Are there any powersets which are better on Brute than on other AT's ?

[Erratic1]

4 hours ago, aethereal said:

If you gave them huge amounts of survivability such that, like Tankers, they could start to devote a ton of build space to procs, they might surpass Scrappers and then we'd have two ATs again -- Tankers and Brutes.

 

As opposed to having Scrapper and Tankers, eh? It is quite literally suboptimal to bring Brutes to a group.

 

4 hours ago, aethereal said:

If you gave them huge amounts of survivability such that, like Tankers, they could start to devote a ton of build space to procs, they might surpass Scrappers and then we'd have two ATs again -- Tankers and Brutes.  That's not preferable to the current situation of two valid ATs: Tankers and Scrappers.

 

Everything after the word "If" above is you, given I quite literally wrote (and you quoted), "The simple solution would be to give Brutes a boost in their survivability. To Tanker levels? No." Everything that follows is you knockdown your own creation and nothing I put forth.

 

4 hours ago, aethereal said:

This is crazy.  The Tanker buff was just an overcorrection.  Nobody set out to rub their hands together and try to invalidate Brutes, they just misunderstood how powerful the buff was.

 

You forget, Brute damage caps were nerfed. So Brutes brought down in damage and Tankers buffed. Not just Tankers boosted and nothing else occurred.

 

4 hours ago, aethereal said:

Seems like a lot of work to go and do that to a very uncertain reward and hard to really explore the playtesting.

 

You're right. Let's do what has been happening...NOTHING.

 

Well, glad we solved that. "We'd love to do something but nothing can be done, not even fix the utterly craptastic ATO Brutes have" because "It might go too far." 🙄

4 hours ago, aethereal said:

With respect, touch grass.

 

I am going to offer true respect and say nothing to this.

[Erratic1]

3 hours ago, tidge said:

 

Here you go @CYPHERPUNK, plenty of people who do not play Brutes, ("I just prefer other ATs, honestly.") and only show up in this thread but otherwise do not discuss Brutes, building them, or playing them, asserting that Brutes are fine. This is why Brutes are as they are and will remain as they are.

 

Good luck with your Brutes. I've made my final one. To the extent I play CoH, for melee I do Tankers and Scrapper. I would advise you to do the same.

[aethereal]

5 hours ago, Erratic1 said:

 

As opposed to having Scrapper and Tankers, eh? It is quite literally suboptimal to bring Brutes to a group.

 

You're so emotional about this topic that you don't read what people say, and you're like, "Oh my god I'm going to shock you by saying this: Brutes are suboptimal!"

 

I said right from the start that Brutes are invalidated by Scrappers and Tankers.  Yes, they're quite literally suboptimal.  You aren't arguing with anyone.  But despite your deeply emotional beliefs, no, it's not in fact better to have Brutes invalidate another class than it is for another class to invalidate Brutes.  If we can't figure out a way for all three of Brutes, Scrappers, and Tankers to be valid at the same time, there's no point in fixing Brutes.  No, it's not about turns or retribution or penance.

 

5 hours ago, Erratic1 said:

Everything after the word "If" above is you, given I quite literally wrote (and you quoted), "The simple solution would be to give Brutes a boost in their survivability. To Tanker levels? No." Everything that follows is you knockdown your own creation and nothing I put forth.

 

I don't think you read what I wrote, which was about Brutes invalidating Scrappers, not Tankers.

 

Just to be clear, though: the likely result of slightly raising the defensive values of Brutes is "nothing."  They probably remain just as invalidated as ever: Tankers continue to outclass them in clear-speed (because they continue to have better AoE and largely similar ST), and Scrappers continue to outclass them in DPS both AoE and ST, and Scrappers are durable enough that it doesn't matter if Brutes are a little more durable than Scrappers.  Again, remember that back before the Tanker buffs, Tanks were largely invalidated by Brutes despite having way better defensive scores.

 

But the build environment is complex, and it's hard to predict exactly when builders will be able to leverage additional baseline durability into higher proc performance that would allow Brutes to out-damage Scrappers.  There's no real way for Brutes to outclass Tankers this way: the extra target caps are too potent.  But maybe at some point they do outclass Scrappers.

 

5 hours ago, Erratic1 said:

You're right. Let's do what has been happening...NOTHING.

 

Well, glad we solved that. "We'd love to do something but nothing can be done, not even fix the utterly craptastic ATO Brutes have" because "It might go too far." 🙄

 

Homecoming's whole balance doctrine is not based in "let's make a speculative change, see what happens, and tweak."  This is nothing particularly to do with Brutes.  They just don't say, "Well, this current status quo is bad and we don't quite know what to do, so let's make a change for the sake of a change and see how the environment responds."

 

Like, look at regen.  Obviously has been in a bad way forever.  Are they making little changes again and again?  Nope.  Or Kinetic Melee.  Or Broadsword.  Energy Blast.  Archery.

