DEFCON 5: Defender vs Controller - Which is the Better Support AT?

[wednesdaywoe]

I have independently researched, tested and reviewed everything —and definitively concluded that Defenders are the highest form of life. Case closed!

Edited March 23 by wednesdaywoe

[Dark Current]

18 hours ago, wednesdaywoe said:

I have independently researched, tested and reviewed everything —and definitively concluded that Defenders are the highest form of life. Case closed!

 

I sense zero bias in this statement.

[Dark Current]

My Reaction and Analysis video of the Vexaris team trials is up!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[tjknight]

On 3/22/2025 at 10:38 PM, Dark Current said:

DEFCON 1 is underway! Getting ready for Trap-off between my defender and controller to see who is nastier!

 

The Matchup video:

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

In the Blue Corner, we have my defender Cherie da Bom, a lunatic on the fringe who packs an AR named Boom Boom Pow and a bag full of tricks. Inspired by the Punisher and the Green Goblin.

 

MIDS Build:  Cherie da Bom - Defender (Traps).mbd 43.41 kB · 2 downloads

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

And in the Red Corner, is my controller Vexaris, an illusionist who wields the power of a trickster god through mystical artifacts recovered from an ancient temple. 

 

MIDS Build:  Vexaris - Controller (Illusion Control).mbd 45.38 kB · 2 downloads

 

 

 

@sawgrass here ... Just a side comment .... I ❤️ the concept for this guy. Re-imagining traps as mystical artifacts totally works.  The character concepts for this game are like 50% of the fun for me!!! 

[Dark Current]

17 hours ago, tjknight said:

 

@sawgrass here ... Just a side comment .... I ❤️ the concept for this guy. Re-imagining traps as mystical artifacts totally works.  The character concepts for this game are like 50% of the fun for me!!! 

Thanks, Saw! I agree about character concepts being the foundation for fun. If I can't get into a character, I find it's generally the concept and costume just haven't gelled yet.

 

I wish we had customizable objects beyond weaponry. Or powers you could replace with objects. I'd love the Blackwand to shoot dark blast powers from!

[FFTMime]

I'll be honest, back on live I was a Grav/Kin Controller main, Space Cat, even back when they didn't have double damage to controlled targets. Space Cat was a space catgirl with a garrish color scheme that was kicked off of her home planet for being too annoying. Having kept playing the same controller till I quit the game, I can safely say...

CONTROLLER TRASH

I never even played Defenders. I just know how bad controllers really are. It was always a passion. Not a decision based on functionality. It's bad. They're bad. There are tons of reasons why. Unless successive updates have done something incredibly silly, they have the simple problem of being the most helpful AT to have around in every situation except the exact situations you want help in. At which point they can't even get double damage procs,, and having played controller since near release I can say you may as well expect them to go brawl the target at that point.  It is the most fun AT in the game both in gameplay and concept and the worst designed from a realistic standpoint of how the game wants to work. Which is a shame cause it's the closest you will ever feel to being an actual wizard. Terrible at killing but essentially unassailable. 

That said, I don't doubt somehow madmen can proc build and power pool their way to success regardless.  I don't know a lot about Homecomming itself. 

I post this before reading the thread to see just how wildly my opinion changes post research. 

[Maelwys]

On 3/26/2025 at 12:42 AM, FFTMime said:

That said, I don't doubt somehow madmen can proc build and power pool their way to success regardless.  I don't know a lot about Homecomming itself. 

Procs and Power pools are nice, but IMO by themselves they're rarely the primary factor behind whether a given toon will perform well or not.

A large part of Controller performance on teams is going to come from their "Support" set; and certain powersets simply don't care about the higher buff/debuff scalars of a Defender because you become "capped" just as easily on other lower-scalar ATs. Kinetics is a prime example of this: Fulcrum Shift spam is going to get you to the damage cap regardless of whether it's from a Defender or a Controller or even a Mastermind. Marine Affinity is another one that can work better on non-Defenders - the more friendly entities attacking (e.g. MM Henchmen or Controller Imps/Phantom Army/Vines/etc) the more damage Shifting Tide procs deal.

