People in General Chat are telling me that Super Strength sucks.

[Haijinx]

Please don't let this become a nerf/unnerf rage flamefest. 

 

 

[Cheli]

19 hours ago, ZemX said:

 

Says the person who claims a "simple solution" is just to remove the penalty.  Did you even play that suggestion forward?  Because I did.  Removing Rage's crash increases SS's overall damage bonus from an average +133% over time to +160% ALL the time.  What does that do to the set already at the top of the Brute chart for Trapdoor that you yourself just posted?  Oh yeah... it sends it even farther up.  Now it's got no penalty AND it's above all other sets in performance.   

 

Which of us doesn't understand balance again?

 

Rage could be doublestacked with even a mediocre IO build on live and before the doublestacking bug was "fixed" (which, reminder, was not until the secret server) it had no crash when doublestacked - which was the entirety of the game's retail lifespan. Somehow without a crash SS still wasn't this god-tier machine everyone insists necessitates the crash existing. 

 

Quote

You know what? Don't even bother answering that.  You just told me you think everyone playing SS right now is an idiot, which means I am wasting my time even bothering talking to you.

This is the real problem with these kinds of discussions; people making silly assumptions that completely fair and sensible assessments of a powerset's performance capability is somehow an assessment on the skill, knowledge or worthiness of people who pick the powerset. Outside of a group of minmax trolls or deeply-committed 4* tryhards, no one is casting judgment on someone who enjoys a powerset. I love StJ and Dual Pistols for the sounds and animation alone, but I'm aware enough of how the game works to recognize both sets perform some ways behind the top sets. I love Dual Blades for the combos, which are generally suboptimal to use but I like them so damnit I use them. But if someone explicitly asks for an opinion or explanation on those sets, I'm going to give one that acknowledges their wonkiness and/or numerical drawbacks, but that will inevitably bring out three-dozen people who play DP religiously and are emotionally attached to it and refuse to admit that it has these numerical drawbacks by bringing up feelcrafty stuff about "playstyle" or "just play what you like!" which are useless answers to someone explicitly asking for feedback on a set's performance. 

 

Nobody thinks you're an "idiot". There are just plenty of people, many who even like the look or feel of the set, willing to acknowledge it has mechanical weaknesses that other sets do not. 

[ZemX]

1 hour ago, Cheli said:

Nobody thinks you're an "idiot". There are just plenty of people, many who even like the look or feel of the set, willing to acknowledge it has mechanical weaknesses that other sets do not. 

 

LOL, so now I'm just not "willing to acknowledge" that you're right?   Give it a rest okay?  This is not the non-insult you may have thought it was.

 

Here's a wild notion: I just don't agree that you're right.   Weird huh?  What am I thinking?  I see SS performing among the top tier sets in Ston's Trapdoor trial AND I see its massive popularity among the playerbase and I think these are related but nooooo... you guys who see the truth know that this is all just "misinformation" or "unwillingness to acknowledge the mechanical weaknesses" or maybe roleplaying or something.  Anything but the simple explanation, I guess, right?

 

Come on now.  Do you see how ridiculous this is?

 

For the record, I am NOT saying SS is literally the min-max best thing out there.  And it doesn't have to be.  Someone might drill into all this and see that another set does x% better by some metric and has no crash to deal with and therefore... well therefore what?  It's not like we've got all the melee powersets exactly balanced now do we?  There's quite a range of performance because frankly the original Live devs made a hash of the balance formulas not understanding the impacts of things like animation times and damage types.  Then they compounded the problem with IOs and Incarnates and oh my!   Balance is now practically an impossible task.  So by what metric should we balance?

 

Many may scoff at this notion, but I think popularity is the best metric we have.   Nothing else takes everything I just mentioned into account but... well... everybody.   Any of us can come up with some forum theorycraft to justify our opinion that X powerset needs Y buff/nerf but we're all just picking cherries aren't we?   If you look at the playerbase as a whole you are looking at the collective assessment of all powersets by all metrics players care about all smushed into one number... the number of people playing that powerset.

 

When nobody is playing Super Strength anymore... let's give it a look.  Until then, there are far more neglected sets in need of love.  SS is really in a fine place. Not because I say so, but because MOST of us say so.

[Cheli]

2 hours ago, ZemX said:

 

LOL, so now I'm just not "willing to acknowledge" that you're right?   Give it a rest okay?  This is not the non-insult you may have thought it was.

