The tragedy of the Brute Fury nerf. A timeless lament

[BrandX]

5 minutes ago, Sanguinesun said:

 

 

If your focus is on better ST with the tanker then  switch out pendulum for swoop or gash perhaps. They'd be up around 2s recharge each or so with 400%

 

Got to wondering if I should replace the ToD: Neg DMG Proc in Swoop and the -Resist Proc in Cleave with the +RCH Proc (I have one in Gash)

[Sanguinesun]

15 minutes ago, BrandX said:

 

Got to wondering if I should replace the ToD: Neg DMG Proc in Swoop and the -Resist Proc in Cleave with the +RCH Proc (I have one in Gash)

 

Since I believe the -res proc you're referring to is a unique and only one can be slotted for aoe's, its best suited in burn OR in cyclone since cyclone's got a much lower damage output(ie more damage isnt going to necessarily help the power because its focus is being a mechanic/tactic in combat so procs and whether you full slot it or not may be considered).  Keep your recharge procs in as well.  Not a small number of builds work more effectively with damage powers with multiple procs in them vs full sets too.   

 

Its again about the recipe for optimizing for your needs.   If you remove +recharge, dropping from 400 to 312 for example, that's not going to mean any super meaningful difference for most powers.  Short recharge ones wont really show much difference or any and fiery embrance even with 2 slots of recharge in it would only show a 0.3s difference in recharge.

 

But again keep in mind that in order for the high recharge to occur:

 

1. You must use the power.

2. On use a target must be hit

3. And then the proc must proc.

 

Think then that each proc is roughly 100 extra percent in recharge.

 

This is why the recharge procs are more useful in the AOE's because with many targets(potentially) the chance to proc becomes almost 100% chance.  So for the 400 (if you have haste and  a base recharge around 100 with it from bonuses etc)  you'll need at least 3 powers that hit a proc the procs in a chain to attain that max.

Edited October 10, 2022 by Sanguinesun

[Erratic1]

5 hours ago, Infinitum said:

Please go back and reread what I wrote.  

 

Please go back and rethink about what I wrote.

[Gobbledigook]

Those Tankers that did the Trapdoor test were pushing every ounce of damage they could via procs. They still had enough survival being tanks.

Most Brutes build to be tougher like Tankers and lower their own damage. Build a Brute as you would a dps Tanker. You will be less survivable but you WILL out damage that Tanker equivalent.

The Tanker may have a larger AoE/Arc but the Brute just hits harder altogether. I know this because i have both set up very similar. 

 

My Bio/SS Tanker absolutely destroys the mobs in Trapdoor but so does my Brute. Big deal! proves nothing except it is really easy even on +4x8 for both of them.

 

I would not read too much in to the Trapdoor test except that it is easy and those that can manoeuvre it well do better.

[Erratic1]

5 minutes ago, Gobbledegook said:

Those Tankers that did the Trapdoor test were pushing every ounce of damage they could via procs. They still had enough survival being tanks.

Most Brutes build to be tougher like Tankers and lower their own damage. Build a Brute as you would a dps Tanker. You will be less survivable but you WILL out damage that Tanker equivalent.

 

I rather suspect a brute's clear time will increase if they have to make repeated trips from the hospital back to the mission.

 

At the point the Brute is not making use of their resist potential, all they are is scrapper with crappy damage and no crits.

Edited October 10, 2022 by Erratic1

[Gobbledigook]

20 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

 

I rather suspect a brute's clear time will increase if they have to make repeated trips from the hospital back to the mission.

 

At the point the Brute is not making use of their resist potential, all they are is scrapper with crappy damage and no crits.

 So we see Blasters etc doing it but Brutes can not? lol

So your gripe is that the Brute is not as Tanky as a Tanker and does less damage than a Scrapper whilst solo? Awesome!

You seem to be forgetting that this is not a solo game but a mutiplayer game. That Brute becomes very Tanky with just a few buffs. Much Tankier than a Scrapper. 90% resists vs 75% is huge. Do not base your opinion entirely on soloing.

If you want Scrapper damage then roll a Scrapper. if you want Tanker survival then roll a Tanker. If you want something in between roll a Brute. 

Edited October 10, 2022 by Gobbledegook

[Erratic1]

3 minutes ago, Gobbledegook said:

 So we see Blasters etc doing it but Brutes can not? lol

So your gripe is that the Brute is not as Tanky as a Tanker and does less damage than a Scrapper whilst solo? Awesome!

You seem to be forgetting that this is not a solo game but a mutiplayer game. That Brute becomes very Tanky with just a few buffs. Much Tankier than a Scrapper. 90% resists vs 75% is huge. Do not base your opinion entirely on soloing.

