Super Strength vs. the Fighting Pool

[Biff Pow]

This is basically my pitch to increase the damage of Jab, Punch, and Haymaker. If this applies to other sets besides Super Strength, feel free to chime in.

 

My entire time on Homecoming I've found it strange that Boxing/Kick/Cross Punch do more damage than the first three Super Strength attacks. Yes, I'm including the damage boost from taking all three Fighting attacks, but this is a three vs three comparison. I won't even include the Fighting Pool's buff and debuff effects (like Cross Punch increases ToHit and Recharge for some reason.)

 

Punch and Haymaker only need a slight boost to get it up to Kick and Cross Punch's damage (though Kick has quicker recharge.) Jab would need about a 50% increase to equal Boxing, I would propose maybe changing it to a one-two punch attack like Barrage.

 

I'm not proposing one choice of attacks be better than the other (despite Super Strength being called, you know, Super), just that they're about the same. The Fighting Pool route has the disadvantage that you're forced into one Super Strength attack anyway, but also has advantages like Cross Punch being a cone. Super Strength shouldn't feel like you're accepting lower damage by sticking to your main offensive set.

[Glacier Peak]

Use Rage. 

[Voltor]

The problem is that when they made super strength back in the day, I suspect they were thinking of the HULK. 

 

I wouldn't mind seeing a minor buff to the attacks in Super Strength so as to not be so dependent on rage, but as to the rage crash it shuts down all damage from all attacks possibly even incarnate judgement.  

 

Make the crash a 50% damage reduction instead of what it is now.  

[Biff Pow]

23 minutes ago, Glacier Peak said:

Use Rage. 

 

Rage is a general damage boost, it increases pool attacks too.

[Glacier Peak]

5 hours ago, Biff Pow said:

Rage is a general damage boost, it increases pool attacks too.

Bingo. It should be included in any discussion about Super Strength changes. 

[Troo]

21 hours ago, Glacier Peak said:

Bingo. It should be included in any discussion about Super Strength changes. 

 

Classic. First post, you try and derail the topic into another in a long line of locked topics. Purposely derailing threads to get them locked is a [REDACTED] move.

 

 

 

"this is a three vs three comparison"

 

[Jab, Punch, Haymaker] -vs- [Boxing, Kick, Cross Punch]

 

@Biff Pow, you have a good point. Should primaries somehow be better? I think so.

 

SS -vs- Fighting damages with my old mids

[28/41/68] -vs- [31/40/60 cone] (base)

[28/41/68] -vs- [41/45/68 cone] (with +DAM simply by having Boxing, Kick, Cross Punch)

 

even the recharges are better even if slightly

2-4-8 -vs- 2.5-3-8 (base)

2-4-8 -vs- 2.2-2.7-7.3 (with all three)

 

The disorients compliment in Fighting where Super Strength gets stun, kb, kb. (note: looks like this actually stun, kd, kd+stun for fighting)

 

Edited Tuesday at 01:54 PM by GM_GooglyMoogly

[Rudra]

27 minutes ago, Troo said:

 

Classic. First post, you try and derail the topic into another in a long line of locked topics. Purposely derailing threads to get them locked is an asshole move.

 

 

 

"this is a three vs three comparison"

 

[Jab, Punch, Haymaker] -vs- [Boxing, Kick, Cross Punch]

 

@Biff Pow, you have a good point. Should primaries somehow be better? I think so.

 

SS -vs- Fighting damages with my old mids

[28/41/68] -vs- [31/40/60 cone] (base)

[28/41/68] -vs- [41/45/68 cone] (with +DAM simply by having Boxing, Kick, Cross Punch)

 

even the recharges are better even if slightly

2-4-8 -vs- 2.5-3-8 (base)

2-4-8 -vs- 2.2-2.7-7.3 (with all three)

 

The disorients compliment in Fighting where Super Strength gets stun, kb, kb. (note: looks like this actually stun, kd, kd+stun for fighting)

 

Except the OP is comparing Boxing, Kick, and Cross Punch when all three are picks of the character knowing each pick bolsters the other two, while ignoring the feature in Super Strength whose purpose is to do the same thing: Rage.

