Ever build for +DMG?

[Biff Pow]

I had +40% Damage on my Inv/SS Tank for awhile, so +120% with Rage. 15% of that came from Assault, and 10% from the Assault Hybrid, so it was pretty easy. I could have probably added another 20% if I really built for it (by breaking up the Might of the Tanker ATOs, for example.) It's fun and definitely noticeable, but eventually I dropped Assault and settled at a passive +20% Damage (for a nice even 100% with Rage.)

[Psyonico]

6 hours ago, Hedgefund2 said:

I ended up with 39% +DMG just from set bonuses.  

 

And that's the problem... Don't get me wrong, having an extra SO worth of damage is nice, but unless it's something like this case where you have all of the other ducks in a row it's not a feasible strategy for the most part.

[Loc]

Slotting for +dmg is one of the most inefficient ways to actually get more damage. A min/max damage build would go for procs (giving up set bonuses to get more damage output on the attack) and recharge (enough so that you can easily rotate your high dmg procced powers). The impact fully slotting for +dmg would have compared to procs and recharge is negligible.

 

+ dmg is not inherently bad but set bonuses just gives you so little of it. You'll probably never get over 60% if you go really hard in your slotting and a kin corrupter can give that to yourself and the whole team with just 1 fulcrum shift on a single target. Buffs from powers (mainly kin) are the best way to increase overall damage and procs/recharge is the best way to increase your personal damage.

 

Picking corrupter over defender is another way if we're specially talking about that AT.

[roleki]

I always slot for +Def, +End, and +Rech in that order; way I figure it, nothing increases your DPS quite like being upright and fully fueled, with attacks ready to fire. 

 

If a set I'm using to reach these goals has a damage proc, even better, but I don't often frankenslot just to jam more damage procs into a power. 

 

That said, if I have room for -Res procs I will slot them, as they increase EVERYONE'S DPS for a little window.  

[Sirius.Games]

My order is def to where I want it then +dmg...

 

However

 

+Dmg is what I can get DPS in my attack chain. This means that often times it's +rech.

 

This results in one of my highest DPS characters not having hasten. As stated elsewhere procs often times will get you more because 2% dmg buff is a 1-2dps buff where as a proc will get you 10+ in the worst case.

 

It's really relative. I believe the set +dmg buffs are inferior to res, rech, def, recovery, and max end just off the top of my head.

[Major_Decoy]

3 hours ago, Loc said:

Slotting for +dmg is one of the most inefficient ways to actually get more damage.

The goal isn't always to build for efficiency. Sometimes you just want to see what you can accomplish by choosing to build for a specific goal like +Dam or "How many chances for +health can I fit into a Electric/Electric Sentinel", not necessarily because the end build will be any good, but just to see what's possible.

[battlewraith]

4 hours ago, Loc said:

Slotting for +dmg is one of the most inefficient ways to actually get more damage. A min/max damage build would go for procs (giving up set bonuses to get more damage output on the attack) and recharge (enough so that you can easily rotate your high dmg procced powers). The impact fully slotting for +dmg would have compared to procs and recharge is negligible.

 

Yeah I think that's generally accurate. I only ever slotted to max damage once, on a character that already had a lot of dmg buff--just to see if getting buffed to around 200% was worth it. But the whole discussion is indicative to me of how broken procs are in this game. The fact that you can take any pissant single target hold, for instance, and turn it into a highly damaging attack on any AT is a real deviation from the original game design. It makes +dmg largely irrelevant and it also reduces the importance of damage buffs from other players.

 

If they did something in the future like restricting each individual power to one proc effect, I think +dmg buffs would be probably be relevant again.

[Snarky]

5 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

 

Yeah I think that's generally accurate. I only ever slotted to max damage once, on a character that already had a lot of dmg buff--just to see if getting buffed to around 200% was worth it. But the whole discussion is indicative to me of how broken procs are in this game. The fact that you can take any pissant single target hold, for instance, and turn it into a highly damaging attack on any AT is a real deviation from the original game design. It makes +dmg largely irrelevant and it also reduces the importance of damage buffs from other players.

 

If they did something in the future like restricting each individual power to one proc effect, I think +dmg buffs would be probably be relevant again.

Yes, you are absolutely correct.

 

And HELL NO!  Not no, but HELL NO!

 

I was talking with a good friend last night.  THey mentioned the fact that pissing off the very limited population in this 20 year old game is not necessarily the best move when looking to the future.

 

Look, I never do "proc" builds.  I build really odd compared to most people on the boards.  But DO NOT radically alter what has been the standard forever.  Things evolve.  People found a loophole.  Thely like that.  Serotonin.  Do NOT KILL THE FUN   

 

Jeez, one proc got nerfed and there are long time players who have completely changed their game time.  You advocate changing them all?  

 

Here, Hall monitor badge.  You the man.  

[battlewraith]

1 hour ago, Snarky said:

Jeez, one proc got nerfed and there are long time players who have completely changed their game time.  You advocate changing them all?