 

Why is it that that when someone starts their reply to another person's statement with, "So...." they are invariably going to make something up which has no bearing on what was actually said?

 

[Gobbledigook]

1 minute ago, Erratic1 said:

 

Why is it that that when someone starts their reply to another person's statement with, "So...." they are invariably going to make something up which has no bearing on what was actually said?

 

Why make useless posts like this at all? arguing for arguments sake.

[Erratic1]

19 minutes ago, Gobbledegook said:

Why make useless posts like this at all? arguing for arguments sake.

 

Oh no, don't confuse what you've been doing here with anything I have been doing.

 

*Sigh* 

 

Fine, let's deal with your so-called response....

 

 

(1) Blaster, in case you missed it, get to make ranged attacks. And sure, there is the occasional melee attack set with a ranged attack, but it is not quite the same thing as having the ability to continuously cycle ranged attacks and thereby not be there for most things to hit at all.

 

(2) Blaster are also do the most damage in the game. If Brutes did Blaster damage this thread would not exist. There would probably be several threads about the unfair nature of glass canon and inferior damage (shades of the past) but that is not the reality we find ourselves in.

 

Both points above are on full display here. Notice how much damage is being done while opponents are at range and most are unable to touch him. Love that bit a 1m07s in where he is attacking down the trapdoor and clearing out things which have no way to get to him.

 

(3) No gripe was stated by me. You suggested Brutes build like Tankers do and I noted the consequences. You then, using no logic understood by mortal man, started drawing understandings of my response which had no bearing on anything I wrote.

 

(4) If multiplayer is the only consideration then the anything outside the multiplayer role of an AT is immaterial. So you would be fine with Tankers area damage buff being reverted since hitting things in a larger area did not enhance their role. Pretty sure you're not down for that but who knows...maybe you're going to be logically consistent. *snort*

 

Edit: typo fix

 

 

Edited October 10, 2022 by Erratic1

[Gobbledigook]

1 hour ago, Erratic1 said:

 

Oh no, don't confuse what you've been doing here with anything I have been doing.

 

*Sigh* 

 

Fine, let's deal with your so-called response....

 

 

(1) Blaster, in case you missed it, get to make ranged attacks. And sure, there is the occasional melee attack set with a ranged attack, but it is not quite the same thing as having the ability to continuously cycle ranged attacks and thereby not be there for most things to hit at all.

 

(2) Blaster are also do the most damage in the game. If Brutes did Blaster damage this thread would not exist. There would probably be several threads about the unfair nature of glass canon and inferior damage (shades of the past) but that is not the reality we find ourselves in.

 

Both points above are on full display here. Notice how much damage is being done while opponents are at range and most are unable to touch him. Love that bit a 1m07s in where he is attacking down the trapdoor and clearing out things which have no way to get to him.

 

(3) No gripe was stated by me. You suggested Brutes build like Tankers do and I noted the consequences. You then, using no logic understood by mortal man, started drawing understandings of my response which had no bearing on anything I wrote.

 

(4) If multiplayer is the only consideration then the anything outside the multiplayer role of an AT is immaterial. So you would be fine with Tankers area damage buff being reverted since hitting things in a larger area did not enhance their role. Pretty sure you're not down for that but who knows...maybe you're going to be logically consistent. *snort*

 

Edit: typo fix

 

 

You need to revisit that "Trapdoor mission" thread and get your facts right. There is a Fire Blaster jumping in to the mob and destroying them. Wow!

 

Solo and multiplayer are both a consideration. A Brute can solo very well. They may not be able to solo the hardest content but neither can a Tanker or Blaster.

 

You are arguing for arguments sake and getting your own argument wrong.

 

Just think before you post 🙂

[Snarky]

6 hours ago, Sanguinesun said:

 

Here are the problems with regards to most testing:

 

There are different goals with different tests and with different results often due to tester variables that aren't well accounted for.

 

It skews testing and claims, I think.

This is why I am so wary of results and statistics.  I have done a bit of mathematics in my time.  Statistics is the art of lying and making it look like science, in my opinion.  

I prefer to have discussions, listen to wildly varying opinions, disagree vehemently with people.  Look at the conversation over time.  With the benefit of the long view form an opinion of what all the “results” mean.  
 

To me, it is obvious things are worse for Brutes than they ever have been.  And getting worse In the future

[aethereal]

But Brutes v. Scrappers is actually the place for numbers.

