DEFCON II: AFTERMATH — Do Controllers Still Outscale Defenders?

[Dark Current]

Round 2: Empathy

"Your powers give you the ability to heal and aid allies as well as yourself. Empathy has no offensive powers, but its heals and buffs are unmatched."

 

 

The Challengers...

 

Ankh

Empathy / Water / Soul DEFENDER

 

 

Concept: Lord of the Wrapped. Empowered by Ra, the sun god to reclaim incarnate power stolen by the insolent Greek deities.
Blasts of punishing sand and bursts of radiant vitality. Hunting down Mu mystics in service to Scirocco who have plundered the tombs of the ancients and stolen relics.

Playstyle: Light switch. Buff first. Then Blast away. Support on the fly.
 

VS
 

Frisson Sensate

Symphony / Empathy / Ice CONTROLLER

 

 

Concept: Famous soft rock superstar who gained power through abuse of designer neuro-pharmaceuticals synthesize using CSF from Praetorian Seer Network. His vocal talent has been enhanced to where his songs amplify the emotions of his listeners bringing them euphoria and elevating them to heights of passion.
Playstyle: Blanket enemies with 7 swaths of far-reaching cone attacks, layering multiple CCs and debuffs. Support as needed.

 

 

Matchup Video

 

Both are designed to bring the pain as much as ease the pain. Of special note, Frisson was designed by Cathy (Chat GPT) and I can't wait to show you what she came up with.

 

Edited August 14 by Dark Current

[Dark Current]

Ankh

MIDS Build: Ankh - Defender (Empathy)2.mbd

 

 

 

Frisson Sensate

MIDS Build: Frisson Sensate - Controller (Symphony Control - Empathy).mbd

 

 

 

 

Edited August 6 by Dark Current

[Dark Current]

Frisson's 801 Trials

"The Slaughterhouse doesn’t let you save the team. It lets you trade it—one soul at a time." Chatty Cathy

 

 

The Challenge: AE 801 Trials

• A brutal custom mission arc designed by @Linea to push support builds to their limits
• Includes elite bosses, ambush chains, and heavy debuffs
• Played at +4/x8 difficulty with incarnate-level enemies
• 5-man teams, level 50 minimum
• Increasing mission difficulty from Tier 1 - Tier 5, randomly selected from mission list by die roll
• Trial ends when either Defeat Condition is met: 4 out of 5 defeated teammates at the same time; time-limited missions (30, 30, 45, 45, 60) or Success Condition is met: complete all 5 tiers of missions before the time limit expires.
• No extraneous help, no 'cheese' temp powers like AV summons or super-inspirations, no email access, no exiting the map, no hospital visits... just what your character has on them and would 'normally' do within the purview of their build

Edited August 14 by Dark Current

[Linea]

🍿🍺 I'm glad you're enjoying the missions.  I've been chuckling almost non-stop for the last 2 hours. Voltak and Lumi both frequently brought empaths to these.  If Either of them joined the team I'd automatically set it 1 tier higher. 😉

 

"801.0 I hope this isn't too easy peasy"

- 801.0 is the easiest.  It's intended for a very small team or solo

 

"801.5-C ..."

- You overlooked the team-size multipliers in the list.  That effects lots of things within the tier itself, including mission length and difficulty.

- 801.5 is intended as a full team test, as compared to the small team/solo test above.  Each tier is roughly double the difficulty of the previous tier and you went from the bottom of tier 1 to the top of tier 2.  I'd guess that means this mission is about 3-4x harder than the one you started with, as well as about twice as long.

 

"801.6-Static ..."

- Static tagged missions are "Very Short, Static, less comprehensive, lightweight tests" designed so you can quickly and easily test and compare tiers "Without the Randomness". 

 

"801.7-Tech-R"

- I hope you brought your grown up pants.

- This is just barely over the balance point where game mechanics start breaking. 

- Give me the smallest amount of team buffs and the mechanics balance back out.  However, this is why I made the 6s and inserted them into the list.  The 6s are just under the mechanics balance point.   It was fun and interesting to really find how all the various mechanics work and when and where and how they break.