There are also a good few standout "Control" powersets: Plant is widely regarded as the best all-rounder; to the point that many won't play it because it makes things "too easy" (Seeds of Confusion + Creepers can practically carry a whole team by itself) . However Arsenal can come pretty close (Smoke Cannister + Sleep Grenade/Flashbang spam) and has the ability to tank AVs. And obviously Illusion becomes very good too whenever you get sufficient recharge for Perma Phantom Army (and give them the Soulbound proc) - but opportunities to leverage Containment are few and far between on it. And IMO this is the biggest point worth making about damage procs on Controllers - using them in attacks that have low base damage but reasonably high base recharge (e.g. many controller abilities) will provide a noticeable boost to that attack's damage without you having to jump through hoops to leverage containment... and whilst they don't benefit from +damage buffs; they will from -resistance debuffs (e.g. what your 'Support' powerset is may be very relevant here). 

Epic/Patron pools can also provide a big boost; depending on how you choose to go. Armor toggles. Decently-damaging attacks. Powerful Debuffs (like Poisonous Ray). More Pets. Endurance Management tools. Mez Protection. Self-Healing. Self-Rez. Damage/ToHit buffs. And Power Boost (absolutely huge for Forcefield and Time Manipulation).

As for pool powers? Specific ones can be leveraged to add a large amount of performance in specific situations ('Hasten' for Perma-PA Illusion Controllers; for example) and whenever you combine them with Procs a few pool powers will become surprisingly good sources of damage and/or debuffs (such as 'Weaken Resolve' from the Force of Will pool) but IMO usually they'll only be providing minor additional utility or a filler attack or two; rather than a character-defining boost in performance.

[FFTMime]

5 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

Procs and Power pools are nice, but IMO by themselves they're rarely the primary factor behind whether a given toon will perform well or not.
 

I guess one can't bleed a stone.

I've started a Fluff/Fluff controller, and I am in love all over again. The -ToHit really helps in the interm, but I know this is a temporary life. I still remember being on a TF where we simply did not have the damage to kill the AV, and at that moment I wished I had spent all those hours leveling a blaster instead. Any blaster. Maybe a defender at least. It's, sadly, one of my core original COH memories. At least it made me appreciate the role blasters played. You don't know to appreciate having a nice overtuned one till you need it. 

I mean you are there for catching runners or the occasional enemy making a run at the blaster. The blaster you do genuinely need more than you are needed. They'll be incredibly thankful you were on the look out for it. Since even great tankers need a moment to respond to that. Silly things can still happen. 

 

I don't know. I just wish there was another AT I enjoyed this much. 

[Carnifax]

1 hour ago, FFTMime said:

I've started a Fluff/Fluff controller, and I am in love all over again. The -ToHit really helps in the interm, but I know this is a temporary life. I still remember being on a TF where we simply did not have the damage to kill the AV, and at that moment I wished I had spent all those hours leveling a blaster instead. Any blaster. Maybe a defender at least. It's, sadly, one of my core original COH memories. At least it made me appreciate the role blasters played. You don't know to appreciate having a nice overtuned one till you need it. 

 

A Dark / Dark controller will be laying on -Resists and -Regens so they definitely pull their weight on TFs and vs AVs. Plus pet damage from the doggie & haunts. And keeping the bugger in one place. 

 

I basically kept Rommie on his back (steady) yesterday on an ITF with my Fire / Marine. And was donating damage via the Imps ("free" damage with regards to animation times), +dam to the whole team and -resist on Rommie. 

 

Here's a side by side parse of that run vs a Dual Pistols / Kin corruptor I ran earlier this week. Definitely held my own. 

[FFTMime]

6 hours ago, Carnifax said:

Here's a side by side parse of that run vs a Dual Pistols / Kin corruptor

I've been skimming the forum for a sense of how things work in Homecoming, and I've never seen something nice said about Dual Pistols. Just how bad is it? 

[Carnifax]

3 hours ago, FFTMime said:

I've been skimming the forum for a sense of how things work in Homecoming, and I've never seen something nice said about Dual Pistols. Just how bad is it? 

AoE is good. Likes to be in melee. Can't compete with Fire or Ice in single (like most sets) but it's great fun. 

[FFTMime]

So one of those low single target damage but high aoe sets. I could see why a lot don't like it as such. Something to be said for designating the toughest guy in the room for death RIGHT NOW. Particularly on a blaster. 