 

Here's a wild notion: I just don't agree that you're right.   Weird huh?  What am I thinking?  I see SS performing among the top tier sets in Ston's Trapdoor trial AND I see its massive popularity among the playerbase and I think these are related but nooooo... you guys who see the truth know that this is all just "misinformation" or "unwillingness to acknowledge the mechanical weaknesses" or maybe roleplaying or something.  Anything but the simple explanation, I guess, right?

 

Come on now.  Do you see how ridiculous this is?

 

For the record, I am NOT saying SS is literally the min-max best thing out there.  And it doesn't have to be.  Someone might drill into all this and see that another set does x% better by some metric and has no crash to deal with and therefore... well therefore what?  It's not like we've got all the melee powersets exactly balanced now do we?  There's quite a range of performance because frankly the original Live devs made a hash of the balance formulas not understanding the impacts of things like animation times and damage types.  Then they compounded the problem with IOs and Incarnates and oh my!   Balance is now practically an impossible task.  So by what metric should we balance?

 

Many may scoff at this notion, but I think popularity is the best metric we have.   Nothing else takes everything I just mentioned into account but... well... everybody.   Any of us can come up with some forum theorycraft to justify our opinion that X powerset needs Y buff/nerf but we're all just picking cherries aren't we?   If you look at the playerbase as a whole you are looking at the collective assessment of all powersets by all metrics players care about all smushed into one number... the number of people playing that powerset.

 

When nobody is playing Super Strength anymore... let's give it a look.  Until then, there are far more neglected sets in need of love.  SS is really in a fine place. Not because I say so, but because MOST of us say so.

You're taking game mechanic discussions very weirdly personal, which is.. the exact thing I was pointing out in my post.

 

ROP was among the least-picked powers in the game pre-nerf back when it was essentially free, permanent mez protection for any character that took it. Popularity is not an indication of power strength, especially for a set that flavor-wise is the only one that represents an extremely common and extremely popular character archetype. There's a reason AR/dev has always been one of the most common types of blasters in the game, and it's not because those sets are mechanically strong.

[ZemX]

12 hours ago, Cheli said:

You're taking game mechanic discussions very weirdly personal, which is.. the exact thing I was pointing out in my post.

 

I hate to break it to you, but not only did you fail to explain how I wasn't being called an idiot, you pretty much doubled down with another personal attack.  Don't think so?  Read what you wrote.

 

15 hours ago, ZemX said:

There are just plenty of people, many who even like the look or feel of the set, willing to acknowledge it has mechanical weaknesses that other sets do not. 

 

Is the subject of this sentence game mechanics?  Oops!  No, it isn't!  It's people.  You're making a judgement about people here, not about mechanics.  You were saying, to paraphrase, "I'm not saying you're an idiot.  The rest of us are just willing admit the set is weak."   So... we also know it's weak but we're just not willing to admit it like you are?  That's the problem?  Get it now?  If that wasn't what you intended to mean, I am sorry to say that is in fact what you wrote.  And ParagonKid is saying much the same thing by implying the popularity of SS can be chalked up largely to people being misled.   Saying someone is being misled, while attempting to blame someone else for doing the misleading, is still insulting the person being misled.  They can't think for themselves the way you can.  They are just mindlessly following.

 

I mean, it's not like I'm gravely insulted or anything, but when someone levels a personal attack during an argument, I like to point it out because it usually is the sign of a weak argument.  If you had a really solid argument to counter points about how well SS seems to perform in testing and how popular it is to boot with a VERY large portion of the playerbase, you'd probably have gone with that instead.

 

12 hours ago, Cheli said:

Popularity is not an indication of power strength

 

Didn't say it was.  I said it was the combination of all metrics players care about.

 

Why do you think powers are balanced?  I mean, what's the reason it's done?  It might make some kind of logical sense that powers should be more or less equivalent in effectiveness... but why?  What's the actual reason we do it?   The powers themselves don't care, right?  So who is it for?  Oh.. right... us!  Presumably, we balance powers so that when a players looks at their available choices, they will see all the choices before them as potentially viable choices.   Right?  And performance isn't the only reason people pick powers.  There can be other factors.  But performance is a BIG reason.  I'd say it's the top reason most of the time.  But yeah, you might pick out a power here or there that's flown under the radar.  It happens.  Lots of people sleep on Focused Accuracy's -toHit debuff protection, for example.