- I ran a lot of 6's and 7's depending on the balance point of the team.

 

"It's hard to figure out a time limit"

- Teams vary too much, You'll never get one answer here.  I've had teams complete Difficulty 15 in less than 30 minutes, and teams fail difficulty 2 after 2 hours.  

 

"We've Got this."

"Wasn't too bad."

"Oh !@#$ ... Oh ^%!@#,  ... OH! @#$ %!@# &%@#!"

"Got Smoked. Bro!"

"They broke the Unbreakable Tank ... "

"It's getting to the point that I have to start buffing the tanks ..."

"We're dying like crazy ..."

"Come to the PO AE and have BAG of Wakies ..."

"Holy !@#$ this is !@#$%$# Insane ..."

"What the !@#$ was that! Holy %@#% ..."

"Does that Count? ... That was Brutal! ... The Doom of the Squad ..."

- *Evil Chuckle* 🤣

 

Edited August 7 by Linea

[gyyv]

@Linea

Been running these with a couple diff groups (along with DC.) Love this stuff. I've had the team express hesitation about doing them, however once started thegrind is addictive.

Thanks.

[Dark Current]

On 8/7/2025 at 4:15 PM, Linea said:

🍿🍺 I'm glad you're enjoying the missions.  I've been chuckling almost non-stop for the last 2 hours. Voltak and Lumi both frequently brought empaths to these.  If Either of them joined the team I'd automatically set it 1 tier higher. 😉

 

"801.0 I hope this isn't too easy peasy"

- 801.0 is the easiest.  It's intended for a very small team or solo

 

"801.5-C ..."

- You overlooked the team-size multipliers in the list.  That effects lots of things within the tier itself, including mission length and difficulty.

- 801.5 is intended as a full team test, as compared to the small team/solo test above.  Each tier is roughly double the difficulty of the previous tier and you went from the bottom of tier 1 to the top of tier 2.  I'd guess that means this mission is about 3-4x harder than the one you started with, as well as about twice as long.

Thanks for putting these together @Linea They're a fun challenge for testing my DECONs.

 

If each tier is 2x as hard as the one before, how would the 801.0 compare to a standard +4 radio or paper mission?

[Apocalyptical]

@Linea Dude! Thank you for creating these! They have been a blast! 

Edited August 12 by Apocalyptical

[Linea]

18 hours ago, Dark Current said:

If each tier is 2x as hard as the one before, how would the 801.0 compare to a standard +4 radio or paper mission?

Harder.  I really don't know how much harder.  My original intent was to design a mission, or two, that would test each potential mechanic and/or potential hole in armors.   I never really intended to do more than the two missions that were what is 801.2 now.  But people asked for more.

• 801.0 would be roughly equivalent in layout, and overall mission mechanics, and short small maps like radios.
• I'd guess somewhere between 1x and 2x length, but I really didn't measure it that way so I'm not sure.
• Harder Mobs, it has 801 mobs instead of standard mobs.  I'd guess they are probably similar to Blackwing, or Blackwing are similar to them.   But I don't know.  I tested the early Blackwing prototypes when they were still buggy and overpowered.
• Harder, Even with just 801.2, I stopped counting after slaughtering a few thousand tanks.

[Dark Current]

Frisson Sensate, Empathy Controller analysis:

 

 

Mission Overview

• Mission 1: 801.0 IC 6034 = 16 minutes
• Mission 2: 801.5 C IC 6035 = 36 minutes
• Mission 3: 801.6 Static IC 6041 = 30 minutes
• Mission 4: 801.7 Tech R IC 6089 = 18 minutes

4 Teammates: Arcfusion (Tanker), Shocksplice (Tanker), Nate Shocks (Sentinel), gyyv (Peacebringer)

Total Time = 100 minutes

 

1. Survivability – Personal Defeats

Mission	P Defeats	Time	Teammate	RATE	Composite
1	0	16	4	0.000	0.000
2	7	36	4	0.194	0.049
3	7	30	4	0.233	0.058
4	3	18	4	0.167	0.042
Total	17	100		0.149	0.037	AVG
				0.103	0.026	STD
				0.051	0.013	SE