 

Like, look, I agree.  There are lots of places in City of Heroes where a numerical argument can only offer some suggestions, not hard answers.  Are Tanker increased AoE/Target Caps better than Brute higher numbers?  Reasonable people can disagree!  Blasters get both Aim and Build Up, and Stalkers get rapidly recharging Build Up, allowing both of them to operate under the effects of damage boost for quite a large percentage of the time -- but do people actually effectively use these abilities in real game play?  It's not clear.

 

But Scrappers v Brutes:

 

• They get almost exactly the same powers
• They get pretty exactly the same AoEs and target caps
• Their inherents are both pretty straightforward damage boosts with little nuance

This is the place in CoH where a direct numerical comparison does the best.  And here's what it looks like:

 

A power that does 100 damage at scale 1:

 

On a Scrapper:

 

(Base damage 112.5.  +.95 * 112.5 for damage enhancement) * 1.1 for crits = 241.3125

 

On a Brute:

 

Base damage 75 + .95 * 75 for damage enhancement + 1.6 * 75 for 80 fury = 266.25

 

That's the situation before Scrapper ATOs.  With Scrapper ATOs, Scrappers pull ahead.  But the reason Fury doesn't get much better than it is today is because, before ATOs, Brutes do solidly more damage than Scrappers.  And these are very good numerical comparisons.

 

Now, I agree with Snarky that to the extent that Fury actually does fluctuate up and down, and to the extent that it's genuinely hard/dangerous to put yourself into a position to max Fury, things break down and get hard to quantify purely with numbers again -- and I think it would be good for Brutes to face genuinely fluctuating Fury.  But I'm also not sure that without sweeping levels of systemic change, we can really put Brutes on the razor's edge of death to max Fury.  Doesn't that entail game-wide challenge-level changes?  We know that in most normal content, it's easy for most Brutes to not be in serious danger of dying.

 

Brutes have to do less damage than Scrappers.  A Scrapper who can't outdamage a Brute is a completely eclipsed AT -- why would we ever play someone who gets the same powers as another AT, but has less hit points, lower resist caps, and worse taunting, and also lower damage?

 

I'd love to see more of Scrapper performance moved into the AT proper and out of the ATOs (and very specifically out of PPM shenanigans for the second ATO proc).  And I'd love to see Fury fluctuate more instead of going to 80 and then barely moving.

[Erratic1]

3 hours ago, Gobbledegook said:

You need to revisit that "Trapdoor mission" thread and get your facts right. There is a Fire Blaster jumping in to the mob and destroying them. Wow!

 

Solo and multiplayer are both a consideration. A Brute can solo very well. They may not be able to solo the hardest content but neither can a Tanker or Blaster.

 

You are arguing for arguments sake and getting your own argument wrong.

 

Just think before you post 🙂

 

You literally have no arguments, make up positions to tilt at, and really need to follow your own advice.

[Erratic1]

2 hours ago, aethereal said:

Brutes have to do less damage than Scrappers. 

 

Has anyone here been asking for Brutes to do equal or more damage than scrappers?

[Gobbledigook]

37 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

 

Has anyone here been asking for Brutes to do equal or more damage than scrappers?

Lol You're funny 🙂

[Erratic1]

16 minutes ago, Gobbledegook said:

Lol You're funny 🙂

 

The first time scrapper damage is related to damage on this page is your post above: 

 

You do not post in good faith. I refer back to what people have written, most often quoting them. You make up bullshit, engage in innuendo, and act to no discernable advancement of understanding. Short of better behavior, this is the last response you get from me.

[Gobbledigook]

8 hours ago, Erratic1 said:

 

I rather suspect a brute's clear time will increase if they have to make repeated trips from the hospital back to the mission.

 

At the point the Brute is not making use of their resist potential, all they are is scrapper with crappy damage and no crits.

Enough said.

 

Wrong again! just stop please lol.

Edited October 10, 2022 by Gobbledegook

[Gobbledigook]

1 hour ago, Erratic1 said:

 

The first time scrapper damage is related to damage on this page is your post above: 

 

You do not post in good faith. I refer back to what people have written, most often quoting them. You make up bullshit, engage in innuendo, and act to no discernable advancement of understanding. Short of better behavior, this is the last response you get from me.

Fingers crossed you keep to your word 😛

 

At least you agreed with Krimson which is good lol.

Edited October 10, 2022 by Gobbledegook

[aethereal]

2 hours ago, Erratic1 said:

 

Has anyone here been asking for Brutes to do equal or more damage than scrappers?