[Dark Current]

I had this done a week ago, but I'm just now getting around to releasing my DEFCON 1 Verdict:
 

Traps goes to the DEFENDER!!! My detailed reasons are in my YT video linked below, but the short version is that while the statistics suggest a tie, the Controller had what I would call (in hindsight) a disqualifying team and therefore his stats are suspect, if not misleading. Overall, the defender provided better defenses while the controller provided superior offense.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now that all 5 levels of DEFCON are complete, all the stats will be combined and analyzed in totem and patterns looked for to answer the big question: who is the superior support archetyped?

 

Is a defender with the better buff / debuff numbers and their arsenal of blasts, better? Or is the controller with their synergy between controls and support? Or are they statistically indistinguishable? Or is 'better' a situational product?

 

Find out in the next video: DEFCON 5 FINAL JUDGEMENT... coming Soon

[Dark Current]

FINAL VERDICT: Controllers ARE the Superior Support Archetype vs. Defenders

 

Recap of all DEFCON Matchups:

 

 

Deep-dive Statistical Analysis of Aggregate Defenders vs Controllers:

 

Edited April 17 by Dark Current

[Dark Current]

The Bulwark vs. The Binder… SURVIVABILITY

Support	Mission	P Defeats	Time	Teammate	RATE	COMPOSITE	Support	Mission	P Defeats	Time	Teammate	RATE	COMPOSITE
Electrical	1	0	13	3	0.000	0.000	Electrical	1	0	8	4	0.000	0.000
	2	1	11	4	0.091	0.023		2	0	14	4	0.000	0.000
	3	0	11	5	0.000	0.000		3	0	17	4	0.000	0.000
	4	1	13	5	0.077	0.015		4	1	19	3	0.053	0.018
	mayhem	1	28	5	0.036	0.007		mayhem	1	26	4	0.038	0.010
Nature	1	0	7	4	0.000	0.000	Nature	1	0	12	4	0.000	0.000
	2	0	6	4	0.000	0.000		2	0	18	4	0.000	0.000
	3	0	4	4	0.000	0.000		3	0	13	2	0.000	0.000
	4	0	18	4	0.000	0.000		4	0	7	3	0.000	0.000
								5	0	6	3	0.000	0.000
	mayhem	2	27	4	0.074	0.019		mayhem	0	25	3	0.000	0.000
Time	1	0	8	4	0.000	0.000	Time	1	1	25	4	0.040	0.010
	2	0	12	4	0.000	0.000		2	0	28	4	0.000	0.000
	3	0	6	4	0.000	0.000		3	0	22	4	0.000	0.000
	4	0	16	4	0.000	0.000		4	0	15	4	0.000	0.000
	safeguard	0	30	3	0.000	0.000		safeguard	0	41	4	0.000	0.000
Kinetics	1	1	8	4	0.125	0.031	Kinetics	1	0	6	4	0.000	0.000
	2	0	16	4	0.000	0.000		2	0	8	4	0.000	0.000
	3	0	12	4	0.000	0.000		3	0	11	4	0.000	0.000
	4	0	4	4	0.000	0.000		4	0	12	4	0.000	0.000
	5	1	11	4	0.091	0.023		5	0	20	4	0.000	0.000
Traps	1	0	14	4	0.000	0.000	Traps	1	0	6	4	0.000	0.000
	2	0	15	4	0.000	0.000		2	0	11	4	0.000	0.000
	3	0	7	4	0.000	0.000		3	0	6	4	0.000	0.000
	4	0	7	4	0.000	0.000		4	1	10	4	0.100	0.025
	mayhem	0	33	4	0.000	0.000		Safeguard	0	27	4	0.000	0.000
	TOTAL	7	337	4.04	0.020	0.005	AVG	TOTAL	4	413	3.77	0.009	0.002
					0.038	0.009	STD					0.023	0.006
					0.008	0.002	SE					0.005	0.001

 

 

 

 

Interpretation: Survivability – Personal Defeats

• Defenders: Took more defeats on average, but the difference wasn’t statistically meaningful. Slightly more volatile survivability.
• Controllers: Fewer defeats overall with tighter clustering, but isolated spikes skewed a few results.
• Distribution Insight: Defenders had more outliers (4 vs. 3), suggesting greater variance, but most data still clustered tightly around the mean.
• No correlation found between defeat rate and time for either archetype.
• Verdict: Neither side showed a consistent edge. Performance > archetype.