 

 

 

2. Risk – Ally Defeats

Mission	A Defeats	Time	Teammate	RATE	Composite
1	0	16	4	0.00	0.00
2	8	36	4	0.22	0.06
3	17	30	4	0.57	0.14
4	10	18	4	0.56	0.14
Total	35	100		0.34	0.08	AVG
				0.28	0.07	STD
				0.14	0.03	SE

 

 

3. Resilience – Damage Taken

Mission	DMG In	Time	Teammate	RATE	Composite
1	1454	16	4	91	23
2	20112	36	4	559	140
3	23342	30	4	778	195
4	11814	18	4	656	164
Total	56722	100		521	130	AVG
				300	75	STD
				150	38	SE

 

 

3a. Punishment – Damage taken vs Personal defeats

 

3b. Overwatch – Damage taken vs Ally defeats

 

3c. Pet Loyalty – Pet Damage Taken

Mission	Char DMG In	Pet DMG In	Total	PP	CP
1	1454	2441	3896	62.7%	37.3%
2	20112	6931	27043	25.6%	74.4%
3	23342	20656	43997	46.9%	53.1%
4	11814	3684	15498	23.8%	76.2%
Total	56722	33712	90434	39.8%	60.2%

 

 

3d. Pet Sacrifice – Pet Damage Taken vs Team Defeats

 

4. Disruption – Controls Delivered

Mission	Controls	Time	Teammate	RATE	COMPOSITE
1	406	16	4	25.4	6.3
2	1013	36	4	28.1	7.0
3	1497	30	4	49.9	12.5
4	1235	18	4	68.6	17.2
SubTotal	4151	100		43.0	10.8	AVG
				20.3	5.1	STD
				10.1	2.5	SE

 

 

4a. Blunting – Controls vs Damage Taken

 

4b. Prevention – Controls vs Team Defeats

 

5. Avoidance – Hits Taken

Mission	Hits	Time	Teammate	RATE	COMPOSITE
1	88	16	4	5.5	1.4
2	252	36	4	7.0	1.8
3	234	30	4	7.8	2.0
4	74	18	4	4.1	1.0
Total	648	100		6.1	1.5	AVG
				1.6	0.4	STD
				0.8	0.2	SE

 

 

5a. Targeting – Hits vs DMG taken

 

5b. Deflection – Controls vs Hits

 

6. Provision – Buffs Provided

 

6a. Warding – Buffs vs Ally Defeats

 

6b. Shielding – Buffs vs Pet Damage Taken

 

7. Lethality – Foe Defeats

Mission	F Defeats	Time	Teammate	RATE	Composite
1	26	16	4	1.6	0.4
2	82	36	4	2.3	0.6
3	44	30	4	1.5	0.4
4	10	18	4	0.6	0.1
Total	162	100		1.5	0.4	AVG
				0.7	0.2	STD
				0.4	0.1	SE

 

 

7a. Kill Share – Proportion of Team Kills

 

7b. Amplification – Provision vs Foes Defeated by Allies

 

8. Threat – Combined Damage Output

Mission	DMG Out	Time	Teammate	RATE	Composite
1	31029	16	4	1939	485
2	110368	36	4	3066	766
3	142988	30	4	4766	1192
4	99522	18	4	5529	1382
Total	383908	100		3825	956	AVG
				1625	406	STD
				812	203	SE

 

 

8a. Potency – Damage Dealt vs Foe Defeats

 

8b. Engagement – Hits vs Damage Dealt

 

9. Efficiency – Character vs Pet DMG Out

Mission	Character		Pets	Total	PP	CP
1	27758	3272		31029	10.5%	89.5%
2	91710	18658		110368	16.9%	83.1%
3	121571	21416		142988	15.0%	85.0%
4	82761	16761		99522	16.8%	83.2%
Total	323801	60107		383908	14.8%	85.2%	AVG

 

 

 