 

Yep!  It's a little obscure post called "the first post of the thread."  Here's the relevant section:

 

"In my opinion.  Ahem, the long ago great Fury nerf of Brutes was a tragic mistake

 

As I recall, there were accusations, spreadsheets, data, that Brutes could out damage Scrappers at full Fury.  If I remember (and it is vague) some Brutes with specific attack sets and combos once in a while might do it.  But the damage to the Scrapper ego had been done.  There were spreadsheets after all

 

And so, the great Fury nerf was decreed."

 

Un-nerfing Fury would make Brutes do more damage than Scrappers.  And Snarky brushed aside concerns that Brutes were, pre-nerf, doing more damage than Scrappers.  He is also pretty substantially incorrect that it was "some Brutes with specific attack sets and combos" -- it was straightforwardly every Brute who could maintain any substantial amount of Fury.  But see, the straightforward evidence for that was "spreadsheets," and so that means it could be dismissed.

 

And that's all basically wrong.  I'm pretty united with Snarky that I don't love where we ended up after that, but his whole gloss of "there was never even a problem" is wrong.

[Erratic1]

7 minutes ago, aethereal said:

 

Yep!  It's a little obscure post called "the first post of the thread."  Here's the relevant section:

 

"In my opinion.  Ahem, the long ago great Fury nerf of Brutes was a tragic mistake

 

As I recall, there were accusations, spreadsheets, data, that Brutes could out damage Scrappers at full Fury.  If I remember (and it is vague) some Brutes with specific attack sets and combos once in a while might do it.  But the damage to the Scrapper ego had been done.  There were spreadsheets after all

 

And so, the great Fury nerf was decreed."

 

Un-nerfing Fury would make Brutes do more damage than Scrappers.  And Snarky brushed aside concerns that Brutes were, pre-nerf, doing more damage than Scrappers.  He is also pretty substantially incorrect that it was "some Brutes with specific attack sets and combos" -- it was straightforwardly every Brute who could maintain any substantial amount of Fury.  But see, the straightforward evidence for that was "spreadsheets," and so that means it could be dismissed.

 

And that's all basically wrong.  I'm pretty united with Snarky that I don't love where we ended up after that, but his whole gloss of "there was never even a problem" is wrong.

 

Saying you believe something to be a mistake is not the same as saying that thing should be undone. Moreover, you leave out the part where he writes:

 

Quote

As a last laugh.    This made Scrappers less desirable than they were. Sure, Brutes do less damage than a Scrapper.  But they really always did.  Not by much, but generally less.  After change, still generally less.  Now with less mercurial swings and a more attractive playstyle to those who might have rolled a Scrapper. While being more survivable.  Ka-ching

 

Key words: Sure, Brutes do less damage than a Scrapper.  But they really always did.  Not by much, but generally less.  After change, still generally less.

 

He believes that pre-nerf Brutes did less damage and now even less than that. So were he calling for the nerf to be undone his target is not more damage than a scrapper (regardless of the correctness of belief in what the result would be). But he is not in fact calling for such a change.

 

 

[Snarky]

Great posts aethereal and Erratic1.  Spot on to my madness in both I do believe.

 

I truly have no answers.  Yes, I did believe Brutes generally did less damage than Scrappers.  If not by much, pre nerf.

 

I am sure (and this will never happen....and, erm, I have zero data) that if the Nerf was somehow undone Scrappers would now out damage Brutes.  Because ATOs.  

 

But I saw someone post that Brutes are CURRENTLY outdamaging Scrappers without Scrap ATOs  (They had a formula and everything!!!)

 

Someone else (I vaguely recall I think I respect them....) Said Brutes damage is way closer to Tanks than Scrappers right now.

 

Sigh.  I got no F-ing clue.  I just know in the modern game Brutes seem screwed.  This has as much (and prob more) to do with Melee being in a shit game position due to high end mechanics like damage patches etc.  Which, due to Brutes time on target style is worse on them by far.

 

In my (prob not so humble) opinion

[aethereal]

1 hour ago, Snarky said:

But I saw someone post that Brutes are CURRENTLY outdamaging Scrappers without Scrap ATOs  (They had a formula and everything!!!)

 

That was me.  It's true.

 

1 hour ago, Snarky said:

 

Someone else (I vaguely recall I think I respect them....) Said Brutes damage is way closer to Tanks than Scrappers right now.

 

So comparing Tanks to Brutes is complicated.  Brutes do significantly higher damage in terms of numbers, but obviously Tanks have the improved AoEs.  How you weigh those things is a judgment.

