok, so at this point we've established that Tankers don't do anything better than Brutes, other than survive. Which is, inarguably, the entire purpose of that AT.

 

However, Brutes are tougher than Scrappers. And they can also, in certain circumstances, do more damage than Scrappers. Those two points seem, to me anyway, to be the purpose behind the Brute AT.

 

So what am I missing here? Am I just being stupid, or is this really the non-issue that it appears to me to be?

[Sovera]

7 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

Ok, so at this point we've established that Tankers don't do anything better than Brutes, other than survive. Which is, inarguably, the entire purpose of that AT.

 

However, Brutes are tougher than Scrappers. And they can also, in certain circumstances, do more damage than Scrappers. Those two points seem, to me anyway, to be the purpose behind the Brute AT.

 

So what am I missing here? Am I just being stupid, or is this really the non-issue that it appears to me to be?

 

It can be argued that the hard content is a very small percentage of the game. But, yeah, it applies everywhere except soloing: buffed Brute = Tanker but more damage. Buffs include damage? More damage to the Brute as well since higher caps.

[The_Warpact]

1 hour ago, Spaghetti Betty said:

 

Wanted to quote this for emphasis. I've been observing how 4-star ITFs are being ran faster and the current prevailing strategy is shifting towards 1 Brute and 7 Corrs/Defs. Having a Tank in that spot was dropped in favor of the Brute's better potential growth from massive buffs. Which, just from my own observations, is just history repeating itself when it comes to new, tougher content being released. Tanks set the standard, but Brutes push the limit.

Ok so it falls back on tactics then. You beat it, don't let it beat you philosophy to win. Find the weaknesses and choose the tactic to beat it.

[PeregrineFalcon]

27 minutes ago, Sovera said:

It can be argued that the hard content is a very small percentage of the game. But, yeah, it applies everywhere except soloing: buffed Brute = Tanker but more damage. Buffs include damage? More damage to the Brute as well since higher caps.

Ok, so Brutes are better than either Scrappers or Tankers when on a team with the right composition.

 

Is there some reason why that can't be ok?

 

Can't some ATs do better solo and others on teams?

[Erratic1]

2 hours ago, Spaghetti Betty said:

 

Wanted to quote this for emphasis. I've been observing how 4-star ITFs are being ran faster and the current prevailing strategy is shifting towards 1 Brute and 7 Corrs/Defs. Having a Tank in that spot was dropped in favor of the Brute's better potential growth from massive buffs. Which, just from my own observations, is just history repeating itself when it comes to new, tougher content being released. Tanks set the standard, but Brutes push the limit.

 

At the point where you have 7 Corruptors/Defenders I seriously question that the 8th person matters.

[Infinitum]

49 minutes ago, The_Warpact said:

Ok so it falls back on tactics then. You beat it, don't let it beat you philosophy to win. Find the weaknesses and choose the tactic to beat it.

 

Ie.  Git gud.  *Snicker*

 

Too soon?

[Infinitum]

1 minute ago, Erratic1 said:

 

At the point where you have 7 Corruptors/Defenders I seriously question that the 8th person matters.

 

It does when the player is capable

[Erratic1]

Just now, Infinitum said:

 

It does when the player is capable

 

Pretty sure with 7 Corruptors/Defenders the 8th person could be afk.