9a. Character Ratio – Out:In

Mission	DMG Out	DMG In	Ratio
1	27758	1454	19.1
2	91710	20112	4.6
3	121571	23342	5.2
4	82761	11814	7.0
Total	323801	56722	9.0	AVG
			6.8	STD
Ratio of the Sums	5.7		3.4	SE

 

9b. Pet Ratio – Out:In

Mission	DMG Out	DMG In	Ratio
1	3272	2441	1.3
2	18658	6931	2.7
3	21416	20656	1.0
4	16761	3684	4.5
Total	60107	33712	2.4	AVG
			1.6	STD
Ratio of Sums	1.8		0.8	SE

 

 

 

 

9c. Pet Aggression = Pet DMG : Character DMG Output Ratio

 

9d. Pet Savagery – Pet Damage vs Foe Defeats

 

10. Debilitation – Controls vs Damage Dealt

 

10a. Devastation – Controls vs Lethality

[Dark Current]

Empathy Defender Team

Ankh's 801 Trials - Team 2

 

Mission Overview

• Mission 1: 801.0 f IC 6034 = 13 minutes
• Mission 2: 801.5 F IC 6035 = 23 minutes (team defeated)
• Mission 3: 801.0 f IC 6034 = 17 minutes
• Mission 4: 801.5 F IC 6035 = 46 minutes (timer expired)

Teammates Missions 1-2: Gammalock (Dominator), Wednesdaywoe (Tanker), Fire Marsh (Blaster), Golden Anathema (VEAT Crab).
Teammates Missions 3-4: Gammalock (Dominator), Nate Radrock (Tanker), Hank Kirchhoff (Blaster), KILL O’WATTS (Scrapper)

 

Empathy Verdict

Reaction and Analysis - Ankh vs. Frisson Sensate (DEF vs CON)

 

 

Defensive Metrics

 

 

 

 

 

 

Defensive Summary

• Survivability: Ankh only fell 2 times vs Frisson’s 17. Clear durability edge.
• Ally Risk: Ankh’s allies suffered fewer defeats (22 vs 35), even with reckless teammates.
• Resilience: Ankh absorbed half the damage (29k vs 57k) and withstood spikes far better.
• Punishment & Overwatch: For Frisson, damage taken was directly tied to both his own and his team’s defeats. For Ankh, those links were weaker — he could take hits without dragging allies down.
• Avoidance: Frisson dodged more hits on paper, but when he was struck the damage was devastating. Ankh took more hits but reduced their impact.
• Provision (Buffs): Ankh nearly doubled Frisson’s buff output and delivered it more consistently.
• Warding (Buffs vs Ally Defeats): Frisson’s buffs tracked with collapses (reactive). Ankh’s broke the tie, preventing defeats.
• Shielding (Buffs vs Pet Damage → proxy for teammates): Frisson’s buffs rose alongside pet damage (reactive). Ankh’s reduced the link, showing true prevention.

Verdict

Defensively, Ankh was the far stronger supporter.

• Frisson: avoided more hits, but every landed blow punished him and his team. His buffs were reactionary, tied to defeats.
• Ankh: took more hits, absorbed them at half the cost, kept defeats low, and proactively blunted damage with nearly twice the buff volume.

Takeaway:

Defensively, this one wasn’t close. Frisson dodged more, but when he got hit, both he and his team collapsed. His buffs mostly came too late, chasing damage. Ankh, meanwhile, soaked more hits, turned them into half the damage, barely fell himself, and pumped out almost double the buffs — actually preventing collapses. Bottom line: Ankh was the sturdier, steadier supporter… defensively speaking.