[Dark Current]

The Bulwark vs. The Binder… RISK

Support	Mission	A Defeats	Time	Teammate	RATE	COMPOSITE	Support	Mission	A Defeats	Time	Teammate	RATE	COMPOSITE
Electrical	1	1	13	3	0.08	0.03	Electrical	1	1	8	4	0.13	0.03
	2	3	11	4	0.27	0.07		2	3	14	4	0.21	0.05
	3	1	11	5	0.09	0.02		3	12	17	4	0.71	0.18
	4	4	13	5	0.31	0.06		4	1	19	3	0.05	0.02
	mayhem	10	28	5	0.36	0.07		mayhem	1	26	4	0.04	0.01
Nature	1	0	7	4	0.00	0.00	Nature	1	0	12	4	0.00	0.00
	2	0	6	4	0.00	0.00		2	0	18	4	0.00	0.00
	3	0	4	4	0.00	0.00		3	1	13	2	0.08	0.04
	4	5	18	4	0.28	0.07		4	0	7	3	0.00	0.00
								5	0	6	3	0.00	0.00
	mayhem	2	27	4	0.07	0.02		mayhem	3	25	3	0.12	0.04
Time	1	1	8	4	0.13	0.03	Time	1	2	25	4	0.08	0.02
	2	0	12	4	0.00	0.00		2	1	28	4	0.04	0.01
	3	0	6	4	0.00	0.00		3	1	22	4	0.05	0.01
	4	0	16	4	0.00	0.00		4	1	15	4	0.07	0.02
	safeguard	3	30	3	0.10	0.03		safeguard	4	41	4	0.10	0.02
Kinetics	1	1	8	4	0.13	0.03	Kinetics	1	2	6	4	0.33	0.08
	2	1	16	4	0.06	0.02		2	1	8	4	0.13	0.03
	3	1	12	4	0.08	0.02		3	0	11	4	0.00	0.00
	4	0	4	4	0.00	0.00		4	1	12	4	0.08	0.02
	5	1	11	4	0.09	0.02		5	0	20	4	0.00	0.00
Traps	1	1	14	4	0.07	0.02	Traps	1	0	6	4	0.00	0.00
	2	0	15	4	0.00	0.00		2	1	11	4	0.09	0.02
	3	0	7	4	0.00	0.00		3	1	6	4	0.17	0.04
	4	1	7	4	0.14	0.04		4	0	10	4	0.00	0.00
	mayhem	2	33	4	0.06	0.02		Safeguard	3	27	4	0.11	0.03
	TOTAL	38	337	4.04	0.09	0.02	AVG	TOTAL	40	413	3.77	0.10	0.03
					0.11	0.02	STD					0.15	0.04
					0.02	0.00	SE					0.03	0.01

 

 

 

 

 

Interpretation: Risk (Ally Defeats)

• Overall Outcome:
  No significant difference in Risk Rate between Defenders and Controllers. Both archetypes had an average team defeat rate of around 0.10 per minute — meaning their teams suffered a defeat roughly once every 10 minutes, on average.
   
• Consistency & Spread:
  Composite distributions for both archetypes were narrow and overlapping, indicating a stable and similar performance level.
  The Controllers showed two high outliers, indicating occasional team collapses that weren’t seen in the Defender runs — but those were exceptions, not patterns.
   
• No Correlation to Mission Length:
  Neither archetype showed a meaningful relationship between mission length and team defeat rate. Long or short, the rate remained consistent, suggesting reliability across mission types and durations.
   
• Conclusion:
  Despite Controllers occasionally having spike events (likely due to burst failure of controls or pet AI quirks), the overall team safety profile was nearly identical between the two archetypes.

 

 

DEFEAT LOAD

Across all the entire DEFCON 5 series…

• How punishing were these missions were on the team overall?
• How well the team was protected over time?
• Which archetype carried the weight of team safety better?

If you add all player defeats (personal + ally) and divide by the average number of teammates (including the support character), you get a “Defeat Load” — or how many total defeats occurred per player on the team.

 

 

Interpretation:

• The number is very close: both archetypes resulted in about 9 total defeats spread across each player slot over their missions.
• This backs up the previous conclusions: no meaningful difference in team-wide fragility or risk management. The load per player is basically the same.