 

Yes, Rage is a universal buff for the character, but it has already been established that Rage is established as an intended for use power to bolster Super Strength. It is the only Build Up style power in any of the sets with a two minute duration.

 

Edit: Look at Boxing, Kick, and Cross Punch individually versus Jab, Punch, and Haymaker without Rage, and the scales shift the other way.

 

Edited Monday at 05:06 PM by Rudra

[Troo]

21 hours ago, Rudra said:

Except the OP is comparing Boxing, Kick, and Cross Punch when all three are picks of the character knowing each pick bolsters the other two, while ignoring the feature in Super Strength whose purpose is to do the same thing: Rage.

 

Yes, Rage is a universal buff for the character, but it has already been established that Rage is established as an intended for use power to bolster Super Strength. It is the only Build Up style power in any of the sets with a two minute duration.

 

No.

They pretty clearly responded that buffs (Aim, BuildUp, Rage, inspirations, etc) would effect both the primaries powers AND the pool powers. As such, non-factor. 

But go ahead and continue trying to derail the topic.

The example provided is a super strength character looking at Jab, Punch, Haymaker and seeing that Boxing, Kick, Cross Punch look better for their character.

 

Edited Tuesday at 02:48 PM by Troo

[Rudra]

15 minutes ago, Troo said:

 

No.

They pretty clearly pointed out that any buff (Aim, BuildUp, Rage, etc) would effect both the primaries powers AND the pool powers. As such it is a non-factor. 

But go ahead and continue trying to derail the topic.

 

First, talking about how Jab, Punch, and Haymaker as part of the Super Strength set were designed to be more dependent on Rage than other melee sets despite Rage bolstering all powers' damage versus Boxing, Kick, and Cross Punch being stronger when all three are taken is not a derailment of topic. It is the topic.

 

Second, the OP clearly states it is looking at the empowered from having all three of Boxing, Kick, and Cross Punch to see them at their strongest while ignoring Jab, Punch, and Haymaker at their strongest. (Edit: A true three versus three comparison would look at them individually to be fair.) (Edit again: Or barring that, look at the Fighting Pool versus the Super Strength pool since the OP is basically comparing a pool to three powers. That wouldn't be fair to Fighting since it is a power pool and not a primary pool, but it would be a more fair comparison.) (Edit yet again: Hells, the title is literally Super Strength vs the Fighting pool! But the OP doesn't look at Super Strength.)

 

Third, Boxing, Kick, and Cross Punch were changed to bolster each other and Brawl when taken in conjunction specifically because they were deemed to be ineffectually weak before the change. So now we are crossing over into power creep discussions.

 

Fourth, if the OP really wanted to make an argument to bolster Jab, Punch, and Haymaker from Super Strength, then the OP should have evaluated Super Strength as a set versus other melee sets instead of cherry picking for effect.

 

Yet another edit:

You edited your post, so I need to address that part too.

  

16 minutes ago, Troo said:

The example provide is a super strength character looking at Jab, Punch, Haymaker and seeing that Boxing, Kick, Cross Punch look better for their character.

When I hear people talking about something looking better for someone's character, I think visuals. In this case, that would be animations. Which the OP says nothing about. (This would a derailment from you.) If your comment about looking better is the damage aspect though? We can go back to my preceding comments in this post.

 

Edited Monday at 05:25 PM by Rudra

[MTeague]

1 hour ago, Rudra said:

First, talking about how Jab, Punch, and Haymaker as part of the Super Strength set were designed to be more dependent on Rage than other melee sets despite Rage bolstering all powers' damage versus Boxing, Kick, and Cross Punch being stronger when all three are taken is not a derailment of topic. It is the topic.

I agree with you on a lot of topics, but I can't get behind this.

 

When Jab, Punch, Haymaker do less damage than Boxing, Kick, Crosspunch, 

AND, Jab Punch, Haymaker, plus Rage, do less damage than Boxing, Kick, Crosspunch plus Rage, there's a problem.  