 

Offensive Metrics

 

 

 

 

 

 

Offensive Summary

• Lethality & Kill Share: Ankh nearly doubled Frisson’s kills (339 vs 162) and claimed a larger share of team lethality (22% vs 14%).
• Amplification: Ankh’s buffs scaled cleanly with ally kills, while Frisson’s were inconsistent.
• Threat (Raw Damage): Frisson dealt more total and per-minute damage (384k vs 323k), showing higher ceiling for raw output.
• Potency (Damage → Kills): Ankh converted his damage into kills far more reliably. Frisson’s damage often failed to finish.
• Engagement (Under Fire): Frisson held the edge — at his worst he matched Ankh, but at his best he outpaced him even when targeted.
• Disruption (Controls): Frisson dominated volume (4,151 vs 985), but Ankh’s knock-up controls hit harder and were tied to kills.
• Efficiency: Ankh turned damage taken into output more effectively (10.2 vs 9.0 average ratio).
• Pets: Ankh’s pets contributed more (81k vs 60k), were more efficient, and tied tightly to kills. Frisson’s pets were steadier but secondary.

Verdict

Offensively, Ankh was the more efficient and lethal supporter.

• Frisson: excelled at raw damage output and constant control pressure, thriving when under fire — but much of that effort failed to translate into kills.
• Ankh: dealt less raw damage, but converted more of it into decisive outcomes. His pets, buffs, and efficiency made him deadlier and more reliable in supporting team offense.

Takeaway

Frisson flooded the field with pressure, but Ankh struck with sharper results. Offensively, Ankh comes out ahead.

 

 

 

Final Verdict…

In this Empathy showdown, Ankh comes out on top. Defensively, the difference wasn’t close. Ankh only fell twice compared to Frisson’s seventeen, absorbed half the damage, and still kept his allies standing with nearly double the buffs. Frisson dodged more hits, but when he got tagged, both he and his team collapsed. Ankh, on the other hand, soaked more pressure and turned it into half the cost.

Offensively, Ankh was just as decisive. He nearly doubled Frisson’s kills and claimed a bigger share of his team’s lethality. His pets were stronger, more efficient, and tightly tied to actual enemy defeats. Frisson still shined in raw damage output and sheer control volume — he blanketed the battlefield and put up the bigger numbers. But much of that pressure didn’t finish fights, while Ankh’s output translated directly into results.

⚖️So here’s the Bottom Line:

• Frisson was the louder supporter, overwhelming the field with suppression and damage. He fought hard, putting up bigger raw numbers and constant suppression pressure, but he was fragile: when hit, he and his team paid dearly, and his offensive volume often failed to convert into kills.
• Ankh was the stronger supporter — sturdier, steadier, and far more lethal. He absorbed twice the punishment at half the cost, kept his team standing with superior buffs, and turned his output — and his pets’ — into actual victories on the field.

So while Frisson made a lot of noise — Ankh brought receipts carved in stone. And in this matchup, that makes him the true pharaoh of Empathy.

 

DEFENDERS Win Empathy!!!

[Dark Current]

Put on your SPF 1 Million! It's time for the next DEFCON: Aftermath match up!

 

 

 

Edited 20 hours ago by Dark Current

[Dark Current]

Trinculo the Elec / Rad / Mu Controller

 

Mids Build: Trinculo - Controller (Electric Control - Radiation Emission).mbd

 

Build and Solo Test Video:

 

 

[Dark Current]

After streaming Trinculo's 801 Trials on my Twitch channel, I crunched the numbers collected using Sythlin's DPS Tool and analyzed the stats with Excel.

 

The full unedited Trial footage downloaded from Twitch is here:

 

 

 

Here's my reaction to that video and report of the results:

 

 

Edited 20 hours ago by Dark Current

[Ringo]

So in the Build 3/Empathy test how much do you think Frisson's build is part of the problem?

 

No Hasten

 

Almost everything in the Force of Will pool (Project Will, Wall of Force, Unleash Potential) runs counter to your strengths.  Reverberant cannot replicate those attacks so you should be using your primary, and Unleash Potential is just a worse version of the R Auras which would be up more often with Hasten

 

Using the Cold Epic Defense shield is counter to the amount of healing and regen you have.  An epic with a Resistance shield would allow you to heal that damage back

 

Taking the single target immobilize instead of the Confuse is... confounding

 

Using chatgpt was a mistake

[Linea]

One of these days you need to drag me along on one of these.