 

They make big changes that they think will conclusively solve a problem with a strong theory for what the new status quo will be.

 

Is that a good doctrine of balance change?  Eh.  I'm not personally in love with it.  But it's not insane: they clearly think that constant change is frustrating for players and perhaps strains their very limited development resources.  Whether they're right or wrong, it's got nothing to do with Brutes.

[Maelwys]

10 hours ago, aethereal said:

Given that we are in a status quo in which we have two of three of Brutes/Tankers/Scrappers valid, it doesn't make sense to go and try to make a change to switch which two are valid.

 

This.

 

IMO when you're soloing there's not a huge amount of difference, Brutes still underperform offensively but their higher mitigation caps can still be relevant and it's basically just the ATOs that are to blame for the Scrapper dominance, not the rest of the AT.

 

 

However on teams...

 

Tankers are valid because they're the AoE damage Melee AT. And they can tank harder stuff with minimal support.

 

Scrappers are valid because they're the Single Target damage Melee AT. And they can still tank stuff, although choosing one of the secondary sets that has a Taunt Aura definitely helps.

 

Stalkers can sometimes be more useful than a Scrapper depending on the team's goal and composition. They approach Scrapper levels of Single Target damage (especially if there isn't a Kin on the team since they can lean more into build up autorecharges) and they get stealth and some limited aggro control. They do just fine at [Elite] boss-killing but they can't really tank and their AoE damage is typically worse than a Scrapper.

 

Brutes are currently what you pick if you can't get one of the others, or if you like the player and have a "pity spot" free.

 

Want aggro control and AoE damage? Tanker.

Want Single Target damage and aggro control? Scrapper.

Want only Single Target damage and Stealth and/or don't have a Kin? Stalker.

Want aggro control and lesser Single Target damage plus X? Brute.

 

Realistically something needs to change so that we can find a decent value for X.

 

Personally I still like the idea of making Fury and/or the Brute ATOs provide minor AoE effects - buffs to teammates or debuffs to enemies. But whatever it is it'll be a balancing act so as not to invalidate either Scrappers or Tankers.

[Erratic1]

1 hour ago, aethereal said:

You're so emotional about this topic that you don't read what people say, and you're like, "Oh my god I'm going to shock you by saying this: Brutes are suboptimal!"

 

You don't know me, so don't presume you know my emotional state. 

1 hour ago, aethereal said:

I said right from the start that Brutes are invalidated by Scrappers and Tankers.  Yes, they're quite literally suboptimal.

 

And you are fine with them being suboptimal. Not much more needs to be said.

 

[Maelwys]

1 hour ago, Erratic1 said:

And you are fine with them being suboptimal.

 

[Citation Needed]

 

I don't see anyone in this thread who is fine with Brutes being suboptimal.

 

What I see is two people who are both annoyed that Brutes have become irrelevant, with one stressing extreme caution in implementing big sweeping changes in case those changes make us end up in exactly the same situation but with a different melee AT now occupying the "suboptimal" position.

 

Attaining balance is certainly possible, but it's not going to be straightforward.

[CYPHERPUNK]

ya it really seems pretty simple imho

 

looking at the HP scaling on the HC wiki , tanks>brutes>scraps>stalky , you can logically presume that avg DPS for each AT should be the converse of that , and clearly buffing the aoe and tgt caps for tanks has unbalanced this , but imho not necessarily in a bad way , it just that not enough was done [and like was mentioned , the simultaneous nerfing of brute dmg cap seems entirely unwarranted]

 

tanks SHOULD be the most durable , and they are , they have the highest base HP and since the armors are primary for them its a LOT easier to hit the caps for def/res

 

stalkys SHOULD deal the most ST burst DMG , and they do [or at least they used to , maybe im out of the loop but stj/bio stalkers were top tier dps awhile back]

 

scraps and brutes are the closest and were designed intentionally to be effectively inter-change-able , the community trying to invalidate or min/max and AT out of efficiency is missing the point , and if HC is balancing around this then maybe they have lost the plot

 

scraps with crits will and should always have the potential to deal more burst dmg than brutes , with fury brutes should be able to deal more consistent dmg ; mathematically this is going to average out very closely , and ofc this muddys the waters

 

what probably should not be happening on a regular basis is for a tanker to be clearing mobs faster than an equivalent brute , obvs there are always going to be edge/outlier cases with a game as complex as CoX , but in general , if a tank is hitting more tgts consistently , then the brute should be dealing significantly more dmg to compensate

 

i think it makes sense for tanks to have higher tgt aggro caps [this fits into their AT design] , and im fine with them getting larger aoes as well , but they probably didnt need the dmg buff in that case ; ie pick one , either more dmg OR more aoe , but not both [becuz obvs larger aoe and more tgts IS effectively and additional overall dps increase]

