Why a Brute?

[Triumphant]

I play a lot of brutes.  I think it's because I like the style of play.  Very aggressive, attack, attack, attack.  I'm close to as tough as a tank but not expected to do the tankers job, as my role is DPS, and I just like to focuse on destroying things as swiftly and brutally (if you'll forgive the pun) as possible.

 

Yes, Brutes could use a better ATO special ability, but I can live with what we've got.  Overall, I'm pretty happy with where Brutes are at, power wise.  

[GM_GooglyMoogly]

Tanks vs Brutes!

 

Brutes vs Scrappers!

 

Men vs Women!

 

Wait . . . 

 

Please settle down, restless natives.

[Maelwys]

10 minutes ago, GM_GooglyMoogly said:

Please settle down, restless natives.

There's a "The Peasants are Revolting" gag in there somewhere...
 

  

3 hours ago, tidge said:

Meanwhile Kheldians are in a far worse position than Brutes. 

 

I'm pretty sure Kheldian performance is comfortably ahead of Brutes right now, unless you ignore/discount the whole 'Infinity Changeling' thing.

I'm honestly not aware of another AT that currently has the same overarching problem as Brutes - which IMO generally comes down to "everything this toon can do could be done better if it was rerolled on a different AT using exactly the same powersets". It sucks, but AFAIK that's the current state of things.

I've played a few MMORPGs over the years which have "Jack of All Trades, Master of None" classes; but they've thrown those classes a bone or two (in terms of giving them a unique ability or two, or them getting specific useful powers at an earlier level than other classes) or they have certain desirable content where a very small team is required + so a character having the ability to fulfil multiple roles simultaneously is valuable. However on CoX it's virtually never optimal to bring a Brute along over a different melee AT.

Thankfully CoX is still easy enough that having an optimal team composition hardly ever matters... but a mechanically-sub-par choice is still mechanically-sub-par regardless of whether or not it's "good enough" for the content you're running. And there are a lot of people out there who are frustrated that their character can never be "the best at what they do".

[Bionic_Flea]

4 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

"everything this toon can do could be done better if it was rerolled on a different AT using exactly the same powersets".

 

Doesn't the chart quoted above show Brutes doing better than scrappers or tankers on a few power-sets refute that?  Granted, I think the only set they do better than both is only Staff.  But there are several where they do better than scraps on some and better than tanks on others.  Or am I missing something?

[Ukase]

On 10/15/2024 at 5:35 AM, Maelwys said:

If the HC Devs reworked one or both of the Brutes ATO sets so that the proc/global is brought up to par with the Stalker or Scrapper ones then they'd recover in a heartbeat.

Brutes aren't in a bad place as long as you ignore ATOs and dealing maximum AoE damage at level 50.

This always puzzles me when folks say this about the Brute ATOs. 

Now, I recognize that I've never been able to get fury up to 100%. I always assumed it was because my health rarely goes below 85%. But the set bonuses for the two brute sets are quite good in my opinion. I don't see any need for any adjustment. They work fine to me. 

Granted, I am admittedly obtuse, and frankly, I don't go looking for problems. If I notice one, it's got to be pretty bad. I just don't see why there's this negative attitude regarding the Brute ATOs. 

[Erratic1]

5 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

And there are a lot of people out there who are frustrated that their character can never be "the best at what they do".

 

And to make it perfectly clear, it was because certain builds of Brutes, buffed to their gills on a team, could sometimes exceed Scrapper damage that Brutes had to be nerfed (Brutes have NEVER had Tanker survivability) but somehow it is completely fine Brutes be far worse off now.

 

Hmmm...scale secondary effects by Fury (might want to exclude KB...even if it would be hilarious punting mobs across zones). Scrappers/Stalkers are damage kings, Tankers are survivability and area damage gods, and Brutes the lords of debuffs.

[Neiska]

My favorite and best brute is savage/bio. 
 

Overall, tanks do more aoe and are more survivable with most power combinations. Not all, but most. 
 

Another thing is that tankers get more from +damage than brutes do, such as super strength. 
 

I think where brutes shine, is fast paced teams where they can keep their fury up, and some mechanics like bleed or dot damage is affected by brute fury bonus. 
 