 

I think you might have mixed an 801.2 (Tier 1, Team-size 8, Long), with an 801.3 (Tier 2, Team-size 4, short).  801.6 only has one size, it was the last design wedged in to bridge the gap from 5 to 7.  I think 6 used a medium design, but don't recall.  If you want to balance by number of spawns on a map 801.1, 801.4, 801.6.  If you want to try to balance time on map, then I'd look at 801.2 ((Most spawns with Softest targets), 801.4 (Medium spawns with Medium targets), 801.6(Less spawns Hard targets).  If you want fastest (and easiest), that would be 801.0, 801.3, 801.6; the shortest fastest for each tier.  I would avoid 801.7 and higher for anything that is trying to evaluate game balance, even 6 with it's boss mechanics will be a little problematic with controllers and doms, but it doesn't break anything else, and that was the intent behind wedging it in after all the others (maintain as much game balance as possible while pushing difficulty up to the edge of 7,  where 7 is when balance starts breaking).

 

"That's just wrong" 

"What the !@#$ was that!" 

"Pretty !@#$%^& nasty"

🤣

[Dark Current]

On 10/27/2025 at 12:34 PM, Ringo said:

So in the Build 3/Empathy test how much do you think Frisson's build is part of the problem?

 

No Hasten

 

Almost everything in the Force of Will pool (Project Will, Wall of Force, Unleash Potential) runs counter to your strengths.  Reverberant cannot replicate those attacks so you should be using your primary, and Unleash Potential is just a worse version of the R Auras which would be up more often with Hasten

 

Using the Cold Epic Defense shield is counter to the amount of healing and regen you have.  An epic with a Resistance shield would allow you to heal that damage back

 

Taking the single target immobilize instead of the Confuse is... confounding

 

Using chatgpt was a mistake

 

His build definitely needs a human rework. It wasn't optimal, but I don't think you can point specifically at it as the reason for the overall results. The cone controls / attacks didn't have the stopping power necessary to hold off these 801s once you start having all the +4 bosses and EBs. After those fail, Empathy doesn't have anything else to rely on to stop the enemy. Meanwhile, the defender has an entire suite of blast attacks with debuffs and soft controls, plus the ATO procs to keep the enemy back and keep the team moving forward.

 

It was my first time with Symphony, so there are definitely areas for improvement.

[Dark Current]

On 10/27/2025 at 2:16 PM, Linea said:

One of these days you need to drag me along on one of these.

 

I think you might have mixed an 801.2 (Tier 1, Team-size 8, Long), with an 801.3 (Tier 2, Team-size 4, short).  801.6 only has one size, it was the last design wedged in to bridge the gap from 5 to 7.  I think 6 used a medium design, but don't recall.  If you want to balance by number of spawns on a map 801.1, 801.4, 801.6.  If you want to try to balance time on map, then I'd look at 801.2 ((Most spawns with Softest targets), 801.4 (Medium spawns with Medium targets), 801.6(Less spawns Hard targets).  If you want fastest (and easiest), that would be 801.0, 801.3, 801.6; the shortest fastest for each tier.  I would avoid 801.7 and higher for anything that is trying to evaluate game balance, even 6 with it's boss mechanics will be a little problematic with controllers and doms, but it doesn't break anything else, and that was the intent behind wedging it in after all the others (maintain as much game balance as possible while pushing difficulty up to the edge of 7,  where 7 is when balance starts breaking).

 

"That's just wrong" 

"What the !@#$ was that!" 

"Pretty !@#$%^& nasty"

🤣

 

Thanks for the insights, Linea.

 

I'm not super concerned about standardizing mission size / spawn number as that randomness is part of the testing. At the end of the day, I'm going to have 5 defenders and 5 controllers' cumulative data to compare with multiple teammates and maps and spawns. I also have the original DEFCON 5 data with the original 5 defenders and 5 controllers data as well, although the foes there were standard 54x8 content. But that is also part of the variability that I'm sifting through to find a signal within the noise. That signal, if it exists, is the difference between the ATs.