 

But in any case, popularity is WHY powers are balanced.   Which by the way is me walking back something I said earlier just a bit.  I said all powersets having roughly the same performance was the ideal.  It isn't now I've given it a bit more thought.  They should be balanced by popularity.  If they are all equally popular with the players then THAT is the ideal.  What else should be?   It also neatly answers ParagonKid's point about Staff Stances balancing the set's poor damage output.   I disagree but the proof is in the popularity pudding.  Do ALL players on average agree with me or with Kid there about how much value Stances provide? It's not something we can easily quantify with some quick forum theorycrafting.  It involves peoples' value judgements.  Popularity is the sum of all players' value judgements.

 

It's actually a pretty good metric.

 

[PLVRIZR]

Rage.  Doublestacked or otherwise, I have multiple SS toons because (and I've said it before) Foot Stomp is one of the most satisfying powers, in the game.  And every 7 seconds (with Hasten up).  Yes, popular...because it is so satisfying.

[ZemX]

26 minutes ago, PLVRIZR said:

Rage.  Doublestacked or otherwise, I have multiple SS toons because (and I've said it before) Foot Stomp is one of the most satisfying powers, in the game.  And every 7 seconds (with Hasten up).  Yes, popular...because it is so satisfying.

 

I really think it's both aesthetics (for those that like them) AND performance.  One or the other alone would not have sent it to the top of played powersets for Tankers.  People do play powersets just for funsies... but not in those numbers.  I should know.  I have a Staff Tanker.  It's fun but if we're both in a race to clear Trapdoor... uh... don't wait up for me. 🤪  And I make sure to tell people that if they're asking me about it.  Cause I get a lot of comments on PuGs about how much fun it looks like I'm having Stick Tanking.  But I can rattle off all the rapid fire Tanker-wide AoEs that set has and while it looks fun and impressive all Mr. Double Raging Footstomp needs to do is wade into the same pack and put his one foot down to catch up and then pass me. 

 

The funny thing about its performance is that SS's otherwise poor performance without Rage is the only thing that has probably saved Rage from a more comprehensive nerf.  SS's attacks suffer both from being smashing damage AND from having generally poor DPA.  Add to that a whole AoE attack that does no base damage.  SS would be down there with Staff and Kinetic Melee probably save only for the glory that is Double-Rage's uptime.   It's really saying something about how bad the attacks in SS are when an average +133% damage over the full minute only puts SS in league with the top powersets instead of shooting well over their heads.

[SeraphimKensai]

I've said the following before in other threads, but I'll echo it here as well: Super Strength is pretty damn good. The crash disproportionately affects defense based characters as it drops defense, so as I don't mind a crash, I think it could be adjusted to be more equitable for defense based characters.

[ParagonKid]

Pretty damn good isn't good enough for having tacked on penalties while other melee sets are better yet don't have those.

[Maelwys]

On 3/2/2024 at 7:23 PM, Cheli said:

Nobody thinks you're an "idiot".

Really? Nobody? 🤔
That sounds precisely like the kind of sweeping generalist statement that should be confronted at all costs.
WE THE PEOPLE DEMAND THE FREEDOM TO CONSIDER PEOPLE TO BE IDIOTS!
_{(Disclaimer: I don't actually believe that Zem's an idiot, a moron, or any other kind of label insinuating sub-par intellect. And being a little bit confrontational about ones opinions on a forum is not [currently] an arrestable offense)}
 

Quote

There are just plenty of people, many who even like the look or feel of the set, willing to acknowledge it has mechanical weaknesses that other sets do not. 

*Raises Hand*

Me sir, me! Over here!

Super Strength is one of my favourite sets.
I love the Footstomp animation and knockdown radius; the Damage output is just gravy (I also loved it on Kheldians whenever it was known as White Dwarf Flare; and I got royally cheesed off when they swapped it out for the ridiculous sparkly handclap!).
I quite like Haymaker's "Captain Kirk double-fisted-headslap" animation.
I get flashbacks to old Popeye reruns every time KO Blow's arm-spinning windup animation plays; and it follows through on the damage-per-activation front.

Super Strength is one of my least favourite sets. 
Jab and Punch and Hand Clap are all horrible. Hurl looks fun but has some of the worst DPA around. You are practically required to take pool power attacks (like Boxing or Cross Punch) to fill out a reasonable attack chain. This is bad design.
Rage's Crash flooring your damage output is fine. Rage's Crash reducing your defences can go and feck itself with a 10 foot pylon.