Slow your roll my dude! I'm not advocating anything. If I was, I'd put it in the suggestions forum where it would've no doubt devolved into some sort thematic debate about what procs actually represent in the game world.

 

I do feel that the evolution of the game in the age of procs make something like +dmg not only skippable, but actually a kind of trap that people can fall into when making their characters. Damage is king in this game. So it's not stupid to think that +dmg is a good thing to go for. But it's generally not the case and you need a fairly sophisticated understanding of slotting and set bonuses to know when you're wasting your time. Likewise I think you still have a lot of people running assault and thinking that if they all huddle up in a little group the dmg buff will be good. I think it's actually just a waste of end.

 

 

[Loc]

2 hours ago, battlewraith said:

 

Yeah I think that's generally accurate. I only ever slotted to max damage once, on a character that already had a lot of dmg buff--just to see if getting buffed to around 200% was worth it. But the whole discussion is indicative to me of how broken procs are in this game. The fact that you can take any pissant single target hold, for instance, and turn it into a highly damaging attack on any AT is a real deviation from the original game design. It makes +dmg largely irrelevant and it also reduces the importance of damage buffs from other players.

 

If they did something in the future like restricting each individual power to one proc effect, I think +dmg buffs would be probably be relevant again.

 

 

I get your point but that's not the entire picture, though. The trade off is far bigger. If you proc out a power you need to compensate for the following stuff:

 

- You'll likely have less accuracy than a full set so you'll have to keep on top of your global accuracy bonus/tohit bonus and/or supplement with inspirations

- You'll likely have less normal dmg slotted in the power so to make up for it you'll have to supplement it with your alpha, team buffs and inspirations to get full value out of that procced power

- The power will cost a lot more endurance as you don't have a set slotted to mitigate that so you'll have to be very smart in your other set slotting, use temps, waste your destiny on ageless core or rely on your team buffing you

- You'll need to be on top of your global rech as you won't have a set to reduce the rech reduction of your procced power. In fact slotting rech in it is really bad for your proc rate. If you don't keep up on that you're probably better off not proccing in the first place

- You're losing a whole set with 4 or 5 bonuses for every procced power you use.

 

So yes, it's the best damage but it's a huge trade off to do so. If procs got nerved from where they are now, you'd basically invalidate their use and take out a whole path of speccing out a toon.

Edited October 23, 2022 by Loc

[battlewraith]

1 hour ago, Loc said:

So yes, it's the best damage but it's a huge trade off to do so.

Yes there's a sweet spot in relation to how much you slot for proc dmg. But the reason I was commenting in the first place was in regard to +dmg buffs from sets. I think the point still stands that proc dmg makes those buffs largely irrelevant. Certainly not all bonuses from sets.

[Loc]

Just now, battlewraith said:

Yes there's a sweet spot in relation to how much you slot for proc dmg. But the reason I was commenting in the first place was in regard to +dmg buffs from sets. I think the point still stands that proc dmg makes those buffs largely irrelevant. Certainly not all bonuses from sets.

 

Fair, I suppose I was making a more general comment. To your specific point I'd say that even if procs were not a thing, going for other set bonuses is still a better value proposition and that team buffs would still be the way to get any decent +dmg. The problem is not really procs at this point but just the low values of these set bonuses.

[roleki]

19 minutes ago, Loc said:

 

Fair, I suppose I was making a more general comment. To your specific point I'd say that even if procs were not a thing, going for other set bonuses is still a better value proposition and that team buffs would still be the way to get any decent +dmg. The problem is not really procs at this point but just the low values of these set bonuses.

 

Keep in mind, they have to split the difference between solo, team, and league play.  Most of the set bonuses ARE tiny, but necessarily so.   If the second/third/fourth piece of a set gave better bonuses, it could get a little crazy out there.

[MistressOhm]

1 hour ago, roleki said:

 If the second/third/fourth piece of a set gave better bonuses, it could get a little crazy out there.

 

It's already a 'little crazy', but point made.  Some of the set bonuses are... meh.  But enough 'meh' stacked up becomes 'eh???' and suddenly the build is no longer average.  

 

Look, here's my thing with procs.  I think they're great, when they go off.   The problem I see with them is, they are designed to fire X amount of times per minute.  That means you have to tune the recharge on those procc'd powers to not be faster than the proc cycle time, OR sometimes they won't fire.  When? Who knows? That's the RNG's chance to mess with you.  You can whale on pylons all you like and get an average proc rate, but when you're in a scrap, sometimes you want that proc to do its thing and ... it doesn't.  RNG Wins.

 

I would MUCH rather build to a solid buff/debuff percentage, including the 'gravy' you get from set bonuses, rather than mess it all up for what amounts to an extra four or five dice rolls every time you do something.  Does that mean I'm missing out on those extra dice rolls? Yes.  But that's my choice.  I gamble often enough in real world, chasing 'procs' there (bonus rolls on slots) loses your money.  🙂