 

Oh, and we'd love to have you jump in on a run. I have Storm Summoning on deck next, so I'll be interested to see how that chaos engine fares against the 801 surge. We're fast running out of incarnate teammates as each character can only be used on one trial unless the team successfully completes a run (which could end early if we call it quits due to exhaustion at the end of a completed mission... usually a Tier 4). So if you have a qualified body - non-support, level 50, IOd, incarnated - give me a shout either here or over on the FAFO Company discord

 

https://discord.gg/mxqXvKaX

[Dark Current]

Here is my Radiation Defender's Build and Solo testing:

 

Despina the Rad / Water / Energy Defender

 

Despina - Defender (Radiation Emission).mbd

 

 

Edited 20 hours ago by Dark Current

[Dark Current]

Here's the full Trial video downloaded from my Twitch channel.

 

 

 

 

And here's my reaction and analysis of that Trial's performance, which includes the Verdict on Radiation

 

 

[Dark Current]

So, who won the matchup between DEF and CON with Radiation???

 

Defensive Metrics

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Defensive Summary

• Survivability: Despina fell more times overall, but over quadruple the time. Her defeat rate (0.026 vs 0.074) was far lower and steady (R² = 0.93 vs 0.40). Edge Despina.
• Ally Risk: Despina’s team had more total defeats, but fewer per minute (0.14 vs 0.16). Her protection held better over time.
• Resilience: Trinculo absorbed roughly 2× more damage per minute (553 vs 274), fighting in hotter zones while Despina managed longer, cooler engagements. Tie by context.
• Punishment: Trinculo withstood heavier burst (212 vs 143 dmg/min per defeat), but Despina’s loads were cooler and more controlled. Edge Trinculo (short burst), Edge Despina (sustained).
• Overwatch: Despina’s team defeats were less linked to her own damage intake (30 vs 123). She stayed steady when allies fell.
• Pets (Loyalty + Sacrifice): Trinculo’s 5 pets took more hits by design; Despina’s 2 pets faced little exposure. Different risk models, functional tie.
• Avoidance: Trinculo logged 10× more hits/min (62 vs 5.7) from AoE ticks; Despina simply stayed out of harm’s way. Winner Despina.
• Targeting: Each hit on Trinculo did ≈9 dmg vs Despina’s ≈61. He soaked volume, she dodged spikes. Winner Trinculo.
• Provision: Despina maintained double the buff tempo (5.0 vs 2.5 buffs/min) with perfect consistency. Clear edge Despina.
• Warding: Buff rate rose slightly with defeats for both (R² = 0.52 vs 0.62); Despina’s flatter curve (0.37 vs 0.42) shows minor preventive edge.
• Shielding: Despina’s flatter slope (42 vs 374 dmg/min per buff) indicates better efficiency, but low pet count deflates it. Contextual tie; Edge Despina overall.

Verdict

Defensive Winner: Despina — the steadier, preventive supporter.
Despina minimized exposure, kept her buff cycle flawless, and held steady through long, grinding missions. Trinculo absorbed more fire and handled it well, but his frontline presence and reactive buffing made his defense more volatile.

Takeaway

Both Radiators endured their environments well, but Despina did so calmly and predictably — controlling danger before it escalated. Trinculo thrived in the blast zone, absorbing chaos through sheer toughness.
Defensively: Despina prevents the collapse; Trinculo survives it.

 

 