Edited Friday at 10:59 PM by Dark Current

[Dark Current]

The Bulwark vs. The Binder… LETHALITY

Support	Mission	F Defeats	Time	Teammate	RATE	COMPOSITE	Support	Mission	F Defeats	Time	Teammate	RATE	COMPOSITE
Electrical	1	32	13	3	2.5	0.8	Electrical	1	25	8	4	3.1	0.8
	2	50	11	4	4.5	1.1		2	25	14	4	1.8	0.4
	3	32	11	5	2.9	0.6		3	26	17	4	1.5	0.4
	4	19	13	5	1.5	0.3		4	44	19	3	2.3	0.8
	mayhem	74	28	5	2.6	0.5		mayhem	78	26	4	3.0	0.8
Nature	1	25	7	4	3.6	0.9	Nature	1	46	12	4	3.8	1.0
	2	22	6	4	3.7	0.9		2	128	18	4	7.1	1.8
	3	2	4	4	0.5	0.1		3	70	13	2	5.4	2.7
	4	42	18	4	2.3	0.6		4	30	7	3	4.3	1.4
								5	14	6	3	2.3	0.8
	mayhem	81	27	4	3.0	0.8		mayhem	61	25	3	2.4	0.8
Time	1	42	8	4	5.3	1.3	Time	1	91	25	4	3.6	0.9
	2	53	12	4	4.4	1.1		2	101	28	4	3.6	0.9
	3	26	6	4	4.3	1.1		3	45	22	4	2.0	0.5
	4	31	16	4	1.9	0.5		4	45	15	4	3.0	0.8
	safeguard	127	30	3	4.2	1.4		safeguard	87	41	4	2.1	0.5
Kinetics	1	16	8	4	2.0	0.5	Kinetics	1	24	6	4	4.0	1.0
	2	47	16	4	2.9	0.7		2	42	8	4	5.3	1.3
	3	38	12	4	3.2	0.8		3	55	11	4	5.0	1.3
	4	9	4	4	2.3	0.6		4	33	12	4	2.8	0.7
	5	24	11	4	2.2	0.5		5	114	20	4	5.7	1.4
Traps	1	23	14	4	1.6	0.4	Traps	1	24	6	4	4.0	1.0
	2	46	15	4	3.1	0.8		2	41	11	4	3.7	0.9
	3	26	7	4	3.7	0.9		3	33	6	4	5.5	1.4
	4	23	7	4	3.3	0.8		4	17	10	4	1.7	0.4
	mayhem	88	33	4	2.7	0.7		Safeguard	85	27	4	3.1	0.8
	TOTAL	998	337	4.04	3.0	0.8	AVG	TOTAL	1384	413	3.77	3.6	1.0
					1.1	0.3	STD					1.4	0.5
					0.2	0.1	SE					0.3	0.1

 

 

 

 

Interpretation:

• Controllers had a higher average kill rate than Defenders — but this wasn't domination. It was consistency.
   
• Controllers are opportunists. They create fragile windows of vulnerability through control and illusion, then capitalize. Their damage output often comes in waves — phantasms, creepers, pets, DoTs — and it works because the battlefield is under their thumb. They aren't rushing. They're setting the stage and letting the clockwork run.
   
• Defenders, on the other hand, are slow burners. Their lethality builds. Their tools — often debuffs, auras, positional blasts — compound over time. And while their average kill rate was lower, the correlation with mission time tells a story: the longer the mission, the more dangerous the Defender becomes. That’s not just about output — it’s about traction.
   
•  “Who kills more?” The answer is: Controllers, slightly. But if you’re asking, “Who shapes the kill tempo?”, then it becomes trickier.
  • Controllers frontload and finish.
  • Defenders ramp and sustain.

 

 

LETHALITY LOAD – interpreting the kill pressure

Across the entire DEFCON 5 series…

• How lethal were these teams overall?
• How much offensive pressure did they apply as a group?
• Which archetype generated more total team impact over time?

To answer that, we calculate the Lethality Load:

Add up all foe defeats from the mission logs. Divide by the average number of teammates (excluding the support character) to determine how many kills were generated per teammate slot across all missions.

This gives a sense of teamwide combat output — and allows direct comparison to the individual Lethality stats of the Defenders and Controllers.