If a power overbuffs your damage, then the crash should debuff your damage output (via -Damage and/or -ToHit and/or -Recovery. See: Conduit of Pain, Meltdown, etc)
If a power overbuffs your survivability, then the crash should debuff your survivability (via -Endurance and/or -HP and/or -Recovery. See: Unstoppable, One with the Shield, etc)

Rage does NOT overbuff your survivability, therefore Rage's Crash should NOT debuff your survivability. However EVEN IF IT DID there should never be a case where you self-inflict -Defence% or -DamageResistance% on yourself with a buff power. At worst, such a power should floor your Recovery and/or drain some Endurance. We got rid of that horrendous self-survivability-debuff garbage from all the other stuff (Moment of Glory?) decades ago. It beggars belief why the Devs ever felt the need to introduce MORE of it, and to a melee damage powerset no less!

IMO the old Rage Crash where you literally couldn't attack anything was fine; and the fact that you could eliminate it with Perma Rage was a bug.

 

Quote

Please don't let this become a nerf/unnerf rage flamefest. 

🥺 🤦‍♂️ 🙊


 

Edited March 7 by Maelwys

[ZemX]

2 hours ago, ParagonKid said:

Pretty damn good isn't good enough for having tacked on penalties while other melee sets are better yet don't have those.

 

Whether it's good enough or even the idea that other melee sets are better are BOTH opinions, not facts.  This is why you felt the need to invent the idea that players are being misled.  You needed to explain why the majority opinion is wrong and your opinion is right.

 

You don't need to do that.  You can express that YOU personally think the penalties outweigh the benefits.  But it's going to remain an inconvenient fact for SS complainers that they are effectively crying into their champagne compared to most, if not almost all, other melee powersets that don't have something like Double Stacked Rage to make up for the DPA mistakes the original Live devs made.

[ParagonKid]

5 hours ago, ZemX said:

 

Whether it's good enough or even the idea that other melee sets are better are BOTH opinions, not facts.

 

It is a quantitative assessment based on the best performance data the community has harvested. You're the one dealing in subjective feelings.

[ZemX]

26 minutes ago, ParagonKid said:

It is a quantitative assessment based on the best performance data the community has harvested. You're the one dealing in subjective feelings.

 

Sorry but... so are you.  You think because you found some numbers you like that it's not subjective?  Who decided Ston's test is the definitive measure of which set is better or worse overall?  He measures downing a Pylon and then averages it with clearing Trapdoor.   Why are these two measurements averaged equally?  Are they equally important?  Oh yeah... subjective choice again.  The only thing Ston's test can definitively tell you is which sets are best at.... Ston's test.   You might think these tests are representative of how the sets perform against every other type of content in the game... or you might not.  That's what makes it an opinion.

 

Does Ston's test measure useful secondary effects that contribute to survivability rather than just raw damage output?  Maybe?  Control effects?  Nope.  Hell, even something you mentioned: Stances for Staff.   Not only can't it measure these things, some of them, like Stance's "utility" can't be easily quantified.  How about anything that might make these better in a team?  MA is fantastic according to Ston's test, but it only has one AoE and it's smaller than some other AoEs.  On a Tanker that contributes less to aggro management.  The more you can hit, the easier it is to manage threat for a team.  Ston's tests can't even measure that because he's soloing.  Tanking is meaningless when you're soloing.

 

They are useful, but you're making the mistake of thinking they are definitive.  That this is what should determine precisely where a set sits in the pecking order of good and bad powersets.  Even saying that Ston's test is the yard-stick by which all should be measured is... subjective.  It's an opinion. Not everyone has to agree that downing a Pylon and clearing Trapdoor are the definitive measure of good and bad.  NONE of the powersets in this game have ever been balanced by this metric.  Why should SS get this treatment when nothing else has?

 

That last question is hilarious btw.  If there were ever an overhaul of the base design formula for damage that finally took into account the impact of animation times, SS would get such a buff from that that Rage would HAVE to be nerfed... like... a lot.  The only reason Rage is allowed to be as good as it is is because SS is otherwise a terribly badly balanced set in the other direction.

[ParagonKid]

44 minutes ago, ZemX said:

You think because you found some numbers you like that it's not subjective?  Who decided Ston's test is the definitive measure of which set is better or worse overall? 