Offensive Metrics

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Offensive Summary

• Lethality:
  Both DEFCONs averaged similar foe defeats per minute, but Despina sustained her kill tempo across four missions. Trinculo’s shorter but sharper runs delivered higher burst ratios. Despina edges it for overall endurance; Trinculo for volatility.
• Amplification (Buffs → Ally Kills):
  Trinculo’s smaller buff volume translated into higher team payoff. His allies’ kill totals rose steeply in step with his buffing activity, proving his Radiation fields and Conductive Aura amplified ally aggression more directly than Despina’s steady Water-based sustain.
• Threat (Raw Output):
  Despina dominated with over 720k total damage—a staggering number even factoring pets. Trinculo’s 150k reflects shorter exposure time and mixed melee risk. On output alone, Despina wins outright.
• Potency (DMG Out vs. Kills):
  Both scaled damage effectively with foe defeats, but Despina’s steeper slope indicates better kill-to-damage efficiency. Her Water Blast toolkit produced faster returns per spike.
• Disruption (Control Rate):
  Despina generated three times more control events across missions, but Trinculo’s forgotten Choking Cloud suppresses his real potential here. Adjusted for uptime, the sets likely approach parity.
• Efficiency (DMG Out / DMG In):
  Despina achieved an average 9.1:1 ratio—more than double Trinculo’s 3.6:1. Her ranged positioning and layered debuffs turned offense into defense, minimizing trade cost.
• Pet Contribution:
  Trinculo’s five summons produced 60% of his total damage, working in perfect sync (R² = 0.96). Despina’s pets delivered just 5.6%, but with 3.3× efficiency. → Trinculo’s pets were shock troops; Despina’s were amplifiers. → Trinculo wins Aggression and Savagery; Despina wins Efficiency.

⚖️ Verdict - Despina is the superior offensive architect; Trinculo is the superior offensive catalyst.

• Despina channels overwhelming ranged damage, clean kill efficiency, and unmatched sustain. Her numbers represent strategic dominance—damage delivered precisely, safely, and consistently.
• Trinculo operates as a tactical instigator—faster to surge, faster to burn, but terrifying in momentum. His buffs and pets spike his team’s damage with every engagement, even at personal cost.

💡 Takeaway

Despina: Command of the field. Sustained firepower, reliable returns, minimal exposure. Trinculo: Command in the moment. Aggressive amplification, synergistic pet warfare, volatile bursts.

 

 

Final Verdict…

In this Radiation duel, Despina emerges as the superior DEFCON supporter because…

• Defensively, she was steadier and more sustainable.
  Trinculo’s team folded sooner and more often, while Despina’s endured through longer, harder missions. Her lower defeat rate per minute and superior buff throughput gave her squad the stamina to survive deep into Tier 4 — territory Trinculo’s team never reached. His resilience under pressure was higher per defeat, but that came from hotter incoming fire and a thinner frontline. Despina simply kept her machine running longer, cleaner, and with fewer collapses.
• Offensively, the gap widened.
  Despina out-damaged Trinculo nearly five to one, converting her pressure into clean, decisive kills. Her attacks hit harder, scaled faster, and paid off in sustained enemy defeats. Trinculo’s Radiation fields and pets hit in furious bursts, but the momentum burned out quickly. His team’s kill tempo rose when he spiked — then flatlined when he fell. Despina’s output, by contrast, never stopped climbing.
• And when it came to support impact, Despina’s precision trumped Trinculo’s chaos.
  She buffed twice as fast, healed more consistently, and turned damage mitigation into forward motion. Trinculo’s disruption tactics and pet aggression were brutal, but costly — efficient in short runs, unsustainable in a campaign of attrition.

🧩 What if you focus on the First Three Missions Only…?

Even when you remove Mission 4 entirely, Despina still wins 5 of 6 categories, and by wider margins than she loses any.
The biggest shift is scale — the victory changes from overwhelming to decisive but fair.
Her advantages in duration, buff coverage, and kill conversion still dominate the shared timeline.

Trinculo fought hot and hard in shorter bursts, surviving well enough but failing to translate control into kills or reliable prevention.
Despina, even within the same time window, proved steadier, safer, and far deadlier — producing more buffs, more kills, and fewer team losses at half the incoming pressure per minute.

So yes — even stripping away her marathon fourth mission, Despina still wins the head-to-head, though the result shifts from a landslide to a commanding decision.

⚖️ Bottom Line

• Trinculo: The volatile amplifier — fearless, explosive, and team-driven, but burning twice as bright for half as long.
• Despina: The irradiated engine — stable, lethal, and inexhaustible, turning every joule of power into measurable results.

 

DEFENDERS Win Radiation Emission!!!

Edited 20 hours ago by Dark Current

[Dark Current]

Head to your basements and bathtubs! It's time for the next DEFCON: Aftermath match up!