 

 

Interpretation:

• Teammate Kills: Nearly identical — both archetypes led teams that delivered similar total kills.
• Kills per Teammate: Again, close — suggesting that teammates across both sides contributed evenly, kill-wise.
   
• Controller Lethality is concentrated, even though their teammates didn’t lag too far behind the defender’s.
  • Defender kills = 22.5% of total team kills (998 / 4437)
  • Controller kills = 31.2% of total team kills (1384 / 4441)
     
• Controllers may have had more tools or pets tagging final blows. Their builds could be funneling more combat to themselves — through summons, AoEs, or aggro manipulation. Or, their teammates were more supportive/less aggressive, letting Controllers shine.
• Defender Lethality is Distributed as their teams had higher kills per teammate than the controller’s.
  • More ally throughput — teammates dealt the finishing blows more often.
  • Defenders might not be logging the kills, but they’re boosting teammates’ performance.
• Defenders amplify the team’s total lethality, even if they personally don’t get the credit on the scoreboard.

Edited Friday at 11:03 PM by Dark Current

[Dark Current]

The Bulwark vs. The Binder… THREAT

Support	Mission	DMG Out	Time	Teammate	RATE	COMPOSITE	Support	Mission	DMG Out	Time	Teammate	RATE	COMPOSITE
Electrical	1	26686	13	3	2053	684	Electrical	1	28898	8	4	3612	903
	2	43998	11	4	4000	1000		2	50124	14	4	3580	895
	3	35956	11	5	3269	654		3	34983	17	4	2058	514
	4	32188	13	5	2476	495		4	64033	19	3	3370	1123
	mayhem	136770	28	5	4885	977		mayhem	90620	26	4	3485	871
Nature	1	25917	7	4	3702	926	Nature	1	47382	12	4	3948	987
	2	19978	6	4	3330	832		2	86902	18	4	4828	1207
	3	4611	4	4	1153	288		3	62640	13	2	4818	2409
	4	47292	18	4	2627	657		4	26531	7	3	3790	1263
								5	9054	6	3	1509	503
	mayhem	86752	27	4	3213	803		mayhem	74236	25	3	2969	990
Time	1	42504	8	4	5313	1328	Time	1	94081	25	4	3763	941
	2	56179	12	4	4682	1170		2	103122	28	4	3683	921
	3	21825	6	4	3638	909		3	48758	22	4	2216	554
	4	44633	16	4	2790	697		4	51038	15	4	3403	851
	safeguard	124568	30	3	4152	1384		safeguard	110426	41	4	2693	673
Kinetics	1	17597	8	4	2200	550	Kinetics	1	30271	6	4	5045	1261
	2	55480	16	4	3467	867		2	32299	8	4	4037	1009
	3	36397	12	4	3033	758		3	58663	11	4	5333	1333
	4	15607	4	4	3902	975		4	47442	12	4	3953	988
	5	26970	11	4	2452	613		5	93463	20	4	4673	1168
Traps	1	24937	14	4	1781	445	Traps	1	36405	6	4	6067	1517
	2	41152	15	4	2743	686		2	41197	11	4	3745	936
	3	26942	7	4	3849	962		3	31473	6	4	5246	1311
	4	13016	7	4	1859	465		4	29218	10	4	2922	730
	mayhem	83810	33	4	2540	635		Safeguard	97492	27	4	3611	903
	TOTAL	1091766	337	4.04	3164	791	AVG	TOTAL	1480751	413	3.77	3783	1029
					1021	267	STD					1061	380
					204	53	SE					208	74

 

 

 

 

Interpretation:

• Controllers delivered significantly more damage per minute on average:
  • CON AVG: 3,783 damage/min
  • DEF AVG: 3,164 damage/min
     
• Both archetypes showed a clear correlation between damage output and mission time — longer missions gave more room for their impact to build.
   
• Controllers also had more volatility, with a wider range of values and a high outlier that pushed their composite distribution further than defenders, who were more consistent with no outliers.

 

Threat Quotient (DMG Out : Foe Defeats)

"How much damage does it take for a support archetype to get a kill?"

A lower Threat Quotient means:

• More of a character’s damage results in kills directly.
• The player is likely landing finishing blows or dealing high-impact, decisive bursts.