 

But just to be super clear:

 

Heavy Mallet power on Brutes, Scrappers, and Tanks, with the only assumptions being that we are attacking with 80 fury and hitting a Lieutenant or higher-ranked enemy, with 95% damage enhancement:

 

Scrapper:  142.6402 damage base, +95% enhancement = 278.14839 damage, twice that on a crit, blended average of = 305.9632 damage

Brute:  95.0936 damage base, +95% enhancement + 160% from Fury = 337.5823 damage

Tank:  120.4517 damage base, +95% enhancement = 234.8808 damage

 

Those are very apples-to-apples comparisons.  And Brute has the highest value.  ATOs for Scrappers change things.  Tankers get better AoEs.  If you do something like add in an external buffer or assume farm conditions where everyone's scarfing reds like they're going out of style, it changes things.  But these are straightforward, bread-and-butter damage numbers for the same power.

[Erratic1]

1 hour ago, aethereal said:

 

That was me.  It's true.

 

 

So comparing Tanks to Brutes is complicated.  Brutes do significantly higher damage in terms of numbers, but obviously Tanks have the improved AoEs.  How you weigh those things is a judgment.

 

But just to be super clear:

 

Heavy Mallet power on Brutes, Scrappers, and Tanks, with the only assumptions being that we are attacking with 80 fury and hitting a Lieutenant or higher-ranked enemy, with 95% damage enhancement:

 

Scrapper:  142.6402 damage base, +95% enhancement = 278.14839 damage, twice that on a crit, blended average of = 305.9632 damage

Brute:  95.0936 damage base, +95% enhancement + 160% from Fury = 337.5823 damage

Tank:  120.4517 damage base, +95% enhancement = 234.8808 damage

 

Those are very apples-to-apples comparisons.  And Brute has the highest value.  ATOs for Scrappers change things.  Tankers get better AoEs.  If you do something like add in an external buffer or assume farm conditions where everyone's scarfing reds like they're going out of style, it changes things.  But these are straightforward, bread-and-butter damage numbers for the same power.

 

So one might expect doing the same mission, say like is chronicled in the Trapdoor thread, to find Scrappers taking at least 10% longer than Brutes to clear and Tankers taking 45% longer than Brutes.

 

But that is not what is seen is looking at reported times.

 

The apples to apples comparison is a purely numerical bit that ignores the realities of play.

 

[Snarky]

11 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

 

So one might expect doing the same mission, say like is chronicled in the Trapdoor thread, to find Scrappers taking at least 10% longer than Brutes to clear and Tankers taking 45% longer than Brutes.

 

But that is not what is seen is looking at reported times.

 

The apples to apples comparison is a purely numerical bit that ignores the realities of play.

 

And this is exactly the type of stuff (hard to define stuff) that is at the heart of one of my gripes.  The game has evolved past Brutes.  It just has.   To add insult to the injury every once in a while they (you know,…them) will nerf another bit of Brute power or buff another melee class.  Or give most ATs great ATOs and Brutes….garbage

[aethereal]

12 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

 

So one might expect doing the same mission, say like is chronicled in the Trapdoor thread, to find Scrappers taking at least 10% longer than Brutes to clear and Tankers taking 45% longer than Brutes.

 

But that is not what is seen is looking at reported times.

 

The apples to apples comparison is a purely numerical bit that ignores the realities of play.

 

Did you somehow fail to read both before and after the comparison where I noted that Tankers have better AoE than Brutes and that creates an area which is not directly comparable?

 

Scrappers who don't use the ATOs will absolutely underperform Brutes in basically all circumstances.  I think people really underestimate just how much of Scrapper performance is locked into the ATO2.

 

Basically:

 

Without ATOs, Scrappers are strongly outperformed by Brutes (on pure damage)

With just ATO1, Scrappers are slightly outperformed by Brutes (on pure damage)

With ATO1 and ATO2 and no PPM abuse, Scrappers are somewhere pretty close to Brute damage

With ATO1 and perma-hasten levels of global recharge leading to about triple the listed PPM of the ATO2, Scrappers solidly outperform brute damage

With ATO1 and perma-hasten levels of global recharge leading to about triple the listed PPM of the ATO2, and the ATO2 proc slotted carefully in just the right power and the attack rotation made to bias the big hitter powers right after the ATO-procced power, then Scrappers can do really crazy amounts of damage

 

The ATOs are crucial to rescuing Scrapper performance, and specifically PPM abuse on the superior version of the ATO2 proc is necessary for the kind of scrapper performance that we see on things like Pylon tests.  That's, like...  I don't know.  It's better than just having Scrappers be inferior to Brutes in every way.  But it's a pretty bad approach to the AT balance, in my opinion.  The very highest end scrappers are probably overpowered.  Lots of scrappers who don't know how to use the ATO2 proc at its most effectiveness are pretty underpowered.