 

we all know the brute ATOs are lame/weak , simple solution? buff/fix them , give them dmg procs and/or -foe regen/resist ; another option? make fury give +3% dmg instead of +2% ; additionally/also? maybe give brutes 50% of the aoe/tgt cap increase that tanks were given , ie less aoe than tanks but more than scraps/stalk [ie in-line with the HP scalar tiers]

 

as far as peak dmg potential goes , its obvs way more complex ingame/real scenarios , but it seems like raising the dmg cap for stalkers and scrappers would make more sense than lowering the cap for brutes [assuming the original AT base scalars] , ie return brutes to 800% cap , push scraps to 600% cap and stalks to 700% cap , so that the order is the reverse of their AT base HP scalar tier order [excluding the brutes outlier highest cap due to their having the lowest AT base dmg scalars] ; this would ensure that on big teams , the stalks and scraps would continue to deal superior dps , while the brute would continue to fill the mid-role that they were always designed to be

 

TLDR - maybe give brutes 50% of the tank aoe/tgt cap boosts or lower tanks dmg scalar if they are going to keep the aoe boosts exclusive , and/or improve the brute ATO with dmg procs/degen , and/or increase fury +dmg% , and/or adjust/revert AT dmg caps

 

for those unaware heres a quick breakdown of the ATOs for the above discussed ATs

stalk guile - 30% chance to insta-hide

assass mark - 5% chance to refresh build-up

 

scrap strike - global +3-6% boost to crit chance

crit strike - 60% chance for proc to give the next atk +50% crit chance

 

brute fury - proc to give 7 fury

unrelenting - proc to give 6% endreduc and 20% regen - ie less than 2 hp/sec

 

gauntlet fist - proc for 400-500 absorb shield

might of tank - 90% chance for +6.7% ALL resist for 10 sec - this will be up all the time

 

so how about this instead

brute fury - purple dmg proc equivalent plus foe -regen or -resist

unrelenting - global +100% regen and +25% end recovery

[aethereal]

4 hours ago, Erratic1 said:

 

You don't know me, so don't presume you know my emotional state. 

 

 

My brother in Christ, what I presume is that you are the same person who wrote three posts prior:

 

"My posting on these forums had dropped considerably because I am still working my way through the stages of grief and have not quite made it to acceptance."

[tidge]

To answer the title question of the thread: I think Savage Melee is best on Brutes, but I will disclose that I am not relying on an assessment of comparison that relies on using Cross Punch or Pylons. Savage Melee certainly feels suboptimal on Scrappers. It isn't miserable, just that it feels like getting Fury bonuses on the DoT would be better for this primary.

 

This thread was resting in peace, and after a straightforward question about the change to the Brute Damage Cap (from January 2020) we immediately get a rehearsed monologue of "Brutes were nerfed" that several other users felt obligated to explain the circumstances around why (a) there was no "Brute nerf" and (b) bringing Tankers up so that they don't take an order of magnitude longer to clear maps than any other melee is a good thing. Luckily we didn't get re-burdened with the famous "testing" that shows one player's clear times are all roughly equivalent for content that ignores other ATs ... because that "analysis" is about seconds of difference which is treated like it is the end of the world... and all signs point to the "Brute nerf" being the consensus loss of "herp derp, Brutes great, Tankers bad" claims. If certain players hadn't been so eternally willing to default to being so public about "Brutes >> Tankers" I don't think we'd see so much hair-pulling.

 

Tankers were somewhat irrelevant on Live before CoV because Scrappers could pretty much do what Tankers could do, especially once the levels above 40 opened up.

 

As noted recently in this thread: There isn't a LOT of design space for distinguishing among melee classes, especially once they share 90%+ of primary/secondary choices. My personal suggestion (that I wouldn't really want to see implemented, out of respect for existing Brutes) for the Brute AT would be to take a page out of the Sentinel playbook... and somehow make the Fury mechanic work like an enemy debuff (in melee)... because melee has basically run out of design space for the "make this AT hit HARDER" and/or "make this AT resist BETTER".  If Brutes could reliably debuff enemies that ought to both "improve solo Brute clear times" (even though I think this is already a marginal concern) and "why team up with a Brute?" (even though I see no shortage of Brutes in team play).

 

 

[Erratic1]

41 minutes ago, aethereal said:

 

My brother in Christ, what I presume is that you are the same person who wrote three posts prior:

 

"My posting on these forums had dropped considerably because I am still working my way through the stages of grief and have not quite made it to acceptance."

 

Don't try to word salad some sort of justification for your continued misbehavior. I suppose I should grant that English may not be your first (or even necessarily second or third) language and so you are working with some misunderstanding of it words.