A higher Threat Quotient might suggest:

• The character’s damage is spread across enemies, weakening them but letting teammates land the final blows.
• They’re playing a more enabling or support-through-damage role.

Results

• Defender TQ: 1088 damage per foe
• Controller TQ: 1003 damage per foe
• Statistical Tie (no significant difference)
• Positive correlation for both ATs — more damage = more kills, consistently

 

 

Edited Friday at 11:08 PM by Dark Current

[Dark Current]

Controllers' Pet-centricity

Interpretation:

• Controllers unleashed more overall damage, driven heavily by their high-performing pets (48% of their total damage on average).
• Defenders relied more on their personal output, with pet contributions making up a smaller share (only 28.8% of total damage).
   
• Statistically, this was a very large difference:
  • Defender pet damage: 777k out of 1.09M
  • Controller pet damage: 770k out of 1.48M
     
• This suggests Controllers act as force multipliers, leveraging summoned pets to maintain consistent pressure and damage across missions — even when the controller isn’t doing the bulk of the blasting.
• Meanwhile, Defenders embody a “do-it-yourself” ethos, channeling the bulk of their value through their own powers, not proxies.

 

 

Pet Protection

"Does higher pet damage correlate with fewer ally deaths?"

 

Interpretation:

• • Defender Slope: 5712 pet dmg per ally defeat
• Controller Slope: 5537 pet dmg per ally defeat
• No correlation for either AT

Pets aren’t reliably absorbing or distracting enough enemies to reduce team casualties in a predictable way.

The similar slope values show equal levels of investment in pet-generated threat, but the lack of correlation suggests their protection value is situational — maybe spiking during certain fights (e.g., large groups or drawn-out mayhems), but not reliable across all missions.

 

 

Pet Aggression

"Does pet damage lead directly to more kills?"

Interpretation:

• Defender Slope: 329 pet dmg per foe defeated (no correlation)
• Controller Slope: 475 pet dmg per foe defeated (with correlation)
   
• Controller pets are delivering reliable finishing power — the correlation shows a direct link between pet damage and actual kills. Their minions aren’t just nibbling at edges; they’re actively closing fights.
• Defender pets are contributing solidly (lower slope), but their impact is more diffuse — possibly because they’re soaked into AoE fights where others land the kills, or because defenders mix more personal damage into the equation.

 

Edited Friday at 11:13 PM by Dark Current

[Dark Current]

The Bulwark vs. The Binder… RESILIENCE

Support	Mission	DMG In	Time	Teammate	RATE	COMPOSITE	Support	Mission	DMG In	Time	Teammate	RATE	COMPOSITE
Electrical	1	4519	13	3	348	116	Electrical	1	3102	8	4	388	97
	2	10026	11	4	911	228		2	9459	14	4	676	169
	3	7181	11	5	653	131		3	11204	17	4	659	165
	4	14233	13	5	1095	219		4	12474	19	3	657	219
	mayhem	17804	28	5	636	127		mayhem	11172	26	4	430	107
Nature	1	1764	7	4	252	63	Nature	1	1134	12	4	95	24
	2	1352	6	4	225	56		2	2779	18	4	154	39
	3	1870	4	4	467	117		3	2409	13	2	185	93
	4	14316	18	4	795	199		4	2805	7	3	401	134
								5	492	6	3	82	27
	mayhem	13203	27	4	489	122		mayhem	6705	25	3	268	89
Time	1	7274	8	4	909	227	Time	1	11511	25	4	460	115
	2	2624	12	4	219	55		2	6112	28	4	218	55
	3	532	6	4	89	22		3	7993	22	4	363	91
	4	2611	16	4	163	41		4	4986	15	4	332	83
	safeguard	13706	30	3	457	152		safeguard	17166	41	4	419	105
Kinetics	1	5985	8	4	748	187	Kinetics	1	1557	6	4	259	65
	2	3798	16	4	237	59		2	3773	8	4	472	118
	3	3888	12	4	324	81		3	2071	11	4	188	47
	4	3390	4	4	847	212		4	2739	12	4	228	57
	5	7723	11	4	702	176		5	4845	20	4	242	61
Traps	1	5997	14	4	428	107	Traps	1	3117	6	4	520	130
	2	2429	15	4	162	40		2	1800	11	4	164	41
	3	1684	7	4	241	60		3	3359	6	4	560	140
	4	3272	7	4	467	117		4	9696	10	4	970	242
	mayhem	5571	33	4	169	42		Safeguard	8517	27	4	315	79
	TOTAL	156752	337	4.04	481	118	AVG	TOTAL	152977	413	3.77	373	100
					286	66	STD					210	55
					57	13	SE					41	11