You are objectively worse off investing more in your primary attacks vs a power pool. 

Edited Monday at 06:19 PM by MTeague

[SeraphimKensai]

I've always been of the opinion that excluding AT modifiers, a primary attack should do more damage than the same version when it's a secondary attack, and also more damage than if it's an epic/app. While there aren't any direct copies in pool powers, a pool power should likely not be exceeding the damage output of a comparable primary power.

 

That said super strength doesn't really follow the mold so if the other three were adjusted maybe foot stomp would have to be adjusted as well to bring it more in line with other melee sets?

[golstat2003]

Or the devs would lower the damage of the pool powers. This is HC we're talking about afterall. 😛 

[Glacier Peak]

Changing Super Strength in any way and not talking about Rage is frivolous.

[Biff Pow]

3 hours ago, SeraphimKensai said:

That said super strength doesn't really follow the mold so if the other three were adjusted maybe foot stomp would have to be adjusted as well to bring it more in line with other melee sets?

 

Sticking with only Super Strength, Footstomp is your only damaging AoE attack. If you choose the Fighting Pool route, Cross Punch is a (small) cone attack, which you can take as well as Footstomp. So the Super Strength set isn't the issue here, and I'm not going to suggest nerfing the Fighting Pool.

 

Honestly just improving Jab would be enough of a fix. Even as single, no synergy power, Boxing and Kick do more damage than Jab. (Yes, they have slightly slower recharge but as part of a chain the difference isn't noticeable.)

[Rudra]

4 hours ago, MTeague said:

When Jab, Punch, Haymaker do less damage than Boxing, Kick, Crosspunch, 

AND, Jab Punch, Haymaker, plus Rage, do less damage than Boxing, Kick, Crosspunch plus Rage, there's a problem.  

You are objectively worse off investing more in your primary attacks vs a power pool. 

But they don't. At least not Punch and Haymaker when looked at individually. And @Troo even included that comparison. Here, let's do a breakdown:

 

Tanker:

 Jab: 35.92 (Mids)/35.9251 (CoD) damage, 10% chance Mag 2 Stun for 7.152 secs, 1.07 sec cast, 2.0 sec recharge, 3.536 END cost

Punch: 52.83 (Mids)/52.8311 (CoD) damage, 30% chance Mag 0.67 KB, 1.2 sec cast, 4 sec recharge, 5.2 END cost

Haymaker: 86.64 (Mids)/86.643 (CoD) damage, 60% Mag 0.67 KB, 1.5 sec cast, 8 sec recharge, 8.528 END cost

Boxing: 40.15 (Mids)/40.152 (CoD) damage, 10% chance Mag 2 Stun for 4.768 secs, 1.07 sec cast, 2.5 sec recharge, 4.42 END cost

Kick: 44.38 (Mids)/44.378 (CoD) damage, 15% chance Mag 0.67 KB, 1.83 sec cast, 3 sec recharge, 4.94 END cost

Cross Punch: 67.09 (Mids)/67.095 (CoD) damage, 50 degree cone, 5 target cap, 40% chance Mag 0.67 KB, 1.67 cast, 8 sec recharge, 10.66 END cost

 

Jab does less damage than Boxing, but the Stun lasts almost twice as long, is faster to get off, is faster to recover, and costs less to use. I never bothered checking, but I could have sworn that the accuracy and recharge boosts from having Boxing, Kick, and Cross Punch was across all powers, not just those three. City of Data even supports this by showing a global boost to recharge and accuracy as opposed to the power specific damage increases for those powers. So if you are going to ignore Rage for being universal in application, then you have to ignore the accuracy and recharge boosts from the Fighting pool's attacks too. Which leaves you with the damage consideration.

Using that, having Boxing, Kick, and Cross Punch changes to the following on that same Tanker:

 

Boxing: 52.2 (Mids)/52.195 (CoD math) damage

Kick: 57.69 (Mids)/57.694 (CoD math) damage

Cross Punch: 87.22 (Mids)/87.2235 (CoD math) damage

 

At this point, Jab does decidedly less damage than Boxing, equal chance to Stun, Stun lasts almost twice as long still, equal cast time, faster recharge, and less END cost.