None of this is to say brutes are “bad.” If you like being an angryboi, then I say to heck with the math and have fun. I think most differences would be minor in comparison, and there are circumstances where a brute can shine. Spines/fire certainly, or even a fire/fire brute can be great. I’ve even done a dual wield and battle axe brute and they both were great.

 

So I say if you are enjoying it, then stick with it. Comparison is the thief of joy and all that!

[GM_GooglyMoogly]

20 minutes ago, Ukase said:

This always puzzles me when folks say this about the Brute ATOs. 

 

Compared to the ATOs procs for Scrappers (+criticals), Stalkers (hide for more crits and BU recharge), and Tanks (stacking +res and +absorb), the Brute ones just don't stack up.*

 

https://homecoming.wiki/wiki/Archetype_Enhancements

 

* In my opinion, not an official HC statement.

Edited October 16 by GM_GooglyMoogly

[Erratic1]

15 minutes ago, Bionic_Flea said:

Doesn't the chart quoted above show Brutes doing better than scrappers or tankers on a few power-sets refute that?  Granted, I think the only set they do better than both is only Staff.  But there are several where they do better than scraps on some and better than tanks on others.  Or am I missing something?

 

It was Brutes in far more restricted circumstances exceeding Scrapper damage that got the entire Brute AT nerfed.

 

Trapdoor is geared towards area damage, so it is looking at part of the picture. Fury improves DoTs, so Brutes have an edge with burning/bleeding/etc. Pylon is the more single-target focused one.

 

If you are suggesting being the masters of DoTs makes everything fine....

[tidge]

18 minutes ago, GM_GooglyMoogly said:

 

Compared to the ATOs procs for Scrappers (+criticals), Stalkers (hide for more crits and BU recharge), and Tanks (stacking +res and +absorb), the Brute ones just don't stack up.*

 

https://homecoming.wiki/wiki/Archetype_Enhancements

 

* In my opinion, not an official HC statement.

 

I don't disagree about how the %proc effects fall into tiers, but don't undersell the set bonuses that come from 2-slotting or 3-slotting ATOs. Brutes can get multiple Damage/Health Boosts for 2-slotting, and (some) Defenses or Regeneration from 3-slotting. Those line up pretty directly with what many players want Brutes to do. The Scrapper/Stalker/Tanker ATO bonuses for 2-or-3 slotting are much more indirectly tied to improving performance IMO, YMMV.

[Octogoat]

3 hours ago, Sovera said:

Forum PvP is wild.

 

100%

[Bionic_Flea]

No, I was specifically responding to the statement I quoted:

 

1 hour ago, Maelwys said:

"everything this toon can do could be done better if it was rerolled on a different AT using exactly the same powersets".

 

Trapdoor was a test to measure builds in solo clearing /x8 mobs and pylons is more of an AV killing DPS test.  While both measure different things, and are imperfect measurements at that, it's what we got.  From that chart, it seems that a few Brute sets will do better than a few tanker OR scrapper and, yeah, they seem to be the DoT ones.  And there's a few other sets where the difference is a barely noticeable amount of seconds.

 

I'm not saying everything is fine and dandy.  I am saying that it's not all doom and gloom.  Brutes are fine.  They could be better.

[WuTang]

Balancing a game with so many variables has got to be a nightmare. The only way I could see it would be through the ATOs. It would be madness to have to rework every power set in the game for one AT. That being said...

 

Druids, in a different game, used to have more flexibility, but that was changed for "balance" (personally hated the change). Where one could be both tank and DPS with one build, now it takes two. Brutes could be made to where they could either be built for DPS or tank and possibly have a third option to stay where they are now, which is more gray area leaning either towards DPS or towards tankiness depending on who you talk to... I think this would be incredibly difficult, and maybe not really worth it.

 

I'd be a fan of ATO changes or additional ATOs for each class that would allow for different play, and this could probably be done fairly easily. Limit the sets to two, like now and allow the player to decide the route they wish to take.