 

 

 

 

Interpretation:

• Controllers took less damage per minute than Defenders by a statistically significant amount (SE ranges do not overlap).
  • Controllers: 373 dmg/min (±41 SE)
  • Defenders: 481 dmg/min (±57 SE)
     

• No correlation was found between incoming damage and mission time for either group. This tells us the trend wasn't due to longer fights — damage just arrived at a steadier clip for both.

Composite distribution showed a more tightly packed curve for Controllers, but over 50% IQR overlap means the real difference lies in a small edge, not a massive gap.

 

 

Resilience Quotient

When a support character takes damage, does it protect the team from defeat?

Resilience Quotient = Damage In / Ally Defeats

• A higher number might suggest a support that soaks damage before the team falls.
• A lower number might suggest that team defeats occurred even when the support wasn’t under fire — or that the damage taken wasn’t impactful.

 

 

Interpretation:

Defenders took more damage per team defeat (2,642) — suggesting they were absorbing more punishment without their team crumbling.

Controllers, by contrast, showed a lower damage per defeat (1,763) — either they weren’t being hit as often, or their teams fell regardless of whether they were being targeted.

But there was no correlation, so across dozens of missions, there was no consistent relationship between how much a support was hit and whether their allies lived or died.

In other words, the damage a support character takes may not be the deciding factor in team safety at all. Maybe it’s not about who takes the hits — it’s about who stops the hits from happening in the first place.

Edited Friday at 11:15 PM by Dark Current

[Dark Current]

Damage Efficiency

 

 

Interpretation

• Defenders: Average Efficiency Ratio = 10.1
• Controllers: Average Efficiency Ratio = 14.2
   
• Controllers were more efficient at trading hits for harm — they got more bang for each point of damage they endured.
• The gap was marginal, and in many missions, Defenders kept pace or even outperformed them.
   
• Composite distributions largely overlapped, especially in the middle range, with Controllers skewing higher at the top end.
   
• Controllers edged out ahead in overall efficiency — but it wasn’t a rout. It was a strategic win, not a show of overwhelming power.

 

Edited Friday at 11:16 PM by Dark Current

[Dark Current]

Final Verdict: SO…Which Archetype Emerged as the Superior Support — Defender or Controller?

---

After 51 missions, 4,000+ total kills, nearly 2.5 million combined points of damage dealt, and dozens of metrics across five power set matchups, the Controller archetype edged out the Defender in overall performance — but not by dominance. Here’s the call:
 

🏆 VICTORY: Controller… but with an asterisk.

---

 

Why Controllers Came Out on Top

Higher Damage Output (Threat)

• Controllers had a statistically significant advantage in damage per minute.
• This wasn’t a fluke — it held across most matchups and showed correlation with mission time, indicating scalable impact.

Superior Lethality

• Controllers averaged 3.6 kills per minute vs. 3.0 for Defenders — a significant lead.
• They also claimed 31.2% of total team kills on 5-player teams — punching well above their weight in offensive contribution.

 Better Damage Efficiency

• They absorbed less damage per minute and dealt more — ending with higher out:in ratios.
• Not overwhelming, but the margins were clean and consistent.

Higher Threat Quotient

• Both ATs showed correlation between damage and kills, but Controllers converted their damage to kills more efficiently, often through pet synergy and AoE stacking of damage, controls, debuffs and pets.

 

Caveats: Where Defenders Fought Back

Stronger Individual Set Performances

• In Time Manipulation and Traps matchups, Defenders won clearly, showing that a smart, aggressive build can absolutely rival or exceed a Controller.
• These wins weren’t marginal — they came with superior personal performance and better team outcomes.

Stronger Reliability in Support Roles

• Defenders consistently had lower standard deviation in key metrics — suggesting greater stability and less reliance on team comp or pet AI.
• Their Resilience Quotient was higher, meaning they absorbed more punishment before allies went down.

Edited Friday at 11:20 PM by Dark Current