Punch does slightly less damage than Kick, still has double the chance for a KD, is still faster to cast, is 1 sec slower on recharge, and costs slightly more in END.

Haymaker does negligibly less damage than Cross Punch, still has a 20% better chance of KD, is still faster to cast, has equal recharge, hits up to 4 less targets, and costs less END.

 

This is a much more fair evaluation than "hey, the damage for Jab, Punch, and Haymaker isn't the same or better than Boxing, Kick, and Cross Punch when you have all three Fighting pool attack powers."

 

If you want to argue for a buff? Then first, you run the risk of getting Fighting pool attacks nerfed, but also at least be honest about the comparisons.

 

Edited Monday at 10:45 PM by Rudra
Edited to add closing quotation mark. And again to add missed "also".

[Biff Pow]

47 minutes ago, Rudra said:

I never bothered checking, but I could have sworn that the accuracy and recharge boosts from having Boxing, Kick, and Cross Punch was across all powers, not just those three. City of Data even supports this by showing a global boost to recharge and accuracy as opposed to the power specific damage increases for those powers. So if you are going to ignore Rage for being universal in application, then you have to ignore the accuracy and recharge boosts from the Fighting pool's attacks too.

 

You should have checked, the ToHit and Recharge bonus is only from Cross Punch. Also again, this argument makes no sense because you can take the Fighting Pool AND Rage.

 

49 minutes ago, Rudra said:

If you want to argue for a buff? Then first, you run the risk of getting Fighting pool attacks nerfed, but also at least be honest about the comparisons.

 

The Fighting attacks are fine. If they were overpowered, people wouldn't be constantly suggesting "let me take Tough without Boxing or Kick."

 

As far as I can tell, this is mostly just an issue with Super Strength, and especially since Jab became skippable on Tanks. Just make Jab a better power.

[Rudra]

29 minutes ago, Biff Pow said:

You should have checked, the ToHit and Recharge bonus is only from Cross Punch. Also again, this argument makes no sense because you can take the Fighting Pool AND Rage.

If Rage is not to be considered a factor because it buffs all attacks, then the recharge and accuracy buffs from Cross Punch also have to dropped as factors for buffing all attacks. @Troo made improved recharge a part of his/her/their argument. (Edit again: And only applied it to the Fighting pool.)

 

29 minutes ago, Biff Pow said:

1 hour ago, Rudra said:

If you want to argue for a buff? Then first, you run the risk of getting Fighting pool attacks nerfed, but also at least be honest about the comparisons.

 

The Fighting attacks are fine. If they were overpowered, people wouldn't be constantly suggesting "let me take Tough without Boxing or Kick."

 

As far as I can tell, this is mostly just an issue with Super Strength, and especially since Jab became skippable on Tanks. Just make Jab a better power.

If you want to buff anything from Super Strength, then you need to provide an honest comparison of the powers. And that means all components of the powers.

 

Edited Monday at 11:55 PM by Rudra
Edited to remove "fur" and add space between sections. And again to add "improved".

[Ukase]

So many opinions. None of you are right, and none of you are wrong. 
 

My own opinion is that most of the melee t-1 through t-3 attacks are pretty lame. It takes time for these characters to flesh out, so to speak. And some sets take longer than others. 

So, if it is true that with slotting the same that Boxing out-damages jab...is that a problem, per se? I don't think so, and here's why: 

They have the option of taking the fight pool, and not even using Jab. 

The only real question here is: Should a t-1, t-2, or t-3 do more damage than a pool power t-1?
This is where the question has different answers for different reasons. 

If the power is buffed, Rage does come into play, because the set has rage, and the crash is so meaningless, it's relevant to consider. Sure, 10 seconds without damage. But we forget about procs, and the powers like sands of mu which aren't impacted by the crash. So, with rage, or potentially double rage running...is there really a need to buff these first three powers? 

My own meaningless opinion is that the first three of most sets should have a slight buff in damage until level 19, kind of like how we have beginner's luck with the ToHit buff. 