 

I like the fury mechanic and it's go-Go-GO! playstyle. I've only been playing since Feb of this year and still most of my 50s are Brutes. Got a couple Scrappers, some Corruptors...etc, and I think holes could be shot through each, none are perfect, and all can be built "wrong" (at least I know mine are all still WIP). I know people that swear Brutes are the best and by huge margins, and then there are those that think otherwise. I honestly couldn't tell you who is correct, but I know I like to play them.

 

Meh, but what do I know.... I'm still in the "honeymoon" phase.

 

 

[Octogoat]

1 minute ago, WuTang said:

Balancing a game with so many variables has got to be a nightmare. The only way I could see it would be through the ATOs. It would be madness to have to rework every power set in the game for one AT. That being said...

 

Druids, in a different game, used to have more flexibility, but that was changed for "balance" (personally hated the change). Where one could be both tank and DPS with one build, now it takes two. Brutes could be made to where they could either be built for DPS or tank and possibly have a third option to stay where they are now, which is more gray area leaning either towards DPS or towards tankiness depending on who you talk to... I think this would be incredibly difficult, and maybe not really worth it.

 

I'd be a fan of ATO changes or additional ATOs for each class that would allow for different play, and this could probably be done fairly easily. Limit the sets to two, like now and allow the player to decide the route they wish to take.

 

I like the fury mechanic and it's go-Go-GO! playstyle. I've only been playing since Feb of this year and still most of my 50s are Brutes. Got a couple Scrappers, some Corruptors...etc, and I think holes could be shot through each, none are perfect, and all can be built "wrong" (at least I know mine are all still WIP). I know people that swear Brutes are the best and by huge margins, and then there are those that think otherwise. I honestly couldn't tell you who is correct, but I know I like to play them.

 

Meh, but what do I know.... I'm still in the "honeymoon" phase.

 

 

 

Tbf our druids are seafood aliens.

[Erratic1]

12 minutes ago, tidge said:

 

I don't disagree about how the %proc effects fall into tiers, but don't undersell the set bonuses that come from 2-slotting or 3-slotting ATOs. Brutes can get multiple Damage/Health Boosts for 2-slotting, and (some) Defenses or Regeneration from 3-slotting. Those line up pretty directly with what many players want Brutes to do. The Scrapper/Stalker/Tanker ATO bonuses for 2-or-3 slotting are much more indirectly tied to improving performance IMO, YMMV.

 

Brute's Fury gives the exact same bonus at 2 and 3 pieces slotted as Scrapper's Strike. Stalker's Guile differs on 2pc by giving Accuracy instead of health. Not seeing how Brutes are ahead.

 

Unrelenting Fury gives +Damage (to the AT which gets the least benefit from such) and a pathetic amount of Regen, compared to +Recovery and +Accuracy for Critical Strikes and Assassin's Mark. Definitely Brutes aren't ahead there.

 

So where precisely are Brutes coming out ahead?

[Maelwys]

1 hour ago, Bionic_Flea said:

Doesn't the chart quoted above show Brutes doing better than scrappers or tankers on a few power-sets refute that?  Granted, I think the only set they do better than both is only Staff.  But there are several where they do better than scraps on some and better than tanks on others.  Or am I missing something?

My point was that Brutes being neither the king of Damage Output (Single target? Scrappers and Stalkers are better. AoE? Tankers are better) nor the kings of Survivability (Tankers, all day every day) means that if you want to roll up an [Insert Melee and Defensive set combination here] then opting for Brute will result in you forever being only second place at best.

Also, I actually disagree a smidge on the Staff rankings - IIRC Ston leant pretty heavily into using the Epic Pool abilities, and so their Tanker Staff runs likely encountered an issue of "I have more AoE available than I can feasibly use". My own Bio/Staff Tanker actually ignores Epic Pool powers entirely, but they're still a mobile woodchipper and I'd choose to pilot them over a similarly-bepowersetted Brute any day of the week.
 

Edited October 16 by Maelwys

[tidge]

1 minute ago, Erratic1 said:

 

Brute's Fury gives the exact same bonus at 2 and 3 pieces slotted as Scrapper's Strike. Stalker's Guile differs on 2pc by giving Accuracy instead of health. Not seeing how Brutes are ahead.

 

Brutes have a higher base and max Health than Scrappers, something like 12% at base and 33% more at cap.