 

The stage of grief before acceptance is depression. Am I depressed about the state I see Brutes in? Yes. That does not make me "emotional" in my posting. What it does is explain why I am even bothering, particularly when dealing with people who are much more interested in scoring Internet points than remotely dealing with the topic at hand.

 

So once again, I am telling you to step off that claim.

[Erratic1]

20 minutes ago, tidge said:

This thread was resting in peace, and after a straightforward question about the change to the Brute Damage Cap (from January 2020) we immediately get a rehearsed monologue of "Brutes were nerfed" that several other users felt obligated to explain the circumstances around why (a) there was no "Brute nerf" and (b) bringing Tankers up so that they don't take an order of magnitude longer to clear maps than any other melee is a good thing. Luckily we didn't get re-burdened with the famous "testing" that shows one player's clear times are all roughly equivalent for content that ignores other ATs ... because that "analysis" is about seconds of difference which is treated like it is the end of the world... and all signs point to the "Brute nerf" being the consensus loss of "herp derp, Brutes great, Tankers bad" claims.

 

Blah, blah, blah, Tanker, Tanker, Tanker..."I am afraid someone is coming after Tanker" is what the above is and explains so much about the pushback in this thread from you and others.

 

I have said nothing about Tankers needing to be nerd. I do not advocate it. So your, "herp derp", "want to make Brutes gods" crap is just that--crap. It is the repeated run-to claim of all those who are Tanker uber alles.

 

If you want to relevant, then perhaps deal with what has actually been said and offered in the thread.

Edited 35 minutes ago by Erratic1

[aethereal]

29 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

 

Don't try to word salad some sort of justification for your continued misbehavior. I suppose I should grant that English may not be your first (or even necessarily second or third) language and so you are working with some misunderstanding of it words.

 

The stage of grief before acceptance is depression. Am I depressed about the state I see Brutes in? Yes. That does not make me "emotional" in my posting. What it does is explain why I am even bothering, particularly when dealing with people who are much more interested in scoring Internet points than remotely dealing with the topic at hand.

 

So once again, I am telling you to step off that claim.

 

I grant you that I of course do not have perfect knowledge into you.

 

For example, on this topic that you self-describe yourself in grief about, that you obsessively post on to the near-exclusion of all other topics, when you make clear misinterpretations of what everyone else says into a simple "pro-or-anti Brute" frame, perhaps that's not emotionally driven.  Perhaps your reading comprehension is just terrible in this one specific way that works identically to how it would also work if you just quickly read everything through the filter of, "Everyone else must feel like they fall into the sides that I have decided are emotionally important."  Maybe it's just coincidence!

 

But I know how I'm betting.

 

And, genuinely, I suggest this to you:  you're clearly a smart guy.  You have good points.  But you are in fact emotional about this in a way that is not helpful to your aim to get people to agree with you that Brutes need buffs.  You've gotten so wrapped up into this that you're just out to make enemies of anyone who expresses any nuance.

 

Now, look, I don't really think it matters much what any of us post on this forum.  My experience after years at Homecoming is that the devs are gonna do what the devs are gonna do.  But to the extent that anyone does care what the opinion of the posters here is, I think you make yourself deeply dismissible by picking pointless fights with people who agree with you.

[tidge]

7 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

If you want to relevant, then perhaps deal with what has actually been said and offered in the thread.

 

I'm eternally waiting to see evidence that "Brutes was nerfed (five years ago)". The only across-the-board "subtraction" from Brutes was the lowering of the damage buff cap, which was explicitly lowered from 775% to 700% because of the changes to Fury. I haven't seen any evidence that Brutes got worse in 2020, just that Tankers got better... and that for some classes of builds for some content, Tankers have "faster clear times" than Brutes post i26p4.

 

Unspoken for many of these "But won't anyone think of the Brutes?" threads is that these (slight) differences in "performance" between melee classes are dominated by consideration of full level 50 builds (with or without Incarnates) and pretty much ignore the progression and build possible build/slotting choices as different ATs level up. Tankers and Brutes have different level choices for similar powers; Scrappers and Brutes have different combat fundamentals while leveling.

 

As for what has "been offered"...

 

Increasing resistances for Brutes isn't going to do anything for Brute clear times, as "being defeated" isn't much of a problem for any of the melee classes. The suggestion to increase Brute's survivability to Tanker levels because "Tankers got a damage modifier increase from 0.8 to 0.95" is simply a tit-for-tat ask that would do nothing except make the two classes even less distinct, and would probably not change relative "clear times", unless there is something like a couple of enhancement slots across some builds that could be shuffled.

 

My personal assessment of ATOs across all the ATs is that the Brute ATO %procs (even considering Brute's Fury) don't really stand out as being the least useful... some ATO %proc are clearly great, others not so much. Utility certainly varies across levels and builds, again I feel like the focus is on level 50 builds.