 

There are plenty of reasons to do this, and plenty of reasons not to do this. It's just a question of where your thoughts are about the game. 

[Troo]

15 hours ago, Rudra said:

@Troo made improved recharge a part of his/her/their argument. (Edit again: And only applied it to the Fighting pool.)

 

/em doublefacepalm (..but I'm still trying to bring you up to speed here. there's nothing to argue, it's numbers)

 

3 -VS- 3

 

not 3+3

 

Take the three powers from one OR the other. If there is no fighting pool, there is no buffs from the fighting pool.

 

( caveat: could a player take all 6 powers to have all bonuses present for the 3 primary powers, sure. Is it realistic? Why not, but that's not the discussion here. [just my opinion here - that would be self gimping] )

[Glacier Peak]

Why would a player want to have 6 single target powers that do relatively little DPA (Jab, Brawl, Haymaker, Punch, Kick, Boxing)?

Edited Tuesday at 03:49 PM by Glacier Peak
Phrasing

[JasperStone]

18 minutes ago, Glacier Peak said:

Why would a player want to have 6 single target powers that do relatively little DPA (Jab, Brawl, Haymaker, Punch, Kick, Boxing)?

 

[Glacier Peak]

2 hours ago, Ukase said:

So many opinions. None of you are right, and none of you are wrong. 
 

My own opinion is that most of the melee t-1 through t-3 attacks are pretty lame. It takes time for these characters to flesh out, so to speak. And some sets take longer than others. 

So, if it is true that with slotting the same that Boxing out-damages jab...is that a problem, per se? I don't think so, and here's why: 

They have the option of taking the fight pool, and not even using Jab. 

The only real question here is: Should a t-1, t-2, or t-3 do more damage than a pool power t-1?
This is where the question has different answers for different reasons. 

If the power is buffed, Rage does come into play, because the set has rage, and the crash is so meaningless, it's relevant to consider. Sure, 10 seconds without damage. But we forget about procs, and the powers like sands of mu which aren't impacted by the crash. So, with rage, or potentially double rage running...is there really a need to buff these first three powers? 

My own meaningless opinion is that the first three of most sets should have a slight buff in damage until level 19, kind of like how we have beginner's luck with the ToHit buff. 

 

There are plenty of reasons to do this, and plenty of reasons not to do this. It's just a question of where your thoughts are about the game. 

Great points Ukase.

[Troo]

@Rudra

Now my opinions:

• A 10% stun is not a realistic benefit, it's merely rare rando flavor (as such, stun duration is a non factor)
• When talking powers that recharge in 4s or less they really are too close to compare (and with any global recharge effectively the same)
• Knockdown vs Knockback (edge Fighting Pool)
• Arcana time would be more accurate when getting as detailed as you seem committed to
  • Arcanatime: 1.452 sec vs 1.98 sec.. sure that's .5s. (Punch/Kick)
  • Arcanatime: 1.716 sec vs 1.848 sec.. meh (Haymaker/Cross Punch)

sooo..

18 hours ago, Rudra said:

Jab does decidedly less damage than Boxing, equal chance to Stun, Stun lasts almost twice as long still, equal cast time, faster recharge, and less END cost.

Punch does slightly less damage than Kick, still has double the chance for a KB, is still .5s faster to cast, is 1 sec slower on recharge, and costs slightly more in END.

Haymaker does negligibly less damage than Cross Punch, still has a 20% better chance of KB, is still faster to cast, has equal recharge, hits up to 4 less targets, and costs less END.

 

Haymaker -vs- Cross Punch

• Head to Head - Single Target is a push, maybe but not really a little edge to Haymaker
  • 2 or more targets = Cross Punch. It isn't even close.
• With Boxing and Kick, Cross Punch's +Acc, +Rech, +Dam.. wow.

Damage 

• [28/41/68] -vs- [41/45/68(x1-5)]
• [34/51/61] Claws' first 3 beats SS.. Claws!

 

Beyond just damage, sure, one could argue that SS and Fighting are close-ish and maybe some nuances even them out. 