[Erratic1]

13 minutes ago, Bionic_Flea said:

I'm not saying everything is fine and dandy.  I am saying that it's not all doom and gloom.  Brutes are fine.  They could be better.

 

You're saying Brutes are fine because they don't suck in 100% of the game, just 85% of it and being pedantic as goes what Maelwys wrote?

 

So long as Brutes do better than a Tanker or a Scrapper on even one powerset, apparently they are fine as you judge things.

[Erratic1]

8 minutes ago, tidge said:

 

Brutes have a higher base and max Health than Scrappers, something like 12% at base and 33% more at cap.

 

Brute base health at level 50 is 1499.3 vs 1338.6 for Scrappers and 1204.8 for Stalkers.

 

3% of those values is 45, 40, and 36. 

 

I am not sure how one can claim the suckiness of the Brute procs is made up for by getting 9 more hp at level 50 than a Stalker, or at least do so seriously.

[tidge]

It's ok to not reply to every one of my posts, within minutes, especially if you are going to keep moving goalposts.

 

5 minutes ago, tidge said:

Brutes have a higher base and max Health than Scrappers, something like 12% at base and 33% more at cap.

 

1 minute ago, Erratic1 said:

You're saying Brutes are fine because they don't suck in 100% of the game, just 85% of it and being pedantic as goes what Maelwys wrote?

 

So long as Brutes do better than a Tanker or a Scrapper on even one powerset, apparently they are fine as you judge things.

 

I thought you were the one asking for Brutes to be "better at surviving"?

 

On 10/15/2024 at 7:38 AM, Erratic1 said:

 

If the average player is not using IOs then Brutes are even worse off because they do not have anywhere near the survivability of Tankers, so the Tankers not only deal more area damage, but they are also staying in combat longer and generating xp faster.

 

20 hours ago, Erratic1 said:

Have Fury buff Brute defense/resistance variably as it does damage with a max target matching...say 40% of the difference between the current gulf between Brute and Tanker base values. Brutes would deal no more damage but would be a bit better at surviving and hence able to actually engage in, "Go, go, go!" play.

 

The Brute ATO set enhancement bonuses for 2-or-3 slotting are directly tied to improving Brute's having more HP, keeping them, recovering them, and damage. Accuracy from set bonuses is nice, but half of all enhancements in the ATO sets already boost Accuracy (one by 33%, two by 26%). The same of course can be written about Damage, but getting close to the damage caps and staying there is kinda the whole point of a Brute's offense.

[Octogoat]

Sounds like what would appease one party and be fine with the other is just to tweak the ATOs a bit to be more useful.

[Erratic1]

10 minutes ago, tidge said:

It's ok to not reply to every one of my posts, within minutes, especially if you are going to keep moving goalposts.

 

 

Don't flatter yourself, as I am responding to multiple people and following the thread. 

 

But I think I have established your lack of seriousness here, what with asserting 9 more hp is a meaningful survivability bump over what other ATs can get doing the same splitting of ATOs.

 

I'm fine with ignoring you from here on out.

[Erratic1]

10 minutes ago, Octogoat said:

Sounds like what would appease one party and be fine with the other is just to tweak the ATOs a bit to be more useful.

 

I'll expect it right after proc bombing gets fixed and name freeing is implemented.

[Bionic_Flea]

29 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

 

You're saying Brutes are fine because they don't suck in 100% of the game, just 85% of it and being pedantic as goes what Maelwys wrote?

 

So long as Brutes do better than a Tanker or a Scrapper on even one powerset, apparently they are fine as you judge things.

 

No.  I am saying that Brutes are fine because they don't suck at all.  Most well built brutes can solo 85-95% of the game at +4/x8.  Badly built brutes can solo most of the game at /x8.  Stop putting words in my mouth and telling me what I'm saying.  It's not persuasive.

 

7 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

I'm fine with ignoring you from here on out.

 

Please add me to your list.

[Maelwys]

10 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

 

I'll expect it right after proc bombing gets fixed and name freeing is implemented.

Dunno about the Aprocalypse, but Name Freeing implementation is due to start in two weeks time... 🤞 😉