 

It's a better metric than the nothing you've produced to support your position.

[WARMONGER34]

I recently made an Invul/SS tanker and was wondering which attacks do y'all use? And if there is a rotation to this powerset? (currently basing my build off of Hyperstrikes Mo Durable build)

Mo Durable 4 Psi - Tanker (Invulnerability).mxd

Edited March 8 by WARMONGER34

[ZemX]

1 hour ago, ParagonKid said:

It's a better metric than the nothing you've produced to support your position.

 

Picking the wrong metric is not, in fact, better than picking no metric.   But also, I haven't said nothing.  I mean, I can imagine it feels that way since you've just consistently ignored every logical argument I've made, which is why this is the last time I'm bothering with you in this thread.  What I've said, last time... is that popularity is the best metric.  It's the best because it's the sum total of ALL opinions about a powerset.  It therefore includes everything that might matter from numerical performance to aesthetic appeal.  It includes how EVERYBODY feels about the Rage crash compared to the Rage bonus.  Not just how you feel about it.   It's better than your opinion and it's better than my opinion. And no offense to Ston at all, yes it is also better than just arbitrarily averaging, with equal weight, two other arbitrarily chosen metrics.

 

And my metric says SS is in very good shape.  But by all means, keep trying to get one of the best melee powersets in the game buffed up even more.  Good freakin' luck, too.

[ParagonKid]

1 hour ago, WARMONGER34 said:

I recently made an Invul/SS tanker and was wondering which attacks do y'all use? And if there is a rotation to this powerset? (currently basing my build off of Hyperstrikes Mo Durable build)

Mo Durable 4 Psi - Tanker (Invulnerability).mxd 5.53 kB · 0 downloads

In general, for single targets you fire off the powers in order of highest 'damage per activation time'. For SS that's usually simply running down the attacks in order strongest to weakest: KO Blow, Haymaker, Punch, Jab. If KO Blow finishes recharging before you get to Jab, for example, you'd execute KO Blow, then the next strongest attack that's available..

[WARMONGER34]

Thank you ParagonKid for your response.

[Infinitum]

24 minutes ago, ZemX said:

Picking the wrong metric is not, in fact, better than picking no metric.   But also, I haven't said nothing. 

I can't help it. Your posts are maddening. 

 

Every time I read your posts... It's in Zathras' voice. 

 

I also add a little ad lib. Zathras try to tells them, but they never listen to Zathras. click click click click. 

[Maelwys]

1 hour ago, WARMONGER34 said:

which attacks do y'all use?

Typically just Footstomp, Haymaker, KO Blow.

Normally in Teams, the main idea is to recast Footstomp ASAP (or at least as fast as your procs will allow); and any other attacks you can fit in whilst it's recharging are just gravy.
KO Blow and Haymaker are obvious standouts and good places for your ATOs; and Cross Punch is a very decent filler even though its Area of Effect isn't buffed by gauntlet - it can be Proced up pretty decently and you're likely already taking the fighting pool anyway.
Then to round the chain out, things like Punch or Kick or Boxing or an Epic Pool Power (Gloom is by far the best Single Target DPA; and Ball Lightning or Fireball clinch it for AoE).

[ZemX]

1 hour ago, Infinitum said:

I also add a little ad lib. Zathras try to tells them, but they never listen to Zathras. click click click click. 

 

Zathras can never have anything nice.

[ParagonKid]

20 hours ago, ZemX said:

 

keep trying to get one of the best melee powersets in the game

Prove it.  I've got data indicating it's very middle of the pack. You've got nothing.

[Infinitum]

17 hours ago, ParagonKid said:

Prove it.  I've got data indicating it's very middle of the pack. You've got nothing.

Are you referring to Ston's data you provided?  That isn't middle of the pack.

 

Now I'm not saying anything against you personally, but in fairness, you can't classify an STier Trapdoor and overall average as middle of the pack.

 

SS is great as is - could use a rework - yes, but it is bothersome to think what that could end up looking like.

[Haijinx]

17 hours ago, ParagonKid said:

Prove it.  I've got data indicating it's very middle of the pack. You've got nothing.

 

The Set is middle of the pack, sure, maybe lower

 

The BUILD UP power it gets is the best one in the game. 

[Haijinx]

It also gets a top tier Melee PBAOE attack