One could also argue that Jab, Punch, Haymaker are demonstratively worse than even pool powers.

 

As @SeraphimKensai posted, Primary powers should simply be better than Pool powers. (doesn't have to be Dam, could be some other benefit of significance)

Should Secondaries? That might be debatable. Maybe the Tanker numbers should be similar to Pool powers.

 

 

Debating Hint:

An effective counter argument would be that we are comparing powers that are available at level 1 and 2 to powers that aren't available until level 4 and 14.

 

Edited Tuesday at 05:15 PM by Troo

[MTeague]

3 hours ago, Ukase said:

If the power is buffed, Rage does come into play, because the set has rage, and the crash is so meaningless, it's relevant to consider. Sure, 10 seconds without damage.

I gotta disagree with that, at least a little.  10 seconds of no damage, sure, whoop-dee-do. Minorly annoying but not a big deal.  The Defense Debuff (that is self-inflicted and unresistable), is more serious, and can mean a faceplant for certain armor sets.

 

I deal with that by simply not making an Ice Armor/Super Strength tanker, and not making a Super Strength/Super Reflexes brute.  When I use Super Strength, I pair it with stuff like Invulnerability and Electric Armor, or stuff like Regen, .... things that aren't so dependant upon Defense.  [EDIT:  And sure, Invulnerability likes Defense... but has enough underlying resists to handle the crash.]

Edited Tuesday at 05:33 PM by MTeague

[Rudra]

2 hours ago, Troo said:

 

/em doublefacepalm (..but I'm still trying to bring you up to speed here. there's nothing to argue, it's numbers)

 

3 -VS- 3

 

not 3+3

 

Take the three powers from one OR the other. If there is no fighting pool, there is no buffs from the fighting pool.

 

( caveat: could a player take all 6 powers to have all bonuses present for the 3 primary powers, sure. Is it realistic? Why not, but that's not the discussion here. [just my opinion here - that would be self gimping] )

I am not and have never in this discussion looked at it as 3+3. All I am saying is that the arguments you are decrying as derailment are not derailments and that if anyone wants to argue to buff any powers, they need to give an honest comparison.

 

1 hour ago, Troo said:

A 10% stun is not a realistic benefit, it's merely rare rando flavor (as such, stun duration is a non factor)

As you said, this is your opinion. However, it is still part of the powers being debated, and so must be considered.

 

1 hour ago, Troo said:

When talking powers that recharge in 4s or less they really are too close to compare (and with any global recharge effectively the same)

Then why did you bring up the improved recharge rates?

 

1 hour ago, Troo said:

Knockdown vs Knockback (edge Fighting Pool)

Edge goes to Fighting pool?! The Super Strength powers in question with KB are doing KD levels of KB. The Fighting powers in question doing KD are KD levels of KB. So how are you assigning the edge to Fighting? (Edit: Both sets are doing KB. At equal levels.)

 

1 hour ago, Troo said:

Arcana time would be more accurate when getting as detailed as you seem committed to

• Arcanatime: 1.452 sec vs 1.98 sec.. sure that's .5s. (Punch/Kick)
• Arcanatime: 1.716 sec vs 1.848 sec.. meh (Haymaker/Cross Punch)

 

I don't know why the arcanatimes are different, thank you for pointing that out. And now I will point out that Super Strength is still faster than Fighting with arcanatime. So that doesn't really change anything for my presentation.

 

1 hour ago, Troo said:

sooo..

19 hours ago, Rudra said:

Jab does decidedly less damage than Boxing, equal chance to Stun, Stun lasts almost twice as long still, equal cast time, faster recharge, and less END cost.

Punch does slightly less damage than Kick, still has double the chance for a KB, is still .5s faster to cast, is 1 sec slower on recharge, and costs slightly more in END.

Haymaker does negligibly less damage than Cross Punch, still has a 20% better chance of KB, is still faster to cast, has equal recharge, hits up to 4 less targets, and costs less END.

 

Haymaker -vs- Cross Punch

• Head to Head - Single Target is a push, maybe but not really a little edge to Haymaker
  • 2 or more targets = Cross Punch. It isn't even close.
• With Boxing and Kick, Cross Punch's +Acc, +Rech, +Dam.. wow.

You are trying to remove components from the powers to improve your argument. That is not a fair comparison and you know it. I am not arguing against changes to Super Strength, I am arguing against dishonest arguments to change Super Strength. And why did you scratch out the 30% chance of KD of Punch versus the 15% chance of KD from Kick? There is no way I will believe you think a 30% chance of scoring a KD is not a tangible benefit. Or the 60% chance from Haymaker versus the 40% chance from Cross Punch. This argument strikes me as very dishonest.

 

1 hour ago, Troo said:

Damage 

• [28/41/68] -vs- [41/45/68(x1-5)]
• [34/51/61] Claws' first 3 beats SS.. Claws!

Where are you getting your numbers from? Again, damage from Mids and City of Data is as follows:

 

(Using a level 50 Tanker as reference)

 Jab: 35.92 (Mids)/35.9251 (CoD) damage

Punch: 52.83 (Mids)/52.8311 (CoD) damage

Haymaker: 86.64 (Mids)/86.643 (CoD) damage

Boxing: 40.15 (Mids)/40.152 (CoD) damage (Maxed from all three powers: 52.2 (Mids)/52.195 (CoD math) damage)

Kick: 44.38 (Mids)/44.378 (CoD) damage (Maxed from all three powers: 57.69 (Mids)/57.694 (CoD math) damage)

Cross Punch: 67.09 (Mids)/67.095 (CoD) damage (Maxed from all three powers: 87.22 (Mids)/87.2235 (CoD math) damage)

Swipe: 43.85 (Mids)/43.8498 (CoD) damage

Strike: 65.51 (Mids)/65.5106 (CoD) damage

Slash: 78.19 (Mids)/78.19 (CoD) damage

 

It sure looks like Claws is outdoing Super Strength, doesn't it? Except:

Swipe: 43.85 (Mids)/43.8498 (CoD) damage, 0.83 sec cast, 2.4 sec recharge, 3.494 END cost

Jab: 35.92 (Mids)/35.9251 (CoD) damage, 10% chance Mag 2 Stun for 7.152 secs, 1.07 sec cast, 2.0 sec recharge, 3.536 END cost

Strike: 65.51 (Mids)/65.5106 (CoD) damage, 1.17 sec cast, 4.8 sec recharge, 5.491 END cost

Punch: 52.83 (Mids)/52.8311 (CoD) damage, 30% chance Mag 0.67 KB, 1.2 sec cast, 4 sec recharge, 5.2 END cost

Slash: 78.19 (Mids)/78.19 (CoD) damage, -7% defense for 10 seconds, 1.33 sec cast, 6.4 sec recharge, 6.822 END cost

Haymaker: 86.64 (Mids)/86.643 (CoD) damage, 60% Mag 0.67 KB, 1.5 sec cast, 8 sec recharge, 8.528 END cost

 

Now Claws aren't beating Super Strength. You have to look at all the components or you are not giving a fair comparison.

 

Edit again:

  

1 hour ago, Troo said:

With Boxing and Kick, Cross Punch's +Acc, +Rech, +Dam.. wow.

If Rage is to be ignored because it benefits the Fighting Pool attacks as much as it does Super Strength attacks, then the +ACC and +RECH from the Fighting pool has to be ignored because it also benefits the Super Strength attacks. Not as a 3+3 thing, but as a 1+2 thing. Because no matter how you look at it, you HAVE to start with Jab or Punch, and Cross Punch will buff those as much as it buffs any other attack. And as far as the +DAM goes? That has already been addressed. With all components considered, it does not outclass Super Strength. (Factor the +ACC and +RECH into your build calculus, certainly. However, you can't declare one universal buff invalid for consideration and retain another for arguing with. Because like you and the author have stated, you can have both.)

 

Edited Tuesday at 06:02 PM by Rudra
Edited again to add missing DEF debuff duration.